Posts Tagged ‘OSAMA BIN LADEN’
9/11, ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, ALTERNET, AMERICAN CAESARS: THE LIVES OF THE PRESIDENTS FROM FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT TO GEORGE W. BUSH, AMERICAN EMPIRE, AP, BASHAR AL-ASSAD, BILL CLINTON, BUREAUCRACY, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHRIS MATHEWS, CNN, CONDOLEEZA RICE, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, DWIGHT EISENHOWER, FACEBOOK, FBI, FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, GEORGE H.W. BUSH, GEORGE W. BUSH, GERALD R. FORD, HARRY S. TRUMAN, JIMMY CARTER, JOHN F. KENNEDY, LYNDON B. JOHNSON, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NIGEL HAMILTON, NPR, OSAMA BIN LADEN, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, RICHARD CLARKE, RICHARD NIXON, ROMAN EMPIRE, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SEPTEMBER 11, SLATE, SUETONIUS, SYRIA, TERRORISM, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE TWELVE CAESARS, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UP, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on September 14, 2017 at 12:10 am
It’s that time of year again—yet another anniversary celebration of September 11, 2001.
The day when Islamic terrorists slammed two jetliners into the World Trade Center and a third into the Pentagon.
They would have crashed a fourth jetliner into the White House or Capitol Building except for the heroic resistance of passengers aboard United Airlines Flight 93.
In the years immediately following 9/11, politicians of both parties used this anniversary to wave flags and make self-serving patriotic speeches.
This was especially true for officials of the administration of President George W. Bush—which, even as the rubble was being cleared at the Pentagon and World Trade Center, was preparing to use the attack as an excuse to topple Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.
Hussein had not plotted 9/11, and there was no evidence that he did. But that didn’t matter to Bush and those planning the invasion and conquest of Iraq.
World Trade Center on September 11, 2001
So here it is, 16 years later, and, once again, politicians are using 9/11 as a prop to advance their careers.
President Donald Trump claims that only he can protect America from Al Qaeda, ISIS and any other Islamic terrorist groups. So far, his weapon of choice has been banning Muslims from certain Islamic countries from entering the United States.
Interestingly, Islamic countries where Trump has close business ties—such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Turkey—are exempt from the ban.
As on past commemorations of 9/11, those who died will be remembered by friends and relatives of those who knew and loved them.
Tribute to 9/11 World Trade Center Victims
It is in fact appropriate to remember the innocents who died on that day—and the heroism of the police and firefighters who died trying to save them.
But it’s equally important to remember those who made 9/11 not simply possible but inevitable.
And that does not mean only the 19 highjackers who turned those planes into fuel-bombs. It means the officials at the highest levels of the administration of President George W. Bush.
Officials who, to this day, have never been held accountable in any way for the resulting death and destruction.
And who have been allowed to blatantly lie that they “kept us safe” from terrorism.
Obviously, such an indictment is not going to be presented by TV commentators today—not even on such liberal networks as CNN and MSNBC. And most definitely not on the right-wing Fox network.
Fortunately, British historian Nigel Hamilton has dared to lay bare the facts of this disgrace. Hamilton is the author of several acclaimed political biographies, including JFK: Reckless Youth and Bill Clinton: Mastering the Presidency.
In 2007, he began research on his latest book: American Caesars: The Lives of the Presidents From Franklin D. Roosevelt to George W. Bush.
The inspiration for this came from a classic work of ancient biography: The Twelve Caesars, by Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus—known as Suetonius.
Suetonius, a Roman citizen and historian, had chronicled the lives of the first twelve Caesars of imperial Rome: Julius Caesar, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero, Galba, Otho, Vitellius, Vespasian, Titus and Domitian.
Hamilton wanted to examine post-World War II United States history as Suetonius had examined that of ancient Rome: Through the lives of the 12 “emperors” who had held the power of life and death over their fellow citizens—and those of other nations.
For Hamilton, the “greatest of American emperors, the Caesar Augustus of his time,” was Franklin D. Roosevelt, who led his country through the Great Depression and World War II.
His “”great successors” were Harry S. Truman, Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy—who, in turn, contained the Soviet Union abroad and presided over sustained economic prosperity at home.
By contrast, “arguably the worst of all the American Caesars” was “George W. Bush, and his deputy, Dick Cheney, who willfully and recklessly destroyed so much of the moral basis of American leadership in the modern world.”
Among the most lethal of Bush’s offenses: The appointing of officials who refused to take seriously the threat posed by Al-Qaeda.
And this arrogance and indifference continued—right up to September 11, 2001, when the World Trade Center and Pentagon became targets for destruction.
Among the few administration officials who did take Al-Qaeda seriously was Richard Clarke, the chief counter-terrorism adviser on the National Security Council.
Clarke had been thus appointed in 1998 by President Bill Clinton. He continued in the same role under President Bush—but the position was no longer given cabinet-level access.
This put him at a severe disadvantage when dealing with other, higher-ranking Bush officials–such as Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Rumsfeld’s deputy, Paul Wolfowitz and National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice.
These turned out to be the very officials who refused to believe that Al-Qaeda posed a lethal threat to the United States.
“Indeed,” writes Hamilton, “in the entire first eight months of the Bush Presidency, Clarke was not permitted to brief President Bush a single time, despite mounting evidence of plans for a new al-Qaeda outrage.” [Italics added]
Nor did it help that, during his first eight months in office before September 11, Bush was on vacation, according to the Washington Post, 42% of the time.
9/11 ATTACKS, ABC NEWS, ADOLF EICHMANN, ADOLF HITLER, ALTERNET, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, DAILY KOS, DONALD TRUMP, EGYPT, EXECUTIVE ORDER, FACEBOOK, HEINRICH HIMMLER, HERMAN GORING, HITLER 1889-1936: HUBRIS, HITLER 1936-1945: NEMESIS, HITLER: ASCENT: 1889-1939, IAN KERSHAW, IRAN, IRQA, JOSEPH GOEBBELS, LYBIA, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OSAMA BIN LADEN, PENTAGON, POLITICO, RAW STORY, SALON, SAUDI ARABIA, SLATE, SOMALIA, SUDAN, SYRIA, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, THIRD REICH, TIME, TURKEY, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES, VOLKER ULRICH, WALTER SHAUB, WORLD TRADE CENTER, YEMEN
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on August 4, 2017 at 12:03 am
In Stalingrad, a 1993 war movie, a platoon of German Army soldiers leaves behind the beaches and beauties of Italy and find themselves fighting desperately to stay alive in Russia.
Early in the film, there is an exchange that has its real-life counterpart almost 75 years later.
A young, idealistic German lieutenant, newly transferred to the Russian front, is horrified when he sees a fellow soldier from another unit sadistically beat a Russian prisoner to death.
He seeks out the man’s superior, a captain, and says: “Captain, I must protest about the behavior of your men.”
“You want to protest?” asks the captain, grinning sardonically. “Tell the Fuhrer.”
Fast forward to January 28, 2017, the day after President Donald J. Trump signed into law an executive order which:
- Suspended entry of all refugees to the United States for 120 days;
- Barred Syrian refugees indefinitely;, and
- Blocked entry into the United States for 90 days for citizens from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.
The new rules—and the efforts of security personnel at major international airports to enforce them—triggered a tsunami of chaos and fear among travelers.
