The Memorial Day holiday is probably more significant to me than it is to many Americans for one simple reason.
Historically, May 30th was designated as Memorial Day; however, the day in May has fluctuated during the last several decades due to a change in legislation in order accomodate U.S. businesses and their employees to afford a three day weekend.
Memorial Day remained May 30th for many years after I was born, since May 30th just happens to be my birthday.
I was born on the day which was designated to honor all those killed in the wars preceding my birth...which at that time were those who lost their lives in the American Revolution, War of 1812, Civil War, World War I and World War II.
In Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
My birth and their deaths have been my legacy ever since.
While President Obama laid wreaths and rolled out the patriotic speeches, and Romney used the day to campaign on increases in federal governmental spending on defense, mention was made that this is also the 50th anniversary of the beginning of the Viet Nam war.
Also a war in which I was an eyewitness to the events surrounding its beginning, progression and ending.
What I heard did not at all address this war for what it was.
The start of the wars for global dominance and offensive engagements rather than Constitutional defensive ones.
The service personnel from that war need recognition more so probably than any other group of servicemen and women.
After all, most of them were required to serve, or run off to Canada if they did not wish to be drafted.
Many came back having been the subjects of experiments in chemical warfare (Agent Orange), and with PTSD due to having to fight a war against an ill defined enemy, for an ill defined purpose, and against women and children who were used also as combatants.
Sort of like this ongoing conflict in Iraq, Afghanistan and wherever else the front in this Middle Eastern "War on Terror" moves.
It appeared to me that many of those governmental officials waving the flag interviewed on cable television were using terrorism tactics themselves.
Romney stating that "this country is no more safet today than it was ten years ago" and in need of bulking up its military defensive spending in order to guarantee Americans future safety and security from the Middle Eastern threat.
When over 4,000 men and women so far have died in this current war, in addition to those lost in 9-11...would appear the threat is greater over there than it would be if we were fighting this war on our own home soil, if needed.
I mean, what is the logic of losing another 4,000 lives after losing almost 3,000 and doubling down on the loss of life.
If what Mr. Romney states is true, just how many more lives will be needed?
Our own U.S. borders are still, for the most part, unsecure and more and more foreigners are being afforded entry in this country than ever before, under that U.S. free pass visa waiver program which was instituted during the last days of the Bush Administration.
From over 40 different countries.
We are now training foreign troops on U.S. soil for the first time in American history - just how secure is that making this country's defense?
If we are not any more secure today than we were ten years ago, just what was the point of Reagan's Star Wars program, and all the literally tens of billions of dollars that have been spent to buy the latest satellite technology, and all those gadgets and guns?
Just how many more American lives, and livelihoods, will it take?
The attached video on the Viet Nam conflict is as true today, as it was then....and it is the sons and daughters of Americans that continue to pay the price...
THIS was Viet Nam....and this Middle Eastern war will be this generation's Viet Nam...
And how many that paid tribute today, will not be here for the next Memorial Day?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnnLrmboOYE&feature=related
Showing posts with label Iraq. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iraq. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
Thursday, June 9, 2011
The Weiner Waggers, Palin's Revere and More
This week the mainstream news media is at it again, dominating the airwaves with sensationalized news stories, and propaganda geared more toward ratings, than anything that truly might interest the American public, in this writer's opinion.
First there are what I like to call the "Weiner Waggers" and their subversive journalism.
I'm sure this week's "Saturday Night Live" will be a hoot, and have a field day with this one.
Mr. Weiner is a American of the Jewish faith, married to a Middle Eastern young woman that just so happens to also work for Hillary Clinton, Bill's wife.
I'm sure there is some real bonding going on there between those two women on those taxpayer paid trips to all those foreign ports of call on behalf of the State Department.
Mr. Weiner was, of course, recently married.
I find it strange that this brouhaha occurred just as the public was in the midst of continuing to question and address the bin Laden "burial at sea" and details surrounding that heroic event.
In fact, seems almost to have been concocted so fast - this "news breaking story."
And the pronunciation of Mr. Weiner's name certainly seems to be either intentionally mispronounced also to flesh out this story, since I've yet to meet another whose name is spelled in such a way, especially of the Jewish faith, and pronounced "Weiner" (as in Oscar Mayer) rather than "Whiner" (as in childrens' tales of woe, or rhyming with beer stein-er).
The fact that it seems politician's infidelity is become the norm and seems to be used as a segway after or during horrific Constitutional violations, press reports out of Washington, or whatever to an increasingly outraged public with the goings on in Washington lo these many years also seems rather odd.
Maybe he just simply irritated the Jewish population with the selection of his bride, who is not Jewish from all reports and is of a different religious and ethnic persuasion.
Or maybe he is in on this latest hoax and diversion.
I mean, also from all reports he has sponsored bills for increasing visas also for foreign models to this country (as if we don't have enough American models, most on Fox it seems promoted to "political analysts" or "lawyer"), although who knows if that one is true, either.
And then there was Ms. Palin's version of the Paul Revere tale, with a lot of "shucks" and "by gollies" thrown in for good measure.
Darn those British for even thinking about "takin' away our guns," hence Mr. Revere's warning.
Nothing about that Declaration of Independence and just what the true "grievances" of those patriots were, or the fact that America had already pretty much declared their intent to break free of Britain due to also its history of governmental abuse, increasing taxation, and its partnering with its "favored subjects" in order to rob from the poor, and give to the rich to make them much, much richer with titles and baronies, giving away or demanding both their homes and land, and then even the fruits of their own labors as that 16th Amendment and the increasing eminent domain abuses for purely increased tax revenues demonstrate now in this country.
Not that simple little "indirect" tea tax.
Mimicing the Britain of the 18th century once again.
But, gosh, America it was simply those guns and arms the British wished to confiscate.
Thrown in to all of this was also the release of a report that indicated that Americans at the present time have the lowest taxes since the 1950's.
Federal, state, local or statutory?
No breakdown was provided.
I guess we are forgetting all the literally tens of thousands of laws that have been implemented since the 1950's that now mandate (such as ObamaCare intends to do) the purchase of its "favored subjects" products BY LAW OR ELSE you can simply pay a fine to the government, or be arrested if you do not now also budget whatever income you have left according to the U.S. Congress's will and edicts (or your own state, who gave the federal government back in 1913 power it was never, ever intended to have - at least without the consent of the governed in those "passed" amendments).
Those, by any stretch of the imagination, also count as "taxes" too.
But Ms. Palin's version is more exploitive, and inflammatory (and incorrect).
Gotta love the Washington press corp, cable news and those other "waggers."
First there are what I like to call the "Weiner Waggers" and their subversive journalism.
I'm sure this week's "Saturday Night Live" will be a hoot, and have a field day with this one.
Mr. Weiner is a American of the Jewish faith, married to a Middle Eastern young woman that just so happens to also work for Hillary Clinton, Bill's wife.
I'm sure there is some real bonding going on there between those two women on those taxpayer paid trips to all those foreign ports of call on behalf of the State Department.
Mr. Weiner was, of course, recently married.
I find it strange that this brouhaha occurred just as the public was in the midst of continuing to question and address the bin Laden "burial at sea" and details surrounding that heroic event.
In fact, seems almost to have been concocted so fast - this "news breaking story."
And the pronunciation of Mr. Weiner's name certainly seems to be either intentionally mispronounced also to flesh out this story, since I've yet to meet another whose name is spelled in such a way, especially of the Jewish faith, and pronounced "Weiner" (as in Oscar Mayer) rather than "Whiner" (as in childrens' tales of woe, or rhyming with beer stein-er).
The fact that it seems politician's infidelity is become the norm and seems to be used as a segway after or during horrific Constitutional violations, press reports out of Washington, or whatever to an increasingly outraged public with the goings on in Washington lo these many years also seems rather odd.
Maybe he just simply irritated the Jewish population with the selection of his bride, who is not Jewish from all reports and is of a different religious and ethnic persuasion.
Or maybe he is in on this latest hoax and diversion.
I mean, also from all reports he has sponsored bills for increasing visas also for foreign models to this country (as if we don't have enough American models, most on Fox it seems promoted to "political analysts" or "lawyer"), although who knows if that one is true, either.
And then there was Ms. Palin's version of the Paul Revere tale, with a lot of "shucks" and "by gollies" thrown in for good measure.
Darn those British for even thinking about "takin' away our guns," hence Mr. Revere's warning.
