The Right Scoop- Anonymous
Why does the US government subsidize any foreign country with stolen wealth from the uninvolved and uninterested taxpayer? Call me crazy but I’m not a fan of being enslaved for the enrichment of the Saudi royal family, Karzai government, Jordanian & Bahraini monarchs, Egyptian dictator, Yemeni farse leader, and formerly Libya & Syria’s dictators, or any other country be it welfare for guamanians or bribes for the Ethiopian military.
Let me keep my money, and I’ll write a check if I want to pay for a foreign government’s new mansion or the socialised medicine/college tuition of the nation. Thanks
- Anonymous
I agree. But it’s very good anyway.
- Anonymous
The foreign aid to Pakistand is to bribe the criminal country from assisting more rogue states in geting nukes. If you recall it was Pakistan that assisted North Korea and they were actively assisting Iraq and Iran until the USA negotiated bribe money to keep them from giving terrorists nukes. That is the only thing this is about. If the USA does what BillO is suggesting then Iran, Syria, Egypt and Saudi Arablia will have nukes within a year.
- Anonymous
1. So what? People wouldn’t want to use them on the US if the US weren’t funding the people torturing, murdering, and disenfranchising them (or doing it firsthand via decades of bombings, blockades, and drone strikes).
2. Iran has been “6/12/18 months away from a nuclear device” for decades according to fearmongering BS artists. The truth of the matter is that they aren’t pursuing nuclear weapons, and yes I can support that. They don’t have weapons grade fissile material, they don’t have nuclear triggers, and they don’t have nuclear warhead delivery vehicles, all testified to by 16 US intelligence sources and the IAEA.
3. North Korea has nuclear weapons and the technology to deliver them. They haven’t used them on anyone. Nuclear weapons are a deterrant against invasion, that’s all. It’s a giant sign that says “do not trespass or we’ll vaporize you with our dying breath.”
And that is the true worry for Conservatives and Liberals alike, a nuclear weapon guarantees a regions independence from the American Empire, and that cannot be tolerated by the people in charge of the empire. The worry is not and never has been getting struck by a nuclear first strike, it’s a threat to the US’s hegemonic designs. The only people who believe the scare tactics about being nuked, or Frank Gaffney’s balogna about a deadly EMP are the American sheeple too busy with their own business to fact check the nonsense.
4. Every nation in the middle east with the exception of Pakistan and Israel are signatories to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, and thus subject to inspections as deep and long-reaching as necessary by the IAEA to fulfill their mandate of verifying the treaty compliance. If those nations sought weapons they would have to ban inspectors, effectively announcing their withdrawl from the NNPT just like North Korea did long before it even achieved a nuclear device.
5. Again, why is it a worry for you if those other countries get a nuclear weapon. The only motivations for having one any have ever remotely hinted at would be to prevent a complete imbalance of influence leading to the domination of their nation by another nation. The Saudis and others have said multiple times they would like to see a nuclear-free middle east, but that those talks would have to start with the nuclear weapons state of Israel.
The only internationally militarily aggressive presence in that entire region is the United States.
/end wall-o-text - Anonymous
Dan,
The problem with Iran or other Muslim states having nuclear weapons is that the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction [MAD] will not work. Islam is a nut job cult that prays for a chance to die in a suicide attack. The problem that Islam is also hell bent on committing genocide against the Israelis is also a huge factor. Islam may or may not be able to wage war against America, but they can [ and will ] wage war in Europe and the middle east. Islamic states do not care if they win wars, they want to inflict damage and be sent to their 72 virgins. - Anonymous
Islam is not the cause of suicide attacks, occupation or perceived occupation is the cause of suicide bombings by a factor of 10:1. This has been studied extensively.
http://www.amazon.com/Dying-Win-Strategic-Suicide-Terrorism/dp/1400063175
Just to give a few examples, Hezbollah, in southern Lebanon was very well known as a great innovator of suicide bombings against Israeli forces when they first came on the scene. What was the situation in Lebanon when this was the case? Israel had invaded southern Lebanon to chase out the PLO, which the locals didn’t like either, but Israel then decided they were going to stay and occupy those conquests. Once Israel was driven out of almost all Lebanese lands, Hezbollah hasn’t done a single suicide bombing ever since.