“We’ve gotten reports of people being detained all over the country,” said Becca Heller, the director of the International Refugee Assistance Project. “They’re literally pouring in by the minute.”
Refugees on flights when the order was signed on January 27 were detained upon arrival.
Many students attending American universities were blocked from returning to the United States from visits abroad.
According to Homeland Security officials:
- 109 people who were already in transit to the United States when the order was signed were denied access;
- 173 were stopped before boarding planes heading to America;
- 81 who were stopped were eventually given waivers to enter the United States.
Internationally, travelers were seized by panic when they were not allowed to board flights to the United States. In Dubai and Istanbul, airport and immigration officials turned passengers away at boarding gates. At least one family was removed from a flight it had boarded.
Earlier on January 28, Trump, isolated in the White House from all the chaos he had unleashed in airports across the nation and throughout the world, said:
“It’s not a Muslim ban, but we were totally prepared. It’s working out very nicely. You see it at the airports, you see it all over.”
Then the American Civil Liberties Union intervened.
Two Iraqi immigrants, defended by the ACLU, accused Trump of legal and constitutional overreach.
The Iraqis had been detained at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York City. One had served as an interpreter for American forces in Iraq for a decade. The other was en route to reunite with his wife and son in Texas.
The interpreter, Hameed Khalid Darweesh, was released after nearly 19 hours of detention. So was the other traveler, Haider Sameer Abdulkhaleq Alshawi.
Before the two men were released, one of their lawyers, Mark Doss, a supervising attorney at the International Refugee Assistance Project, asked an official, “Who is the person we need to talk to?”
“Call Mr. Trump,” said the official, who refused to identify himself.
He might just as well have said: “You want to protest? Tell the Fuhrer.”
The ACLU action secured at least a temporary blocking of part of Trump’s order. A Brooklyn judge barred the government from deporting some arrivals who found themselves ensnared by the Presidential order.
Judge Ann M. Donnelly of the Federal District Court in Brooklyn, ruled that sending the travelers home could cause them “irreparable harm.” She said the government was “enjoined and restrained from, in any manner and by any means, removing individuals” who had arrived in the United States with valid visas or refugee status.
But she did not force the administration to let in people otherwise blocked by the executive order who have not yet traveled to the United States. Nor did she issue a broader ruling on the constitutionality of the order.
* * * * *
On November 8, millions of ignorant, hate-filled, Right-wing Americans elected Donald Trump—a man reflecting their own hate and ignorance—to the Presidency.
Summing up Trump’s character in a March 25, 2016 broadcast of The PBS Newshour, conservative political columnist David Brooks warned: “The odd thing about [Trump’s] whole career and his whole language, his whole world view is there is no room for love in it. You get a sense of a man who received no love, can give no love….
“And so you really are seeing someone who just has an odd psychology unleavened by kindness and charity, but where it’s all winners and losers, beating and being beat. And that’s part of the authoritarian personality.”
There were countless warning signs available for Trump’s supporters to see—if they had wanted to see them:
- His threats against his political opponents;
- His five-year “birtherism” slander against President Obama—which even he was forced to disavow;
- His rampant egomania;
- His attacks on everyone who dared to disagree with him;
- His refusal to release his tax returns;
- His history of bankruptcies and lawsuits filed against him;
- His bragging about sexually abusing women (“Grab them by the pussy”).
Those who voted against Trump are now experiencing the truth of the Nazi slogan: “The Fuhrer proposes and disposes for all.”
9/11 ATTACKS, ABC NEWS, ADOLF EICHMANN, ADOLF HITLER, ALTERNET, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, DAILY KOS, DONALD TRUMP, EGYPT, EXECUTIVE ORDER, FACEBOOK, HEINRICH HIMMLER, HERMAN GORING, HITLER 1889-1936: HUBRIS, HITLER 1936-1945: NEMESIS, HITLER: ASCENT: 1889-1939, IAN KERSHAW, IRAN, IRQA, JOSEPH GOEBBELS, LYBIA, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OSAMA BIN LADEN, PENTAGON, POLITICO, RAW STORY, SALON, SAUDI ARABIA, SLATE, SOMALIA, SUDAN, SYRIA, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, THIRD REICH, TIME, TURKEY, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES, VOLKER ULRICH, WALTER SHAUB, WORLD TRADE CENTER, YEMEN
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on August 3, 2017 at 12:02 am
When historians—and ordinary citizens—think about the Third Reich, the name of Werner Willikens doesn’t immediately spring to mind.
Adolf Hitler, Herman Goring, Joseph Goebbels, Heinrich Himmler, Adolf Eichmann—yes.
But Werner Willikens? Why him?
Ian Kershaw has unearthed the reason.
Ian Kershaw is a British historian and author who has written extensively about the Third Reich. He is best-known for his monumental, two-volume biography, Hitler 1889–1936: Hubris (1998) and Hitler 1936–1945: Nemesis (2000).
Ian Kershaw
Willikens, State Secretary in the Ministry of Food, gave a speech on February 21, 1934 that casts new light on how Hitler came to exercise vast authority over Nazi Germany:
“Everyone who has the opportunity to observe it knows that the Fuhrer can hardly dictate from above everything he intends to realize sooner or later.
“On the contrary, up till now everyone with a post in the new Germany has worked best when he has, so to speak, worked towards the Fuhrer….
“In fact, it is the duty of everybody to try to work towards the Fuhrer along the lines he would wish. Anyone who makes mistakes will notice it soon enough.
“But anyone who really works towards the Fuhrer along his lines and towards his goal will certainly both now and in the future one day have the finest reward in the form of the sudden legal confirmation of his work.”
Volker Ullrich, bestselling author of Hitler: Ascent 1889 – 1939, summed up the results of this interplay between Hitler and his subjects:
“Kershaw tried to show that in many instances Hitler didn’t need to do very much at all since German society—everyone from the underlings surrounding him to ordinary people on the street—were increasingly inclined to anticipate and fulfill the Fuhrer’s every wish, ‘working towards him.’
“…Kershaw did not minimize the historical role played by Hitler and his insane, ideological fixations, but he did illustrate that without the readiness of many people to work for the man in charge, there would have been no way he could have achieved his murderous aims.
“Kershaw’s main thesis was that the dynamics of the Nazi regime arose from the interplay of Hitler’s intentions with activism emanating from subordinate individuals and institutions. The results were ever more radical ‘solutions.’”
With the Third Reich dying in the flames of Berlin, at about 3:30 p.m. on April 30, 1945, Adolf Hitler simultaneously bit on a cyanide capsule and fired a pistol shot into his right temple.
The concept of “working towards the Fuhrer” seemed to have come to a literally fiery end.
Fast forward almost 72 years later—to 4:42 p.m. on January 27, 2017.
Newly inaugurated President Donald J. Trump signs into law an executive order that:
- Suspends entry of all refugees to the United States for 120 days;
- Bars Syrian refugees indefinitely; and
- Blocks entry into the United States for 90 days for citizens of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.
Trump’s executive order read: “In order to protect Americans, the United States must ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes toward it and its founding principles.
“The United States cannot, and should not, admit those who do not support the Constitution, or those who would place violent ideologies over American law.”
President Donald Trump
But that statement excluded three extremely troubling facts.
First: Over the past four decades, there have been no fatal attacks within the United States by immigrants from any of those seven banned countries.