Nothing about that Declaration of Independence and just what the true "grievances" of those patriots were, or the fact that America had already pretty much declared their intent to break free of Britain due to also its history of governmental abuse, increasing taxation, and its partnering with its "favored subjects" in order to rob from the poor, and give to the rich to make them much, much richer with titles and baronies, giving away or demanding both their homes and land, and then even the fruits of their own labors as that 16th Amendment and the increasing eminent domain abuses for purely increased tax revenues demonstrate now in this country.
Not that simple little "indirect" tea tax.
Mimicing the Britain of the 18th century once again.
But, gosh, America it was simply those guns and arms the British wished to confiscate.
Thrown in to all of this was also the release of a report that indicated that Americans at the present time have the lowest taxes since the 1950's.
Federal, state, local or statutory?
No breakdown was provided.
I guess we are forgetting all the literally tens of thousands of laws that have been implemented since the 1950's that now mandate (such as ObamaCare intends to do) the purchase of its "favored subjects" products BY LAW OR ELSE you can simply pay a fine to the government, or be arrested if you do not now also budget whatever income you have left according to the U.S. Congress's will and edicts (or your own state, who gave the federal government back in 1913 power it was never, ever intended to have - at least without the consent of the governed in those "passed" amendments).
Those, by any stretch of the imagination, also count as "taxes" too.
But Ms. Palin's version is more exploitive, and inflammatory (and incorrect).
Gotta love the Washington press corp, cable news and those other "waggers."
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Obama Hawks British War Strategy
It appears the hawk has replaced the dove during Mr. Obama's less than three year run as our nation's president.
During the British tour announced and undertaken post the "capture" and "death" of Osama bin Laden, Mr. Obama has been meeting with the British leaders and hawking his new conversion from his election positions and statements in 2008. Remember, at that time he was challenged as "soft" on war with his stances to end the War in Iraq as soon as "safely" possible, and get our troops back home and end this unconstitutional Middle East takeover in the name of fighting "terrorism" and also tracking down bin Laden.
The "new" British initiative which America and American troops are also expected to support?
Establishing "democracies" throughout the Middle East. Of course, the United States is not a democracy, nor was ever intended to be, but a Constitutional Republic honoring freedom of religion most of all, although with Christian-Judeo roots in its original intent and form. Not extremism in either of those two faiths either in supporting interventionist or even precipitated wars in order to "take over" other countries and their established forms of government, whatever they may be, but affording those people living within those sovereign countries to also stage their own revolutionary wars if "change" is truly needed there, with U.S. diplomatic and arms support if need be, of course if absolutely needed or necessary.
Not direct troop involvement, at any rate.
But no matter, it is clear that the "change" which occurs under a change in leadership in this country has no effect, and instead of abiding by the Constitution it appears a race to see which party can desecrate it even faster.
While all this was being announced, of course, the U.S. Congress and House of "Misrepresentatives" again passed the extension of the Patriot Act, that Act of Congress that was passed post 9-11 in order to fight "terrorism," once again ten long years after 9-11, and also after this recent "capture" and "death at sea" of the purported mastermind.
Where is the outraged citizenry who continue to be marginalized also under this unconstitutional provision and "in your face" violation of America's Bill of Rights?
Most likely on the unemployment line, or now without television sets in order to continue keeping tabs and watching the destruction of the late, great U.S. those founders fought so hard and shed their blood to watch our modern day political machines in bed with the unconstitutional agendas of World War II allies destroy.
Hail, Britainnia. Britainnia rules the Hill.
During the British tour announced and undertaken post the "capture" and "death" of Osama bin Laden, Mr. Obama has been meeting with the British leaders and hawking his new conversion from his election positions and statements in 2008. Remember, at that time he was challenged as "soft" on war with his stances to end the War in Iraq as soon as "safely" possible, and get our troops back home and end this unconstitutional Middle East takeover in the name of fighting "terrorism" and also tracking down bin Laden.
The "new" British initiative which America and American troops are also expected to support?
Establishing "democracies" throughout the Middle East. Of course, the United States is not a democracy, nor was ever intended to be, but a Constitutional Republic honoring freedom of religion most of all, although with Christian-Judeo roots in its original intent and form. Not extremism in either of those two faiths either in supporting interventionist or even precipitated wars in order to "take over" other countries and their established forms of government, whatever they may be, but affording those people living within those sovereign countries to also stage their own revolutionary wars if "change" is truly needed there, with U.S. diplomatic and arms support if need be, of course if absolutely needed or necessary.
Not direct troop involvement, at any rate.
But no matter, it is clear that the "change" which occurs under a change in leadership in this country has no effect, and instead of abiding by the Constitution it appears a race to see which party can desecrate it even faster.
While all this was being announced, of course, the U.S. Congress and House of "Misrepresentatives" again passed the extension of the Patriot Act, that Act of Congress that was passed post 9-11 in order to fight "terrorism," once again ten long years after 9-11, and also after this recent "capture" and "death at sea" of the purported mastermind.
Where is the outraged citizenry who continue to be marginalized also under this unconstitutional provision and "in your face" violation of America's Bill of Rights?
Most likely on the unemployment line, or now without television sets in order to continue keeping tabs and watching the destruction of the late, great U.S. those founders fought so hard and shed their blood to watch our modern day political machines in bed with the unconstitutional agendas of World War II allies destroy.
Hail, Britainnia. Britainnia rules the Hill.
Friday, September 10, 2010
Nine Years Later: Whitewashing 9-11
This past week our mainstream print and television media dedicated much of their programming once again to 9-11 and its aftermath, and using it in order to garner ratings and place their subjective spins on this black mark in American history.
One major news magazine has an article devoted to how America "over-reacted" to 9-11, and the threat of al-Qaeda (although originally it was the Taliban and Osama bin Laden which was the focus of those first weeks and months post 9-11, not al Qaeda at all). Another article in the same magazine written by a former President's daughter lambasts how the liberals are disappointed with the reaction of Mr. Obama to the Deepwater Horizon disaster and the weeks and months this Administration stood by while tens of thousands of barrels of oil were spewing into the Gulf, without a mention of the continuing war also whose candidate had pledged to end the war, one of their major concerns at election time.
To this American, it has been nine long years of betrayal and using 9-11 also for their agendas by both political parties which has resulted in the increased discontent of the American people with their leadership.
I would not state that the reactions of the general citizenry were "over-reactions," but that the actions of the Bush/Obama Administration have been "under-reactions."
Our borders, for the most part, and ports of entry are even less secure than they were pre-9-11. Our infrastructure and many of our vital industries and public utility companies are traded on the global exchange, and for all intents and purposes even our nuclear reactors could be "owned" through stock purchases, by foreigners.
There has also been two other attempts under even stranger circumstances, originating from Great Britain since that time used to justify then increasing security measures domestically, although the Bush Administration during his last 90 days in office expanded the Visa waiver program for foreign citizens wishing entry, requiring simply 48 hour security checks, to citizens from over 45 nations.
Our southern and northern borders still remain relatively unsecured, and there are once again even since 2006 attempts being made to "legalize" individuals who are in this country who had absolutely no security checks at all as having entered illegally, and also who have overstayed their work, student or visitor visas.
While instead, Americans are being asked to submit themselves to full body scanners, and other invasive security measures at domestic airports.
In this same magazine, an article also appeared that harkened back to how "united" the American people were post 9-11, pulling together for a "common good," due to all the donations and volunteers that did what they could in the aftermath of the tragedy. As a nation, however, I would not say that this country was "united" except for the fact that it was united in its outrage that such an event, in this modern day and era and with all the monies spent for national defense in technology during the Reagan era, especially, could occur.
We were united in our wish to have the perpetrators of this heinous act brought to justice, which has alluded this nation still even nine long years later.
We wanted our leaders to abide by our Constitution, and close our borders and our country to "foreigners" until those individuals responsible for the act were brought to justice, and order any and all here illegally out until such time.
We wanted our president not to direct us to "go shop," or this president to expand the war without having any real hard intelligence indicating that the perpetrators were within our grasp, and not send any more of our young men and women to die on foreign sand to add to the losses.
We simply wanted our leadership to abide by their oaths of office, and their duties to Americans and protect this nation and its borders and legal and lawful citizenry, rather than their commercial interests and those domestic and foreign privateers.
Attempts are now also being made in order to "whitewash" 9-11 and its impact in declaring this day a "National Day of Service," rather than a memorial day as with Pearl Harbor. And the profiteers who wish to now see a Muslim mosque built in close proximity over the objections of most of the American people, promoting such an act as a demonstration of "tolerance," rather than the real agenda - a multi-million dollar redevelopment project for the city and state coffers of New York.
