Posts Tagged ‘TERRORISM’
9/11, ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, AMERICAN EMPIRE, BILL CLINTON, BUREAUCRACY, CBS NEWS, CHRIS MATHEWS, CNN, 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, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NIGEL HAMILTON, OSAMA BIN LADEN, REPUBLICAN PARTY, SEPTEMBER 11, SUETONIUS, SYRIAN CIVIL WAR, SYRIAN REFUGEES, TERRORISM, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE TWELVE CAESARS, TWITTER
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on September 11, 2015 at 12:01 am
September 11, 2015, marks the 14th anniversary of the worst terrorist attack on United States soil. Inevitably, this is a time to remember all those whose lives were so cruelly snuffed out.
But it should also be a time to remember those who made this atrocity inevitable–by refusing to acknowledge and address the impending threat from Al-Qaeda.
British historian Nigel Hamilton has chronicled their arrogance and indifference in his 2010 biography: American Caesars: Lives of the Presidents from Franklin D. Roosevelt to George W. Bush.
Hamilton noted that Richard Clarke, the national security advisor on terrorism, was certain that Osama bin Laden had arranged the [USS.] Cole bombing in Aden on October 12, 2000.
Richard Clarke
For months, Clarke tried to convince others in the Bush Administration that Bin Laden was plotting another attack against the United States–either abroad or at home.
But Clarke could not prevail against the know-it-all arrogance of such higher-ranking Bush officials as Vice President Dick Cheney; Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld; Rumsfeld’s deputy, Paul Wolfowitz; and National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice.
Rice initially refused to hold a cabinet-level meeting on the subject. Then she “insisted the matter be handled only by a more junior Deputy Principals meeting” in April, 2001, writes Hamilton.
Wolfowitz, the number-two man at the Department of Defense, said: “I don’t understand why we are beginning by talking about this one man, bin Laden.”
Even after Clarke outlined the threat posed by Al-Qaeda, Wolfowitz–whose real target was Saddam Hussein–said: “You give bin Laden too much credit.”
Wolfowitz insisted that bin Laden couldn’t carry out his terrorist acts without the aid of a state sponsor–namely, Iraq.
Wolfowitz, in fact, blamed Iraq for the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. Clarke was stunned, since there was absolutely no evidence of Iraqi involvement in this.
“Al-Qaeda plans major acts of terrorism against the United States,” Clarke warned his colleagues. He pointed out that, like Adolf Hitler, bin Laden had actually published his plans for future destruction.
Osama bin Laden
And he added: “Sometimes, as with Hitler in Mein Kampf, you have to believe that these people will actually do what they say they will do.”
Wolfowitz heatedly traded on his Jewish heritage to bring Clarke’s unwelcome arguments to a halt: “I resent any comparison between the Holocaust and this little terrorist in Afghanistan.”
Writing in outraged fury, Hamilton sums up Clarke’s agonizing frustrations:
- Bush’s senior advisors treated their colleagues who had served in the Clinton administration with contempt.
- President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz seemed content to ignore the danger signals of an impending al-Qaeda attack.
- This left only Secretary of State Colin Powell, his deputy Richard Armitage, Richard Clarke and a skeptical Treasury Secretary, Paul O’Neill, to wage “a lonely battle to waken a seemingly deranged new administration.”
Clarke alerted Federal Intelligence agencies that “Al-Qaeda is planning a major attack on us.” He asked the FBI and CIA to report to his office all they could learn about suspicious persons or activities at home and abroad.
Finally, at a meeting with Rice on September 4, 2001, Clarke challenged her to “picture yourself at a moment when in the very near future Al-Qaeda has killed hundreds of Americans, and imagine asking yourself what you wish then that you had already done.”
Seven days later, Al-Qaeda struck, and 3,000 Americans died horrifically–and needlessly.
Neither Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld nor Wolowitz ever admitted their negligence. Nor would any of them be brought to account.
Disgustingly, these were the same officials who, afterward, posed as the Nation’s saviors–and branded anyone who disagreed with them as a traitor, practices the Right continues to exploit to this day.
Only Richard Clarke–who had vainly argued for stepped-up security precautions and taking the fight to Al-Qaeda–gave that apology.
On March 24, 2004, Clarke testified at the public 9/11 Commission hearings. Addressing relatives of victims in the audience, he said: “Your government failed you, those entrusted with protecting you failed you, and I failed you.”
Yet even worse was to come.
On the evening after the September 11 attacks, Bush took Clarke aside during a meeting in the White House Situation Room:
“I want you, as soon as you can, to go back over everything, everything. See if Saddam [Hussein, the dictator of Iraq] did this. See if he’s linked in any way.”
Clarke was stunned: “But, Mr. President, Al-Qaeda did this.”
“I know, I know,” said Bush. “But see if Saddam was involved. I want to know.”
Hussein had not plotted the attack–and there was no evidence proving that he did. But the attack gave “W” the excuse he wanted to remove the man he blamed for the 1992 defeat of his father, President George H.W. Bush.
Bush believed that his father would have been re-elected if he had “gone all the way” into Baghdad. He would finish the job that his father had started but failed to compete.
On September 12, 2001, Bush attended a meeting of the National Security Council.
“Why shouldn’t we go against Iraq, not just Al-Qaeda?” demanded Donald Rumsfeld, the Secretary of Defense.
Vice President Dick Cheney enthusiastically agreed.
ABC NEWS, AMERICAN EMPIRE, BILL CLINTON, BUREAUCRACY, CBS NEWS, CHRIS MATHEWS, CNN, 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, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NIGEL HAMILTON, REPUBLICAN PARTY, SUETONIUS, SYRIAN CIVIL WAR, SYRIAN REFUGEES, TERRORISM, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE TWELVE CAESARS, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on September 10, 2015 at 12:04 am
September 11, 2015, will mark the 14th anniversary of the greatest act of terrorism on American soil.
As that tragedy recedes ever further into the past, its impact on Americans continues to wane.
Today, tens of thousands of unscreened Islamics, fleeing the carnage of their fellow Islamics in the Syrian civil war, are pouring into Europe.
America has already taken in 1,500. And 14 Democratic Senators are demanding that President Barack Obama admit at least 70,000 more.
Forgotten–or ignored–in all this hand-wringing is a brutal truth:
It took only 19 Saudi highjackers to snuff out the lives of 3,000 Americans–at the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and aboard the four airliners that had been turned into fuel-bombs.
World Trade Center on 9/11/01
“Our FBI doesn’t even have the resources to get a handle on all of the ISIS/jihadist threat in the Muslim community,” warned author and investigative reporter Paul Sperry.
“Now we’re going to lay on top of that all of these new immigrants who are even potentially more radical on top of that threat matrix.”
It is 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.
Obviously, such an indictment is not going to be handed down by the U.S. Department of Justice.
Nor will it be presented by TV commentators–on such liberal networks as CNN and MSNBC or 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, includingJFK: 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.
60 MINUTES, 9/11 ATTACKS, ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, AFGHANISTAN, AL QAEDA, BARACK OBAMA, BARCK OBAMA, BASHAR AL-ASSAD, CARL VON CLAUSEWITZ, CARLOS THE JACKAL, CBS NEWS, CHEMICAL WEAPONS, CHINA, CIA, CNN, DAVID BROOKS, DAVID CORN, FACEBOK, FACEBOOK, HARRY TRUMAN, IMPERIAL HUBRIS, IRAN, ISLAM, ISLAMIC STATE OF IRAQ AND THE LEVANT, ISRAEL, MARCHING TOWARD HELL, MICHAEL SCHEUER, MOTHER JONES MAGAZINE, MUSLIMS, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, OSAMA BIN LADEN, RUSSIA, SOVIET UNION, SYRIA, TERRORISM, THE CHICAGO TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, USA TODAY, VIETNAM WAR, VLADIMIR PUTIN, WORLD WAR 1
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on August 21, 2015 at 12:56 am
For America to avoid permanent military entanglements in the Middle East, it must learn to mind its own business.
So says Michael Scheuer, a 20-year CIA veteran who, from 1996 to 1999, headed Alec Station, the CIA’s unit assigned to track Osama bin Laden at the agency’s Counterterrorism Center.
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 has repeatedly warned: The United States must not deploy troops in Syria.
More than 310,000 people have been killed in Syria’s uprising-turned-civil war. The conflict began on March 15, 2011, triggered by protests demanding political reforms and the ouster of dictator Bashar al-Assad.
And many members of Congress are demanding that “we must do something” to stop all that killing.
Among the reasons why America should steer clear of the Syrian tar-baby:
The Assad regime is backed by–-among others–the Iranian-supported terrorist group, Hezbollah (Party of God). Its enemies include another terrorist group–Al Qaeda.
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. Besides plotting 9/11, It has attacked the mosques and gatherings of liberal Muslims, Shias, Sufis and other non-Sunnis.
Examples of these sectarian attacks include the Sadr City bombings, the 2004 Ashoura massacre and the April, 2007 Baghdad bombings.
Flag of Al Qaeda
When your enemies are intent on killing each other, it’s best to stand aside and let them do it.
Intervening in Syria could produce unintended consequences for American forces–and make the United States a target for more Islamic terrorism.
An American military strike on Syrian government forces could lead the country’s dictator, Bashar al-Assad, to attack Israel–perhaps even with chemical weapons.
Assad could do this simply because he hates Jews–or to lure Israel into attacking Syria.
If that happened, the Islamic world–which lusts to destroy Israelis even more than “apostate” Muslims–would rally to Syria against the United States, Israel’s chief ally.
China and Russia are fully 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 American and Russian forces start trading salvos? Or if Russian President Vladimir Putin orders an attack on Israel, in return for America’s attack on 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 l.
The United States cannot defeat the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) through air power alone.
President Barack Obama authorized airstrikes against ISIL in September, 2014. Since then, the United States Air Force has dropped thousands of bombs on ISIL convoys.
This has not, however, destroyed ISIL. And its failure to do so has only led to demands by hawkish Republicans and Democrats for “boots on the ground.”
This was in fact predictable. Air power alone failed to secure victory over Nazi Germany during World War II and Vietnam during the Vietnam war. Nor did it “shock and awe” the Iraqis into surrendering during the 2003 Iraq war.
While Islamic nations like Syria and Iraq wage war within their own borders, they will lack the resources to launch attacks against the United States.
When Adolf Hitler invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, then-Senator Harry Truman said: “I hope the Russians kill lots of Nazis and vice versa.”
That should be America’s view whenever its sworn enemies start killing themselves off. Americans should welcome such self-slaughters, not become entrapped in them.
* * * * *
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 ISIL.
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 feel is must “do something.”
60 MINUTES, 9/11 ATTACKS, ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, AFGHANISTAN, AL QAEDA, BARACK OBAMA, BARCK OBAMA, BASHAR AL-ASSAD, CARL VON CLAUSEWITZ, CARLOS THE JACKAL, CBS NEWS, CHEMICAL WEAPONS, CHINA, CIA, CNN, DAVID BROOKS, DAVID CORN, FACEBOK, FACEBOOK, HARRY TRUMAN, IMPERIAL HUBRIS, IRAN, ISLAM, ISLAMIC STATE OF IRAQ AND THE LEVANT, ISRAEL, MARCHING TOWARD HELL, MICHAEL SCHEUER, MOTHER JONES MAGAZINE, MUSLIMS, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, OSAMA BIN LADEN, RUSSIA, SOVIET UNION, SYRIA, TERRORISM, THE CHICAGO TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, USA TODAY, VIETNAM WAR, VLADIMIR PUTIN, WORLD WAR 1
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on August 20, 2015 at 12:10 am
The United States must learn to mind its own business. Otherwise, it will remain forever entangled in warfare–especially in the Middle East.
That’s the advice of former CIA agent Michael Scheuer.
Scheuer is a 20-year CIA veteran–as well as an author, historian, foreign policy critic and political analyst.
He is currently an adjunct professor at Georgetown University’s Center for Peace and Security Studies.
Michael Scheuer
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: “An unquenchable ardor to have the United States intervene abroad 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.
On September 28, 2014, President Barack Obama provided an example of this “unquenchable ardor to have the United States intervene abroad in all places, situations and times.”
In an appearance on 60 Minutes, Obama spoke about his recent decision to commit American troops to fighting the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).
Steve Kroft: I think everybody applauds the efforts that you’ve made and the size of the coalition that has been assembled.
But most of them are contributing money or training or policing the borders, not getting particularly close to the contact. It looks like once again we are leading the operation. We are carrying…
President Obama: Steve, that’s always the case. That’s always the case. America leads. We are the indispensable nation. We have capacity no one else has. Our military is the best in the history of the world.
And when trouble comes up anywhere in the world, they don’t call Beijing. They don’t call Moscow. They call us. That’s the deal.
President Barack Obama
Steve Kroft: I mean, it looks like we are doing 90%.
President Obama: Steve…when there’s an earthquake in Haiti, take a look at who’s leading the charge making sure Haiti can rebuild. That’s how we roll. And that’s what makes this America.
Scheuer believes that this mindset shouldn’t be what “makes this America.” And that the place to start is by not deploying troops to Syria.
More than 310,000 people have been killed in Syria’s uprising-turned-civil war. The conflict began on March 15, 2011, triggered by protests demanding political reforms and the ouster of dictator Bashar al-Assad.
Among the reasons why America should steer clear of the Syrian bloodbath:
Since 1979, Syria has been listed by the U.S. State Department as a sponsor of terrorism.
Among the terrorist groups it supports are Hizbollah and Hamas. For years, Syria provided a safehouse in Damascus to Ilich Ramírez Sánchez–-the notorious terrorist better known as Carlos the Jackal.
Ilich Ramírez Sánchez–“Carlos the Jackal”
There are no “good Syrians” for the United States to support–-only murderers who have long served a tyrant and other murderers who now wish to become the next tyrant.
The United States doesn’t know what it wants to do in Syria, other than “send a message.”
Carl von Clausewitz, the Prussian military theorist, wrote: “War is the continuation of state policy by other means.” But President Barack Obama hasn’t stated what his “state policy” is toward Syria–or what he intends to gain by attacking it.
Obama has said he’s “not after regime-change.” If true, that would leave Assad in power–-and free to go on killing those who resist his rule.
60 MINUTES, 9/11 ATTACKS, ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, AFGHANISTAN, AL QAEDA, BARACK OBAMA, BARCK OBAMA, BASHAR AL-ASSAD, CARL VON CLAUSEWITZ, CARLOS THE JACKAL, CBS NEWS, CHEMICAL WEAPONS, CHINA, CIA, CNN, DAVID BROOKS, DAVID CORN, FACEBOK, FACEBOOK, HARRY TRUMAN, IMPERIAL HUBRIS, IRAN, ISLAM, ISLAMIC STATE OF IRAQ AND THE LEVANT, ISRAEL, MARCHING TOWARD HELL, MICHAEL SCHEUER, MOTHER JONES MAGAZINE, MUSLIMS, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, OSAMA BIN LADEN, RUSSIA, SOVIET UNION, SYRIA, TERRORISM, THE CHICAGO TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, USA TODAY, VIETNAM WAR, VLADIMIR PUTIN, WORLD WAR 1
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on August 19, 2015 at 12:07 am
On April 16, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights released some encouraging news for potential victims of Islamic terrorism–and those fighting it.
More than 310,000 people have been killed in Syria’s uprising-turned-civil war.
Put another way: More than 310,000 potential or actual Islamic terrorists will never again pose a threat to the United States or Western Europe.
The Syrian conflict began on March 15, 2011, triggered by protests demanding political reforms and the ouster of dictator Bashar al-Assad.
According to the Observatory, which is safely based in Britain:
- The total number of dead is now at 310,000.
- More than 37,000 rebels have been killed and over 46,000 from pro-Assad forces.
- At least 682 Hizbollah fighters.
- The true toll on both sides was likely much higher–by perhaps more than 60,000.
And who does the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights blame for this Islamic self-slaughter? Why, the West, of course.
According to its website:
“The silence of the International community for the war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Syria encourages the criminals to kill more and more Syrian people because they have not found anyone that deter them from continuing their crimes that cause to wound more than 1500000 people; some of them with permanent disabilities, make hundreds of thousands children without parents, displace more than half of Syrian people and destroy infrastructure, private and public properties.”
310,000 people killed since the beginning of the Syrian Revolution | Syrian Observatory For Human Rights
Got that? “They have not found anyone that deter them from continuing their crimes”–as if it’s the duty of non-Muslims to bring civilized behavior to Islamics.
And why are all these murderers “continuing their crimes”? Because of a religious dispute within Islam that traces back to the fourth century.
Yes, it’s Sunni Muslims, who make up a majority of Islamics, versus Shiite Muslims, who comprise a minority.
Each group considers the other takfirs–that is, “apostates.” And, in Islam, being labeled an apostate can easily get you murdered.
But, according to the Syrian Observatory, it’s the duty of the infidel West to convince these murderers to stop slaughtering one another.
Think of it:
- In three years, 310,000 actual or potential enemies of Western Civilization have chosen to kill each other off.
- Additional thousands are certain to follow their example.
- And the United States cannot be held in any way responsible for it.
Meanwhile, Right-wing Republicans demand that the United States thrust itself into a conflict that doesn’t threaten or concern Americans in any way.
On August 14, conservative columnist David Brooks appeared on the “Week’s Roundup” segment of The PBS Newshour.
Speaking of the current Islamic self-slaughter in Iraq, he said:
“I do think that we abandoned Iraq too quickly, left too quickly, left a void in the Sunni areas, which ISIS was completely happy to fill.
David Brooks
“But more important–and this is a bigger indictment of the Obama administration–we did nothing about the Syrian civil war. And that created the biggest void.
“And that’s not necessarily [Senator] Hillary Clinton’s fault because she was arguing for a more aggressive policy. Nonetheless, we did nothing.
“Even today, our attacks on ISIS are paltry, and we have continue to do nothing. And there are strategic issues. There are just moral issues.
“Today, my newspaper [The New York Times] had a front-page story on just rape academies, this institutionalized rape.
“And the fact that we can stand by and do nothing while this is happening, to me, that’s an indictment of the sitting administration.”
David Corn, the Washington bureau chief for Mother Jones magazine, appeared on that Newshour segment. And he had a totally different take on the matter:
“…It wasn’t until after [President George W. Bush’s] invasion of Iraq that you had something called al-Qaida in Iraq. And that was the group that morphed into ISIS. So ISIS is a direct result of the war in Iraq right there….
“But then [Presidential candidate Jeb Bush] said what happened was that [President Barack] Obama and [then-Secretary of State] Hillary Clinton orchestrated this quick withdrawal after everything was secure.
David Corn
“Nothing was really secure in 2009-2010….But it was George W. Bush in December 2008 who created the agreement with [Iraqi] Prime Minister [Nouri] Maliki that said that U.S. troops had to be out by 2011.
“And then Obama didn’t renegotiate that. And there is a lot of question as to whether he could even have, given the political situation in Baghdad itself. So…Jeb Bush is totally rewriting this. And my question is, why is he even talking about Iraq?”
To which Brooks replied: “He wants to have an anti-terror foreign policy.”
According to Micheal Scheuer, for all their ideological differences, Republicans and Democrats share one belief in common: “An unquenchable ardor to have the United States intervene abroad in all places, situations and times.”
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.
And he’s convinced that if America wants peace, it must learn to mind its own business.
ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, ARIZONA SHOOTINGS, ASSASSINATION, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, BLOOMBERG, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHRISTINA-TAYLOR GREEN, CNN, CONFEDERATE FLAG, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DRUDGE REPORT, DYLANN ROOF, FACEBOOK, FBI, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, GEORGE H.W. BUSH, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HATE CRIMES, HEALTHCARE, HUFFINGTON POST, MEDIA MATTERS, MEIN KAMPF, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NEWT GINGRICH, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REP. GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, RICK PERRY, RICK SANTORUM, RODNEY KING RIOTS, ROLLING STONE MAGAZINE, SALON, Sarah Palin, SEATTLE TIMES, Secret Service, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, TEA PARTY, TERRORISM, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE JOHN ROLL, U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on June 26, 2015 at 12:01 am
When President Barack Obama set out to provide healthcare for all Americans–-and not simply the wealthiest 1%–-Republicans tried to frighten voters with lies.
The most infamous of these was that healthcare reform would lead to wholesale murder by government “death panels,” as Sarah Palin put it.
Despite being the party of the extreme Right, Republicans delight in portraying Obama as the ultimate Fascist: Adolf Hitler.
At their rallies they brandish doctored photos of Obama sporting a Hitler forelock and toothbrush mustache.
And they claim he plans to set up concentration camps for those who disagree with him.
They also claim he intends to “take away our guns–just like Hitler.”
In fact:
- Rather than disarming Germans, Adolf Hitler armed his fellow citizens and created the mightiest war machine Western Europe had ever seen; and
- Rather than confiscating Americans’ firearms, Barack Obama has signed legislation allowing guns to be brought onto Amtrack and into national parks.
Even more ominously, heavily-armed Right-wingers have showed up at places where Obama was scheduled to speak.
In August, 2009, about a dozen people carrying guns, including one with a military-style rifle, milled among protesters outside a Phoenix convention center where President Obama was giving a speech.
A week earlier, during Obama’s healthcare town hall in New Hampshire, a man carrying a sign reading “It is time to water the tree of liberty” stood outside with a pistol strapped to his leg.
On August 28, 2010, an armed Obama protester was arrested by police at the Alaska State Fair, where the President was scheduled to speak.
According to the Secret Service, Obama is the target of more than 30 death threats a day and is the most threatened President in history. The heightened danger he faces is stretching the Secret Service to its limits.
Secret Service emblem
Since Obama took office in 2009, the rate of threats against him has increased 400%.
Fred Solop, a Northern Arizona University political scientist, said the incidents in New Hampshire and Arizona could signal the beginning of a disturbing trend.
“When you start to bring guns to political rallies, it does layer on another level of concern and significance,” Solop said. “It actually becomes quite scary for many people. It creates a chilling effect in the ability of our society to carry on honest communication.”
The way to prevent such tragedies in the future is to hold fully accountable not just the shooters but those who deliberately point them toward their targets and repeatedly scream: “Kill the traitors!”
Americans must shed their naive belief that “America is exempt from the political corruption of other countries.” And they must see the Republicans’ lust for absolute power at any price as the danger it presents to the future of the Republic.
Among the steps that need to be taken:
First, the families and friends of the Tucson massacre victims should file civil lawsuits against Sarah Palin and every other Republican who created the firestorm of hate that consumed 19 victims.
And survivors of the massacre at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church should do likewise against those Right-wing groups that influenced Dylann Roof to snuff out nine innocent lives because they were black.
A legal precedent for such lawsuits emerged 20 years ago, and still remains viable.
On November 13, 1988 in Portland, Oregon, three white supremacist members of East Side White Pride and White Aryan Resistance (WAR) beat to death Mulugeta Seraw, an Ethiopian man who came to the United States to attend college.
Morris Dees and the Southern Poverty Law Center filed a civil suit (Berhanu v. Metzger) against Tom Metzger, founder of WAR. They argued that WAR influenced Seraw’s killers by encouraging their group, East Side White Pride, to commit violence.
Tom and John Metzger were found civilly liable under the doctrine of vicarious liability, in which one can be liable for a tort committed by a subordinate or by another person who is taking instructions.
In October 1990, the jury returned the largest civil verdict in Oregon history at the time—$12.5 million—against Metzger and WAR. The Metzgers’ house was seized, and most of WAR’s profits went to paying off the judgment.
Second, the FBI and Justice Department should launch an all-out investigation into not simply right-wing hate groups but those political leaders who openly or secretly encourage and support their activities.
Those who are found doing so should be indicted and prosecuted under the Patriot Act and the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act.
Third, the Secret Service should immediately adopt the policy that no one but sworn law enforcement officers will be allowed to carry firearms within the immediate vicinity of the President. And it should enforce that policy through its elite countersniper teams.
Finally, President Obama should do what President Clinton failed to do at the time of the 1995 Right-wing truck-bombing of the Oklahoma City Federal Building: He should publicly condemn those Republicans who give “aid and comfort” to the right-wing extremists whose support they openly court.
Unless such steps are taken, outrages such as the Tucson slaughter will continue to remain a needless “mystery.” And those outrages will continue until a Republican version of the swastika permanently flies over the capitol dome and the White House.
ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, ARIZONA SHOOTINGS, ASSASSINATION, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, BLOOMBERG, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHRISTINA-TAYLOR GREEN, CNN, CONFEDERATE FLAG, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DRUDGE REPORT, DYLANN ROOF, FACEBOOK, FBI, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, GEORGE H.W. BUSH, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HATE CRIMES, HEALTHCARE, HUFFINGTON POST, MEDIA MATTERS, MEIN KAMPF, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NEWT GINGRICH, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REP. GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, RICK PERRY, RICK SANTORUM, RODNEY KING RIOTS, ROLLING STONE MAGAZINE, SALON, Sarah Palin, SEATTLE TIMES, Secret Service, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, TEA PARTY, TERRORISM, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE JOHN ROLL, U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on June 25, 2015 at 5:29 pm
The electoral success of Senator Joseph McCarthy’s Red-baiting treason slanders proved too alluring for other Republicans to resist.