Second, approximately 3,000 Americans have been killed by immigrants from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Turkey. Most of those victims died during the attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.
In fact, 15 of the 19 highjackers who took part in those attacks came from Saudi Arabia. Osama bin Ladin, the mastermind of the attacks, was himself a Saudi from a wealthy family with strong ties to the Saudi Royal Family.
Third, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Turkey are all countries where President Trump has close business ties. His properties include two luxury towers in Turkey and golf courses in the United Arab Emirates.
Trump lists companies on his FEC filing possibly related to a development project in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia’s second-biggest city, located outside Mecca: DT Jeddah Technical Services Manager LLC, DT Jeddah Technical Services Manager Member Corp., THC Jeddah Hotel Manager LLC and THC Jeddah Hotel Manager Member Corp.
Trump lists two companies on his FEC filing possibly related to business in Egypt: Trump Marks Egypt and Trump Marks Egypt LLC.
The full dimensions of Trump’s holdings throughout the Middle East aren’t known because he has refused to release his tax returns.
On January 11, Trump said that:
- He would resign from his positions at the Trump Organization but that he would not divest his ownership.
- The organization would be managed by his sons Eric and Don Jr. and chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg.
- The organization would terminate pending deals and not seek new international business.
Walter Shaub, director of the Office of Government Ethics, said that these measures did not resolve the President’s conflict-of-interest problems and called them “meaningless.”
It was after Trump signed his executive order that the true consequences of “working towards the Fuhrer”—or President—were fully revealed.
ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, ALTERNET, AP, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, FACEBOOK, FBI, IDENTIFICATION CARDS, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OSAMA BIN LADEN, PENTAGON, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SECURITY, SECURITY THEATER, SLATE, TERRORISM, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UP, UPI, USA TODAY, VIET CONG
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on July 28, 2017 at 12:02 am
So you want to visit the Pentagon and see how America’s military works to protect you? Fine.
Just be prepared to accept the requirements that go with “security theater.”
A memo from the Public Affairs Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense, dated February 2, 2012, offers this gem:
The Pentagon
“Proper personal identification (ID) must be produced when requested by Pentagon Police prior to entering the Pentagon as follows.
- Ages 12 and under – ID not required.
- Ages 13 to 17 – One form of photo ID or a parent/guardian to vouch for them.
- Ages 18 and up – Two forms of ID: one form must be a government issued photo ID, the other may be a credit/debit card, U.S. passport, birth certificate, or another item with the individual’s name printed on it, excluding business cards.”
Let’s break all this down:
“Ages 12 and under – ID not required.” Strapping bombs to children was a favorite tactic of the Viet Cong. And Al Qaeda has not hesitated to make use of the same weapon. It’s not comforting to learn that our military is still looking at children as “babes of innocence” rather than as possible “bombs of convenience.”
“Ages 13 to 17 – One form of photo ID or a parent/guardian to vouch for them.” Great! So long as an adult says, “Yeah, he’s mine,” any teenager can gain entry to America’s most important military center. This includes those teens who resent the American military’s presence around the world.
“Ages 18 and up – Two forms of ID: one form must be a government issued photo ID, the other may be a credit/debit card, U.S. passport, birth certificate, or another item with the individual’s name printed on it.”
Knowing a person’s identity is useful—so long as you have a reliable database system to match it against. An example of this is the FBI’s National Crime Information Center (NCIC).
Since 1967, the NCIC has been America’s central database for tracking crime-related information. It’s linked with such information repositories as:
- Federal law enforcement agencies
- State law enforcement agencies
- Local law enforcement agencies
- Federal and state motor vehicle registration/licensing agencies.
The NCIC makes available a variety of personal and property records for law enforcement and security purposes, covering:
- Convicted sex offenders
- Criminal convictions
- Foreign fugitives
- Immigration violators
- Persons with active protection orders
- Parolees
- Persons with active arrest warrants
- Secret Service protective alerts
- Terrorist organizations and membership
- Violent gang organizations and membership
Behind this lies a simple but highly effective formula, which was best-expressed in the classic 1973 movie, The Day of the Jackal. An anonymous professional killer has been hired to assassinate French President Charles de Gaulle.
At a government meeting called to thwart the plot, a top security expert says: “The first task is to give this man a name. With a name, we get a face, with a face a passport, with a passport an arrest.”
But if you don’t have a reliable database system to match an ID against, forcing people to “show me your ID” is worthless. What does “John Smith” mean to the average ill-paid security guard?
Even if the person is a wanted criminal, just looking at his ID card is worthless. Unless, of course, the person is so notorious as a criminal that his name is known to almost everyone: “My God, it’s Osama bin Laden!”
That’s presuming that the person is not only notorious but stupid enough to flaunt it. There is, after all, such a thing as a falsified ID. Every teenager who’s ever wanted access to a can of beer knows that.
If it seems impossible that any security official could be so stupid, consider this:
In 2010 a friend of mine decided to rent a P.O. box at his local Postal Service office. He was promptly told he would have to provide two pieces of identification, such as:
- A driver’s license or State ID card
- A passport
- A birth certificate
- A bill from a utility company, such as for phone or electric service.
Now, consider:
- He lived only a few blocks from the post office where he was applying for a P.O. box.
- He had lived at the same apartment building for 22 years.
- The Postal Service had been delivering his mail there that entire time—sometimes knocking at his door to do so.
- When he came to its counter to retrieve mail that was otherwise un-deliverable, his showing a State ID card had been entirely enough.
But, to rent a P.O. box at that very same post office, he had to prove he wasn’t a terrorist. And one of the ways he was to do this was to show a utility bill.
What does paying money to an electric or gas company prove about anyone? Osama bin Laden was paying for utilities in a Pakistani house—and the Pakistanis didn’t say: “Hey, we can’t supply electricity to you–you’re a terrorist.”
9/11, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AP, BARACK OBAMA, BENGHAZI TERROR ATTACK, BIRTH CERTIFICATE, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHARLES KOCH, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DAVID KOCH, DR. STANTON GLANTZ, FACEBOOK, FBI, GEORGE W. BUSH, IMPEACHMENT, IRS, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, NAVY SEALS, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OSAMA BIN LADEN, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TEA PARTY, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TOBACCO INDUSTRY, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UP, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Politics, Social commentary on July 27, 2017 at 12:05 am
The Tea Party hated President Barack Obama and believed he should be impeached.
That you could have easily learned by visiting its website.
But there is a great deal about the Tea Party itself that its website won’t tell you.
Such as:
- Despite its propaganda, it is not a “grassroots organization” comprised of “ordinary Americans.”
- It was created with money from the tobacco industry and the billionaire Koch brothers.
- Its purpose is to co-opt Right-wing Americans and channel their votes into legislation that benefits the 1% richest.
That’s the conclusion of a study by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institute of Health.
National Cancer Institute
The roots of the Tea Party lie in the early 1980s, when tobacco companies started pouring money into third-party groups.
Their mission was two-fold:
- To fight excise taxes on cigarettes; and
- To combat health studies showing a link between cancer and secondhand smoke.
Stanton Glantz, professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, has been a longtime foe of the tobacco industry.
Dr. Stanton Glantz
In 2012, he authored a study for the peer-reviewed academic journal, Tobacco Control. Writing about the ties between the Tea Party and the tobacco industry, Glantz noted:
“The Tea Party, which gained prominence in the USA in 2009, advocates limited government and low taxes. Tea Party organisations, particularly Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks, oppose smoke-free laws and tobacco taxes.