There is much in this puzzle still missing as those that viewed that attack for over seven full days replayed and replayed can attest.
And attempts to marginalize the Americans who still are not satisfied with the official explanations will not change that, nor cloaking 9-11 in patriotism and the flag, or minimizing the impact this massive attack and its scars have left on this nation and a new generation of Americans who didn't live through Pearl Harbor.
Interesting this mosque and its ramifications has reared its head just a short year before the 10th anniversary, and push toward this "National Day of Service" spin focusing on those that responded (although their acts of bravery are not to be discounted by any means), rather than the victims and tragedy itself? I wonder what incentives the City of New York, since it has the support of its Mayor, is extending for this massive, expansive project in order to feed the "jobs and the economy" on the memories of that day, and of the 9-11 victims?
I'm no "conspiracy" nut or theorist, but I still wonder how the mainstream media was able to get full camera crews to the site of the Trade Center within 20 minutes of the first crash since the financial district of New York is quite a distance away from where most of those media centers are located, and this was rush hour at that....even the date selected, an emergency code used throughout the U.S. and not the Middle East, bears scrutiny. If this was a religious attack as has been claimed of jihadists, just why wasn't a Muslim holy day selected, which would certainly make more sense if extremism within the Muslim faith was the origins of this heinous attack on our civilian population primarily and nation's economy and military headquarters.
And I have seen enough controlled demolitions during my years in Phoenix, Arizona when tearing down old buildings in order to redevelop and put in new was an ongoing annual process, since Phoenix and its metro area has exploded in the last two decades, to its detriment also, as a former longer term "almost native" Arizonan. I've been to New York, and it's population and traffic are well-known. Although after the events which occurred, such a decision could be understandable given the extent of the damage and "collateral" damage which also was an eminent threat, but this entire scenario cannot be dismissed by the mere "scientific" theories and explanations which were then subsequently published in an auto mechanics magazine.
To even use such a source by many in our leadershp and print and television media goes to show the utter contempt it does appear that some of those that survived have for their fellow countrymen and victims, in one manner or another all Americans have been progressively impacted, since that horrendous day.
And the ramifications and impact on the American people post 9-11 has been far greater in having their continued rights violated and victimized nine years later, while instead our leadership in the name of "commerce" above true national security, continues to open our doors and shores to all comers.
One major news magazine has an article devoted to how America "over-reacted" to 9-11, and the threat of al-Qaeda (although originally it was the Taliban and Osama bin Laden which was the focus of those first weeks and months post 9-11, not al Qaeda at all). Another article in the same magazine written by a former President's daughter lambasts how the liberals are disappointed with the reaction of Mr. Obama to the Deepwater Horizon disaster and the weeks and months this Administration stood by while tens of thousands of barrels of oil were spewing into the Gulf, without a mention of the continuing war also whose candidate had pledged to end the war, one of their major concerns at election time.
To this American, it has been nine long years of betrayal and using 9-11 also for their agendas by both political parties which has resulted in the increased discontent of the American people with their leadership.
I would not state that the reactions of the general citizenry were "over-reactions," but that the actions of the Bush/Obama Administration have been "under-reactions."
Our borders, for the most part, and ports of entry are even less secure than they were pre-9-11. Our infrastructure and many of our vital industries and public utility companies are traded on the global exchange, and for all intents and purposes even our nuclear reactors could be "owned" through stock purchases, by foreigners.
There has also been two other attempts under even stranger circumstances, originating from Great Britain since that time used to justify then increasing security measures domestically, although the Bush Administration during his last 90 days in office expanded the Visa waiver program for foreign citizens wishing entry, requiring simply 48 hour security checks, to citizens from over 45 nations.
Our southern and northern borders still remain relatively unsecured, and there are once again even since 2006 attempts being made to "legalize" individuals who are in this country who had absolutely no security checks at all as having entered illegally, and also who have overstayed their work, student or visitor visas.
While instead, Americans are being asked to submit themselves to full body scanners, and other invasive security measures at domestic airports.
In this same magazine, an article also appeared that harkened back to how "united" the American people were post 9-11, pulling together for a "common good," due to all the donations and volunteers that did what they could in the aftermath of the tragedy. As a nation, however, I would not say that this country was "united" except for the fact that it was united in its outrage that such an event, in this modern day and era and with all the monies spent for national defense in technology during the Reagan era, especially, could occur.
We were united in our wish to have the perpetrators of this heinous act brought to justice, which has alluded this nation still even nine long years later.
We wanted our leaders to abide by our Constitution, and close our borders and our country to "foreigners" until those individuals responsible for the act were brought to justice, and order any and all here illegally out until such time.
We wanted our president not to direct us to "go shop," or this president to expand the war without having any real hard intelligence indicating that the perpetrators were within our grasp, and not send any more of our young men and women to die on foreign sand to add to the losses.
We simply wanted our leadership to abide by their oaths of office, and their duties to Americans and protect this nation and its borders and legal and lawful citizenry, rather than their commercial interests and those domestic and foreign privateers.
Attempts are now also being made in order to "whitewash" 9-11 and its impact in declaring this day a "National Day of Service," rather than a memorial day as with Pearl Harbor. And the profiteers who wish to now see a Muslim mosque built in close proximity over the objections of most of the American people, promoting such an act as a demonstration of "tolerance," rather than the real agenda - a multi-million dollar redevelopment project for the city and state coffers of New York.
There is much in this puzzle still missing as those that viewed that attack for over seven full days replayed and replayed can attest.
And attempts to marginalize the Americans who still are not satisfied with the official explanations will not change that, nor cloaking 9-11 in patriotism and the flag, or minimizing the impact this massive attack and its scars have left on this nation and a new generation of Americans who didn't live through Pearl Harbor.
Interesting this mosque and its ramifications has reared its head just a short year before the 10th anniversary, and push toward this "National Day of Service" spin focusing on those that responded (although their acts of bravery are not to be discounted by any means), rather than the victims and tragedy itself? I wonder what incentives the City of New York, since it has the support of its Mayor, is extending for this massive, expansive project in order to feed the "jobs and the economy" on the memories of that day, and of the 9-11 victims?
I'm no "conspiracy" nut or theorist, but I still wonder how the mainstream media was able to get full camera crews to the site of the Trade Center within 20 minutes of the first crash since the financial district of New York is quite a distance away from where most of those media centers are located, and this was rush hour at that....even the date selected, an emergency code used throughout the U.S. and not the Middle East, bears scrutiny. If this was a religious attack as has been claimed of jihadists, just why wasn't a Muslim holy day selected, which would certainly make more sense if extremism within the Muslim faith was the origins of this heinous attack on our civilian population primarily and nation's economy and military headquarters.
And I have seen enough controlled demolitions during my years in Phoenix, Arizona when tearing down old buildings in order to redevelop and put in new was an ongoing annual process, since Phoenix and its metro area has exploded in the last two decades, to its detriment also, as a former longer term "almost native" Arizonan. I've been to New York, and it's population and traffic are well-known. Although after the events which occurred, such a decision could be understandable given the extent of the damage and "collateral" damage which also was an eminent threat, but this entire scenario cannot be dismissed by the mere "scientific" theories and explanations which were then subsequently published in an auto mechanics magazine.
To even use such a source by many in our leadershp and print and television media goes to show the utter contempt it does appear that some of those that survived have for their fellow countrymen and victims, in one manner or another all Americans have been progressively impacted, since that horrendous day.
And the ramifications and impact on the American people post 9-11 has been far greater in having their continued rights violated and victimized nine years later, while instead our leadership in the name of "commerce" above true national security, continues to open our doors and shores to all comers.
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Troop Surge In Afghanistan: More War, More Debt, Less Accountability
It was announced by Barack Obama that in accordance with his campaign statements that he is deploying 30,000 additional U.S. troops to Iraq in order to seek out Osama bin Laden and the members of al Qaeda per the original Resolution passed by Congress in the wake of 9-11 (after, of course, at first promising to end the engagement in the Middle East altogether after so many lives, and so many American dollars have been lost in the over eight years since 9-11).
The question is, with the guarantee of support from the Afghan government with respect to this redress for the deaths and lives lost on that fateful September day, why the need for 30,000 troops rather than a limited deployment of intelligence and career military officers?
Not to second guess the commanders on the ground as a mere citizen, but is it really necessary to risk an additional 30,000 U.S. lives in order to capture one leader and those that were DIRECTLY responsible for giving those that participated "aid and comfort" in the planning of 9-11 which is the exact wording of the original Resolution?