What were the large majority of nationalities of the 9/11 hijackers? Saudi Arabians, who are the at least FEEL like the US is occupying their country with the military bases just over the horizon from Mecca that were built for 10 years of bombing Iraq. Osama Bin Laden’s (a Saudi) 1996 fatwa was titled “Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places.”
If Islam is the cause of suicide bombings, why was the Sri Lanka conflict the one that has seen the most suicide bombings of them all where neither side was Muslim?
Or what about the preparations being made by the Japanese to combat conventional invasion by America in WWII? They were getting people ready to strap on explosives and charge tanks, fighting holes, and anything else. As far as I know, less Japanese are Muslim than even Christian, especially in 1945.
As for Islam being a mass suicidal death cult any more than any other religion that promises an afterlife of paradise to any who live “righteously,” why would they wait to get nukes of their own? The Samson Option of Israel has long been published and well known. If they all wanted to be obliterated, why haven’t they all just picked up and walked straight into Tel Aviv through the hail of Israeli bullets and bombs in order initiate the Samson Option and get the entire middle east glassed? They don’t need nukes of their own for that.
Instead the only people you see protesting/marching on Israeli borders are Palestinians who were ejected from the centuries-old family homes in 1948, and Syrians with regard to the Golan Heights which is occupied in violation of Israels signature to the 4th Geneva Convention.
- Anonymous
Dan, do you have any problem living in Fla, where we stole the land from Native Americans? In fact much of this country was stolen from the Native Americans. The earliest inhabitants of Brevard county were Native Americans, thousands of years ago. I don’t believe Tumser is a Native American name.
- Anonymous
Change of topic much? My point of the Golan Heights was that you only see people behaving suicidally towards israel when it comes to territories and persons considered occupied either by Palestinians/Syrians/Lebanese or Israel’s own international agreements.
I think the ideas of nations and collectives are stupid, but insofar as someone presupposes their validity, then they also presuppose the authority of national treaty obligations. Those national treaty obligations are in violation by Israel’s explicit agreement to the 4th Geneva Convention prohibition against the acquiring of land through war. That, even by Israel’s own agreed to terms, makes the Golan Heights an illegally occupied Syrian territory.
And yes, what was done to the indigenous peoples for the sake of the French/British/Spanish imperialism or the US’s first steps in building a global empire was atrocious. It’s old news that I think the British, French, Spanish, and US governments should have and still ought to be abolished. That goes for every other State as well.
- Anonymous
Do you have a problem living on land that was stolen from the Native Americans, in a country you obviously hate more than Obama does?
- Anonymous
Who stole what is not the issue, but what motivates suicide attacks with regards to the notion of existential threats from Muslim states acquiring nuclear weapons. Insofar as that topic, it is occupation or the perception of occupation. You can try to elbow your way into something to force a change of topic, but I don’t play along with that noise.
- KenInMontana
So, by your thinking, the expulsion of the Jews from Jerusalem by the Romans is “old news” even though their living in the areas of Israel and what is now the West Bank predates the Palestinian claims? The fact that the only people who were living in the Golan Heights at the time of the ’67 war were artillery units of the Syrian army (Golan was a restricted military zone at that time) who were shelling the civilian population across the border in Israel ( a violation of the conventions I would add, of which Syria is also a signatory) or is that old news and irrelevant also?
- Anonymous
Two wrongs make a right? Ken, you are sharper than to play the same game as Williamm, I know you are. You know full well what the issue I was talking about with Mikhail and Max is, and it was not about the legitimacy or lack of it in claims of ownership/authority of an area. For the 3rd time, the issue is the motivation for suicidal violence, which is undeniably occupation or the perception of it.