“Rather than being a purely grassroots movement that spontaneously developed in 2009, the Tea Party has developed over time, in part through decades of work by the tobacco industry and other corporate interests.”
Click here: ‘To quarterback behind the scenes, third-party efforts’: the tobacco industry and the Tea Party — Fallin et al. –
Charles and David Koch, the real founders of the Tea Party
Most people believe the Tea Party originated as a 2009 grassroots uprising to protest taxes. But its origins can be traced to 2002.
That was when the Charles and David Koch and tobacco-backed Citizens for a Sound Economy set up the first Tea Party website.
From the National Cancer Institute’s study of the Tea Party:
- “The Tea Party, a loosely organised network of grassroots coalitions at local and state levels, is a complex social and political movement to the right of the traditional Republican Party that promotes less government regulation and lower taxes.”
- “David Koch was a co-founder of Citizens for a Sound Economy (CSE) and Americans for Prosperity (AFP) Foundation,” both major allies of the tobacco industry.
- “National organisations funded by corporations, particularly Americans for Prosperity (AFP) and FreedomWorks, played an important role in structuring and supporting the Tea Party in the initial stages. They provided training, communication and materials for the earliest Tea Party activities, including the first ‘Tea Party’ on 27 February 2009.”
- “FreedomWorks organised the nationwide Tea Party tax protests in April 2009, the town hall protests about the proposed healthcare reform in August 2009 and the Taxpayers’ March on Washington the following September 2009.”
- “As of 2012, AFP and FreedomWorks were supporting the tobacco companies’ political agenda by mobilising local Tea Party opposition to tobacco taxes and smoke-free laws.”
- “In many ways, the Tea Party of the late 2000s has become the ‘movement’ envisioned by Tim Hyde, RJR director of national field operations in the 1990s, which was grounded in patriotic values of ‘freedom’ and ‘choice’ to change how people see the role of ‘government’ and ‘big business’ in their lives, particularly with regard to taxes and regulation.”
- “Many factors beyond the tobacco industry have contributed to the development of the Tea Party. Anti-tax sentiment has been linked to notions of patriotism since the inception of the USA when the colonies were protesting against taxation by the British.”
- “In addition, the Tea Party has origins in the ultra-right John Birch Society of the 1950s, of which Fred Koch (Charles and David Koch’s father) was a founding member.”
- “Although the Tea Party is a social movement, it has been affiliated closely with, and somewhat incorporated into, the Republican Party. This may be due in part to the increased conservatism of politically active Republicans since 1970s and the increased polarisation of American politics.”
- “….AFP and FreedomWorks…capitalised on the changing political realities following President Barack Obama’s election in 2008.”
- “In particular, they harnessed anti-government sentiment arising from the confluence of the mortgage and banking bailout, President Barack Obama’s stimulus package and the Democratic push for healthcare reform, which provided them with the opportunity for more successful grassroots-level Tea Party organising.”
CHART SHOWING Connections between the tobacco industry, third-party allies and the Tea Party, from the 1980’s (top) through 2012 (bottom).
Since 2008, the Tea Party has played a major role in American politics.
Throughout 2009, its thuggish supporters sought to terrorize members of Congress into opposing passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), otherwise known as Obamacare.
This despite the fact that the ACA offered many of them their only chance to obtain access to medical care.
And in 2010 they played a pivotal role in delivering the House of Representatives to the Republican Party. Similarly, they helped Republicans take control of the Senate in 2014.
Yet the vast majority of the Tea Party’s low-level membership probably doesn’t know the origins—or the real purposes—of their organization.
But for those for whom truth is important, “the truth”—as The X-Files tagline once went—“is out there.”
9/11, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AP, BARACK OBAMA, BENGHAZI TERROR ATTACK, BIRTH CERTIFICATE, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHARLES KOCH, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DAVID KOCH, DR. STANTON GLANTZ, FACEBOOK, FBI, GEORGE W. BUSH, IMPEACHMENT, IRS, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, NAVY SEALS, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OSAMA BIN LADEN, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TEA PARTY, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TOBACCO INDUSTRY, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UP, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Politics, Social commentary on July 26, 2017 at 12:41 am
“Should Barack Obama Be Impeached?” shouted the September, 2014 headline on the Right-wing website of TeaParty.org.
“A fake birth certificate, the Benghazi attack, the IRS scandal, National Security invasions on privacy….Many are questioning Obama’s competence. Should Congress initiate impeachment proceedings?
“What do you think?”
Then the site offered this in tribute to its sponsor:
“TeaParty.org, one of America’s leading websites and top online news sources is conducting a poll about an important issue.
“The results of these polls will be published online and are shared with major news networks and policymakers.
“Don’t miss this opportunity to let your voice be heard! Vote today!”
The viewer was then given two questions to answer.
The first was: “Should Barack Obama be impeached?”
The website offered three possible answers for the visitor to choose:
- “Yes, the events are now overwhelming.”
- “No, these do not meet the threshold of high crimes and misdemeanors.”
- “Not sure, still waiting to review the evidence.”
The second question was: “Whom do you believe has better solutions for the nation’s problems?”
It, too, provided three possible answers:
- “Conservatives”
- “Liberals”
- “Neither.”
The website omitted a number of truths—about both President Barack Obama and the Tea Party itself.
Slander #1: “A false birth certificate”
The election of Barack Obama pushed the Right to new heights of infamy. With no political scandal (such as Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky) to fasten on, the Republican Party deliberately promoted the slander that Obama was not an American citizen.
From this there could be only one conclusion: That he was an illegitimate President, and should be removed from office.
President Barack Obama
During the 2008 Presidential campaign, Republicans charged that Obama was really a Muslim non-citizen who intended to sell out America’s security to his Muslim “masters.”
And this smear campaign continued throughout his Presidency.
To the dismay of his enemies, Obama—in the course of a single week—dramatically proved the falsity of both charges.
On April 27, 2011, he released the long-form of his Hawaii birth certificate.
The long-form version of President Obama’s birth certificate
“We do not have time for this kind of silliness,” said Obama at a press conference, speaking as a father might to a roomful of spiteful children. “We have better stuff to do. I have got better stuff to do. We have got big problems to solve.
“We are not going to be able to do it if we are distracted, we are not going to be able to do it if we spend time vilifying each other…if we just make stuff up and pretend that facts are not facts, we are not going to be able to solve our problems if we get distracted by side shows and carnival barkers.”
And on May 1, he announced the solving of one of those “big problems”: Osama bin Laden, mastermind of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, had been tracked down and shot dead by elite U.S. Navy SEALS in Pakistan.
Slander #2: “The Benghazi attack”
A total of four Americans died in a terrorist attack on the American diplomatic consulate in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11, 2012.
Whereas a total of 3,000 Americans died in the Al Qaeda attacks of September 11, 2001. But those occurred on the watch of a white Republican President, so naturally no treason charges were invoked by the Right.
Slander #3: “The IRS scandal”
In 2013, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) disclosed that it had selected political groups applying for tax-exempt status for intensive scrutiny based on their names or political themes.