The original pilots, after all, were Saudi citizens. It was only days after the attacks that it was revealed that bin Laden had claimed reponsibility for the attacks - and with the assistance of the Taliban, as I recall, not al Qaeda, although the two have been merged now in this loosely defined "War on Terror" which evolved under the Bush Administration.
So far, the body count in Iraq is minimal compared to prior full scale declared wars but still staggering for the U.S. given that these individuals are actually using rudimentary weapons most of all, including themselves.
And the amount of money now which has been poured into the rebuilding efforts actually has resulted in the U.S. deficit soaring to unprecedented levels even before all the other "funny money" was printed in order to then "salvage" the U.S. economy in the domestic loss of jobs and the foreclosure mess which occurred in large part due to the inflationary costs and those taxes for the war itself, actually in conjunction with some rather questionably legal loans sold throughout the West and Southwest based on the "global" London bank rates, and not U.S. rates at all and then repackaged and resold to foreign investors who were protected, not the U.S. homeowners even to date that were in essence defrauded or forced into some of those loans due to rising costs and refinances.
As funds were appropriated for the war, less funds were appropriated for domestic needs and costs and the budget for an entire new Department (DHS) and its expensive toys burst the "true" inflation (not the published spin) in rising costs for fuel, groceries and local taxes now for eight years - and then even with the stimulus, states are announcing college tuition cost increases, added taxes and a host of other new ways to bankrupt Americans, of course, after Washington then went so far as to tax the air Americans now breathe, for the "global good" at that, and bail out a London based global insurer on the backs of Americans.
It was interesting and outrageous to note that one of the Congressional members is proposing a new "tax" on Americans labeled the SOS tax (Congress and the media whom it appears they consult more and more for PR purposes love the acronyms for new legislation, unlike days gone by with bills less than 50 pages tops. The size of the average mortgage loan these days, which has also increased from less than five pages to 50 or more, with all the riders and caveats).
I wonder how much destruction we can now wreck in Afghanistan in order to bulk up the revenue, jobs and coffers of the U.S. military contractors once again in order to further plunge this country into a full out depression, since the global economy may be seeing signs of improving, but thus far the U.S. economy continues to tank in order to feed all those other nations and European investors.
By the time this war ends, it appears that what will truly have transpired is that there will eventually have been a leveraged buyout of most of America's infrastructure and assets by foreigner investors.
We will lose our country to foreigners while fighting a foreign enemy and without a shot fired on domestic soil.
In order to capture simply one man who has somehow alluded capture now for over eight years by the finest military in the entire world.
Just when are some of those other promises going to be kept, Mr. Obama, such as making Iraq start picking up the tab actually for this rebuilding effort in which it seems the U.S. funds and builds government buildings only to then have them blown up once again?
While Ms. Clinton then attempts to switch hats, as it were, as ambassador for Iraq and urge what is left of corporate America unrelated to those military contractors to invest in Iraq?
It appears maybe that it would be only the global insurance companies that would profit on businesses that wish to now outsource American production to that country post the rebuilding effort, in hiring then cheaper Iraqi labor in order to then pay those stratospheric insurance rates.
Just how, again, can Congress and the President justify risking 30,000 additional U.S. lives in order to supposedly redress the loss of 2,500 - after, of course, having lost at least three times that many to date?
Is this now the mentality of those on the Hill in defending America, while of course leaving our borders open and affording foreign investors in our nuclear reactors throughout the country for those global markets?
Isn't it the U.S. economy, security and safety and not the global one, that is supposed to be the focus of our elected representatives, since it would appear that fighting a foreign enemy on their own home turf gives us a one down no matter what the engagement, and we've got plenty of risk now due to continued negligence and promoting "foreign investment" in American assets on our own shores at this point?
Isn't the risk of attack by foreign terrorists much greater from within at this point, than without with such skewered logic?
Just how many more lives will be risked in order to secure the Middle East as a permanent source of income for War, Inc. in the name of "jobs and the economy" for the telecom, networks, media, and thousands of military contractors?
Are these again some of the "new jobs" created in addition to those which were primarily taxpayer paid additional government jobs under the non-stimulus (rather than the red-lining promised)?
Do you think after these past two administrations particularly, the American public trusts either the Republicans or Democratic Globalists in any manner whatsoever, except to keep the balls spinning and give public appearances that belie the collusion now involved between both parties in continuing this fiasco?
Is this a war in providing for the common defense of America? Or expansion of a global agenda and result of pemanent alliances with differing interests at the cost of America and Americans?
The proposed timeline and ending of this war really says it all. 2011. Coincidentally, just prior to the next presidential campaign election cycle in order to be rehashed for the consumption of America and spun and spun some more by the Global Socialist Party now residing on the Hill. It will, of course, end as "politically" as it appears that it began.
And an enemy for which this country would never, ever have if it had practiced the "defensive war" measures provided in America's founding documents per the "intent" of the founders.
These were trained terrorists, trained by the U.S. government in Afghanistan to fight the Soviets, from all reports. So trying these individuals in America's federal courts once again also seems to be a political move in order to again rachet up the temperature in America for the continuing war when the details are rehashed on CNN and FOX of the "evidence" for the accused for all America.
Of course, since it will be a world audience involved the Middle Eastern countries will get the impression that the United States citizens are still out for revenge and blood after eight years since actual combat footage of what truly is occurring in Iraq has been suspiciously absent, unlike Viet Nam, so the blood lust will be reignited for the New York trial and the American people the convictors hearing the "evidence," from foreigners that speak little, if any, English at all.
A military target was involved, and these were "soldiers" trained in covert activities. And the mastermind still remains at large, so once captured what type of "plea bargain" will be available for any of these now to be tried, one of whom at least it is claimed was an active participant, in order to convict Mr. bin Laden?
And since our military did train them initially, would they also not be more familiar with their history and an "open" military trial, per the Nuremburg Trials, more along the lines of what is called for here?
The timing of these trials, and now announcement of the surge in conjunction, seems War, Inc. is not about to end before this country is brought to its knees both economically, and in the theft of thousands more of America's youth.
The question is, with the guarantee of support from the Afghan government with respect to this redress for the deaths and lives lost on that fateful September day, why the need for 30,000 troops rather than a limited deployment of intelligence and career military officers?
Not to second guess the commanders on the ground as a mere citizen, but is it really necessary to risk an additional 30,000 U.S. lives in order to capture one leader and those that were DIRECTLY responsible for giving those that participated "aid and comfort" in the planning of 9-11 which is the exact wording of the original Resolution?
The original pilots, after all, were Saudi citizens. It was only days after the attacks that it was revealed that bin Laden had claimed reponsibility for the attacks - and with the assistance of the Taliban, as I recall, not al Qaeda, although the two have been merged now in this loosely defined "War on Terror" which evolved under the Bush Administration.
So far, the body count in Iraq is minimal compared to prior full scale declared wars but still staggering for the U.S. given that these individuals are actually using rudimentary weapons most of all, including themselves.
And the amount of money now which has been poured into the rebuilding efforts actually has resulted in the U.S. deficit soaring to unprecedented levels even before all the other "funny money" was printed in order to then "salvage" the U.S. economy in the domestic loss of jobs and the foreclosure mess which occurred in large part due to the inflationary costs and those taxes for the war itself, actually in conjunction with some rather questionably legal loans sold throughout the West and Southwest based on the "global" London bank rates, and not U.S. rates at all and then repackaged and resold to foreign investors who were protected, not the U.S. homeowners even to date that were in essence defrauded or forced into some of those loans due to rising costs and refinances.
As funds were appropriated for the war, less funds were appropriated for domestic needs and costs and the budget for an entire new Department (DHS) and its expensive toys burst the "true" inflation (not the published spin) in rising costs for fuel, groceries and local taxes now for eight years - and then even with the stimulus, states are announcing college tuition cost increases, added taxes and a host of other new ways to bankrupt Americans, of course, after Washington then went so far as to tax the air Americans now breathe, for the "global good" at that, and bail out a London based global insurer on the backs of Americans.
It was interesting and outrageous to note that one of the Congressional members is proposing a new "tax" on Americans labeled the SOS tax (Congress and the media whom it appears they consult more and more for PR purposes love the acronyms for new legislation, unlike days gone by with bills less than 50 pages tops. The size of the average mortgage loan these days, which has also increased from less than five pages to 50 or more, with all the riders and caveats).