- KenInMontana
I didn’t say that. I’m just turning the coin that you tossed out and tossing it back. The suicidal tendencies of fanatics is just a facet of zealotry, nothing more. You can dress it up anyway you like but it doesn’t change the basic fact behind it, that it requires a base of fanaticism to begin with. History is full of examples of those who fought against occupation without the useless stupidity of the suicide attack.
- Anonymous
Fanaticism and zealotry is hardly exclusively an Islamic guerilla/revolutionary trait either, no matter how much Aubrey Chernick’s financed PR puppets try and claim that is the case.
Not all people fighting occupation use suicide attacks, but suicide attacks are ten times more likely to be against occupation or the perception of occupation than any other circumstance. And if you don’t think there would be a few Americans willing to drive a truck full of explosives into a building if China overthrew and occupied the US, then you got another thing coming.
- KenInMontana
I don’t recall mentioning religion and I certainly did not bring up Chernick. Nor did I make an attempt to connect religion and fanaticism/zealotry. The connection I did make was between fanaticism/zealotry and the tactic of suicide attacks. An individual can be a zealot or fanatic about anything from politics to fruit loops, it’s hardly limited to religion. Your response is a pretty pathetic strawman especially coming from you.
- Anonymous
I should have been clearer who I was talking about with Chernick, and religion. That was addressed to people like the two above who buy into the narrative that Walid Shoebat, David Horowitz, and Pamela Geller are paid to propogate.
- Anonymous
Change of topic much? My point of the Golan Heights was that you only see people behaving suicidally towards israel when it comes to territories and persons considered occupied either by Palestinians/Syrians/Lebanese or Israel’s own international agreements.
I think the ideas of nations and collectives are stupid, but insofar as someone presupposes their validity, then they also presuppose the authority of national treaty obligations. Those national treaty obligations are in violation by Israel’s explicit agreement to the 4th Geneva Convention prohibition against the acquiring of land through war. That, even by Israel’s own agreed to terms, makes the Golan Heights an illegally occupied Syrian territory.
And yes, what was done to the indigenous peoples for the sake of the French/British/Spanish imperialism or the US’s first steps in building a global empire was atrocious. It’s old news that I think the British, French, Spanish, and US governments should have and still ought to be abolished. That goes for every other State as well.
- Anonymous
The people who were ejected from their homes were the Jews living in surrounding muslim cultures, Israel took in more than a million of them. The muslims living in what is now Israel left in 1948 of their own accord. They were promised that Egypt, Syria, and Lebanon would destroy the Jews and they could move back. They became what is now known as Palestinians when their muslim brothers decided that they would be better used as a rallying point against Jews than to take them in.
- Anonymous
If leaving of their own accord is being dragged or chased out by armed Israeli militias and herded into places like Jenin, and then bulldozing their villages and having an imported pine forest planted over top of it by the JNF so they have nothing to return to…then yes.
- Anonymous
There is so much wrong in this and your further posts I don’t even know where to begin. Obviously you have a very skewed view of the world and you are amongst those liberals and libertarians that believe that the USA and the west is the root of all evil in the world. History shows that when people like yourself who ignore the signs of evil in the world by touting warped statistics and completely inaccurate statements to turn the attention away from evil towards the victims of the evil the world ends up in a far worse place. In the 1930′s people like yourself were the most vocal in both USA and England and it allowed evil to be empowered.
Really what you are saying is racist and insulting to the extremists in the world who’s sole purpose is world domination and the destruction of a race of people and the free, democratic way of life that the USA has been promoting to the world (along with others) as the best way we know of living with liberty and personal rights in the world. By you saying that terrorism is a response to USA, Israeli and western policy you are ignoring that the leaders who promote and support terrorism are intelligent enough to have their own agenda. An evil agenda. Just like those in the 1930′s who blamed the Nazi’s agression on the poor treatment Germany recieved after WW1 and the treaty of Versaille. Oh, just let them have Czechslovakia and they will be happy your ilk said. Oh, it’s our fault they are so angry because we were so horrible to them after WW1 so let them have parts of Poland and then they will stop.