Although Right-wingers have claimed that their political organizations were exclusively targeted by the IRS, the agency opened investigations based on such trigger-words as:
- Tea Party
- Patriots
- 9/12 Project
- progressive
- occupy
- Israel
- medical marijuana
“While some of the IRS questions may have been overbroad, you can look at some of these groups and understand why these questions were being asked,” said Ohio State University law professor Donald Tobin.
In January, 2014, the FBI announced that it had found no evidence warranting the filing of federal criminal charges in connection with the scandal.
No evidence has come to light suggesting that President Obama was responsible for the IRS’s actions.
Slander #4: “National Security Agency (NSA) invasions on privacy”
This totally ignores that it was former President George W. Bush who, after 9/11, ordered the NSA to vastly increase its electronic-interception capabilities.
No longer would the agency be confined to spying on calls outside the United States. From now on, it would target Americans who might be linked to international terror cells.
Slander #5: “Many are questioning Obama’s competence”
While this was true—among those on the Right and Left—it missed the essential legal point: Even if true, “incompetence” is not a legitimate impeachable offense.
And no evidence ever came forth to indict President Obama for “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
Meanwhile, there was a great deal about the Tea Party itself that its founders didn’t reveal in their “poll”.
Such as the truth that it was created by the tobacco industry and the billionaire Koch brothers.
9/11 ATTACKS, ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, AFGHANISTAN, AL QAEDA, ALTERNET, AP, BARACK OBAMA, BASHAR AL-ASSAD, BBC, BUZZFEED, CARLOS THE JACKAL, CBS NEWS, CHEMICAL WARFARE, CHINA, CNN, CONGRESS, DAILY KOS, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, GEORGE H.W. BUSH, GEORGE W. BUSH, HARRY S. TRUMAN, HIZBOLLAH, IRAN, IRAQ, ISLAM, ISRAEL, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OSAMA BIN LADEN, POLITICO, RAW STORY, RELIGION, REUTERS, RUSSIA, SADDAM UISSEIN, SALON, SAMUEL P. HUNTINGTON, SEATTLE TIMES, SHIITE MUSLIMS, SLATE, SUNNI MUSLIMS, SYRIA, SYRIAN OBSERVATORY FOR HUMAN RIGHTS, TERRORISM, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE SYRIAN OBSERVATORY FOR HUMAN RIGHTS, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, THE WORLD POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, VLADIMIR PUTIN, WORLD WAR 1
In Bureaucracy, History, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, Social commentary on April 7, 2017 at 12:10 am
Contrary to the propaganda of Republican militarists and Democratic do-gooders, Americans should be thrilled at the mutual destruction of their most dedicated enemies. Such as is now taking place in Syria.
And yet, faced with an unprecedented threat to their security, many Western leaders refuse to publicly acknowledge this fundamental truth.
One man who predicted the ongoing Islamic-vs.-West conflicts with stunning clarity was Samuel P. Huntington.
A political scientist, Huntington taught government at Harvard University (1950-1959, then at Columbia University (1959-1962). He returned to Harvard in 1963, and remained there until his death in 2008.
The author of nine books, in 1996 he published his most influential one: The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order.
Its thesis was that, in the post-Cold War world, people’s cultural and religious identities would be the primary sources of conflict.
Huntington warned that the West’s future conflicts with Islamic nations would be rooted in the Islamic religion:
“The fundamental problem for the West is not Islamic fundamentalism. It is Islam, a different civilisation whose people are convinced of the superiority of their culture and are obsessed with the inferiority of their power.”
Among his assertions:
- Western nations should distance themselves from Islamic ones. The more both civilizations interact, the greater tensions between them will be.
- Relations between Muslims and non-Muslims have been marked by Islamic antagonism and violence.
- A fundamental clash of civilizations between Islam and the West is inevitable.
- Even if Arab dictatorships fall, the new regimes won’t modernize along Western lines.
- When the Muslim world conflicts with other civilizations, tensions and wars result.
- Their primary attachment is to their religion, not to their nation-state.
- Islamic civilization do not share the general ideals of the Western world–such as individualism and democracy.
Despite such realities, both Democratic and Republican politicians insist on constantly intervening in Middle East conflicts–such as the one in Syria.
In Part One of this series, five reasons were given for why the United States should not intervene in the Syrian conflict. Here are the remaining five.
Sixth, intervening in Syria could lead to Syrian attacks against Israel.
An accidental or deliberate American military strike on Syrian government forces could lead the country’s dictator, Bashar al-Assad, to attack Israel–perhaps even with chemical weapons.
If that happened, the Islamic world would rally to Syria against the United States, Israel’s chief ally.
Seventh, committing American ground forces to Syria or just continuing to bomb targets there could lead to Islamic terrorism against the United States–at home or abroad.
Terrorists have already targeted Russia–which, on September 30, 2015, began bombing airstrikes on forces trying to overthrow Assad.
On October 31, Airbus A321, a Russian airliner, broke up in mid-air, then crashed in Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula, killing all 224 people on board. In Egypt, a militant group affiliated to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) claimed it had brought down the plane “in response to Russian airstrikes that killed hundreds of Muslims on Syrian land.”
Airbus A321
The same fate could well befall American civilians and/or soldiers.
Eighth, China and Russia are supporting the Assad dictatorship–and the brutalities it commits against its own citizens.
This reflects badly on them–not the United States. And any move by the United States to directly attack the Assad regime could ignite an all-out war with Russia and/or China.
What happens if a case of “friendly fire” leads Russian and American forces to start trading salvos? Or if Russian President Vladimir Putin orders an attack on America’s ally, Israel, in return for some perceived American slight of Russia’s ally, Syria?
It was exactly that scenario–Great Powers going to war over conflicts between their small-state allies–that triggered World War I.
Ninth, the United States cannot defeat ISIS in Syria through air power alone–thus making commitment of ground troops inevitable.
President Barack Obama authorized airstrikes against ISIS in September, 2014. The United States Air Force has since dropped thousands of bombs on ISIS convoys. This has not destroyed ISIS.
And its failure to do so has only led to demands by hawkish Republicans and Democrats for “boots on the ground.”
Tenth–and most importantly: While Islamic nations like Syria, Iraq and Egypt wage war within their own borders, they will lack the resources–and incentive–to attack the United States.
Every dead Hezbollah and Al-Qaeda and ISIS member makes the United States that much safer. So does the death of every sympathizer of Hezbollah, Al-Qaeda and ISIS.
When Al-Qaeda blows up civilians in Beirut, their relatives will urge Hezbollah to take brutal revenge. And Hezbollah will do so.
Al Qaeda terrorists–taking aim at Hezbollah terrorists
Similarly, when Hezbollah does, those who support Al-Qaeda will demand even more brutal reprisals against Hezbollah.
If the West is lucky, this conflict could easily become the Islamic equivalent of “the Hundred Years War” that raged from 1337 to 1453 between England and France.
When Adolf Hitler invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, then-Senator Harry S. Truman said: “I hope the Russians kill lots of Nazis–and vice versa.”
That should be America’s position whenever its sworn enemies start killing off each other. Americans should welcome such self-slaughters, not become entrapped in them.
