From MSNBC. Who knew? (sarcasm)
Of course, the gov’t called the mass shootings at Ft. Hood workplace violence, too.
Wouldn’t want to upset the Muslim (Islamic fundamentalist version) folks.
(New York Daily News)
Naw, now I see it! Workplace violence. (sarcasm)
I remember when I read The Warren Report and kept seeing the phrase ‘no credible evidence’ of conspiracy.
Nothing to see here, certainly not home-grown Islamofascist terrorism.
PS – IF we are ‘at war’ with Islamoterrorism, and Americans choose to align themselves with the enemy, isn’t that giving aid and comfort? IOW TREASON? Perhaps this is why the government is so slow to mark such acts as terrorism, and to treat them as civilian crimes?
Or rather MY libertarian conundrum!
I’m generally a libertarian (small L), politically and philosophically. Want to MAKE me do something as a function of government? I don’t think so. (conscript me, tax me w/o representation, ad infinitum). Want to believe something different than me? Sure – have at it! Believe in Krishna or The Flying Spaghetti Monster, or nothing. I don’t care.
Just don’t knock on my door demanding I believe as you, with or without the force of government behind you!
I respect your right to think and act and believe differently, as long as you leave me to do the same. Period.
Now comes the conundrum -
I tend to be isolationist. If one tribe or political party in far off Boogaboogastan wants to kill another tribe or political party, it’s no skin off my nose. As long as it doesn’t affect me. Or the National interest. (whatever THAT is!)
BUT, what if I had this opinion (and had been alive) during WWII? What if The United States did? Would we all be speaking German or Japanese now? (Those of us who are alive?)
In short, what is in keeping with libertarian principles, but allows us to have our National Security and Sovereignty and be able to look ourselves in the mirror?
Do our National Principles apply only to us? And if not, to whom, and when?
ProudHillbilly posted on 09/11 about the numerous folks killed and injured because of their religion World-wide.
A partial sampling:
||Thirty-seven Iraqis are reduced to pulp by a Shahid suicide bomber.
||Two Shahid suicide bombers take out a half-dozen human beings.
||A Shahid suicide bomber disassembles six other people.
||Boko Haram militants spray machine-gun fire into villages while yelling praises to Allah. At least fourteen are killed.
||Muslim terrorists murder a teacher with a bomb.
Should we have gone into Iraq initially? I won’t debate that, because the fact is we did. And we then left.
hundreds thousands are paying for our having done so.
A libertarian tenet is WE ARE NOT THE WORLD’S POLICEMAN. We cannot afford to be, and we are not going to make everyone believe as we do.
It would be great if we could just leave others alone to their own Destiny. Or Hell. Pick one.
Then look in the mirror the next morning.
(It’s that horrible anniversary, again. I’d no idea what to write – thank goodness others did! – Guffaw)
By Alan Caruba
As we close in on the 13th anniversary of the infamous 9/11 attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, the media is full of predictions about attacks that will occur.
A September 2nd Debka File, an Israeli news agency, reported “Credible information has reached Saudi, British and Australian agencies that two al Qaeda branches—ISIS in Iraq and Syria and AQAP at its base in Yemen—have wrapped up plans to roll out coordinated terrorist spectaculars around the 13th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks on New York and Washington. According to Debka File’s counterterrorism sources, they are preparing to strike simultaneously in the Middle East and a West European city. Next, they will go for U.S. targets in the Middle East and Europe.”
This report and other factors incline me to believe there will not be a major attack somewhere in the U.S. on what is now officially called “Patriot Day.” There could be a lone wolf attack along the lines of Major Hassan’s 2009 “workplace violence” at Fort Hood or the Boston Marathon bombing, but the threats being made by the Islamic State and other elements of al Qaeda, while intended to raise fears in America, are likely to be manifested in the Middle East. American outlets there will be on full alert for sure.
The Islamic State, while now wealthy, well equipped militarily, and attracting every lunatic Islamist and wannabe terrorist, is facing an increasingly united group of Middle East nations that have put old enemies like Iran and Saudi Arabia on the same page together. Iran has dispatched troops to Iraq to support the Kurds. When other Middle Eastern nations finally screw up enough courage to actually do something they will wage a war on ISIS in the interest of self-defense, a powerful motive.
As for al Qaeda’s war on America, it was declared in 1996 by the late, unlamented Osama bin Laden and, other than 9/11, it has done little to follow up on that dramatic sneak attack except for a few failed efforts. The U.S. responded by bombing the hell out of Afghanistan and our troops there have been attacking the Taliban ever since. Obama says he will pull them out in 2015. Given events in Iraq, that is a very bad idea.
The Department of Homeland Security has been on alert ever since it was created shortly after 9/11. This is not to say that the U.S. doesn’t need more on-the-ground intelligence penetration of al Qaeda and its affiliates. Indeed, DHS and other government agencies don’t know the whereabouts of several thousand foreign students who are supposed to be at our colleges and universities. They likely do not know who else among those with easy access to the nation is a potential terrorist.