Neville Chamberlain must be your hero.
We must learn from history and not repeat it with this nonsensical argument you propose. - Anonymous
1. I don’t believe in “races,” only individuals, so I don’t know how I’m racist. The only “race” is the human race, but your allegiance to a group of people purely on the basis of their “race” (specifically the “chosen people”) is the definition of racism, and a brand that is distinctly Hitler-esque.
Explain how I am racist.
2. Democracy? F–k Democracy. Democracy a good thing, Democracy is mob rule. It’s not something I support, or think is the US government’s role to promote. That is to say if I bought into that BS propaganda line that the US promotes democracy. The US pays for and props up horribly brutal dictators, subverts and overthrows real democracies, installs puppet fraud democracies, and is not democracy itself.
Explain why democracy is something to be promoted per se.
3. Are you actually denying that the Treaty of Versailles wasn’t what obliterated the German economy and enabled an eloquent nationalist demagogue like Hitler to raise to power? Really? Are you also denying that he didn’t cite that treaty’s abuses left and right? Are you denying also that the fighting in the European theatre lasted longer than it needed to because that treaty was fresh in German minds when FDR demanded an unconditional surrender?
Explain how the Treaty of Versailles and Woodrow Wilson’s influence over the crafting of it didn’t lead directly to the raise of Hitler.
4. “Poland,” you mean Danzig? The town where over 90% of the people considered themselves German? The piece of Baltic coastline that was part of Germany before the Treaty of Versailles? That little coastal town that Poland refused to negotiate over because it had a total war guarantee from the British, making the Polish generals more stubborn than they would have been otherwise? The war guarantee given at Churchill’s insistance that he later regretted?
Explain how Germany reintigrating old german territories carved off by the Treaty of Versailles would not be like if the US lost Maine and decided to bring it back into the union.
5. It’s not just me who says that the guerilla warfare, terrorism, and large-scale Islamic radicalization is due to in large measure to US foreign policy, it’s also those leaders you mention saying exactly that themselves. Over 90% of the foreign fighters fighting the US in Iraq were radicalized and picked up arms BECAUSE of the US invasion of Iraq. Every attack on US property and personnel by AQ since 1996 has been to bait the US into reenacting the Soviet defeat in Afghanistan BECAUSE of the US support of brutal arab dictators and occupation. Hezbollah didn’t even exist until Israel invaded Lebanon and stayed. Al Qaeda in Iraq didn’t exist until the US invaded Iraq. Ayman al-Zawahiri wasn’t radicalized into militant wahabism until his stint in an Egyptian torture prison under an dictator propped up by the US. Zarkawi wasn’t radicalized until a stint in a Jordanian prison, and the Jordanian monarchs are more dictators paid for by the US government.
- KenInMontana
Zarkawi had been a radical in search of a cause for some time. He was a street thug who had a problem with alcohol. He got thrown into prison for the possession of explosives and a plot to kill the royal family, prison did not turn him into a terrorist, he was one before he ever went to prison.He did about three years and in that time became the equivalent of a prison gang leader. As soon as he got out he bombed a hotel in Amman in an attempt to kill American and Israeli tourists. He was nothing more than a thug who wrapped himself in pretended fundamentalism to give himself a veneer of legitimacy. You were aware that he was in Iraq well before the US led invasion and Saddam had directed his intelligence agency to hunt him down and kill him because he considered Zarkawi a threat to the regime. The royal family of Jordan are Hashemites, a clan who’s history and lineage goes back to Biblical times to the area around the Red Sea. Jordan’s government is a constitutional monarchy it has been for some time, which hardly fits the model of a dictatorship.
- Anonymous
You and I have different standards for what qualifies as tyranny, and when I hear “monarch” I hear “dictator.” Toh-may-toh, toh-mah-toh.
The US is purportedly a constitutional republic, but virtually all constitutional powers vested in the legislature now rest in the hands of the executive. Regardless of high-minded intent, the end result is more and more a dictatorship with every passing year, and considering who’s bank accounts in Jordan the US taxpayer’s money is transferred to, the status of Jordan’s government is pretty clear.
Zarqawi’s presence in Iraq prior to the 2003 invasion is not the same thing as “Al Qaeda in Iraq” existing in Iraq prior to the 2003 invasion. AQI was formed in 2004 and combatted the US occupation. If that is not what you were getting at, then disregard this last bit.
- KenInMontana
The point about Zarkawi (Zarqawi or however you want to spell it) is that he was nothing more than a thug looking for an excuse. He wasn’t particularly pious (that may have changed in the split second he heard the JDAM come crashing through the shingles) there are reports he knew just a few snippets from the Quran, likely just enough to attempt religious justification for his actions. In the end he was just one more opportunist that poked the wrong dog with a stick. No I don’t think that our definitions of tyranny are really all that different it falls to ideologies. I believe that it’s possible to push a government into a box to where it is really nothing more than a face that the rest of the world deals with, that is responsible for keeping the rest of the world off our backs and internally all “governance” is really done at the local level ergo by the people. Yours on the other hand is the ideology of complete self governance and no state. In an ideal world it could be made to work, and would be nice I’m willing to give you that. However, we don’t live in an ideal world do we? While it looks good on paper and sounds good in the classroom it will not stand up in the real world. It this modern world we live in our technology has made the world smaller, it’s a vastly “smaller world” than it was during the Bronze Age or the Middle Ages when it took months to years to go anywhere or even the late 19th century. Your ideal “society” wouldn’t last out a week in the modern world. At this stage of human history, the only way that the nation-state will go away would require an event far beyond just an economic crash, it would require a holocaust of such a proportion that would wipe half to three quarters of the present global population off the face of the earth. It would require taking humanity back to a tribal level society and the only way to take us back to that would be rolling back population and technology, it’s just too hard of a sell and that’s why people just won’t buy it. As far as what you feel is a load that Shoebat, Horowitz and others are trying to sell doesn’t matter a whit. The cold hard reality is this, the West is facing a mindset and ideology straight out of the medieval period, one that sees no compromise as being possible. An ideology whose endgame is domination over all. While yes there are moderates and reformers among them, they are a very small minority, and given a few hundred more years their views might make some headway. But we don’t have that luxury any longer and at this point I see the best that can be hoped for is a containment of that ideology. This isn’t rhetoric it comes from up close and very personal experience of dealing with this mindset, although it went by another name it’s the exact same frame of mind, the exact same “global vision”and it won’t just go away if we ignore it. Now I am not advocating for intervention as intervention has failed as it always does, besides it’s “advance guard” is already here, it isn’t hard to find it’s right out in the open. All one need do is to open one’s eyes and take a good look around. If you think that the “state” here is tyrannical you are in for a rude awakening to just what real tyranny is when it comes, and it is coming.
- Anonymous
The current government of the US claims all people as property of the State, commits mass murder around the world, has secret prisons, enables routine police/SWAT team gunning down of innocent people with no consequences, permits at will spying on people, upholds self-written permits for the invasion of people’s homes, embraces aggressive imperialism with the jailing of people on hear-say, and excuses torturing people to death.
If that’s not tyrannical, then I’m Bugs Bunny.
“There are reports he knew just a few snippets from the Quran, likely just enough to attempt religious justification for his actions.”
Sounds like more than a few “true believer” fanatic theocrat Christians that live in my area who want what amounts to holy war and religion as an official government role. Unless you can look into people’s heads, It’s pretty difficult to judge the sincerity of a person’s professed convictions or whether they believe or not.
I at first meant the “few snippets” to be like those individuals’ knowledge of their own Holy Book.
“Shoebat … An ideology whose endgame is domination over all.”
Sounds like Neoconservatism, generic nationalism, Liberal Internationalism, etc. Does that mean that it’s reasonable to advise police departments to kill Neocons/Liberal Internationalists? That it’s reasonable to advise those police departments that the only thing to do with the children of those people is to kill them too?
The fact of the matter is that Shoebat is a fraud, there is no record anywhere outside of his own claims that he was ever part of the PLO or a terrorist, which he gives as his credentials to know the mind of “islamofascists.” He and the other two and Robert Spencer are funded/linked to Chernick who is also the money behind Pajamas Media and is personally linked to the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (ie. AIPAC). It’s for you to judge what the motivations are.
“However, we don’t live in an ideal world do we?”
Exactly why I don’t think it’s possible to keep government “in a box.” Utopianism is generally thought to mean a denial of human nature, well the State is just a violent monopolist firm of human beings and to deny that a State will kick and claw it’s way out of any artificial box is to deny human nature. Conceding the existance of the state is to concede all of the power and false authority necessary to grow into what we have and beyond.
Nobody can be eternally vigilant against an entity/notion they themselves have already acquiesced too. Angels don’t exist, so why put one of our fellow flawed men into a position of Congresscritter or President, when all it can ever beget is mass theft, mass abuse, and mass murder for the short-sighted personal gains of those individuals through the exploitation of the power/positions you’ve so happily granted them and of yourself.
- KenInMontana
In regards to Shoebat, I don’t consult him or Spencer for my information on Radical Islam. As far as Shoebat being a fraud just because he isn’t somewhere on some “supposed” list of every person that has ever been a fighter for the PLO, well that’s thin. Not sure where you came up with the idea that I would favor killing anyone for their politics because I’ve certainly never advocated it. If we actually went about killing people for written words or political speech there would be many on this site that would find themselves in the crosshairs (probably myself included).
The current government of the US claims all people as property of the State, commits mass murder around the world, has secret prisons, enables routine police/SWAT team gunning down of innocent people with no consequences, permits at will spying on people, upholds self-written permits for the invasion of people’s homes, embraces aggressive imperialism with the jailing of people on hear-say, and excuses torturing people to death.
This one, well I have to ask. Did you by chance lift that from a 60′s-70′s Marxist pamphlet by any chance?
- Anonymous
Shoebat is the one who has advised police departments to kill radicals and the children of radicals, not you if he’s not an authority on this in your eyes.
The problem with Shoebat’s credentials is that there is no record of him anywhere on anyone’s records of the PLO at all, ever.
As for the quoted part:
“Claims all people as property” – Taxation and regulation of victimless behavior.
“Mass murder” – How many hundreds of thousands of Iraqis Afghans, Pakistanis, Yemenis, and Solamis (through payment of the Ethiopian government to start a war in Somalia) are the counts up to now? How many Bahraini protestors have been killed with aid from the Saudis and the US through the Saudis?
“secret prisons” – Diego Garcia and other CIA black sites.
“SWAT team gunning down of people” – the little reported but increasingly frequent use of SWAT teams to execute drug-related search warrants and the consequence-free gunning down of the occupants of these houses countless times.
“at will spying” – FISA and NSA
“self-written [warrants]” – Patriot Act
“Aggressive imperialism” – wikileaks documents explaining the growing friction between Libya’s dictator and oil companies, the reasons for re-installing the Shah of Iran, the installing of heroin dealing Unocal consultant Karzai in Afghanistan.
“jailing of people on hear-say” – Jesus David Petreus Christ’s mass ‘counter-insurgency’ arrests in Afghanistan have recently been exposed to have jailed innocent people at a rate of approaching 90% on tips as flimsy as “hey, that guy is Taliban.”
That’s where I got it. Even clocks and Communists can be right twice a day.
“Torturing people to death.” – “Camp No” in Guantanamo Bay
- KenInMontana
The assertions in regards to Camp 7 (the facility’s actual designation) were never proven. The allegations were made by a British journalist quoting 3 unnamed sources that he claimed were former guards in regards to three suicides. These “sources” were some of the same guards who were relieved of duty at the main facility because of “insensitivity” to the detainees and protocol violations. Which makes their reliability and motivation suspect.
As to SWAT Teams gunning down “countless” occupants of drug-houses. I would have to ask just why do you suppose SWAT teams are used in these operations? Have you ever seen the fire power the dealers possess, firepower they are more than willing to use on anyone without a moments hesitation. Have there been missteps by police in which some individuals were killed by mistake? Yes I know there have been. However it’s no where near “countless” as you assert. The lion’s share of these raids go off with out a shot being fired because of the tactics used the occupants rarely have time to react. Your obvious hatred of the police tends to cloud your vision leads you to some gross over generalizations in regards to police.
Finally as to the repeated statements in regards to the Taliban offer to hand over Bin Laden, you have left a great deal out of the story. Let’s remember that Bin Laden made many claims of responsibility for the attack on 9/11, claims that were posted on websites,videos and written statements. The Taliban offered to turn Bin Laden over to a third party of their choice IF and only if incontrovertible evidence of his complicity in the attacks was given to them and Bush stopped the bombing campaign.
- Anonymous
Scott Horton is not British, and he has named sources about the deaths in “Camp No.”
I didn’t say drug-houses, I said homes that aren’t even the right building or apartment as listed on the search warrant. And even when they do manage to get the right residence, many times the exigency justifying the warrant is drummed up by the police who called it in. Many times all it takes for a cop to get one of these warrants is to claim to have smelled weed, and then knock on the door and say he heard things moving around inside.
As for rarely have time to react, that’s right in the case of the former Marine Iraq veteran reacted when his wife screamed about unannounced unidentified maxed gun-weilding intruders broke into their home and he was shot 60 times by the SWAT team who then claimed he opened fire and assumed an aggressive pose even though the safety was never taken off his weapon. They then refused to let medical personnel in to treat him for over an hour until he was dead.
As for the Taliban, the requirement for evidence was in their first offer to the United States. They waived the bit about evidence in the second offer when it was becoming apparent that the US military was going to take them out of power in the march for Bin Laden.
- KenInMontana
That was my bad about Horton’s nationality as I read his allegations at Guardian UK’s site. Which in regards to the detainee suicides are still allegations. The source he “named” was Matthew Diaz but that was a list of detainees smuggled out via a greeting card.
Executing drug warrants is normally performed on drug houses. I never said mistakes haven’t been made, in fact they have. What I am disputing is your exaggeration of “countless”.
As to the Taliban and turning over Bin Laden well if they did not believe what they were told the consequences of sheltering the individual who bragged about orchestrating the 9/11 attacks. That was their bad.
- Anonymous
Offering to turn him over without the stipulation about evidence doesn’t really sound like sheltering to me. The first offer was before 9/11, the second was post-9/11, I believe.
- Anonymous
Why don’t we just wipe pakistan off the planet?
Problem solved. - http://punditpawn.wordpress.com PunditPawn
Why hasn’t a national oil emergency been declared and work begun on building up a repository of a year’s worth of distributed oil reserves for the USA so we are not beholden to OPEC every time a thunder head forms in the Gulf of Mexico?
- Anonymous
Because the US government is just as much in bed with Riyadh as it is with Tel Aviv. That’s not to mention domestic government-worshipping environmentalist ideologues.
- Anonymous
Drillin’ is cheaper and more reliable. Storage is unworkable. We couldn’t store enough to make even a minor difference.
- KenInMontana
Abdul Qadeer Khan is the man responsible for North Korea’s nuclear arsenal and the one ultimately responsible for the spread of this technology. The bribes were paid to Musharraf to “contain” Khan. We should have “let” the Israelis take him out when they wanted to years before he delivered the goods, it may not have stopped it but it certainly would have delayed it a great deal.
- Anonymous
Blow the place up and bring our Troops home.
- Anonymous
LtCol. Peters is great.
I always enjoy listening to his views. - Anonymous
Didn’t the Pahkeestahnee’s arrest the CIA informants which led to OBL’s killing?
- http://punditpawn.wordpress.com
Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.