9/11 ATTACKS, ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, AFGHANISTAN, AL QAEDA, ALTERNET, AP, BARACK OBAMA, BASHAR AL-ASSAD, BBC, BUZZFEED, CARLOS THE JACKAL, CBS NEWS, CHEMICAL WARFARE, CHINA, CNN, CONGRESS, DAILY KOS, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, GEORGE H.W. BUSH, GEORGE W. BUSH, HARRY S. TRUMAN, HIZBOLLAH, IRAN, IRAQ, ISLAM, ISRAEL, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OSAMA BIN LADEN, POLITICO, RAW STORY, RELIGION, REUTERS, RUSSIA, SADDAM UISSEIN, SALON, SAMUEL P. HUNTINGTON, SEATTLE TIMES, SHIITE MUSLIMS, SLATE, SUNNI MUSLIMS, SYRIA, SYRIAN OBSERVATORY FOR HUMAN RIGHTS, TERRORISM, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE SYRIAN OBSERVATORY FOR HUMAN RIGHTS, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, THE WORLD POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, VLADIMIR PUTIN, WORLD WAR 1
In History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on April 6, 2017 at 2:15 am
“Yesterday’s chemical attack, a chemical attack that was so horrific in Syria against innocent people, including women, small children and even beautiful little babies, their deaths were an affront to humanity.”
So spoke President Donald J. Trump at an April 5 press conference in the White House Rose Garden.
He was referring to an April 4 chemical weapons attack in northwestern Syria that had killed scores of civilians.
The bombing was carried out by the Syrian Air Force in an effort to put down a six-year civil war.
The Syrian conflict began on March 15, 2011, triggered by protests demanding political reforms and the ouster of dictator Bashar al-Assad. Since then, the fighting has reportedly taken the lives of 470,000 men, women and children.
Bashar al-Assad
Yet, despite Trump’s rhetoric, there is an optimistic way to view this incident–and the Syrian conflict generally: As a win for the United States.
Consider:
- As many as 470,000 actual or potential enemies of Western civilization–and especially the United States–have chosen to slaughter one another.
- Additional thousands are certain to follow their example.
- The United States cannot be held in any way responsible for it.
- And Russia–which openly supports the brutal Assad dictatorship–daily earns the hatred of the Islamic world.
Yet, Left-wing do-gooders and Right-wing militarists demand that the United States thrust itself into a conflict that doesn’t threaten America in any way.
In fact, it’s in America’s best interests that this conflict last as long as possible and spread as widely as possible throughout the Islamic community.
Here’s why:
First, in Syria, two of America’s most deadly enemies are waging war on each other.
Yes, it’s Hezbollah (Party of God) vs. Al-Qaeda (The Base). Hezbollah is comprised of Shiite Muslims. A sworn enemy of Israel, it has kidnapped scores of Americans suicidal enough to visit Lebanon and truck-bombed the Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983, killing 299 Americans.
Flag of Hezbollah
Al Qaeda, on the other hand, is made up of Sunni Muslims. It is intolerant of Shiites and has instigated violence against them. It denounces them as takfirs–“apostates”–and thus worthy of extermination.
Flag of Al-Qaeda
Al Qaeda has attacked the mosques and gatherings of liberal Muslims, Shiites, Suffis and other non-Sunnis. Examples of sectarian attacks include the Sadr City bombings, the 2004 Ashoura massacre and the April, 2007 Baghdad bombings.
On one side of this conflict is the Ba’ath regime of Bashar al-Assad, whose allies include Russia, Iran, Hezbollah and elements of the Iraqi government.
On the other side are a host of Syrians and thousands of foreign Sunni fighters, some of whom are affiliated with Al-Qaeda.
Second, the United States has been at war in the Middle East for 15 years–since the terror attacks of September 11, 2001.
In October, 2001, America first committed its forces to Afghanistan, in pursuit of Osama bin Laden, the 9/11 mastermind. Failing to find him, its forces nevertheless stayed on in that country, hoping–and failing–to bring civilization to its barbaric population.
Then, in March, 2003, President George W. Bush invaded Iraq to settle a personal score with its dictator, Saddam Hussein.
After Bush’s father, George H.W. Bush, launched the 1991 Gulf War, Hussein had had the bad grace to not topple from power. When the elder Bush lost a second term as President to Bill Clinton in 1992, his son blamed Hussein.
By contrast: America entered World War 1 in 1917–and wrapped up its fighting in Europe in 1918. Similarly, the United States first committed forces in World War II in 1942–and saw an end to that conflict in 1945.
Even the Vietnam war–far more divisive for Americans than either World War 1 or II–ended after eight years of fighting (1965-1973.
Third, the United States is still fighting a brutal war in Afghanistan.
America originally intended to withdraw all but a small embassy-based force of 1,000 troops by the end of 2016.
But as the Taliban re-emerged as a threat, President Barack Obama announced he would maintain 9,800 troops there for most of 2016. Those troops are still stationed there–some of them advising local Afghan troops, others locked in deadly combat with the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.
American soldiers in Afghanistan
Fourth, since 1979, Syria has been listed by the U.S. State Department as a sponsor of terrorism.
Among the terrorist groups it supports: Hezbollah and Hamas. For many years, Syria provided a safe-house in Damascus for Illich Ramirez Sanchez–the notorious international terrorist known as Carlos the Jackal.
Fifth, the United States had no part in creating or supporting the decades-long dictatorship of the Assad regime–which has long been hostile to America.
After a long series of political maneuverings, Hafez al-Assad seized power in 1970 and was proclaimed “president” next year. With aid from the Soviet Union, he built up the Syrian army. Using arrest, torture and execution, he ruled Syria as a dictator until he died in 2000.
His son, Bashar, then took command of Syria. Like his father, he has supported Palestinian and Lebanese militant groups. And, like his father, he continues to receive financial and military support from the successor to the Soviet Union, the Russian Federation.
Thus, America has no moral obligation of any kind to Syria–or Syrians.
9/11, ABC NEWS, AFGHANISTAN, AL-QUAEDA, ALTERNET, ANDREW M. CUOMO, BARACK OBAMA, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, DAILY KOS, FACEBOOK, GEORGE W. BUSH, HAMID KARZAI, JOSEPH LEMM, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NBC NEWS, NEW YORK AIR NATIONAL GUARD, NEW YORK POLICE DEPARTMENT, NEWSWEEK, NORTH VIETNAMESE ARMY, NPR, OSAMA BIN LADEN, POLITICO, RAW STORY, ROLLING STONE MAGAZINE, SALON, SLATE, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE PENTAGON, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, USA TODAY, VIETCONG, VIETNAM, WORLD TRADE CENTER
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on February 16, 2017 at 1:02 am
On February 9, Army General John Nicholson told the Senate Armed Services Committee he had enough U.S. and NATO troops for counterterrorism operations in Afghanistan.
But he needed more to sufficiently “train, advise and assist” the Afghan forces.
There are now 8,400 U.S. troops in Afghanistan and another 5,000 troops from NATO countries.
To put this latest troop request into human terms:
On December 21, 2015, a suicide-bomber rammed an explosives-laden motorcycle into a joint NATO-Afghan patrol. Six American troops and an Afghan were killed.
One of the dead was Joseph Lemm, 45, a detective and 15-year veteran of the New York Police Department. A technical sergeant in the New York Air National Guard, he had been deployed three times–once to Iraq and twice to Afghanistan.
Joseph Lemm
Lemm left behind a daughter, Brook, 16, a son, Ryan, four, and his wife, Christine.
New York Governor Andrew M. Cuomo ordered that flags on all state government buildings be flown at half-staff on December 23 in Lemm’s honor.
“Staff Sergeant Joe Lemm served this nation with the selflessness and bravery that embodies the U.S. Armed Forces and the NYPD,” Cuomo said in a statement.
Lemm’s death was a double tragedy–that of a dedicated man who should not have died so needlessly.
In short: It’s long past time for the United States to quit its failed mission to civilize Afghanistan.
The history of American conflict in Afghanistan began on September 11, 2001.
On that date, 19 Islamic highjackers slammed two jetliners into the World Trade Center in New York and one into the Pentagon in Washington, D.C.
A fourth plane, headed for the White House or Capitol Building, failed to reach its target when its passengers rioted–and the highjackers dove it into a Pennsylvania field.
The mastermind of the attacks was Osama bin Laden, a Saudi millionaire then living in Afghanistan, under protection by its ruling thugocracy, the Taliban.
The administration of President George W. Bush demanded his immediate surrender to American justice.
The Taliban refused.
So, on October 7, 2011–less than one month from the 9/11 attacks–American bombers began pounding Taliban positions.
The whole point of the campaign was to pressure the Taliban to surrender Bin Laden.
But the Taliban held firm. Bin Laden holed up in the mountains of Tora Bora, and then ultimately escaped into Pakistan.
After December, 2001, American Intelligence completely lost track of Bin Laden. CIA officials repeatedly said he was likely living in the “no-man’s-land” between Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Thus, there was no longer any point in pressuring the Taliban to surrender Bin Laden.
Osama bin Laden
Still, the United States continued to commit forces to Afghanistan–to turn a primitive, warlord-ruled country into a modern-day democracy.
There was, admittedly, a great deal to detest about the Taliban:
- When the Taliban ruled Afghanistan, they turned soccer stadiums into execution plazas for mass beheadings or shootings.
- Taliban “fighters” have proven their “courage” by throwing acid into the faces of women who dared to attend school.
Taliban religious police beating a woman
- On August 8, 1989, the Taliban attacked Mazar-i-Sharif. Talibanists began shooting people in the street, then moved on to mass rapes of women. Thousands of people were locked in containers and left to suffocate.
- The Taliban forbade women to leave their homes unless accompanied by a male relative and wearing the burqa–a traditional dress covering the entire body. Those who disobeyed were publicly beaten.
Yet, as horrific as such atrocities were, these did not obligate the United States to spend eternity trying to bring civilization to this barbaric country.
And, in pursuing that goal, both the Bush and Obama administrations have repeatedly overlooked the following realities:
- Hamid Karzai, the “president” of Afghanistan (2001-2014) didn’t believe in democracy–despite American claims to support his efforts to bring this to Afghanistan.
- His authority didn’t extend beyond Kabul, and he was viewed by most Afghans as an illegitimate ruler, imposed by America.
- The same can be said for his successor, Mohammad Ashraf Ghani.
- American soldiers in Afghanistan feel surrounded by enemies and hamstrung by unrealistic orders to win “hearts and minds” at the risk of their own lives.
- The Taliban poses no threat to the security of the United States.
- Afghan “insurgents” are fighting American forces because (1) they are in a civil war; and (2) they believe their country has once again been occupied by foreigners.
- Counterinsurgency is being preached as the key to defeating the Taliban in Afghanistan–where it hasn’t worked.
- Americans entered Afghanistan without an exit strategy.
All these truths applied just as firmly to America’s failed misadventure in Vietnam.
Almost 50 years ago, American “grunts” felt about their so-called South Vietnamese allies as American troops now feel about their Afghan “allies.”
Dr. Dennis Greenbaum, a former army medic, summed up how Americans had really felt about their supposed South Vietnamese allies.
“The highest [priority for medical treatment] was any U.S. person. The second highest was a U.S. dog from the canine corps. The third was NVA [North Vietnamese Army]. The fourth was VC [Viet Cong].
“And the fifth was ARVIN [Army of the Republic of South Vietnam], because they had no particular value,” said Greenbaum.
When you despise the “ally” you’re spending lives and treasure to defend, it’s time to pack up.
60 MINUTES, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, BARACK OBAMA, BASHAR AL-ASSAD, BUZZFEED, CARL MUELLER, CBS NEWS, CIA, CNN, DAILY KOS, FACEBOK, FACEBOOK, IMPERIAL HUBRIS, ISLAM, ISLAMIC STATE OF IRAQ AND SYRIA (ISIS), ISLAMIC STATE OF IRAQ AND THE LEVANT, ISRAEL, KAYLA MUELLER, MARCHING TOWARD HELL, MICHAEL SCHEUER, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MUSLIMS, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OSAMA BIN LADEN, POLITICO, RAW STORY, SALON, SLATE, SYRIA, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, USA TODAY, VIETNAM WAR
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on February 13, 2017 at 12:13 am
“When trouble comes up anywhere in the world,” said President Barack Obama, “they don’t call Beijing. They don’t call Moscow. They call us.”
And, according to former CIA agent Michael Scheuer, that’s the problem: America can’t learn to mind its own business.
Scheuer is a 20-year CIA veteran–as well as an author, historian, foreign policy critic and political analyst.
Michael Scheuer
From 1996 to 1999 he headed Alec Station, the CIA’s unit assigned to track Osama bin Laden at the agency’s Counterterrorism Center.
He is currently an adjunct professor at Georgetown University’s Center for Peace and Security Studies.
He’s also the author of two seminal works on America’s fight against terrorism: Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror (2003) and Marching Toward Hell: America and Islam after Iraq (2008).
Scheuer says that Islamics don’t hate Americans because of “our way of life”–with its–freedoms of speech and worship and its highly secular, commercialized culture.
Instead, Islamic hatred toward the United States stems from America’s six longstanding policies in the Middle East:
- U.S. support for apostate, corrupt, and tyrannical Muslim governments
- U.S. and other Western troops on the Arabian Peninsula
- U.S. support for Israel that keeps Palestinians in the Israelis’ thrall
- U.S. pressure on Arab energy producers to keep oil prices low
- U.S. occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan
- U.S. support for Russia, India, and China against their Muslim militants
Scheuer contends that no amount of American propaganda will win “the hearts and minds” of Islamics who can “see, hear, experience, and hate” these policies firsthand.
But there is another danger facing America, says Scheuer, one that threatens “the core of our social and civil institutions.”
And in Marching Toward Hell he bluntly indicts that threat: The “profound and willful ignorance” of America’s “bipartisan governing elite.”
Scheuer defines this elite as “the inbred set of individuals who have influenced…drafted and conducted U.S. foreign policy” since 1973.
Within that group are:
- politicians
- journalists
- academics
- preachers
- civil servants
- military officers
- philanthropists.
“Some are Republicans, others Democrats; some are evangelicals, others atheists; some are militarists, others pacifists; some are purveyors of Western civilization, others are multiculturalists,” writes Scheuer.
But for all their political and/or philosophical differences, the members of this governing elite share one belief in common.
According to Scheuer, that belief is “an unquenchable ardor to have the United States intervene in all places, situations and times.”
And he warns that this “bipartisan governing elite” must radically change its policies–such as unconditional support for Israel and corrupt, tyrannical Muslim governments.
Otherwise, Americans will be locked in an endless “hot war” with the Islamic world.