I wonder how much destruction we can now wreck in Afghanistan in order to bulk up the revenue, jobs and coffers of the U.S. military contractors once again in order to further plunge this country into a full out depression, since the global economy may be seeing signs of improving, but thus far the U.S. economy continues to tank in order to feed all those other nations and European investors.
By the time this war ends, it appears that what will truly have transpired is that there will eventually have been a leveraged buyout of most of America's infrastructure and assets by foreigner investors.
We will lose our country to foreigners while fighting a foreign enemy and without a shot fired on domestic soil.
In order to capture simply one man who has somehow alluded capture now for over eight years by the finest military in the entire world.
Just when are some of those other promises going to be kept, Mr. Obama, such as making Iraq start picking up the tab actually for this rebuilding effort in which it seems the U.S. funds and builds government buildings only to then have them blown up once again?
While Ms. Clinton then attempts to switch hats, as it were, as ambassador for Iraq and urge what is left of corporate America unrelated to those military contractors to invest in Iraq?
It appears maybe that it would be only the global insurance companies that would profit on businesses that wish to now outsource American production to that country post the rebuilding effort, in hiring then cheaper Iraqi labor in order to then pay those stratospheric insurance rates.
Just how, again, can Congress and the President justify risking 30,000 additional U.S. lives in order to supposedly redress the loss of 2,500 - after, of course, having lost at least three times that many to date?
Is this now the mentality of those on the Hill in defending America, while of course leaving our borders open and affording foreign investors in our nuclear reactors throughout the country for those global markets?
Isn't it the U.S. economy, security and safety and not the global one, that is supposed to be the focus of our elected representatives, since it would appear that fighting a foreign enemy on their own home turf gives us a one down no matter what the engagement, and we've got plenty of risk now due to continued negligence and promoting "foreign investment" in American assets on our own shores at this point?
Isn't the risk of attack by foreign terrorists much greater from within at this point, than without with such skewered logic?
Just how many more lives will be risked in order to secure the Middle East as a permanent source of income for War, Inc. in the name of "jobs and the economy" for the telecom, networks, media, and thousands of military contractors?
Are these again some of the "new jobs" created in addition to those which were primarily taxpayer paid additional government jobs under the non-stimulus (rather than the red-lining promised)?
Do you think after these past two administrations particularly, the American public trusts either the Republicans or Democratic Globalists in any manner whatsoever, except to keep the balls spinning and give public appearances that belie the collusion now involved between both parties in continuing this fiasco?
Is this a war in providing for the common defense of America? Or expansion of a global agenda and result of pemanent alliances with differing interests at the cost of America and Americans?
The proposed timeline and ending of this war really says it all. 2011. Coincidentally, just prior to the next presidential campaign election cycle in order to be rehashed for the consumption of America and spun and spun some more by the Global Socialist Party now residing on the Hill. It will, of course, end as "politically" as it appears that it began.
And an enemy for which this country would never, ever have if it had practiced the "defensive war" measures provided in America's founding documents per the "intent" of the founders.
These were trained terrorists, trained by the U.S. government in Afghanistan to fight the Soviets, from all reports. So trying these individuals in America's federal courts once again also seems to be a political move in order to again rachet up the temperature in America for the continuing war when the details are rehashed on CNN and FOX of the "evidence" for the accused for all America.
Of course, since it will be a world audience involved the Middle Eastern countries will get the impression that the United States citizens are still out for revenge and blood after eight years since actual combat footage of what truly is occurring in Iraq has been suspiciously absent, unlike Viet Nam, so the blood lust will be reignited for the New York trial and the American people the convictors hearing the "evidence," from foreigners that speak little, if any, English at all.
A military target was involved, and these were "soldiers" trained in covert activities. And the mastermind still remains at large, so once captured what type of "plea bargain" will be available for any of these now to be tried, one of whom at least it is claimed was an active participant, in order to convict Mr. bin Laden?
And since our military did train them initially, would they also not be more familiar with their history and an "open" military trial, per the Nuremburg Trials, more along the lines of what is called for here?
The timing of these trials, and now announcement of the surge in conjunction, seems War, Inc. is not about to end before this country is brought to its knees both economically, and in the theft of thousands more of America's youth.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Fort Hood Spins Saturate Media
For Any And All American Conserve-atives (not the British variety ala Fox News):
In light of the upcoming funerals and media coverage of the loss of additional American lives in the wake of the Fort Hood incident in Texas this week, it appears now the media spins are getting wider, deeper and more and more furious by the day.
Since America's presence in the Middle East in some form or another has been a fact since that British "taking" of the land now comprising Israel prior to World War I in an agreement entered into between a British Lord of the Realm and a British banker zionist, America's continued loss of life on behalf of this foreign non-U.S. based accord is becoming greater and greater by the year.
And what has been interesting has been one fundamental question which the media has not in any significant manner raised during the past several days of the "analysis" that are being made on both liberally based and focused mainstream sources - funded by either the Republican Globalists or Democratic Globalists ala FOX and CNN.
Just why would an avowed pacifist and war protestor enlisted or continued serving in the U.S. military during the continuation of this war, which has now gone on for more than eight years after the attacks on the World Trade Center in 2001.
Most enlistees, or even those career military officers - which is more likely since the accused is or was the base psychiatrist apparently - tours of duties come up for renewal in two to four year increments.
The outrage of the American people, and the clearly questionable now basis for our continued presence in that region has been a well known fact as based upon false intelligence for over five years at this point. And was, after all, the major focus of most of the liberals in their other extra-Constitutional positions who, however, were the major supporters of Mr. Obama in his run for the roses as the "change" candidate, after all. Although disagreement with the continuation of this war as not in any way at all based upon Constitutional provision, or the intent of the founders with respect to defensive wars as hoping this country would remain as neutral as possible in such events as the continued Middle East situation, is not a liberal position at all, but actually a conservative one.
Most of these so called "progressives" and "liberals" of course now have continued to be suspiciously silent, although Mr. Obama is clearly following the Bush agendas and agreements which were reached with the "new" Iraqi government in his last 100 days in office calling for the withdrawal of all American troops by 2011, coincidentally just prior to the new U.S. presidential election cycle.
So it will end just as politically as it began apparenlty - and not legally or Constitutionally brought or now ended in any manner whatsoever.
Now it is being reported the suspect will be tried in a military court, as deemed not an overt act of terrorism. And, of course, terrorism itself is a practice used by many in our media and also those now serving on the Hill against the American people now more so than even most of these branded extremist Iraqi groups - whose very existence and training were, after all, at the hands of the U.S. military to begin with.
The suspects now behavior prior to the incident is now uncovering some connections to spiritual leaders in this country and the Middle East.
But just how did most of these individuals, after all, be approved for immigration to this country I haven't a clue, although the suspect appears to be an American citizen by birth and not an immigrant or naturalized citizen.
And at last count, over 80% of the American people are dissatisfied with our continued presence in this war now that the focus has shifted from the events surrounding what occurred those many years ago, to building up a U.S force and presence now in that region on behalf of Israel most of all once again.
And, of course, to fatten the bank books of the Wall Street financiers and those invested in the military industrial and manufacturing areas in this country. All those "science based" technology firms which this Administration and the last were feeding at the cost of American soldiers and families. Silicon Valley is bursting at the seams at this point, although California's governor whining about a shortfall.
Unbeliveable.
My heart goes out to the families of those affected, but it would appear that the perpetrators and blame that is shifting is being shifted from the true source of the cause of their actual losses.
And that is, once again, a foreign and military policy in this country that is centered not on national security whatsoever, but nation building and agressive and pre-emptive wars.
At the cost of the families of many Americans, not simply those that were and have been lost now in the past eight years - and a domestic security problem that has not been solved at all by the creation of that massive Department of Homeland Security.
Since that Department has decreased, rather than increased, its budgeting and funding for the measures needed to truly secure this country rather than giving monies to Mexico and Israel in the form of foreign aid for the Silcon Valley venture capitalists profits, many of whose investors are foreigners also, after all, with British and Middle Eastern investors.
Funds were once again cut for the needed border fencing and security, and instead this and the last Administration also expanded its Visa waiver and immigration policies ten fold since 9/11 occurred.
In fact, a better name for this agency at this point is the Department of Homeland Insecurity. With the running of their paid ads warning Americans to "have a plan" appearing to be the only real attempts to actually address the true defensive measures that would fundamentally secure this country from any such future incidents.
Such as reducing the number of airports and such available for those traveling to this country. As Ellis Island was in the past maybe having three or four points of entry, rather than affording foreign based and owned airlines, ships and other modes of travel access to the interior airports and such would and could reduce the threat of any further attacks.
British Airways was given a contract for service to Phoenix years ago, and there are many foreign owned airlines with such contracts throughout the nation at the present time.
It does appear that break downs in communications and also the shear number now of agencies involved in these domestic and foreign surveillance departments are having an adverse affect and not the solution, but part of the problem.
As it appears is becoming now clear in this incident, as it was in the original loss of lives on September 11th - since that also as blamed on a breakdown of communications between the FBI and DoD. Now we have the FBI, DoD and Homeland Security pointing fingers.
So just where is the change, except more of the same, and around another 50 more dead or wounded Americans?
In light of the upcoming funerals and media coverage of the loss of additional American lives in the wake of the Fort Hood incident in Texas this week, it appears now the media spins are getting wider, deeper and more and more furious by the day.
Since America's presence in the Middle East in some form or another has been a fact since that British "taking" of the land now comprising Israel prior to World War I in an agreement entered into between a British Lord of the Realm and a British banker zionist, America's continued loss of life on behalf of this foreign non-U.S. based accord is becoming greater and greater by the year.
And what has been interesting has been one fundamental question which the media has not in any significant manner raised during the past several days of the "analysis" that are being made on both liberally based and focused mainstream sources - funded by either the Republican Globalists or Democratic Globalists ala FOX and CNN.
Just why would an avowed pacifist and war protestor enlisted or continued serving in the U.S. military during the continuation of this war, which has now gone on for more than eight years after the attacks on the World Trade Center in 2001.
Most enlistees, or even those career military officers - which is more likely since the accused is or was the base psychiatrist apparently - tours of duties come up for renewal in two to four year increments.
The outrage of the American people, and the clearly questionable now basis for our continued presence in that region has been a well known fact as based upon false intelligence for over five years at this point. And was, after all, the major focus of most of the liberals in their other extra-Constitutional positions who, however, were the major supporters of Mr. Obama in his run for the roses as the "change" candidate, after all. Although disagreement with the continuation of this war as not in any way at all based upon Constitutional provision, or the intent of the founders with respect to defensive wars as hoping this country would remain as neutral as possible in such events as the continued Middle East situation, is not a liberal position at all, but actually a conservative one.
Most of these so called "progressives" and "liberals" of course now have continued to be suspiciously silent, although Mr. Obama is clearly following the Bush agendas and agreements which were reached with the "new" Iraqi government in his last 100 days in office calling for the withdrawal of all American troops by 2011, coincidentally just prior to the new U.S. presidential election cycle.
So it will end just as politically as it began apparenlty - and not legally or Constitutionally brought or now ended in any manner whatsoever.
Now it is being reported the suspect will be tried in a military court, as deemed not an overt act of terrorism. And, of course, terrorism itself is a practice used by many in our media and also those now serving on the Hill against the American people now more so than even most of these branded extremist Iraqi groups - whose very existence and training were, after all, at the hands of the U.S. military to begin with.
The suspects now behavior prior to the incident is now uncovering some connections to spiritual leaders in this country and the Middle East.
But just how did most of these individuals, after all, be approved for immigration to this country I haven't a clue, although the suspect appears to be an American citizen by birth and not an immigrant or naturalized citizen.
And at last count, over 80% of the American people are dissatisfied with our continued presence in this war now that the focus has shifted from the events surrounding what occurred those many years ago, to building up a U.S force and presence now in that region on behalf of Israel most of all once again.
And, of course, to fatten the bank books of the Wall Street financiers and those invested in the military industrial and manufacturing areas in this country. All those "science based" technology firms which this Administration and the last were feeding at the cost of American soldiers and families. Silicon Valley is bursting at the seams at this point, although California's governor whining about a shortfall.
Unbeliveable.
My heart goes out to the families of those affected, but it would appear that the perpetrators and blame that is shifting is being shifted from the true source of the cause of their actual losses.
And that is, once again, a foreign and military policy in this country that is centered not on national security whatsoever, but nation building and agressive and pre-emptive wars.
At the cost of the families of many Americans, not simply those that were and have been lost now in the past eight years - and a domestic security problem that has not been solved at all by the creation of that massive Department of Homeland Security.
Since that Department has decreased, rather than increased, its budgeting and funding for the measures needed to truly secure this country rather than giving monies to Mexico and Israel in the form of foreign aid for the Silcon Valley venture capitalists profits, many of whose investors are foreigners also, after all, with British and Middle Eastern investors.
Funds were once again cut for the needed border fencing and security, and instead this and the last Administration also expanded its Visa waiver and immigration policies ten fold since 9/11 occurred.
In fact, a better name for this agency at this point is the Department of Homeland Insecurity. With the running of their paid ads warning Americans to "have a plan" appearing to be the only real attempts to actually address the true defensive measures that would fundamentally secure this country from any such future incidents.
Such as reducing the number of airports and such available for those traveling to this country. As Ellis Island was in the past maybe having three or four points of entry, rather than affording foreign based and owned airlines, ships and other modes of travel access to the interior airports and such would and could reduce the threat of any further attacks.
British Airways was given a contract for service to Phoenix years ago, and there are many foreign owned airlines with such contracts throughout the nation at the present time.
It does appear that break downs in communications and also the shear number now of agencies involved in these domestic and foreign surveillance departments are having an adverse affect and not the solution, but part of the problem.
As it appears is becoming now clear in this incident, as it was in the original loss of lives on September 11th - since that also as blamed on a breakdown of communications between the FBI and DoD. Now we have the FBI, DoD and Homeland Security pointing fingers.
So just where is the change, except more of the same, and around another 50 more dead or wounded Americans?
Sunday, November 1, 2009
America's Economy Continues To Tank While Wall Street and Global Socialists Prosper
While Mr. Obama and his appointed financial czar, Timothy Geithner, continue to rally round the stock ticker proclaiming that the Bush/Obama agendas of stimulating the global economy at the expense of America's own is "working", there are quite a few signs now that things are getting far, far worse than most Americans have yet to realize.
As one who has much experience in what is occurring in the border states as a former 45 year resident of Arizona with the increases in crime and drug trafficking which have been the result of the last Reagan amnesty yet even eight years now after 9/11 continuing in its failure to adequately secure over 500 miles of open desert between the U.S. and Mexico especially, it appears that even though the American people - primarily those on the front lines living in the border states and who have been progressively affected by this agenda and now losing their homes right and left due to increases in insurance and the fraudulent and usurous loans and lending practices promoted by the Fed and global bankers for their socialism agendas and profits most of all, and who were scammed due to lack of regulation of those underwritten by California lenders, are blatantly and clearly being sacrificed by the Global Socialist Party.
And apparently haven't sacrificed enough according to Washington and the merged Democratic and Republican parties per Mr. Obama's and the Fortune 500 media reps "we all must sacrifice" continued pulls at Americans heartstrings.
Just where is that sacrifice coming from with respect to those for which the American people are paying six figure salaries, for the most part, in either wages or benefits, since it does appear the only ones economies who are improving are those holding public office at this point, at also the continuing bankruptcy of the citizenry at large.
The buzz is out once again that Mr. Obama intends to again bring up an "amnesty" for those foreigners now living in this country.
Without, of course, at all addressing the open borders once again.
In fact, the sums for the monies under the Secure Fence Act instead apparently went to buy Blackberries for most of the state legislators throughout the country, and upgrade their personal websites.
While in Lousiana due to a family member's illness, headlines proclaimed that there is a move on to increase the state gasoline taxes now in order to repair a good deal of the roadways that were affected by both Katrina and Gustav.
However, nothing was mentioned about the fact that the entire focuse of that "stimulus" was also promoted and defended over the American people's objections at the amounts as being necessary for infrastructure needs such as the repair work in Louisiana.
I received an interesting response from one of their legislators there on an unrelated issue prior to this announcement over the listings now of the historic homes in the French Quarter which are being handled and brokered by Sotheby's, a British property and investment company - mostly marketing those homes to Canadians and the British.
As an American, I did have a problem with the fact that some of America's foremost historic buildings and more valuable real estate is being sold right and left to foreign interests such as is occurring with those homes.
The legislator who did respond sent me his response via text messaging with a note that the message was being provided by AT&T.
Now it appears, our state and federal legislators are actually unabashedly publicizing their "sponsors" via their email responses.
I wonder if during the next meeting of Congress or on the floor of the state legislature soon we will be seeing our "misrepresentatives" with patches sort of like the drivers in the Indy 500 wear in exchange for the funding they receive for their careers.
While Mr. Obama meets with the Iraqi leaders one week in order to reaffirm his commitment to the Bush agenda for withdrawal of troops prior to the next American presidential election cycle, one week later another attack is made on a Iraqi government building (one in which U.S. contractors were making repairs apparently, and in which in the accord and agreement Mr. Bush agreed and stated that U.S. contractors would not be under U.S. directives, but those of the Iraqi government interestingly enough, thus the political ramifications of this attack also neglected by the U.S. global socialist owned media and press corp).
In essence, Washington not only went into a joint venture in that GM deal, but is now subcontracting and/or "leasing" out American contractors to the Iraqi government in the terms of the accord such as the one executed by Mr. Bush his last 100 days in office.
In which our Constitution provides that such treaties and agreements are the actual duties of Congress, not the president, at all - nor can that power be "shifted" to the executive branch without an actual amendment to the U.S. Constitution actually itself. So much for the Bush/Obama understandings of our actual intended form of government as legally provided in that torn and tattered document residing under glass less than two miles from the hallowed halls of Congress itself.
I wonder if some of those men who were working for those contractors had any idea of their chain of command prior to the bombing?
I don't believe that this is quite what the Americans had in mind when voting last election, and it appears that more and more civilians are instead being offered up as sacrifices for the Global Socialists now agendas, in addition to those living in the border states and those lives lost on September 11, 2001.
I'm wondering also when shares of the Grand Canyon will be listed on the NYSE for foreign ownership and investment.
As one who has much experience in what is occurring in the border states as a former 45 year resident of Arizona with the increases in crime and drug trafficking which have been the result of the last Reagan amnesty yet even eight years now after 9/11 continuing in its failure to adequately secure over 500 miles of open desert between the U.S. and Mexico especially, it appears that even though the American people - primarily those on the front lines living in the border states and who have been progressively affected by this agenda and now losing their homes right and left due to increases in insurance and the fraudulent and usurous loans and lending practices promoted by the Fed and global bankers for their socialism agendas and profits most of all, and who were scammed due to lack of regulation of those underwritten by California lenders, are blatantly and clearly being sacrificed by the Global Socialist Party.
And apparently haven't sacrificed enough according to Washington and the merged Democratic and Republican parties per Mr. Obama's and the Fortune 500 media reps "we all must sacrifice" continued pulls at Americans heartstrings.
Just where is that sacrifice coming from with respect to those for which the American people are paying six figure salaries, for the most part, in either wages or benefits, since it does appear the only ones economies who are improving are those holding public office at this point, at also the continuing bankruptcy of the citizenry at large.
The buzz is out once again that Mr. Obama intends to again bring up an "amnesty" for those foreigners now living in this country.
Without, of course, at all addressing the open borders once again.
In fact, the sums for the monies under the Secure Fence Act instead apparently went to buy Blackberries for most of the state legislators throughout the country, and upgrade their personal websites.
While in Lousiana due to a family member's illness, headlines proclaimed that there is a move on to increase the state gasoline taxes now in order to repair a good deal of the roadways that were affected by both Katrina and Gustav.
However, nothing was mentioned about the fact that the entire focuse of that "stimulus" was also promoted and defended over the American people's objections at the amounts as being necessary for infrastructure needs such as the repair work in Louisiana.
I received an interesting response from one of their legislators there on an unrelated issue prior to this announcement over the listings now of the historic homes in the French Quarter which are being handled and brokered by Sotheby's, a British property and investment company - mostly marketing those homes to Canadians and the British.
As an American, I did have a problem with the fact that some of America's foremost historic buildings and more valuable real estate is being sold right and left to foreign interests such as is occurring with those homes.
The legislator who did respond sent me his response via text messaging with a note that the message was being provided by AT&T.
Now it appears, our state and federal legislators are actually unabashedly publicizing their "sponsors" via their email responses.
I wonder if during the next meeting of Congress or on the floor of the state legislature soon we will be seeing our "misrepresentatives" with patches sort of like the drivers in the Indy 500 wear in exchange for the funding they receive for their careers.
While Mr. Obama meets with the Iraqi leaders one week in order to reaffirm his commitment to the Bush agenda for withdrawal of troops prior to the next American presidential election cycle, one week later another attack is made on a Iraqi government building (one in which U.S. contractors were making repairs apparently, and in which in the accord and agreement Mr. Bush agreed and stated that U.S. contractors would not be under U.S. directives, but those of the Iraqi government interestingly enough, thus the political ramifications of this attack also neglected by the U.S. global socialist owned media and press corp).
In essence, Washington not only went into a joint venture in that GM deal, but is now subcontracting and/or "leasing" out American contractors to the Iraqi government in the terms of the accord such as the one executed by Mr. Bush his last 100 days in office.
In which our Constitution provides that such treaties and agreements are the actual duties of Congress, not the president, at all - nor can that power be "shifted" to the executive branch without an actual amendment to the U.S. Constitution actually itself. So much for the Bush/Obama understandings of our actual intended form of government as legally provided in that torn and tattered document residing under glass less than two miles from the hallowed halls of Congress itself.
I wonder if some of those men who were working for those contractors had any idea of their chain of command prior to the bombing?
I don't believe that this is quite what the Americans had in mind when voting last election, and it appears that more and more civilians are instead being offered up as sacrifices for the Global Socialists now agendas, in addition to those living in the border states and those lives lost on September 11, 2001.
I'm wondering also when shares of the Grand Canyon will be listed on the NYSE for foreign ownership and investment.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Obama Meets With Iraq's Al Maliki: Holds To Bush Timetable For 2010-2011 Troop Withdrawals
For Any and All American Conserve-atives:
The AP reported today that in a meeting with Iraq's president, Nouri al-Maliki, Mr. Obama reiterated the terms of the agreement reached in the last 100 days of the Bush Administration for American troop withdrawals beginning in August of next year.
Although this agreement got little press with Americans diverted by the U.S. elections and appointments of cabinet members in the new Obama Administration, this meeting and the AP's report appeared to be nothing more than merely an affirmation of Mr. Obama to the Bush agenda and timetable for troop withdrawals which was quietly executed in his last 100 days in office.
Interestingly, of course, and just to show how truly political this matter also is, it calls for complete withdrawal by the end of 2011, just in time for the next presidential election cycle.
Watch for Mr. Obama and the Democratic wing of the Global Socialist Party to then to use this to take credit for Mr. Obama having "lived up to his campaign promise" to bring our trooops home and end the war.
While actually continuing to engage in it for the entire length of his first term in office, per those Bush agreements and accords.
Recently also, complications have arisen in the closing down of Guantanamo according to Mr. Obama's prior promises also along those lines. His Administration is now stating just how complicated this is going to be.
Although, of course, we have several maximum security prison facilities if need be in the United States in order to house any and all detainees with prima facie connections to the attacks in New York by the claimed responsible individuals, the Taliban, if need be.
One off the coast of California that hasn't been used in decades, but is quite secure and for little cost would provide adequate security for such foreign detainees.
Although, of course, Ms. Feinstein has a problem using a maximum security prison such as Alcatraz for the actual purpose for which it was paid for and provided by the U.S. taxpayers.
For the housing of violent criminals that needed maximum security detention while awaiting their trials if denied bail due to the severeity of their charged crimes, or upon conviction.
Imagine that, a California legislator protesting using a U.S. taxpayer funded facility (and not a part of California) in order to actually house foreign prisoners.
And due to its location also the best and most economical security facility for the American people security-wise also due to its off shore location.
It does appear that the Bush timetables and agendas continue under Mr. Obama, and the "changes" which are becoming more and more clear with each and every new announcement out of Washington and the White House now controlled press seems to simply have been a change in the mouthpiece, but not the overall agendas.
Stimulating Iraq's economy also was a topic for the pow wow between Mr. Obama and Mr. al Maliki due to the fact that Iraq's economy and infrastructure have been totally wiped out due to the "war," although the U.S. is pumping literally billions of our worthless now dollars here into Iraq in order to now rebuild the infrastructure that was destroyed during the invasion and capture of Saddam Hussein now over three years ago.
Mr. al Maliki also mentioned his wish to stimulate international and foreign investment into Iraq in order to pump up its lagging economy.
Maybe he ought to take a history lesson into what is now going on in the U.S. with respect to its economy if his country also is entertaining "going global" in any respect.
Americans now are in the bread lines and homeless due to America's "globalized" economy, and now eating the debts for both this war on Iraq's (and Israel's primarily also) behalf, and also the foreign investors due to the international British bankers manipulation of the U.S. currency during this war that has depressed it to the point where the U.S. dollar is now at almost its lowest point ever.