Joseph McCarthy
Among those who have greatly profited from hurling similar charges are:
- President Richard Nixon
- His vice president, Spiro Agnew
- Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich
- Former Congressman Dick Armey
- President George W. Bush
- Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin
- Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann
- Rush Limbaugh
- Glenn Beck
- Sean Hannity
- Bill O’Reilly.
During the 1992 Presidential campaign, Republicans tried to paint Bill Clinton as a brainwashed “Manchurian candidate” because he had briefly visited the Soviet Union during his college years.
After the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, Republicans lost their “soft on Communism” slander-line. So they tried to persuade voters that Democrats were “soft on crime.”
When riots flared in 1992 after the acquittal of LAPD officers who had savagely beaten Rodney King, President George H.W. Bush blamed the carnage on the “Great Society” programs of the 1960s.
George H.W. Bush
After losing the White House to Clinton at the polls in 1992 and 1996, Republicans tried to oust him another way: By impeaching him over a tryst with a penis-loving intern named Monica Lewinsky.
The Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted to impeach, but the effort was defeated in the Democratically-controlled Senate.
The 2008 election of Barack Obama pushed the Republican “treason chorus” to new heights of infamy.
Barack Obama
Almost immediately after Obama took office, he came under attack by an industry of right-wing book authors such as Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh.
The following titles vividly reveal the hates, fears and ambitions of their authors–and audience:
- Conservative Victory: Defeating Obama’s Radical Agenda by Sean Hannity
- Obama Zombies: How the Liberal Machine Brainwashed My Generation by Jason Mattera
- How Barack Obama is Bankrupting the U.S. Economy by Stephen Moore
- Let Freedom Ring: Winning the War of Liberty over Liberalism by Sean Hannity
- The Manchurian President: Barack Obama’s Ties to Communists,Socialists and Other Anti-American Extremists by Aaron Klein
- The Blueprint: Obama’s Plan to Subvert the Constitution and Build an Imperial Presidency by Ken Blackwell
- Culture of Corruption: Obama and His Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks, and Croniesby Michelle Malkin
- Why Obama’s Government Takeover of Health Care Will Be a Disaster by David Gratzer
- To Save America: Stopping Obama’s Secular-Socialist Machine by Newt Gingrich
- Obama’s Radical Transformation of America: Year One by Joshua Muravchik
- How the Obama Administration Threatens to Undermine Our Elections by John Fund
- Power Grab: How Obama’s Green Policicies Will Steal Your Freedom and Bankrupt America by Christopher C. Horner
- The Bad Science and Bad Policy of Obama’s Global Warning Agenda by Roy W. Spencer
- America’s March to Socialism: Why We’re One Step Closer to Giant Missile Parades by Glenn Beck
- Obama’s Betrayal of Israel by Michael Ledeen
- The Obama Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality by Jerome R. Corsi
- The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media’s Favorite Candidate by David Freddoso
- Censorship: The Threat to Silence Talk Radio by Brian Jennings
- The War On Success: How the Obama Agenda Is Shattering the American Dream by Tommy Newberry
- Green Hell: How Environmentalists Plan to Control Your Life and What You Can Do to Stop Them by Steven Milloy
- Liberalism is a Mental Disorder: Savage Solutions by Michael Savage
- Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism by Ann Coulter
- How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must): The World According to Ann Coulter by Ann Coulter
- Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right by Ann Coulter
- If Democrats Had Any Brains, They’d Be Republicans by Ann Coulter
- Guilty: Liberal “Victims” and Their Assault on America by Ann Coulter
- Catastrophe: How Obama, Congress and the Special Interests Are Transforming…a Slump into a Crash, Freedom Into Socialism and a Disaster into a Catastrophe….And How to Fight Back by Dick Morris
Consider the vocabulary Right-wingers use to describe their political adversaries:
“Liberals,” “radicals, “bankrupting,” “treason,” subversion,” “slander,” “terrorism,” “betrayal,” “catastrophe,” “shattering the American dream,” “leftists,” “Communists,” “government takeover,” “socialism,” “power grab,” “secularism,” “environmentalism.”
And while the Right lusts to constantly compare Obama to Adolf Hitler, its propaganda campaign draws heavily on the Nazi leader’s own advice.
In Mein Kampf, Hitler laid out his formula for successful propaganda: “All effective propaganda must be confined to a few bare essentials.
“Those must be expressed as far as possible in stereotypical formulas. These slogans should be persistently repeated until the very last individual has come to grasp the idea that has been put forward.”
Among the lies most “persistently repeated” by Republicans about Obama:
Obama isn’t an American citizen. The reason: To “prove” that he is an illegitimate President, and should be removed from office.
Even the President’s releasing of the long-form version of his birth certificate in 2011–showing that he was born in Hawaii, not Kenya–didn’t end these falsehoods.
The long-form version of President Obama’s birth certificate
Oaama is a secret Muslim who intends to betray America to his Islamic masters.
In fact, Obama has eliminated far more Al Qaeda leaders than George W. Bush ever did–including the most sought-after one of all: Osama bin Laden.
ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, ARIZONA SHOOTINGS, ASSASSINATION, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, BLOOMBERG, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHRISTINA-TAYLOR GREEN, CNN, CONFEDERATE FLAG, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DRUDGE REPORT, DYLANN ROOF, FACEBOOK, FBI, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, GEORGE H.W. BUSH, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HATE CRIMES, HEALTHCARE, HUFFINGTON POST, MEDIA MATTERS, MEIN KAMPF, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NEWT GINGRICH, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REP. GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, RICK PERRY, RICK SANTORUM, RODNEY KING RIOTS, ROLLING STONE MAGAZINE, SALON, Sarah Palin, SEATTLE TIMES, Secret Service, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, TEA PARTY, TERRORISM, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE JOHN ROLL, U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on June 24, 2015 at 12:10 am
“The Republican Party has weaponized its supporters, made violence a virtue and, with almost every pronouncement for 50 years, given them an enemy politicized, radicalized and indivisible.”