During his September 28, 2014 appearance on 60 Minutes, President Obama admitted that the mostly Sunni-Muslim Iraqi army had refused to combat the Sunni army of ISIS.
Then followed this exchange:
Steve Kroft: What happens if the Iraqis don’t fight or can’t fight?
President Obama: Well….
Steve Kroft: What’s the end game?
President Obama: I’m not going to speculate on failure at the moment. We’re just getting started. Let’s see how they do.
It was precisely such a mindset that led the United States, step by step, into the Vietnam quagmire.
As in the case of Vietnam, the United States lacks:
- Real or worthwhile allies in Iraq or Syria;
- A working knowledge of the peoples it wants to influence in either country;
- Clearly-defined goals that it seeks to accomplish in that region.
America rushed to disaster in Vietnam because its foreign policy elite felt it had to “do something” to fight Communism anywhere in the world.
And it is continuing to rush toward disaster in the Middle East because its foreign policy elite once again feels is must “do something.”
During his interview with the “Today” show, Carl Mueller–the father of Kayla, who went to Syria to help Syrians caught up in their own civil war–said:
“How many mistakes have we all made in life that were naïve and didn’t get caught at? Kayla was just in a place that was more dangerous than most. And she couldn’t help herself. She had to go in there and had to help.”
Kayla Mueller
But did she?
There were thousands of communities within the United States desperate for the help of a caring social activist. And thousands of organizations–such as Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA), Habitat for Humanity and Catholic Relief Services–that would have been thrilled to enlist her services.
And she could have made lives better without constantly facing the dangers of kidnapping by Islamics determined to humiliate and slaughter Americans.
Michael Sheuer is right: The United States should learn to mind its own business and quit intervening in the affairs of Middle Eastern governments and peoples.
Kayla Mueller is proof of the rightness of that assertion.
.jpg)
_08.jpg)
Bureaucracybuster's Blog 
9/11, ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, ALTERNET, AMERICAN CAESARS: THE LIVES OF THE PRESIDENTS FROM FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT TO GEORGE W. BUSH, AMERICAN EMPIRE, AP, BASHAR AL-ASSAD, BILL CLINTON, BUREAUCRACY, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHRIS MATHEWS, CNN, CONDOLEEZA RICE, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, DWIGHT EISENHOWER, FACEBOOK, FBI, FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, GEORGE H.W. BUSH, GEORGE W. BUSH, GERALD R. FORD, HARRY S. TRUMAN, JIMMY CARTER, JOHN F. KENNEDY, LYNDON B. JOHNSON, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NIGEL HAMILTON, NPR, OSAMA BIN LADEN, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, RICHARD CLARKE, RICHARD NIXON, ROMAN EMPIRE, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SEPTEMBER 11, SLATE, SUETONIUS, SYRIA, TERRORISM, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE TWELVE CAESARS, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UP, UPI, USA TODAY
THE AMERICANS WHO GAVE US 9/11: PART ONE (OF THREE)
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on September 14, 2017 at 12:10 amIt’s that time of year again—yet another anniversary celebration of September 11, 2001.
The day when Islamic terrorists slammed two jetliners into the World Trade Center and a third into the Pentagon.
They would have crashed a fourth jetliner into the White House or Capitol Building except for the heroic resistance of passengers aboard United Airlines Flight 93.
In the years immediately following 9/11, politicians of both parties used this anniversary to wave flags and make self-serving patriotic speeches.
This was especially true for officials of the administration of President George W. Bush—which, even as the rubble was being cleared at the Pentagon and World Trade Center, was preparing to use the attack as an excuse to topple Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.
Hussein had not plotted 9/11, and there was no evidence that he did. But that didn’t matter to Bush and those planning the invasion and conquest of Iraq.
World Trade Center on September 11, 2001
So here it is, 16 years later, and, once again, politicians are using 9/11 as a prop to advance their careers.
President Donald Trump claims that only he can protect America from Al Qaeda, ISIS and any other Islamic terrorist groups. So far, his weapon of choice has been banning Muslims from certain Islamic countries from entering the United States.
Interestingly, Islamic countries where Trump has close business ties—such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Turkey—are exempt from the ban.
As on past commemorations of 9/11, those who died will be remembered by friends and relatives of those who knew and loved them.
Tribute to 9/11 World Trade Center Victims
It is in fact appropriate to remember the innocents who died on that day—and the heroism of the police and firefighters who died trying to save them.
But it’s equally important to remember those who made 9/11 not simply possible but inevitable.
And that does not mean only the 19 highjackers who turned those planes into fuel-bombs. It means the officials at the highest levels of the administration of President George W. Bush.
Officials who, to this day, have never been held accountable in any way for the resulting death and destruction.
And who have been allowed to blatantly lie that they “kept us safe” from terrorism.
Obviously, such an indictment is not going to be presented by TV commentators today—not even on such liberal networks as CNN and MSNBC. And most definitely not on the right-wing Fox network.
Fortunately, British historian Nigel Hamilton has dared to lay bare the facts of this disgrace. Hamilton is the author of several acclaimed political biographies, including JFK: Reckless Youth and Bill Clinton: Mastering the Presidency.
In 2007, he began research on his latest book: American Caesars: The Lives of the Presidents From Franklin D. Roosevelt to George W. Bush.
The inspiration for this came from a classic work of ancient biography: The Twelve Caesars, by Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus—known as Suetonius.
Suetonius, a Roman citizen and historian, had chronicled the lives of the first twelve Caesars of imperial Rome: Julius Caesar, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero, Galba, Otho, Vitellius, Vespasian, Titus and Domitian.
Hamilton wanted to examine post-World War II United States history as Suetonius had examined that of ancient Rome: Through the lives of the 12 “emperors” who had held the power of life and death over their fellow citizens—and those of other nations.
For Hamilton, the “greatest of American emperors, the Caesar Augustus of his time,” was Franklin D. Roosevelt, who led his country through the Great Depression and World War II.
His “”great successors” were Harry S. Truman, Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy—who, in turn, contained the Soviet Union abroad and presided over sustained economic prosperity at home.
By contrast, “arguably the worst of all the American Caesars” was “George W. Bush, and his deputy, Dick Cheney, who willfully and recklessly destroyed so much of the moral basis of American leadership in the modern world.”
Among the most lethal of Bush’s offenses: The appointing of officials who refused to take seriously the threat posed by Al-Qaeda.
And this arrogance and indifference continued—right up to September 11, 2001, when the World Trade Center and Pentagon became targets for destruction.
Among the few administration officials who did take Al-Qaeda seriously was Richard Clarke, the chief counter-terrorism adviser on the National Security Council.
Clarke had been thus appointed in 1998 by President Bill Clinton. He continued in the same role under President Bush—but the position was no longer given cabinet-level access.
This put him at a severe disadvantage when dealing with other, higher-ranking Bush officials–such as Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Rumsfeld’s deputy, Paul Wolfowitz and National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice.
These turned out to be the very officials who refused to believe that Al-Qaeda posed a lethal threat to the United States.
“Indeed,” writes Hamilton, “in the entire first eight months of the Bush Presidency, Clarke was not permitted to brief President Bush a single time, despite mounting evidence of plans for a new al-Qaeda outrage.” [Italics added]
Nor did it help that, during his first eight months in office before September 11, Bush was on vacation, according to the Washington Post, 42% of the time.
Share this: