(P) It's been 21 years since economic sanctions started killing Iraqis in 1990.
18 years since the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
13 years since the 1998 African embassy bombings.
11 years since the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole.
10 years since the 2001 World Trade Center and Pentagon bombings and the invasion of Afghanistan.
8 years since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
5 years since Saddam Hussein was killed in 2006.
And now, the White House is set to report the death of Osama bin Laden.
If we don't bring our troops home now from foreign military occupations, we'll be doing this forever.
Forever.
Well, as long as empires last.
Which tends to be shorter than forever.
Showing posts with label terrorism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label terrorism. Show all posts
5/02/2011
1/06/2011
i'm not afraid
Julie goes out of town for 24 hours and I'm ready to blow something up*.
*warning, don't joke about blowing things up in England.
Two bits of information came out on the same day that highlight everything that's wrong with our two-tiered justice system - the one for the rich and powerful, the other for the rest of us. And when I say rest of us, I mean all of us. White, black, young, old, christian, atheist, north, south; if you're not rich, the government can steamroll you.
What am I talking about?
On the same day, we learn that:
1. The government kidnapped and tortured (err, 'allowed' to be kidnapped and tortured) an American teenager in Kuwait.
2. The government has arrested a former intelligence officer for saying embarrassing (err, 'state secret') things, a local man from O'Fallon, MO.
That both men happen to be black is perhaps the icing on the cake.
Essentially, we can't prosecute - or even stop - the most vicious assaults on American citizens. We can't prosecute - or even stop - the most blatant looting of our financial system.
But boy, share CIA secrets about CIA incompetence in the run-up to Bush's oh-so-legal invasion of Iraq, watch out! Wammmo, Obama/Bush/whoever you picture as 'the enemy' will be after you!
I have a special place in my heart for people who go nuts, because I think insanity is the only rational reaction to what's going on in this world of ours. I have some stupid unevolved hangeron in my brain that refuses to give up. I believe this country of ours can still be saved.
But it's worth it yet again to ponder the difference between a US President and a third world dictator. If government agents can arrest patriots and kidnap citizens, what can't be done to any one of us?
I'm not afraid of black people. I'm not afraid of Muslims. Secrecy itself is the cancer eating away at our security. I refuse to be afraid, whether it's a Republican or a Democrat telling me scary bedtime stories. I refuse to accept that this is the way things are.
*warning, don't joke about blowing things up in England.
Two bits of information came out on the same day that highlight everything that's wrong with our two-tiered justice system - the one for the rich and powerful, the other for the rest of us. And when I say rest of us, I mean all of us. White, black, young, old, christian, atheist, north, south; if you're not rich, the government can steamroll you.
What am I talking about?
On the same day, we learn that:
1. The government kidnapped and tortured (err, 'allowed' to be kidnapped and tortured) an American teenager in Kuwait.
2. The government has arrested a former intelligence officer for saying embarrassing (err, 'state secret') things, a local man from O'Fallon, MO.
That both men happen to be black is perhaps the icing on the cake.
Essentially, we can't prosecute - or even stop - the most vicious assaults on American citizens. We can't prosecute - or even stop - the most blatant looting of our financial system.
But boy, share CIA secrets about CIA incompetence in the run-up to Bush's oh-so-legal invasion of Iraq, watch out! Wammmo, Obama/Bush/whoever you picture as 'the enemy' will be after you!
I have a special place in my heart for people who go nuts, because I think insanity is the only rational reaction to what's going on in this world of ours. I have some stupid unevolved hangeron in my brain that refuses to give up. I believe this country of ours can still be saved.
But it's worth it yet again to ponder the difference between a US President and a third world dictator. If government agents can arrest patriots and kidnap citizens, what can't be done to any one of us?
I'm not afraid of black people. I'm not afraid of Muslims. Secrecy itself is the cancer eating away at our security. I refuse to be afraid, whether it's a Republican or a Democrat telling me scary bedtime stories. I refuse to accept that this is the way things are.
4/14/2010
I don't get the Iraq shooting video
(P) I had been debating whether I wanted to see the video posted at Wikileaks of the shooting of some Iraqis a few years ago from Apache helicopters. There was so much hype around it, I really wasn't sure what might be on it.
But I went and watched it last night, and I don't get it. The soldiers in the video were quite professional. They maintained aerial surveillance of the ground, stayed in contact with each other, sought permission from their commanders before taking action, used short controlled bursts of rounds, and were otherwise quite calm and focused. I was particularly impressed by their restraint after one of them thought he saw an RPG. I'm sorry, but if I'm in a helicopter in a war zone, and my colleague is saying there's an RPG, I just might pull that trigger and ask permission to engage later. After wetting my pants, of course.
This. Is. War.
What the bleeping bleepity bleep bleep did you think was going on over there? We're handing out flowers? Baking cookies? Singing Kum ba yah?
If Iraqis (and Afghans and Iranians and Saudis and Pakistanis and everybody else) are our enemies, then we should celebrate the efficient, professional conduct captured in this engagement. If those people aren't our enemies, well, get the heck out of there. Until the President, Secretary of Defense, and Centcom commanders give the orders to leave, this is precisely what will continue in our name.