While, of course, it was Great Britain that entered into that earlier "accord" creating essentially the nation of Israel even prior to World War II, an agreement between the bankers and a British Lord signed prior to World War I, actually. So America truly is under 'sovereign' British rule at this point fundamentally once again due to the U.S. back in 1913 breaching our Constitution and "privatiziing" and affording foreign investment into our most fundamental area and one of Congress's primary duties - regulation and printing of our domestic currency.
We don't even have silver dollars or silver quarters in circulation anymore due to that violation, and have had progressive depressions and recessions thereafter every since due to having a fiat, rather than full faith and credit exchange based currency system now in place.
And the British and foreign investors are now buying up our nuclear power plants and infrastructure, and even the stately homes now in New Orleans, thus under now more foreign control than this country was back in 1776 when the founders fought our first war to break free from a global government, and global control by the British.
In fact, the people in this country by and large are worse off economically and personally, than those founders were in 1776 with respect to "unalienable" rights violations such as have occurred since that fateful day in September over eight years ago.
Be careful what you wish for, Mr. al Maliki.
Diversification and foreign investment is not always postive, but can and many times is regressive and simply a change in dictators. And increase, not decrease, civil unrest due to foreign interests determing national and governmental policies.
Economic dictators, but dictators all the same.
The continuing civil unrest between the various religious factions also was discussed.
And it is unclear if it is and has been the intention of the U.S. to assist the Iraqi government and people why the suggestion that the country not be divided into states and more mirror a "republican" form of government rather than a pure democracy has not been pursued - which is actually more along the lines of the form of government the U.S. formerly had also.
Not a democracy, since our founders felt that democracies were once again nothing more than "gang rule" and ended in successive civil wars in order to change the "ruling" party, and ended up in the end destroying the countries in the process due to the costs of those continuing wars in both blood and treasure.
Nor maintaining foreign alliances past the point of the immediate need in defense of a sovereign nation and securing its country and its borders.
Which appears should at least now, three years later, be attainable without direct U.S. involvement at this point.
Especially with the U.S. economy now continuing to tank in the process, while there again were more U.S. casualties this past year than there have been Iraqi military casualties, meaning that for the skirmishes that still remain, it is clear that the U.S. military is still doing most of the fighting.
But I guess the AP story at least was a good public relations tool in order to once again promise the American people that this war, entered into under false intelligence to begin with which was fully eventually admitted by the prior Administration, "someday" might end.
I just hope that it does end before a good 3/4's the American people are homeless and jobless, rather than it appears the 1/3 that have been so far affected.
Or another mother receives another visit from Pentagon protcol with the sad news that her son has become now the latest victim.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5js_Znl58WrrbnNO-nAMzPmi4QG4AD9BEVBE00
The AP reported today that in a meeting with Iraq's president, Nouri al-Maliki, Mr. Obama reiterated the terms of the agreement reached in the last 100 days of the Bush Administration for American troop withdrawals beginning in August of next year.
Although this agreement got little press with Americans diverted by the U.S. elections and appointments of cabinet members in the new Obama Administration, this meeting and the AP's report appeared to be nothing more than merely an affirmation of Mr. Obama to the Bush agenda and timetable for troop withdrawals which was quietly executed in his last 100 days in office.
Interestingly, of course, and just to show how truly political this matter also is, it calls for complete withdrawal by the end of 2011, just in time for the next presidential election cycle.
Watch for Mr. Obama and the Democratic wing of the Global Socialist Party to then to use this to take credit for Mr. Obama having "lived up to his campaign promise" to bring our trooops home and end the war.
While actually continuing to engage in it for the entire length of his first term in office, per those Bush agreements and accords.
Recently also, complications have arisen in the closing down of Guantanamo according to Mr. Obama's prior promises also along those lines. His Administration is now stating just how complicated this is going to be.
Although, of course, we have several maximum security prison facilities if need be in the United States in order to house any and all detainees with prima facie connections to the attacks in New York by the claimed responsible individuals, the Taliban, if need be.
One off the coast of California that hasn't been used in decades, but is quite secure and for little cost would provide adequate security for such foreign detainees.
Although, of course, Ms. Feinstein has a problem using a maximum security prison such as Alcatraz for the actual purpose for which it was paid for and provided by the U.S. taxpayers.
For the housing of violent criminals that needed maximum security detention while awaiting their trials if denied bail due to the severeity of their charged crimes, or upon conviction.
Imagine that, a California legislator protesting using a U.S. taxpayer funded facility (and not a part of California) in order to actually house foreign prisoners.
And due to its location also the best and most economical security facility for the American people security-wise also due to its off shore location.
It does appear that the Bush timetables and agendas continue under Mr. Obama, and the "changes" which are becoming more and more clear with each and every new announcement out of Washington and the White House now controlled press seems to simply have been a change in the mouthpiece, but not the overall agendas.
Stimulating Iraq's economy also was a topic for the pow wow between Mr. Obama and Mr. al Maliki due to the fact that Iraq's economy and infrastructure have been totally wiped out due to the "war," although the U.S. is pumping literally billions of our worthless now dollars here into Iraq in order to now rebuild the infrastructure that was destroyed during the invasion and capture of Saddam Hussein now over three years ago.
Mr. al Maliki also mentioned his wish to stimulate international and foreign investment into Iraq in order to pump up its lagging economy.
Maybe he ought to take a history lesson into what is now going on in the U.S. with respect to its economy if his country also is entertaining "going global" in any respect.
Americans now are in the bread lines and homeless due to America's "globalized" economy, and now eating the debts for both this war on Iraq's (and Israel's primarily also) behalf, and also the foreign investors due to the international British bankers manipulation of the U.S. currency during this war that has depressed it to the point where the U.S. dollar is now at almost its lowest point ever.
While, of course, it was Great Britain that entered into that earlier "accord" creating essentially the nation of Israel even prior to World War II, an agreement between the bankers and a British Lord signed prior to World War I, actually. So America truly is under 'sovereign' British rule at this point fundamentally once again due to the U.S. back in 1913 breaching our Constitution and "privatiziing" and affording foreign investment into our most fundamental area and one of Congress's primary duties - regulation and printing of our domestic currency.
We don't even have silver dollars or silver quarters in circulation anymore due to that violation, and have had progressive depressions and recessions thereafter every since due to having a fiat, rather than full faith and credit exchange based currency system now in place.
And the British and foreign investors are now buying up our nuclear power plants and infrastructure, and even the stately homes now in New Orleans, thus under now more foreign control than this country was back in 1776 when the founders fought our first war to break free from a global government, and global control by the British.
In fact, the people in this country by and large are worse off economically and personally, than those founders were in 1776 with respect to "unalienable" rights violations such as have occurred since that fateful day in September over eight years ago.
Be careful what you wish for, Mr. al Maliki.
Diversification and foreign investment is not always postive, but can and many times is regressive and simply a change in dictators. And increase, not decrease, civil unrest due to foreign interests determing national and governmental policies.
Economic dictators, but dictators all the same.
The continuing civil unrest between the various religious factions also was discussed.
And it is unclear if it is and has been the intention of the U.S. to assist the Iraqi government and people why the suggestion that the country not be divided into states and more mirror a "republican" form of government rather than a pure democracy has not been pursued - which is actually more along the lines of the form of government the U.S. formerly had also.
Not a democracy, since our founders felt that democracies were once again nothing more than "gang rule" and ended in successive civil wars in order to change the "ruling" party, and ended up in the end destroying the countries in the process due to the costs of those continuing wars in both blood and treasure.
Nor maintaining foreign alliances past the point of the immediate need in defense of a sovereign nation and securing its country and its borders.
Which appears should at least now, three years later, be attainable without direct U.S. involvement at this point.
Especially with the U.S. economy now continuing to tank in the process, while there again were more U.S. casualties this past year than there have been Iraqi military casualties, meaning that for the skirmishes that still remain, it is clear that the U.S. military is still doing most of the fighting.
But I guess the AP story at least was a good public relations tool in order to once again promise the American people that this war, entered into under false intelligence to begin with which was fully eventually admitted by the prior Administration, "someday" might end.
I just hope that it does end before a good 3/4's the American people are homeless and jobless, rather than it appears the 1/3 that have been so far affected.
Or another mother receives another visit from Pentagon protcol with the sad news that her son has become now the latest victim.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5js_Znl58WrrbnNO-nAMzPmi4QG4AD9BEVBE00
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