So wrote Rolling Stone writer in a blistering June 19 editorial. The touchstone was the slaughter of nine black worshipers by a white supremacist at a South Carolina black church.
But the proof of Republican culpability in political violence goes back much further.
Consider:
Gabrille Giffords, 40, is a moderate Democrat who narrowly wins re-election in November, 2010, against a Republican Tea Party candidate.
Her support of President Obama’s health care reform law has made her a target for violent rhetoric–-especially from former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.
In March, 2010, Palin releases a map featuring 20 House Democrats that uses cross-hairs images to show their districts. In case her supporters don’t get the message, she later writes on Twitter: “Don’t Retreat, Instead – RELOAD!”
Sarah Palin’s “Crosshairs” Map
As the campaign continues, Giffords finds her Tucson office vandalized after the House passes the healthcare overhaul in March.
Giffords senses that she has become a target for removal–in more than political terms. In an interview after the vandalizing of her office, she refers to the animosity against her by conservatives.
She specifically cites Palin’s decision to list her seat as one of the top “targets” in the midterm elections.
“For example, we’re on Sarah Palin’s targeted list, but the thing is, that the way that she has it depicted has the cross-hairs of a gun sight over our district. When people do that, they have to realize that there are consequences to that action,” Giffords tells MSNBC.
At one of her rallies, her aides call the police after an attendee drops a gun.
Giffords may have seen the spectre of violence closing in on her. In April, 2010, she supported Rep. Raúl Grijalva after he had to close two offices when he and his staff received threats.
He had called for a boycott of Arizona businesses in opposition to the state’s controversial immigration law.
“I am deeply troubled about reports that Congressman Grijalva and members of his staff have been subjected to death threats,” Giffords said.
“This is not how we, as Americans, express our political differences. Intimidation has no place in our representative democracy. Such acts only make it more difficult for us to resolve our differences.”
But intimidation–-and worse–-does have a place among the tactics used by influential Republicans in the pursuit of absolute power.
Increasingly, Republicans have repeatedly aimed violent–-and violence-arousing–-rhetoric at their Democratic opponents. This is not a case of careless language that is simply misinterpreted, with tragic results.
Republicans like Sarah Palin fully understand the constituency they are trying to reach: Those masses of alienated, uneducated Americans who live only for their guns and hardline religious beliefs–and who can be easily manipulated by perceived threats to either.
If a “nutcases” assaults a Democratic politician and misses, then the Republican establishment claims to be shocked–-shocked!–-that such a thing could have happened.
And if the attempt proves successful–-as the January 8, 2011 Tucson shootings did–-then Republicans weep crocodile tears for public consumption.
The difference is that, in this case, they rejoice in knowing that Democratic ranks have been thinned and their opponents are even more on the defensive, for fear of the same happening to them.
Consider the following:
- Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-Tex.) yelled “baby killer” at Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) on the House floor.
- Florida GOP Congressional candidate Allen West, referring to his Democratic opponent, Rep. Ron Klein, told Tea Party activists: You’ve got to make the fellow scared to come out of his house. That’s the only way that you’re going to win. That’s the only way you’re going to get these people’s attention.”
- Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) said Tea Partiers had “every right” to use racist and homophobic slurs against Democrats, justifying it via Democrats’ “totalitarian tactics.”
- Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.) said she wanted her constituents “armed and dangerous” against the Obama administration.
- Sarah Palin told her supporters: “Get in their face and argue with them. No matter how tough it gets, never retreat, instead RELOAD!”
- Right-wing pundit Ann Coulter: “My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times building.”
- Senator Phil Gramm (R-Tex.) “We’re going to keep building the party until we’re hunting Democrats with dogs.”
- Rep. Louisa M. Slauter (D-NY) received a phone message threatening sniper attacks against lawmakers and their families.
Since the end of World War 11, Republicans have regularly hurled the charge of “treason” against anyone who dared to run against them for office or think other than Republican-sponsored thoughts.
Republicans had been locked out of the White House from 1933 to 1952, during the administrations of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman.
Determined to regain the Presidency by any means, they found that attacking the integrity of their fellow Americans a highly effective tactic.
During the 1950s, Wisconsin Senator Joseph R. McCarthy rode a wave of paranoia to national prominence–by attacking the patriotism of anyone who disagreed with him.
The fact that McCarthy never uncovered one actual case of treason was conveniently overlooked during his lifetime.
ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, ARIZONA SHOOTINGS, ASSASSINATION, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, BLOOMBERG, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHRISTINA-TAYLOR GREEN, CNN, CONFEDERATE FLAG, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DRUDGE REPORT, DYLANN ROOF, FACEBOOK, FBI, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, GEORGE H.W. BUSH, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HATE CRIMES, HEALTHCARE, HUFFINGTON POST, MEDIA MATTERS, MEIN KAMPF, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NEWT GINGRICH, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REP. GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, RICK PERRY, RICK SANTORUM, RODNEY KING RIOTS, ROLLING STONE MAGAZINE, SALON, Sarah Palin, SEATTLE TIMES, Secret Service, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, TEA PARTY, TERRORISM, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE JOHN ROLL, U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on June 23, 2015 at 3:39 pm
On June 17, 2015, Dylann Roof, a white high school dropout, gunned down three black men and six black women at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina.
At 21, Roof was unemployed, dividing his time between playing video games and taking drugs.
Dylann Roof
The signs of Roof’s malignant racism were evident long before he turned mass murderer:
- He had posed for a photo sitting on the hood of his parents’ car–whose license plate bore a Confederate flag.
- He had posed for pictures wearing a jacket sporting the white supremacist flags of Rhodesia and apartheid South Africa.
- He told a friend that he hoped “to start a civil war” between the black and white races.
- Roof reportedly told friends and neighbors of his plans to kill people.
- In the midst of his massacre of unarmed worshippers, he told one of his victims: “You’ve raped our women, and you are taking over the country.” Then Roof shot him.
The evidence makes clear that Roof’s slaughter was racially motivated. Yet one Republican Presidential candidate after another has refused to acknowledge it.
Jeb Bush, former governor of Florida: “I don’t know what was on the mind or the heart of the man who committed these atrocious crimes.”
Rick Santorum, former United States Senator from Pennsylvania: “You talk about the importance of prayer in this time and we’re now seeing assaults on our religious liberty we’ve never seen before. It’s a time for deeper reflection beyond this horrible situation.”