So, yes, that could mean I am very wrong and that 9/11 would be a day for a whole series of attacks for much the same reason our consulate in Libya was attacked that day in 2012. The Benghazi cover-up has been falling apart ever since. The lie that it was caused by a video grows more absurd and obscene very day.
The Israelis have made a far greater and more successful effort than us to infiltrate their enemy’s organizations. Hamas was so rattled by the effectiveness of the Israeli bombing of sites where its rockets were stored and fired from, as well as the killing of a number of its leaders, that they made a public display of executing a number of people they accused of being Israeli spies, whether they were or not. The likelihood was that they were Gazans who had spoken out against Hamas.
After breaking a number of ceasefires, Hamas, running out of any support, accepted the most recent one and Israel thereafter announced the annexation of more West Bank territory for its settlements and, no doubt, for militarization to protect against further attacks. The Israelis know how to deal with their enemies, to prepare, and to take action rather than issue empty threats.
There have even been a number of small events by American Muslims speaking out against barbarity of the Islamic State and the threats leveled at the U.S. That is a hopeful sign, but it needs to increase in numbers and volume. The vast silence of the 1.3 billion Muslims in the world is an offense to humanity.
The Arabs of the Middle East are forever making dramatic threats, but they have a record of doing little. When Saddam Hussein controlled Iraq, he waged a war against Iran that ended inconclusively and then invaded Kuwait and was defeated by a U.S. coalition. When he continued to make threats the U.S. invaded again and deposed him.
What followed was an effort in several Middle Eastern nations to rid themselves of their despots. This occurred in Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt. Only Egypt, after a brief encounter with a Muslim Brotherhood government, rallied again with a military coup that led to the election of a new military leader. The Brotherhood has been banned! Libya is a failed state that has been taken over by Islamic militants. Tunisia has a new constitution as of January and numerous political parties. Its government is battling local militias.
Iraq is in near failure as it tries to unite its Shiite and Sunni factions in a functioning government. Much of the nation has been taken over by the Islamic State in the same fashion as northern Syria whose civil war has killed 190,000 and driven over a million out as refugees in Lebanon, Jordan and anywhere else they could flee. Who has put troops into Iraq to resist the Islamic State? The Iranians!
One threat the President of the United States does not appear to have taken seriously is an Iran with a nuclear weapon and the intercontinental missiles to deliver it. Both Israel and Saudi Arabia are far more aware of the danger this poses and in all likelihood Israel will conclude it must destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities and military installations.
The United States has lost virtually all the influence it once had in the Middle East, even if it came from the barrel of a gun. Our Secretary of State, John Kerry, is held in low regard by both the Israelis and Arabs. The President, Kerry, and Hillary Clinton keep insisting that “climate change” is the greatest threat to mankind.
If President Obama does not engage in the destruction—not “containment”—of the Islamic State, its oil wealth will enable it to become a major threat in the Middle East and beyond, including us. They have demonstrated no restraint on their use of violence and pose a threat comparable or even greater than the Nazi regime of the last century.
Will there be attack or attacks in the U.S. on 9/11? We all wish we know the answer, but we don’t.
© Alan Caruba, 2014
My only responds to Alan is how do we separate the wheat from the chaff? The normal from the radical Islamic folks?
Those held hostage by radical elements of their own religion?
Regardless – please take a moment to remember the innocents lost thirteen years ago.
As they said on Flight 93 – “Let’s roll!”
h/t Theo Spark
Of course they do, you nit, it’s just not INDEPENDENCE DAY!
Here, we celebrate our freedom from government-imposed tyranny!
courtesy of Theo Spark
…or perhaps not.
(In addition to the constant video and audio surveillance, warrantless searches, police overreaching, Internet spying, illegal detentions, eminent domain theft, inability to defend ourselves, welfare statism, forced unionization, ad infinitum – ad nauseum.)
REGARDLESS, HAVE A HAPPY AND SAFE INDEPENDENCE DAY! I plan to read the Declaration of Independence aloud today, in it’s entirety, before doing so is also banned! – Guffaw
Via Fox News Latino
A federal appellate court here ruled that a Mexican teenager fatally shot by a Border Patrol agent was protected by the U.S. Constitution despite the fact that he was on Mexican territory at the time of the incident.
The ruling by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in El Paso held that the family of 15-year-old Sergio Adrian Hernandez Güereca may proceed with their $25 million civil suit over his death in 2010.
U.S. District Judge David Briones earlier had ruled that the boy’s family lacked the right to sue the government because Sergio was on Mexican territory when he was shot.
The appellate court concluded, however, that Briones’ logic would permit Border Patrol agents to establish “zones of lawlessness” and institute “a perverse rule that would treat differently two individuals subject to the same conduct merely because one managed to cross into our territory.” (…)
I wonder if this applies in reverse?
If the United States Border Patrol agents who were recently shot at from a Mexican military helicopter (flying over U.S. soil!) had been hit, could THEY sue The Mexican Military?
Inquiring minds want to know…
h/t Dapandico, Weasel Zippers
No wait, yes we do!
(reposted from Random Acts of Patriotism/asm826)
…it’s just another brick in the wall.
If it was my son, I would be willing to give up every swinging dick in Guantanamo to get him back. I get that part. But it’s not. And now the enemy knows what we will pay for a live American soldier. We will pay five for one. And we will negotiate.
1. Mohammad Fazl
One of the first detainees captured in Afghanistan to be transferred to Guantanamo — in January 2002 — Fazl is the Taliban’s former deputy minister of defense. He was one of the Taliban’s founding members, rising through the ranks to become Taliban Chief of Army Staff when it ruled Afghanistan. Human Rights Watch accuses Fazl of presiding over the mass killings of Afghanistan’s Shi’ite Muslims in 2000 and 2001.
2. Mohammad Nabi
The former chief of Taliban security in Qalat, the capital of Afghanistan’s southern Zabul Province.
3. Abdul Haq Wasiq
Also accused by Human Rights Watch of mass killings and torture during the Taliban’s time in power, the Taliban’s former deputy minister of intelligence is considered to have been at one time one of Mullah Omar’s closest confidants.
4. Mullah Norullah Nori
Nori was the senior Taliban commander in the strategic northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif. He is considered to be one of the most high-ranking Taliban officials ever to be held in Guantanamo. He is also accused of being involved in the massacre of thousands Shi’ite Muslims in 2000 and 2001.
5. Khairullah Khairkhwa
The former Taliban governor of Heart Province, which borders Iran, Khairkhwa has also served as a military commander and a minister of the interior.
I get that part, too. (About willingness to give up those in Git’mo) I grieve for every soldier, sailor, Marine and others who gave all in service to this Nation. And those horribly wounded or held as prisoners-of-war. It must be horrible for them and their loved ones.
But every one who signs on for this kind of service understands the risks.
ASM826 is correct – do we want to change U.S. Policy and show weakness when the enemy only understands strength?
And since this story broke, it’s come out that Bergdahl’s father is a Muslim, AND, Bergdahl himself may have given aid and comfort to the Taliban, not been a prisoner! And there is evidence he renounced his U.S. Citizenship and walked away from his unit!
How many men died and were wounded trying to ‘save’ him? If the above allegations are indeed true, he should be placed in Fort Leavenworth and shot.
Stormbringer reminded us of a teacher of yore. We need more like her, today.
Meet Captain Nieves Fernandez, the only known Filipino female guerrilla leader and school teacher. When the Japanese came to take the children under her care she shot them. She didn’t hide in a closet, she didn’t put up a gun free zone sign, she shot them in the face with her latong (a home made shotgun).
Note she has an M1 carbine with a 15 round magazine – illegal in the Gun Control States of California and Massachusetts.
She then went on to kill over 200 Japanese soldiers during the war with a group of commandos and holds the distinction as the only female commander of a resistance group in the Philippines.
In this photo she is showing U.S. Army Private Andrew Lupiba how she used her bolo to silently kill Japanese sentries during the occupation of Leyte Island.
Can you imagine an American school teacher in the day & age having the chutzpah to pull off a class act like this?
h/t Theo Spark
I was never in ‘the service’. Not for lack of trying, though. My disability kept me 4-F until the draft was discontinued.
I admire members of the military for their tenacity; their discipline. Always have, even when many of my generation (Vietnam and post-Korea) protested actively against the military.
Of course, with today’s volunteer military, much of the culture has become ‘cool’. I find in conversations with many the lingo terms I use are outdated. “No lie G.I.!”
So I found a crib sheet!
U.S. Military Lingo: The (Almost) Definitive Guide
Blowed up: Hit by an IED. Example: “I been blowed up six times this year.”
Fitty: The M2 .50 caliber machine gun. (and how sad is THAT!)
Joe: Soldier. Replacement term for GI.
Perhaps one day we won’t have a need for such lingo…
h/t NPR, Ben Brody
Please remember today’s anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor. We lose more WWII Veterans every day. – Guffaw
Of course you do!
I do, too. But Kent’s “Hooligan Libertarian Blog” offers perspective, along with support.
To wit (in part):
The powderkeg of “troops”
Are individuals in America better off that there are US troops all over the planet? Do troops really help “
the people”?Think about it.Was Germany better off by having and supporting the Nazi troops? Or, in the long run was the normal, average German made less safe and less prosperous because of “the troops”? (And don’t bother trying to misuse Godwin’s Law
on me- I’m on to that game.)
The only ones helped by “the troops” are those who work for that gang of thugs called “government”. Everyone else is harmed. They may think they are benefiting, but only until consequences catch up to them all. At that time the veil is ripped away.
You should go to Kent’s link above and read the whole thing. Blind obedience isn’t thinking, and it certainly isn’t what freedom and liberty are about.
Question Authority. Not just for the exercise, but for the meaning; the agenda.