The story of this video is that there's no story. That's why the government fought Reuters' FOIA request. The Reuters employees, and the other Iraqis too, are dead because of the choice to occupy the country. These events are expected consequences of sending military troops to patrol foreign places.
But I went and watched it last night, and I don't get it. The soldiers in the video were quite professional. They maintained aerial surveillance of the ground, stayed in contact with each other, sought permission from their commanders before taking action, used short controlled bursts of rounds, and were otherwise quite calm and focused. I was particularly impressed by their restraint after one of them thought he saw an RPG. I'm sorry, but if I'm in a helicopter in a war zone, and my colleague is saying there's an RPG, I just might pull that trigger and ask permission to engage later. After wetting my pants, of course.
This. Is. War.
What the bleeping bleepity bleep bleep did you think was going on over there? We're handing out flowers? Baking cookies? Singing Kum ba yah?
If Iraqis (and Afghans and Iranians and Saudis and Pakistanis and everybody else) are our enemies, then we should celebrate the efficient, professional conduct captured in this engagement. If those people aren't our enemies, well, get the heck out of there. Until the President, Secretary of Defense, and Centcom commanders give the orders to leave, this is precisely what will continue in our name.
The story of this video is that there's no story. That's why the government fought Reuters' FOIA request. The Reuters employees, and the other Iraqis too, are dead because of the choice to occupy the country. These events are expected consequences of sending military troops to patrol foreign places.
10/29/2009
oppressors get upset, hilarity ensues
Let me premise this by saying I'm not one of those people who thinks we live in an honest, full blown police state, but I do care a lot about Constitutional rights (I did grow up in a town called Liberty, after all) and probably follow related news more than the average bear.
Well, sometimes our surveillance society ends up being comical as much as anything else. Check out these two stories I saw together this evening.
First, the Pittsburgh G-20 Twitter-Terrorist (I have that copyrighted, CNN!) appears to actually be under real government investigation. It wasn't enough that the police spent 16 hours searching his home for...something (the warrant wasn't real clear on that). A federal Grand Jury indicted him on a separate line of inquiry about alleged violations of the Anti-Riot Act. Yes, the guy tweeting publicly available locations of police who shouldn't even have been deployed so that protestors could avoid them is accused of inciting a riot. That's just brilliant. Next thing you know, people who advocate nonviolence are going to be locked up in jail as dangerous criminals. Oh wait, we have a great history of doing that, from this guy to that one.
The second thing I ran across was this devious sex criminal. How do I know she's devious? She's a Philadelphia Phillies fan, of course. She posted an ad on Craigslist. The Philly police, naturally having nothing else to do, read through Craigslist, found her ad, and asked her to meet a guy in a bar. They talked for awhile until some sort of implied offer for World Series tickets involved, gasp, sex. Then presto, guy replying to ad about World Series tickets turns out to be a cop, girl wanting World Series tickets turns out to be a danger to society.
Thank you Pennsylvania for removing two hardened, dangerous, violent criminals off our streets!
Well, sometimes our surveillance society ends up being comical as much as anything else. Check out these two stories I saw together this evening.
First, the Pittsburgh G-20 Twitter-Terrorist (I have that copyrighted, CNN!) appears to actually be under real government investigation. It wasn't enough that the police spent 16 hours searching his home for...something (the warrant wasn't real clear on that). A federal Grand Jury indicted him on a separate line of inquiry about alleged violations of the Anti-Riot Act. Yes, the guy tweeting publicly available locations of police who shouldn't even have been deployed so that protestors could avoid them is accused of inciting a riot. That's just brilliant. Next thing you know, people who advocate nonviolence are going to be locked up in jail as dangerous criminals. Oh wait, we have a great history of doing that, from this guy to that one.
The second thing I ran across was this devious sex criminal. How do I know she's devious? She's a Philadelphia Phillies fan, of course. She posted an ad on Craigslist. The Philly police, naturally having nothing else to do, read through Craigslist, found her ad, and asked her to meet a guy in a bar. They talked for awhile until some sort of implied offer for World Series tickets involved, gasp, sex. Then presto, guy replying to ad about World Series tickets turns out to be a cop, girl wanting World Series tickets turns out to be a danger to society.
Thank you Pennsylvania for removing two hardened, dangerous, violent criminals off our streets!
6/23/2008
who supports criminals?
Pop quiz time. Who said this about legislation designed to prevent powerful companies from being held accountable for criminal activities and to allow even further spying on Americans by unaccountable government leaders?
"It is not all that I would want," [____] said. "But given the legitimate threats that we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay."
A) President Bush
B) Vice President Cheney
C) Senate Minority Leader McConnell
D) Presumptive Republican nominee McCain
E) Presumptive Democratic nominee Obama
If you guessed Obama, you're right.
Wow, this is just unbelievable. Or at least, unbelievable if you think Obama is as progressive as he lets people believe he is. When push comes to shove, he seems quite willing to support corporations, even when they commit felonies. Some guy who smokes a joint will serve more jail time than these criminals! He seems quite willing to do what the Republican leadership demands, no matter how much the very people whose votes he's pursuing despise the policies of the GOP. He seems quite willing to use the same baseless scare tactics and the same hollow deceptions about 'safeguards' as the GOP leaders themselves.
This legislation doesn't even prevent outright spying on Americans. The Executive merely will have to tell the court that they are trying to 'minimize' the information collection on US citizens.
"It is not all that I would want," [____] said. "But given the legitimate threats that we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay."
A) President Bush
B) Vice President Cheney
C) Senate Minority Leader McConnell
D) Presumptive Republican nominee McCain
E) Presumptive Democratic nominee Obama
If you guessed Obama, you're right.
Wow, this is just unbelievable. Or at least, unbelievable if you think Obama is as progressive as he lets people believe he is. When push comes to shove, he seems quite willing to support corporations, even when they commit felonies. Some guy who smokes a joint will serve more jail time than these criminals! He seems quite willing to do what the Republican leadership demands, no matter how much the very people whose votes he's pursuing despise the policies of the GOP. He seems quite willing to use the same baseless scare tactics and the same hollow deceptions about 'safeguards' as the GOP leaders themselves.
This legislation doesn't even prevent outright spying on Americans. The Executive merely will have to tell the court that they are trying to 'minimize' the information collection on US citizens.
4/25/2008
illicit markets are the coolest
Jodi and I are watching a show on PBS about illicit markets. Aside from the exaggeration of the uniqueness of now (as if black markets haven't always existed) it's pretty cool. I find illegal markets a lot more intellectually stimulating than legal ones. There's just so much going on, so much innovation, you always have to be a step ahead of the people chasing you. The power of people's individual choices to overwhelm the best laid plans of governments and corporations. The reminder that criminal is a label of one's relation to arbitrary laws (and the arbitrary enforcement of those laws), not a statement on one's abilities in sales, marketing, operations, strategy, entrepreneurship, interpersonal relations, or other valuable, marketable, productive skills.
And of course, the overwhelming economic, human, and national security case for ending crime as we know it by decriminalizing much of what we call crime. Consumers get inferior products when pushed into gray and black markets, taxpayers get screwed by the massive bills which don't do anything, and organized crime and terrorist organizations have access to massive revenue and transportation networks.
But hey, it's hard to compromise on good public policy when it comes to issues like this. After all, the GOP is all about big government, and they hate free markets.
And of course, the overwhelming economic, human, and national security case for ending crime as we know it by decriminalizing much of what we call crime. Consumers get inferior products when pushed into gray and black markets, taxpayers get screwed by the massive bills which don't do anything, and organized crime and terrorist organizations have access to massive revenue and transportation networks.
But hey, it's hard to compromise on good public policy when it comes to issues like this. After all, the GOP is all about big government, and they hate free markets.
4/19/2008
to laugh or to cry
Oh, this is just too much. One of my main hesitations about Senator Obama has been his position that we need to pay more attention to Afghanistan, not less.
But regardless of how you feel about US troops there, this is pretty funny, in a very disturbing way.
Nato forces mistakenly supplied food, water and arms to Taliban forces in southern Afghanistan, officials today admitted.
That NATO has been so unsuccessful in militarily occupying Afghanistan is a very sobering reality. The last thing we need to be doing is helping the Taliban.
But regardless of how you feel about US troops there, this is pretty funny, in a very disturbing way.
Nato forces mistakenly supplied food, water and arms to Taliban forces in southern Afghanistan, officials today admitted.
That NATO has been so unsuccessful in militarily occupying Afghanistan is a very sobering reality. The last thing we need to be doing is helping the Taliban.
3/29/2008
traitors or liars
Or both?
(P) Attorney General Mukasey's comments in San Francisco are really interesting:
...we knew that there had been a call from someplace that was known to be a safe house in Afghanistan and we knew that it came to the United States. We didn't know precisely where it went. You've got 3,000 people who went to work that day, and didn't come home, to show for that...
Did we know about a safe house in Afghanistan that was making phone calls in 2001? If so, why did the Bush Administration choose not to perform surveillance of those terrorists, as explicitly allowed by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act? What part of foreign, intelligence, and surveillance does the Bush Administration not understand?
And if we didn't know that, will we now be treated like kindergarteners as Mukasey tells us he didn't say that we knew that? It's definitely a new low when the Administration doesn't even try to tell believable lies anymore.
(P) Attorney General Mukasey's comments in San Francisco are really interesting:
...we knew that there had been a call from someplace that was known to be a safe house in Afghanistan and we knew that it came to the United States. We didn't know precisely where it went. You've got 3,000 people who went to work that day, and didn't come home, to show for that...
Did we know about a safe house in Afghanistan that was making phone calls in 2001? If so, why did the Bush Administration choose not to perform surveillance of those terrorists, as explicitly allowed by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act? What part of foreign, intelligence, and surveillance does the Bush Administration not understand?
And if we didn't know that, will we now be treated like kindergarteners as Mukasey tells us he didn't say that we knew that? It's definitely a new low when the Administration doesn't even try to tell believable lies anymore.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)