Bobby Jindal, former governor of Louisiana: “I don’t think we’ll ever know what was going on in his mind.”
But Rolling Stone magazine writer Jeb Lund left no doubt as to what–and who–was ultimately responsible for this crime: Racism and Republicans.
In a June 19 editorial–published two days after the massacre–Lund noted: “This [crime] is political because American movement conservatism has already made these kinds of killings political.
“The Republican Party has weaponized its supporters, made violence a virtue and, with almost every pronouncement for 50 years, given them an enemy politicized, racialized and indivisible.
“Movement conservatives have fetishized a tendentious and ahistorical reading of the Second Amendment to the point that the Constitution itself somehow paradoxically ‘legitimizes’ an armed insurrection against the government created by it.
“Those leading said insurrection are swaddled by the blanket exculpation of patriotism. At the same time, they have synonymized the Democratic Party with illegitimacy and abuse of the American order.
“This is no longer an argument about whether one party’s beliefs are beneficial or harmful, but an attitude that labels leftism so antithetical to the American idea that empowering it on any level is an act of usurpation.”
Click here: The Charleston Shooter: Racist, Violent, and Yes – Political | Rolling Stone
Lund is absolutely right. And the evidence for this was on display long before Dylann Roof opened fire on “uppity blacks” praying in their own church.
Consider:
On January 8, 2011, Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was shot in the head while meeting with constituents outside a grocery store in Tucson, Arizona. After a miraculous recovery, she continues to struggle with language and has lost 50% of her vision in both eyes.
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords
She vowed to return to her former Congressional duties, but was forced to resign for health reasons in 2012.
Giffords was only one victim of a shooting spree that claimed the lives of six people and left 13 others wounded.
Also killed was Arizona’s chief U.S. District judge, John Roll, who had just stopped by to see his friend Giffords after celebrating Mass.
Although the actual shooter, Jared Lee Loughner, was immediately arrested, those who fanned the flames of political violence that consumed 19 people that day have remained unpunished.
Consider the circumstances behind the shootings:
John Roll is Arizona’s chief federal judge. Appointed in 2006, he wins acclaim as a respected jurist and leader who pushes to beef up the court’s strained bench to handle a growing number of border crime-related cases.
In 2009, he becomes a target for threats after allowing a $32 million civil-rights lawsuit by illegal aliens to proceed against a local rancher. The case arouses the fury of local talk radio hosts, who encourage their audiences to threaten Roll’s life.
In one afternoon, Roll logs more than 200 threatening phone calls. Callers threaten the judge and his family. They post personal information about Roll online.
Roll and his wife are placed under fulltime protection by deputy U.S. marshals. Roll finds living under security “unnerving and invasive.”
Authorities identify four men believed responsible for the threats. But Roll declines to press charges on the advice of the Marshals Service.
9/11 ATTACKS, ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, AFGHANISTAN, AL QAEDA, BARCK OBAMA, BASHAR AL-ASSAD, CARL VON CLAUSEWITZ, CARLOS THE JACKAL, CBS NEWS, CHEMICAL WEAPONS, CHINA, CNN, FACEBOOK, HARRY TRUMAN, IRAN, ISLAM, ISRAEL, MUSLIMS, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, OSAMA BIN LADEN, RUSSIA, SOVIET UNION, SYRIA, TERRORISM, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, VLADIMIR PUTIN, WORLD WAR 1
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on June 15, 2015 at 12:10 am
On April 16, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights released some encouraging news for potential victims of Islamic terrorism–and those fighting it.
More than 310,000 people have been killed in Syria’s uprising-turned-civil war.
Put another way: More than 310,000 potential or actual Islamic terrorists will never again pose a threat to the United States or Western Europe.
The Syrian conflict began on March 15, 2011, triggered by protests demanding political reforms and the ouster of dictator Bashar al-Assad.
According to the Observatory, which is based in Britain:
- The total number of dead is now at 310,000.
- More than 37,000 rebels have been killed and over 46,000 from pro-Assad forces.
- At least 682 Hizbollah fighters.
- The true toll on both sides was likely much higher–by perhaps more than 60,000.
And who does the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights blame for this Islamic self-slaughter? Why, the West, of course.
According to its website:
“The silence of the International community for the war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Syria encourages the criminals to kill more and more Syrian people because they have not found anyone that deter them from continuing their crimes that cause to wound more than 1500000 people; some of them with permanent disabilities, make hundreds of thousands children without parents, displace more than half of Syrian people and destroy infrastructure, private and public properties.”
310,000 people killed since the beginning of the Syrian Revolution | Syrian Observatory For Human Rights
Got that? “They have not found anyone that deter them from continuing their crimes”–as if it’s the duty of non-Muslims to bring civilized behavior to Islamics.
And why are all these murderers “continuing their crimes”? Because of an inner-religious dispute within Islam that traces back to the fourth century.
Yes, it’s Sunni Muslims, who make up a majority of Islamics, versus Shiite Muslims, who comprise a minority.
Each group considers the other takfirs–that is, “apostates.” And, in Islam, being labeled an apostate can easily get you murdered.
But, according to the Syrian Observatory, it’s the duty of the West to convince these murderers to stop slaughtering one another.
Think of it:
- In three years, 310,000 actual or potential enemies of Western Civilization have chosen to kill each other off.
- Additional thousands are certain to follow their example.
- And the United States cannot be held in any way responsible for it.
Meanwhile, Right-wing Republicans demand that the United States thrust itself into a conflict that doesn’t threaten Americans in any way.
Here are six excellent reasons why America should stay clear of the Syrian bloodbath:
1. Since 1979, Syria has been listed by the U.S. State Department as a sponsor of terrorism.
Among the terrorist groups it supports are Hizbollah and Hamas. For years, Syria provided a safehouse in Damascus to Ilich Ramírez Sánchez–-the notorious terrorist better known as Carlos the Jackal.
Ilich Ramírez Sánchez–“Carlos the Jackal”
2. There are no “good Syrians” for the United States to support–-only murderers who have long served a tyrant and other murderers who now wish to become the next tyrant.
3. The United States doesn’t know what it wants to do in Syria, other than “send a message.”
Carl von Clausewitz, the Prussian military theorist, wrote: “War is the continuation of state policy by other means.” But President Barack Obama hasn’t stated what he intends gain by attacking Syria.
Obama has said he’s “not after regime-change.” If true, that would leave Assad in power–-and free to go on killing those who resist his rule.
4. The Assad regime is backed by–-among others–-the Iranian-supported terrorist group, Hizbollah (Party of God). Its enemies include another terrorist group–Al Qaeda.
Hizbollah 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. Besides plotting 9/11, It has attacked the mosques and gatherings of liberal Muslims, Shias, Sufis and other non-Sunnis.
Examples of these sectarian attacks include the Sadr City bombings, the 2004 Ashoura massacre and the April, 2007 Baghdad bombings.
Flag of Al Qaeda
When your enemies are intent on killing each other, it’s best to stand aside and let them do it.
5. China and Russia are fully 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 American and Russian forces start trading salvos? Or if Russian President Vladimir Putin orders an attack on Israel, in return for America’s attack on 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 l.
6. While Islamic nations like Syria and Iraq wage war within their own borders, they will lack the resources to launch attacks against the United States.
When Adolf Hitler invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, then-Senator Harry Truman said: “I hope the Russians kill lots of Nazis and vice versa.”
That should be America’s view whenever its sworn enemies start killing themselves off. Americans should welcome such self-slaughters, not become entrapped in them.
Bureaucracybuster's Blog 
9/11, ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, AMERICAN EMPIRE, BILL CLINTON, BUREAUCRACY, CBS NEWS, CHRIS MATHEWS, CNN, 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, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NIGEL HAMILTON, OSAMA BIN LADEN, REPUBLICAN PARTY, SEPTEMBER 11, SUETONIUS, SYRIAN CIVIL WAR, SYRIAN REFUGEES, TERRORISM, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE TWELVE CAESARS, TWITTER
THE UNINDICTED AMERICANS WHO GAVE US 9/11: PART TWO (OF THREE)
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on September 11, 2015 at 12:01 amSeptember 11, 2015, marks the 14th anniversary of the worst terrorist attack on United States soil. Inevitably, this is a time to remember all those whose lives were so cruelly snuffed out.
But it should also be a time to remember those who made this atrocity inevitable–by refusing to acknowledge and address the impending threat from Al-Qaeda.
British historian Nigel Hamilton has chronicled their arrogance and indifference in his 2010 biography: American Caesars: Lives of the Presidents from Franklin D. Roosevelt to George W. Bush.
Hamilton noted that Richard Clarke, the national security advisor on terrorism, was certain that Osama bin Laden had arranged the [USS.] Cole bombing in Aden on October 12, 2000.
Richard Clarke
For months, Clarke tried to convince others in the Bush Administration that Bin Laden was plotting another attack against the United States–either abroad or at home.
But Clarke could not prevail against the know-it-all arrogance of such higher-ranking Bush officials as Vice President Dick Cheney; Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld; Rumsfeld’s deputy, Paul Wolfowitz; and National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice.
Rice initially refused to hold a cabinet-level meeting on the subject. Then she “insisted the matter be handled only by a more junior Deputy Principals meeting” in April, 2001, writes Hamilton.
Wolfowitz, the number-two man at the Department of Defense, said: “I don’t understand why we are beginning by talking about this one man, bin Laden.”
Even after Clarke outlined the threat posed by Al-Qaeda, Wolfowitz–whose real target was Saddam Hussein–said: “You give bin Laden too much credit.”
Wolfowitz insisted that bin Laden couldn’t carry out his terrorist acts without the aid of a state sponsor–namely, Iraq.
Wolfowitz, in fact, blamed Iraq for the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. Clarke was stunned, since there was absolutely no evidence of Iraqi involvement in this.
“Al-Qaeda plans major acts of terrorism against the United States,” Clarke warned his colleagues. He pointed out that, like Adolf Hitler, bin Laden had actually published his plans for future destruction.
Osama bin Laden
And he added: “Sometimes, as with Hitler in Mein Kampf, you have to believe that these people will actually do what they say they will do.”
Wolfowitz heatedly traded on his Jewish heritage to bring Clarke’s unwelcome arguments to a halt: “I resent any comparison between the Holocaust and this little terrorist in Afghanistan.”
Writing in outraged fury, Hamilton sums up Clarke’s agonizing frustrations:
Clarke alerted Federal Intelligence agencies that “Al-Qaeda is planning a major attack on us.” He asked the FBI and CIA to report to his office all they could learn about suspicious persons or activities at home and abroad.
Finally, at a meeting with Rice on September 4, 2001, Clarke challenged her to “picture yourself at a moment when in the very near future Al-Qaeda has killed hundreds of Americans, and imagine asking yourself what you wish then that you had already done.”
Seven days later, Al-Qaeda struck, and 3,000 Americans died horrifically–and needlessly.
Neither Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld nor Wolowitz ever admitted their negligence. Nor would any of them be brought to account.
Disgustingly, these were the same officials who, afterward, posed as the Nation’s saviors–and branded anyone who disagreed with them as a traitor, practices the Right continues to exploit to this day.
Only Richard Clarke–who had vainly argued for stepped-up security precautions and taking the fight to Al-Qaeda–gave that apology.
On March 24, 2004, Clarke testified at the public 9/11 Commission hearings. Addressing relatives of victims in the audience, he said: “Your government failed you, those entrusted with protecting you failed you, and I failed you.”
Yet even worse was to come.
On the evening after the September 11 attacks, Bush took Clarke aside during a meeting in the White House Situation Room:
“I want you, as soon as you can, to go back over everything, everything. See if Saddam [Hussein, the dictator of Iraq] did this. See if he’s linked in any way.”
Clarke was stunned: “But, Mr. President, Al-Qaeda did this.”
“I know, I know,” said Bush. “But see if Saddam was involved. I want to know.”
Hussein had not plotted the attack–and there was no evidence proving that he did. But the attack gave “W” the excuse he wanted to remove the man he blamed for the 1992 defeat of his father, President George H.W. Bush.
Bush believed that his father would have been re-elected if he had “gone all the way” into Baghdad. He would finish the job that his father had started but failed to compete.
On September 12, 2001, Bush attended a meeting of the National Security Council.
“Why shouldn’t we go against Iraq, not just Al-Qaeda?” demanded Donald Rumsfeld, the Secretary of Defense.
Vice President Dick Cheney enthusiastically agreed.
Share this: