Like the "War on Drugs," a rhetorical phrase that the Obama administration has rejected even while continuing to wage the policy it describes, many ongoing activities of the government he presides over came under verbal attack from President Barack Obama this afternoon.
So the president says "journalists should not be at legal risk for doing their jobs," even though journalists are at legal risk—from his administration—for doing their jobs. "History will cast a harsh judgment" on the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, the president warned, even though (in the words of Human Rights Watch's Laura Pitter) "there are still a number of steps the Obama administration could have taken -- and can still take now -- to begin closing the facility and ending indefinite detention without trial."
Obama worries, rightly, that "in the absence of a strategy that reduces the well-spring of extremism, a perpetual war – through drones or Special Forces or troop deployments – will prove self-defeating, and alter our country in troubling ways." And yet at perpetual war we remain, altering our way of life by the day. "The very precision of drones strikes, and the necessary secrecy involved in such actions can end up shielding our government from the public scrutiny that a troop deployment invites." And yet we drone on, boats against the current of international opinion, borne ceaselessly back to the awesome responsibility of wielding lethal power.
There was much to like in Obama's speech today if you like words, and share the broad worries he outlined above. And it is surely true that changing policy becomes easier after you make public arguments about changing policy. But the fact is Barack Obama is the president of the United States, and according to both the Constitution and especially the way executive power has accrued over the past century, Obama actually has quite a bit of latitude to impose his values on the waging of American war. After 52 months in office, it’s long since past time to stop judging the man by his words alone.
JUST TO JOG YOUR MEMORY:
JUST TO JOG YOUR MEMORY:
Why is this woman not President? Too smart and honest for the herd of know nothings who marble the collective fat lazy ass, of spineless Americans?
ReplyDeleteYes indeed!
DeletePirro For President.
What about Palin, inconstant lover, you ask?
DeletePirro/Palin 2016
>>Too smart and honest for the herd of know nothings who marble the collective fat lazy ass, of spineless Americans?<<
DeleteHeh, excellent.
You are speaking of yourself when you describe your fellow Americans as fat lazy assed and spineless, boobie?
DeleteI do believe you are a master of under statement.
No, I had you in mind.
DeleteThe wheels of Justice turn mighty slow. Even slower while Obama is in charge.
ReplyDeleteBut to impeach him, which won't happen, would put Biden in office.
Obama's second term won't be a lame duck because the man is an activist through and through.
And audacious.
An impressive share! I have just forwarded this onto a friend
ReplyDeletewho was conducting a little homework on this. And he actually bought me breakfast
due to the fact that I stumbled upon it for him..
. lol. So let me reword this.... Thanks for the meal!
! But yeah, thanx for spending the time to talk about this issue
here on your blog.
Here is my website Lean Muscle X
.
ReplyDeleteCongress may have provided certain authorizations under the AUMF, authorizations, IMO, that have been distored, expanded, and misrepresented by the last two presidents. Congress in a rush to do 'something' after 9/11 created an open-ended document that was unclear, overly-broad, and ultimately prone to abuse. However, it is fruitless to continue blaming Congress for either putting out the initial document or for not replacing or ending it now.
All the document does is provide some level of authorization. It is up to the president to either act on that authorization or not. Any actions or policies undertaken by the Obama administration are the clear responsibility of that administration and no one else. To argue Congress made me do it is clearly specious.
We'll soon see what comes of Obama's speech.
.
Ending the War is beyond the President's power and authority.
DeleteThe Congress did ore than authorize force, it demands its' use.
Senator Bob Corker, R-Tennessee, ranking member of the influential Senate Foreign Relations Committee, for instance, last month called for an expansion of the scope of the authorization.
The President is supposed to serve the interests of the People, as expressed through Congress.
Now you, Q, want him to become a King and act independently of the Congress. Actually thwart the will of Congress and the People...
... to do what you think best.
Congress has to act, for the War to end.
DeleteThe President ha not determined that there is no threat.
DeleteWhen the President tried to down play the threat, folks like you skewered him, when a small US facility was attacked.
Said he was trying to portray the situation in Libya as "normal", for domestic political gain, when we ALL KNEW, a war was raging, there.
This is ongoing, and proof positive that the President, on his own, cannot 'End the War'.
He cannot normalize, while small bands of terrorists still roam the whirled.
I mean, really, the global terrorist conspirators even utilized two WMDs, in Boston.
We have to do something, so our interests are secure and NEVER attacked, or a US citizen disrespected or even killed. ;-)
.
DeleteI assume you are being facetious rat.
.
He doesn't know the meaning of that word.
DeleteBetter to assume he is just bull shitting again.
>>Congress may have provided certain authorizations under the AUMF<<
Delete"May"?
I thought you were the guy who said it was all illegal.
.
DeleteGeez, Bob you are too fucking dense to even attempt to talk to.
I've tried to explain this to you a dozen times and you are too thick to get it.
Go away.
You were at least right in saying the Swedes must have small brains.
The blind squirrel/stopped watch rules being applied I guess.
.
"May" have?
DeleteYou moron.
Well, General Quirk, what do we do? Congress 'may' have declared war. What do you think?
You stupid fuck.
Your watch doesn't even have any hands on it. If you were a squirrel you'd die of starvation.
What trick, what device, what starting-hole canst thou now find out, to hide thee from this open and apparent shame?
Thou Idol of idiot-worshippers!
Delete.
DeleteGo away Bob. You are like a small annoying child.
.
Go away yourself. You are like an adult acting like a small annoying child.
DeleteYou owe me an apology, dick.
Delete.
DeleteYou are as likely to get an apology from me as you are to get me to accept that $5 dollars you offered under your usual usurious terms. You couldn't pay me enough to barrow one plug nickel from you.
Apology?
What a puerile suggestion, how infantile. You are one callow sot, jellybean.
.
The last President used the AUMF to send 200,000 American kids to war. This President has brought 140,000 of them back home, and has set a return date for the other 60,000.
ReplyDeleteIt hardly seems fair lumping these two, together.
Esp. since many in the previous president's party howled, and pounded their homely heads on the table when this President refused to force the Iraqis to accept 15,000 Permanent Occupiers/Fighters.
Deletehe Iraq War had a different AUMF.
DeleteWhich was proof, really, that Bush/Cheney really knew that Saddam had absolutely NOTHING to do with the forces that attacked US on 11SEP01.
Bush/Cheney were not so dishonest as to use the 14SEP01 AUMF against Saddam, when they KNEW that there was no case to be made. They had fully investigated the situation and 'determined' that there was no linkage.
Or Mr Bush would not have needed an additional AUMF to have invaded Iraq.
.
DeletePlease Rufus, get a grip.
Who doesn't rant when a president does anything? I judge him on his actions regardless of who is saying what.
In the statement above, I was speaking of one aspect that was mentioned in Deuce's post, the WOT.
Congress did not tell Bush he had to attack Iraq and then stay there 10 years. They did not tell Bush he had to indulge in torture. They did not tell him rendition was necessary. They did not tell him he had to open Guantonimo or hold people there indefinately without trial.
Likewise, they did not tell Obama he had to attack Libya. They did not tell Obama he needed to institute signature strikes or double taps. They did not tell him that him he had to continue to hold those same prisoners without trial. They did not tell him he should assassinate Americans without indictment or trial. Likewise, they did not tell him he had to use wiretaps or confiscate reporters e-mails or documents.
Those were the issues Obama spoke of in his speech on national security. Those were the issues he promised to address. Those were the issues I, within the context of the post, was addressing.
To blame Congress for the issues noted above is silly. They may be enablers but it was the presidents mentioned and the administrations involved that decided to engage in those actions and employ those tactics, nobody else.
Obama has promised to address the abuses. I'll wait and see.
.
Maybe you should "get a grip." The Republicans fought Obama tooth and nail when he tried to close down Guantanamo.
DeleteThe fact is, the thing that really matters is: Bush blew a couple of Trillion, and 4,500 American lives on a phony, ginned-up war in Iraq, and Obama called it off.
And Iraq is going to hell, just like Afghanistan.
DeleteSo, in the end, all futile.
.
DeleteNo, ruf, that is all that matters to you. But then you are koolaid-sopped.
You ought to at least get your facts straight. In 2008, Bush signed the U.S./Iraqi Status of Forces Agreement which called for all U.S. troops to be out of Iraqi cities by June, 2009 and for all U.S. troops to be out of Iraqi territory in December, 2001. Basically, all Obama did was follow the established timeline.
And if you want to talk war, Obama has been president going on five years. In that time, the deaths of coalition troops in Afghanistan have been double that of the previous eight years. And what have we accomplished in that five years? Zip. Our troops are still dying. Why? Why are we still there? Obama says that in another eighteen months we will have drawn down most of our troops there. But just within the past few weeks he tells us that unlike Iraq, even after 2014, we will continue to maintain a troop presence there. Why?
As for Guantanimo, it's true the GOP and some Dems fought providing funds to bring the Gitmo prisoners to the U.S. However, by emphasizing that fact, you ignore that most of the prisoners could have already been gone. The bulk of them have never been charged with anything nor are thay likely to be. A good portion of them were authorized for release over two years ago yet they are still there. Even the big dogs there have been sitting around for 11 years with no trial, military or civilian, in sight any time soon. Most will never see a civilian trial because there would be a good chance they would be set free because of the way they have been treated. Please don't try to blame Gitmo on Congress.
.
No, Bush's agreement was Contingent upon reaching an agreement on the number of troops remaining in country.
DeleteWhen Obama acceded to Iraq's wish to have NO American Forces remain in country, the Republicans howled like Banshees.
As for Afghanistan? Obama did what he said he would do - he chased down, and killed Osama Bin Laden (something Bush didn't seem too awfully interested in.)
Delete.
DeleteNo, Bush's agreement was Contingent upon reaching an agreement on the number of troops remaining in country.
Once again you are pulling this stuff out of you ass.
Even though the term of the agreement is three years, and either party may cancel the agreement with one-year notice, both countries retain the right to remove U.S. forces independent of the agreement. However, because the agreement requires the removal of all U.S. forces no later than December 31, 2011, if any U.S. forces were to remain in
Iraq in support of security training, or other programs, the withdrawal agreement will need to be extended or replaced with a peacetime SOFA.
Reference:
Congressional Research Service: U.S.-Iraq Withdrawal/Status of Forces
Agreement: Issues for Congressional Oversight
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R40011.pdf
I am open to seeing that extended or peacetime SOFA. Link?
.
I have vague recollections of Bush saying, in reference to Obama's promise to close Gitmo, something like "good luck with that!"
DeleteHonestly, didn't your eyes cross while reading that "agreement?"
DeleteThe proper term would probably be "aspirational scribbling" with enough weasel to open a fur factory.
The fact is, Obama took all the troops out, and the republicans squalled.
.
DeleteObama deserves credit for taking down OBL, no doubt about it.
But let's not go crazy either.
OBL was located and taken down as the result of a four year long investigation that began with identifying one of OBL's couriers and tracking down that lead. That process started well before Obama took office. Now, Obama deserves credit for making the decision to go in and take OBL out and he seems quite proud of it since he brings it up whenever possible; however, when the info was presented to him, did he really have any other choice?
A president gets credit for whatever he does as well as what he doesn't do during his term of office. That's just the way it works.
But as you say, OBL has been taken out.
Why then are we still in Afghanistan? Why will we be there for at least another 18 months? Why is Obama saying we will still have troops there even after that eighteen months.
.
.
DeleteHonestly, didn't your eyes cross while reading that "agreement?"
While it is often difficult to parse what you are saying, I take this to mean you will not be providing a link to justify your statement that "No, Bush's agreement was Contingent upon reaching an agreement on the number of troops remaining in country" or to argue against the legal opinion of the Congressional Research Services's legislative attorney that the existing SOFA would have to be formally modified or a new SOFA drawn or the terms of the original SOFA would continue to apply, that in fact there was no contingencies involved.
Thanks, for the clarification.
.
Good questions. Any answers?
Delete.
DeleteGood questions. Any answers?
I am not sure which of my two posts you are adressing this to. If it is the first one with my questions on Afghanistan, I can only say I haven't a clue. We are not accomplishing anything there. As you pointed out, we got OBL, the reason for going there in the first place. Our troops are still dying there. It will take six months to a year to get our troops out once we start. What are we waiting for? Why are we saying we will maintain a presence there indefinitely? I don't get it.
If you are asking about your question that started my second post, I can only say again .
You said that the agreement, the SOFA, was 'contingent' on an agreement on the number of troops remaining in country. That is obviously not true. Look up the word contingent. Look up the SOFA. The language was pretty clear. The opinion of the legislative attorney for the CRS was very clear.
In fact, the SOFA went into effect exactly as it was written.
It is true the SOFA 'could have been' modified before it went into full effect. It 'could have been' replaced by another document, an entirely new SOFA. Hell, while it has already been executed as written, we could still go to Iraq and try to negotiate a new SOFA for new troops. But there was nothing in the original SOFA that demanded it. There was NO contingency written into the original SOFA. Any contingency is merely something you assumed.
The idea has no legal basis, no logical basis, and no basis in fact, given the wording of the SOFA and the fact that it was executed in the exact manner it was written.
.
.
Q, the last I heard, we were down from 90 some-odd thousand to Sixty-something in Afghanistan. Obama has made noises about speeding up the pace of the withdrawal, but, once again, the Pubs have pitched a bitch when it was mentioned.
DeleteThat said, you can withdraw only so fast (not saying that it couldn't be faster, however.)
They're talking about leaving some "trainers" with the Afghani Army, but I'd bet they won't last long.
As for the Status of Forces Agreement, I'm going to give you a split decision on points, just because it's a moot deal; but, I really have a hard time referring to that piece of scribbling as an "Agreement."
DeleteI'd probably refer to it as a "memorandum of intent to reach some sort of agreement in due time - maybe."
Delete
Delete.
Q, the last I heard, we were down from 90 some-odd thousand to Sixty-something in Afghanistan. Obama has made noises about speeding up the pace of the withdrawal, but, once again, the Pubs have pitched a bitch when it was mentioned.
Well, that's great. Glad to hear it.
Of course, when you consider that with only 63k there we have had at least 53 American dead (66 coalition total) in 4 1/5 months this year, and if you were to anualize the current rate there will be more dead this year than in the first three years of the war combined, it gets back to my question, what are we doing there?
As for the Pubs pitching a bitch, is this guy the president or not?
Excuses are like assholes, everybody's got one.
Something goes right, OBL or the auto bailout, Obama is there for the photo op. Something goes wrong he is nowhere to be seen, don't know nottin, just found out about it, it was either one of his lower level minions responble or it is a 'legacy' issue. Legacy being his favort word other than I, me, or we, the royal 'we' that is.
.
ReplyDeleteArizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio to appeal ruling in racial profiling case
Of course he is, and is going to have his lawyers write the appeal in Dark Black Ink.
DeleteThe real question when looking for illegal Mexicans is why not profile?
Of course we're not supposed to be so sensible anymore.
Fantastic goods from you, man. I've take into accout your stuff previous to and you're simply too great.
ReplyDeleteI really like what you've got here, certainly like what you are stating and the best way wherein you say it. You are making it enjoyable and you continue to take care of to keep it sensible. I can not wait to learn much more from you. That is actually a tremendous website.
Here is my website new cellulite treatment
May 25, 2013
ReplyDeleteU.S. Military: We Could Have Saved Ambassador Stevens
By Jonathon Moseley
http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/05/us_military_we_could_have_saved_ambassador_stevens.html
Naturally, we here at Wonkblog were all eager to see the results. But we’d quibble a bit with Wile’s interpretations of the data. His charts all struck us as horrible news. So we’re re-analyzing them here with the proper, gloom-heavy spin:
ReplyDelete31 Charts that will Destroy your Faith in Humanity
Some of these charts are quite surprising, if not downright remarkable.
:)
DeleteThe girls are all getting prettier, and smarter too. Check out the offerings on Fox News The Five and Redeye, for instance.
Wow.
Like the little brainiac on "the five" that called on everyone to find an Obama supporter, and punch him/her in the face.
DeleteShe did? Wonderful!
DeletePeople are starting to fight back.
Against the people whom Barky advised to 'bring a gun to a knife fight'.
But, I doubt she did. I would have to see that. I think you must be exaggerating. Post it if you can find it. I'd really be interested.
I'd be surprised if it was one of the regulars. Most are circumspect.
Glad you are watching Fox.
You are beginning to heal.
'bring a gun to a knife fight'
DeleteWhat wonderful Presidential words.
What a leader, what a uniter.
Good God.
Notice Barky begins by assuming politics is 'a knife fight', and not a civilized debate as most assume it should be.
DeleteI wasn't going to bother with it, but
DeleteFind an Obama Voter, and Punch'em in the Face
Class act, our little Tarantula
And, NO, I don't watch Fox News. ever. I just happened to read about it elsewhere.
Delete:)
DeleteBy God she did!!
But no reference nearly as bad as Barky's advice to 'bring a gun to a knife fight'.
And HE is President.
UK intelligence agency MI5 offered job to London jihad murderer
ReplyDeleteAfter Obama says "The best way to prevent violent extremism is to work with the Muslim American community," Hamas-linked CAIR rep warns Muslims to call them if they're contacted by FBI
Muslim cleric who taught London jihad murderer praises attack for "courage"
UK: Man arrested for making "racist or anti-religious" Facebook comments
Guardian claims without a shred of evidence that "Muslim groups are doing all they can to counter the divisive intent of the killers"
http://jihadwatch.terrorismawareness.org/
Partial list of offering from JihadWatch today.
I'm really impressed with your writing skills as smartly as with the layout to your weblog. Is that this a paid topic or did you modify it yourself? Anyway stay up the nice quality writing, it is uncommon to look a great weblog like this one nowadays..
ReplyDeleteMy webpage - earn dollars online
Contact Quirk.
DeleteYI, YI-YI, YI-YI
ReplyDeleteit's
Tornado Trutherism
And, just in case you don't believe he really said it:
DeleteAlex Jones, in all his glory
Bob
ReplyDeleteSat May 25, 11:11:00 AM EDT
And Iraq is going to hell, just like Afghanistan.
So, in the end, all futile.
Such cynicism, from a person who says that the removal of Mr Holder would have "Real" meaning.
While the expenditure of more than a trillion dollars, and thousands of lives, all in the attempt to manage the children, it was all futile.
My oh my.
Such a cynic.
Yeah, same guy that just can't wait to get us involved in wars in Iran (would make Iraq look like "lunch in front of the tv,) and Syria.
DeleteWhat we've done, boobie, is clear, concise and reasonably successful.
DeleteAfter stumbling out of the box, in Iraq, the US found its way.
We strengthened the sectarian and ethnic divides in each country, setting the residents at each other in the pursuit of justice, power and wealth.
The resulting instability will assure the US and its' allies in the region that no foreign aggression will emanate from Iraq, any time soon.
To balance the increased influence that Iran gained in Iraq, with the empowerment of the Shia majority in Iraq, the regime in Syria was brought under intense pressure.
Libya, there will be no disco bombings in Germany, emanating from Tripoli, soon.
The regime of Colonel Q, good and gone and gone for good. Pan Am 103, justice finally served.
The actions of the US, not at all futile.
Perhaps not done efficiently, but done none the less.
Obama taking down Colonel Q, really a more impressive defense of US interests than killing bin Laden.
State sanctioned terror attacks, targeting US international interests ...
DeleteYou can run, pay the fine, compensate the victims financially, pretend to be our friend ...
It all ain't bygones.
Justice will still be served upon the miscreant nation.
Mostly bunk by General Bunk.
DeleteAnd Rufus I am not for going into Syria.
Recall Deuce saying it was 100% against that here.
Don't worry about Iran. Barky isn't going to do a thing.
You will have your insane mullahs with nukes, I would be really surprised if you don't, unless the Israelis stop it. Barky probably won't even back them up, if they do.
.
DeleteMostly bunk by General Bunk.
It pains me to have to agree with you.
.
You've been out the loop, Q.
DeleteTo much time at the Imperialist, or not enough.
The neo-con plan, it is in full swing.
Not the "Plan" that publicly calls for freedom, democracy and Spring Time in the Arc ...
But the one that calls for sectarian war, blood shed and anarchy.
It is a grand plan, part of the "Great Game 2.0"
Read Carter's man, Brzezinski, he laid it all out, oh, a couple of decades ago.
Moving right along, we are.
Stay the Course!
... of course, we are.
It is all about Russia, Eurasia and Caspian oil.
Well, the oil first, Russia is an oil state.
by Alexander Cockburn And Jeffrey St. Clair
DeleteQ: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs ["From the Shadows"], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?
Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise: Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.
Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?
Brzezinski: It isn’t quite that. We didn’t push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.
Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn’t believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don’t regret anything today?
Brzezinski: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter: We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.
Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic [integrisme], having given arms and advice to future terrorists?
Brzezinski: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?
Q: Some stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated: Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today.
Brzezinski: Nonsense! It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn’t a global Islam.
Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries.
According to the report, here ...
Deletehttp://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/01/10/john-brennan-the-cia-zibgnew-brezinski-columbia-university-and-obama/
John Brennan – The CIA -Zbigniew Brzezinski – Columbia University and Obama
While attending Occidental University, 1979 – 81′, young Barack Obama meets a former Jimmy Carter administration official Zbigniew Brzezinski. Brzezinski is a key CIA asset and expert on Russia. He later becomes a mentor, and then much later a foreign policy advisor to President Elect Obama.
Obama is friends with three Pakistani college roommates, muslims, Mohammed Hasan Chandio, Wahid Hamid, and Indian Vinai Thummalapally. In the summer of 1981 Obama travelled with his friends to Pakistan.
Brzezinski with Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan
Brezinski was deeply involved in the U.S. aspects to support Osama Bin Laden against the Russians in Afghanistan. Pakistan was the base of operations against the Russians in support of the Mujahadeen. Simultaneous to this time Brezinski is in Pakistan / Afghanistan, so is John Brennan as part of his CIA duty.
BEAR WITH ME – Obama goes to Pakistan in the summer of 1981 and then for some reason there is a gap in his historical references and timeline. He does not reappear until the fall of 1982 attending Columbia (?) - or so the story is told, where he graduated in May of 1983. (This timeline has always been a thorn in my psyche of reconciliation).
Obama and Pakistani friend Hasan ChandooThe trip to Pakistan was unexpectedly noted in an April 2008 fundraiser . We wrote about it HERE. Just two weeks before this speech and surprise announcement of his 1981 visit to Pakistan, employees of John Brennan (who would become Obama’s terror chief) were caught tampering with Obama’s passport files. It should be noted that “Obama’s top terrorism and intelligence adviser, John O. Brennan, heads a firm that was cited in March 2008 (just before this April fundraiser) for breaching sensitive files in the State Department’s passport office, according to a State Department Inspector General’s report released July 2009. On April 19th the key figure Lt. Quarles Harris Jr., 24, who had been cooperating with a federal investigators, was found slumped dead inside a car.
However, against the backdrop of events at the time in 1981 Pakistan/Afghanistan, and undefined against the backdrop of both Brennan and Brzezinski being in the same area, at exactly the same time, things are adding up.
Read more, if you're a mind ...
But this fella puts Obama in a CIA cover.
Is this how it all finally ties together? I mean what are the odds that both CIA operatives Brennan and Brezinski would be in Pakistan at the same time young Obama was there, and then both men end up on his advisory team in 2008, 26 years later - at the same time the State Dept Passport records are breached by John Brennan’s company specifically regarding Obama? The same guy who Obama just nominated to be CIA Director.
Seriously, give me odds?
Was the Columbia University angle just a CIA cover story, replete with faux documents, just to cover for Obama’s time in Pakistan as a liason between affiliated political interests, the circles of his friends parents, in support of the Mujahadeen/U.S. objectives?
The odd thing is, this outline explains every single disconnected theory, reconciles all the fragmented narratives, and actually solves all the disjointed narratives simultaneously.
The CIA from the Afpakistan War has taken over the US!
DeleteFrom a junior under cover agent to the President, engineered by Brzezinski and Crown.
All with the same goal, in their minds.
From two polar ends of the DC establishment.
One Goal.
Hegemonic empire.
;-)
Obama, a deep cover CIA plant, funded by the Saudis and the Crowns.
DeleteAll the way to the White House!
Who you gonna call?
The odd thing is, this outline explains every single disconnected theory, reconciles all the fragmented narratives, and actually solves all the disjointed narratives simultaneously.
It is a 'fun' read.
Saw it on the internet, must be true.
;-(
.
DeleteYou've been out the loop, Q.
As opposed to being just plain loopy, rat? Are you in some kind of a time warp? Obama some kind of Manchurian candidate? When you start channeling Ziggy, you know you need a vacation. When you start thinking the clusterfucks the U.S. has created in the ME were all part of 'the plan' you need some serious medical help.
.
.
It is a 'fun' read.
DeleteSaw it on the internet, must be true.
;-(
Contemplate this: The same geniuses, politicians and generals, that thought it a good idea to get us in war after endless and meaningless war, also figured it was only right to encourage woman into every aspect of the US military including the barracks. Now they are shocked, shocked, shocked I say, to find out that they happened to miss something that was obvious to every generation that preceded them.
ReplyDeleteOh my what are we to do?
(Reuters) - Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel called sexual assault a “scourge” on Saturday as he addressed graduates of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, where a sergeant stands accused of videotaping female cadets in the showers.
"Sexual harassment and sexual assault in the military are a profound betrayal - a profound betrayal - of sacred oaths and sacred trusts," Hagel said. "This scourge must be stamped out."
His comments came a day after President Barack Obama delivered a similar message to graduates at the U.S. Naval Academy, saying sexual assault threatened to erode trust and discipline in America's armed forces.
The Pentagon is reeling from a series of sex-related scandals in recent weeks, including cases in which military advocates for victims of sexual assault were themselves accused of sex crimes.
A study released by the Defense Department two weeks ago estimated that reports of unwanted sexual contact in the military, from groping to rape, rose 37 percent in 2012, to about 26,000 cases from 19,000 the previous year.
They know how to fuck with the girls that are in uniform. Pity the woman that came in their way in the foreign campaigns.
ReplyDeleteOOrah!
On Friday, President Barack Obama delivered a similar message to graduates of the U.S. Naval Academy.
ReplyDelete"Those who commit sexual assaults are not only committing a crime, they threaten the trust and discipline that make our military strong," Mr. Obama said. "They've got no place in the greatest military on earth."
You know, I'm just a little skeptical of that 26,000 number. My gut tells me they're throwing a pretty broad net to get a number that large.
Delete26,000 out of a million strong force.
DeleteThat number is LOW.
Lots of sexual assault, even rape goes unreported.
That is correct, boobie, is it not?
I had a short assignment to an army base in Germany called Kaiserslautern. I believe the numbers.
ReplyDeleteYou always exaggerate. You were the guy that was saying there were something like 400,000, or was it 4 million, I forget, orphans caused by the US of A in Iraq, when the total number estimated by the Iraqi in charge of the orphan program, from all sources, and he has an incentive to exaggerate, was 1/10 your number.
DeleteYou have no clue.
DeleteI believe you were wrong on that topic.
DeleteNo one believes you, boobie.
DeleteYou have ZERO credibility.
Your stand on abortion, well you know ...
It differs depending upon the race, religion or ethnicity of the victim.
As do your views on most everything.
boobie, how can you even comment upon accuracy the number of sexual assault cases reported, when you, of all people, know that oh so many of them just go unreported.
DeleteWhere the women had to close a relationship to the assailant to even file a report.
That was what allen said, was it not?
>>Obama deserves credit for taking down OBL, no doubt about it.<<
ReplyDeleteNot really, but why argue about it.
He deserves no more credit than Bush, if it had happened under Bush.
Bush put the wheels in motion, Barky kept them in motion.
Even you Quirk could have done as much if you were President.
That is BULL Shit, boobie.
DeleteBush shut down the bin Laden unit.
Closed it.
C.I.A. Closes Unit Focused on Capture of bin Laden
WASHINGTON, July 3 — The Central Intelligence Agency has closed a unit that for a decade had the mission of hunting Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants, intelligence officials confirmed Monday.
The unit, known as Alec Station, was disbanded late last year and its analysts reassigned within the C.I.A. Counterterrorist Center, the officials said.
The decision is a milestone for the agency, which formed the unit before Osama bin Laden became a household name and bolstered its ranks after the Sept. 11 attacks, when President Bush pledged to bring Mr. bin Laden to justice "dead or alive."
The realignment reflects a view that Al Qaeda is no longer as hierarchical as it once was, intelligence officials said, and a growing concern about Qaeda-inspired groups that have begun carrying out attacks independent of Mr. bin Laden and his top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri.
Yada yada yada.
Bush dropped the ball, then kicked it away.
That was 3JUL2006
Delete2006, the search for bin Laden was "Scaled Back", or in the common vernacular ...
'Terminated'.
Well before bin Laden was.
President Obama rejected the Bush administration's policy on bin Laden that "conflated all terror threats from al-Qaeda to Hamas to Hezbollah," replacing it with "with a covert, laserlike focus on al-Qaeda and its spawn."
DeleteLies and misdirection, boobie, from GW Bush.
Truth from trish's favorite General
U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said in December 2009 that officials had had no reliable information on bin Laden's whereabouts for years. One week later, General Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan said in December 2009 that al-Qaeda will not be defeated unless its leader, Osama bin Laden, is captured or killed. Testifying to the U.S. Congress, he said bin Laden had become an "iconic figure, whose survival emboldens al-Qaeda as a franchising organization across the world", and that Obama's deployment of 30,000 extra troops to Afghanistan meant that success would be possible. "I don't think that we can finally defeat al-Qaeda until he's captured or killed", McChrystal said of bin Laden. "Killing or capturing bin Laden would not spell the end of al-Qaeda, but the movement could not be eradicated while he remained at large."
Bush was wrong, he lied to the American people, promised US bin Laden 'Dead or Alive', then gave up the hunt, when the Pakistani gave bin Laden shelter from the storm.
On December 11, 2005, a letter from Atiyah Abd al-Rahman to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi indicated that bin Laden and the al-Qaeda leadership were based in the Waziristan region of Pakistan at the time. In the letter, translated by the United States military's Combating Terrorism Center at West Point, "Atiyah" instructs Zarqawi to "send messengers from your end to Waziristan so that they meet with the brothers of the leadership [...] I am now on a visit to them and I am writing you this letter as I am with them..." Al-Rahman also indicates that bin Laden and al-Qaeda are "weak" and "have many of their own problems." The letter has been deemed authentic by military and counterterrorism officials, according to The Washington Post.
DeleteSame time frame the team hunting bin Laden was disbanded.
Got a solid lead bin Laden was in Pakistan, Bush calls off the hunters, has them all ressigned.
Maybe it was a mistake to integrate the sexes in the military in the first place. This idea came from the left. Most in the military seemed to be opposed to it, back in the day.
ReplyDeleteThe US was following the Israeli model, boobie.
DeleteDid you not see "Cast a Giant Shadow"?
Did anyone notice this article? -
ReplyDeleteMay 25, 2013
U.S. Military: We Could Have Saved Ambassador Stevens
By Jonathon Moseley
http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/05/us_military_we_could_have_saved_ambassador_stevens.html
Here is a good article for those always using the words Israeli, Israel, etc. as if there is a single point of view in Israel on all matters. There usually is not, though one on may be forming now on a particular topic, according to this author.
ReplyDeleteMay 25, 2013
How Hafez Assad Saved Israel
By Caroline Glick
http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2013/05/25/how_hafez_assad_saved_israel_105187.html
>>During the 1990s, the Israeli Left and the Clinton administration managed to convince the Rabin, Netanyahu and Barak governments to offer to surrender the Golan Heights to Syria.
DeleteThe only reason that the initiative failed was because Assad Sr. rejected Israel's repeated offers to surrender the strategic plateau in exchange for a piece of paper with a smiley face on it.<<
Some here may be having memory lapses about that which occurred in past.
Assad's honor was worth more to him than the land.
DeleteHe knew Syria would eventually regain the Golan, but he could never regain his honor, after signing an agreement, one that was not worthy of a smiley face to Syria.
The leader of Hezbollah has warned that the fall of the Syrian regime would give rise to extremists and plunge the Middle East into a “dark period”, and vowed that his Shia militant group will not stand idly by while its chief ally in Damascus is under attack.
ReplyDeleteIn a televised address, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah said Hezbollah members are fighting in Syria against Islamic extremists who pose a danger to Lebanon, and pledged that his group will not allow Syrian militants to control areas bordering Lebanon.
Nasrallah's comments marked the first time he has publicly confirmed that his men are fighting in Syria, and were his first remarks since Hezbollah fighters have become deeply involved in the battle for the strategic Syrian town of Qusair near the Lebanese frontier.
Hezbollah has been heavily criticised at home and abroad for sending fighters to Syria to fight along President Bashar al-Assad's forces. In his speech, Nasrallah sought to defend the group's deepening involvement, and frame it as part of a broader battle against Israel.
He also portrayed the fight in Syria as an "existential war" for anti-Israel groups including Hezbollah.
"Syria is the back of the resistance, and the resistance cannot stand, arms folded, while its back is broken," Nasrallah said.
"If Syria falls into the hands of America, Israel and the takfiris, the people of our region will go into a dark period," he said in a speech to mark the anniversary of Israel's withdrawal from southern Lebanon in May 2000. "If Syria falls, Palestine will be lost."
The term "takfiri" has become associated with an offshoot of the salafist movement, which condones violence to achieve ideological goals. Many of its practitioners embrace the teachings of al-Qaida.
Nasrallah's comments came as Syrian government forces and Hezbollah launched a fierce campaign on Saturday to seize more rebel territory in the town of Qusair.
Rebels fighting to topple Assad said additional tanks and artillery had been deployed around opposition-held territory in the Syrian town close to the Lebanese border.
"I've never seen a day like this since the battle started," said activist Malek Ammar. "The shelling is so violent and heavy. It's like they're trying to destroy the city house by house."
At least 30 people were killed in opposition-held areas on Saturday, most of them rebels, and dozens were injured, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.
Rebels are largely surrounded in Qusair, a town of 30,000 that has become a strategic battleground. Assad’s forces want to take the area to secure a route between the capital Damascus and his stronghold on the Mediterranean coast, effectively dividing rebel-held territories in the north and south.
(Reuters) - Syrian government forces and the Lebanese guerrilla group Hezbollah launched a fierce campaign to seize more rebel territory in the border town of Qusair on Saturday, sources on both sides of the conflict said.
ReplyDeleteRebels fighting to topple President Bashar al-Assad said additional tanks and artillery had been deployed around opposition-held territory in Qusair, a Syrian town close to the Lebanese border.
"I've never seen a day like this since the battle started," said Malek Ammar, an activist speaking from the town by Skype. "The shelling is so violent and heavy. It's like they're trying to destroy the city house by house."
At least 30 people were killed in opposition-held areas on Saturday, most of them rebels, and dozens were injured, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.
Rebels are largely surrounded in Qusair, a town of 30,000 that has become a strategic battleground. Assad's forces want to take the area to secure a route between the capital Damascus and his stronghold on the Mediterranean coast, effectively dividing rebel-held territories in the north and south.
The opposition has been fighting back, seeing it as critical to maintain cross-border supply routes and stop Assad from gaining a victory they fear would give him the upper hand in proposed U.S.-Russia led peace talks next month.
Assad's forces are believed to have seized about two-thirds of Qusair, but the price has been high and rebels insist they are preventing any further advances.
"We are in the second phase of our plan of attack but the advance has been quite slow and difficult," an official close to Hezbollah told Reuters.
"The rebels have mined everything, the streets, the houses. Even the refrigerators are mined."
Hezbollah's Manar TV said the Syrian army had recaptured the Dabaa airport near the town, which rebels had seized several weeks ago.
SECTARIAN FIGHTING
There is an increasingly sectarian tone of Syria's political struggle, which is not only overshadowing the revolt but threatening to destabilize the region. Israel has launched two air strikes in Syria, and Lebanon has seen a rise in Syria-linked violence.
Syria's Sunni Muslim majority has led the struggle to topple Assad, which has been joined by Islamist fighters across the region, some of them linked to the militant group al Qaeda.
Assad comes from the minority Alawite sect, an offshoot of Shi'ite Islam, and has relied on an army led mostly by Alawite forces. He has been bankrolled by Shi'ite power Iran and now increasingly by Iran's Lebanese proxy, Shi'ite Hezbollah.
The British-based Observatory, which has a network of activists across Syria, said Assad forces led by Hezbollah were trying to advance from three directions in Qusair.
"Every area they didn't have a foothold in, they are trying to gain one now," said Rami Abdelraham, head of the Observatory.
Rebels from across Syria say they have sent units into Qusair.
Colonel Abdeljabbar al-Okaidi, the Aleppo-based regional leader of the moderate, internationally-backed rebel Supreme Military Council said he and Islamist brigade al-Tawheed had sent forces to the outskirts of the town to help the Qusair fighters.
Of the nineteen hijackers who attacked this nation on 911, fifteen were Saudi Arabian. All were Sunnis. Syria’s Sunni Muslim majority has led the struggle to topple Assad. That same majority has been joined by al Qaeda and other radical Islamists.
ReplyDeleteAfter we thoroughly cocked up Iraq, we deposed Saddam and installed a Shiite government, since which Sunni radical groups have been doing their best to wreck.
And we have a fight with Assad who is fighting to stop al Qaeda?
Here is the Saudi score card:
ReplyDeleteThe Khobar Towers - 1996- 19 Americans killed. 14 men indicted by US DOJ13 were Saudi Arabian.
The Nairobi embassy bombing - 1998, 12 Americans dead - Saudis.
The USS Cole bombing- 2000, 17 Americans killed - Saudis.
The Riyadh residential compound bombings in May 2003, which killed nine Americans. All nine of the suicide bombers killed in the attacks were Saudis.
The Mosul mess tent bombing - 2004 -killed 18 Americans. Saudis.
And we have John Kerry soliciting help from the Saudis to overthrown the Syrian government by supporting al Qaeda?
The Shiite Hezbollah are fighting alongside regime troops in Syria. if Assad’s regime falls, Hezbollah will be weakened in Lebanon.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Syrian human rights activists, the Lebanese group lost more than 100 fighters since getting involved in the Syrian civil war.
The surge in the number of Hezbollah fatalities is mainly due to fighting alongside Syrian army troops in Qusayr near the Lebanese border.
Israel attacked Syria to keep weapons out of the hands of Hezbollah. In doing so, Israel set itself up to be seen on the side of the rebels against Assad or worse yet, the rebels appeared to be on the side of Israel against Assad.
If we have any business in the Middle East, it is against Saudi Arabia.
Let's not forget the numbers of Americans that Hezbollah has killed (marine barracks), kidnapped (william buckley) and more.
ReplyDeletehezbollah has murdered American in America, in LA.. but they were Jews so they might not count
You like to bring up the fact that Hezbollah killed Americans in (marine barracks). Where were these marine barracks? Camp Pendleton, in California, Jacksonville NC, Norfolk, Virginia? No, they were in Lebanon. Us marines in Lebanon, sort of like Lebanese troops in Pennsylvania.
DeleteWhat business did US marines have in Lebanon. What happened before they go there? What was the neighborhood where the US marines barracks were? The Multinational Force (MNF) US and French troops) were among Lebanese Muslims, Shi’ites living in the slums of West Beirut and around the airport. The Shi’ites saw the MNF siding with the Maronite Catholics in their domination of Lebanon. Prior to that the US Sixth Fleet lobbed missiles at the Druze-dominated Shuf mountains killing innocent civilians. The US also backed Israel in the 1982 invasion of Lebanon and other pro-Israeli factions within Lebanon. These factions had been responsible for multiple attacks committed against the Muslim and Druze Lebanese population.
Colonel Timothy J. Geraghty, the commander of the marines in Beirut during the incident, said that the marine and the French headquarters were targeted primarily because of "who we were and what we represented;" and that,
It is noteworthy that the United States provided direct naval gunfire support -- which I strongly opposed -- for a week to the Lebanese Army at a mountain village called Suq-al-Garb on September 19 and that the French conducted an air strike on September 23 in the Bekaa Valley. American support removed any lingering doubts of our neutrality and I stated to my staff at the time that we were going to pay in blood for this decision.
Some authors, including Thomas Friedman point to the use of this naval gunfire as the beginning point of the U.S. forces being seen as participants in the civil war rather than peace keepers and opening them up to retaliation.
Some analysts believe the newly formed Islamic Republic of Iran was heavily involved and that a major factor leading it to participate in the attacks on the barracks was America's support for Iraq in the Iran–Iraq War and its extending of $2.5 billion in trade credit to Iraq while halting the shipments of arms to Iran. A few weeks before the bombing, Iran warned that providing armaments to Iran’s enemies would provoke retaliatory punishment.
This is reported in Wikipedia and is essentially as I understood it to be at the time. We had no business in Lebanon. Which American state would not attack foreign troops that bombed Americans and set up camp on American soil?
None.
It is called blowback. The marines were killed because of US unquestioning support of Israel attacking Lebanon and the US Navy killing Lebanese. What should their response have been to a foreign invasion. You argue continuously that any missile attack on Israel justifies an Israeli response. Why should a US attack on Lebanon not result in a Lebanese response?
Delete
ReplyDeleteIf we have any business in the Middle East, it is against Saudi Arabia.
We can talk and chew gum at the same time.
To bad the Israeli cannot.
DeleteRumors and hyperbole emanating from Israel, controlled leaks, as it were ...
They put Israel flying over Saudi Araia, on the way to Iran, in a committed corridor ...
They put Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, aliened with Israel, to topple Assad.
Just as Israel strikes Assad from the air
No, the Israeli cannot chew gum and talk out one side of their mouth at a time.
The are allied with the Wahhabi, against the whirled.
To include US.
Our two false flag flying 'allies'
The Israeli
ReplyDeleteThe Wahabbi
The Whirled
The Gibberish
General 'Gib' Bunker
DeleteHow is your good friend, allen, boobie.
DeleteStill exchanging e-mails?
Gettin' all that AIPAC skivvy from your Atlanta connection?
A true supporter of Israel, he'd never day something out his ass, aye.
A man of honor and integrity, right?
Who attacked US on 11SEP01, boobie. It was the Saudi funded, Pakistani trained terrorists, all Salafists or Wahhabi, depending upon the writer.
Wahhabi, the more popular term for the brand of Sunni Islam that is financially supported by the Saudi and practiced by the Pakistani. Along with the Muslim Brotherhood, another Wahhabi based sectarian group.
The Israeli, they are well ensconced with Saudi, their common enemy in Iran, makes them allies.
You know the Middle East, the enemy of the enemy, is a friend.
The Israeli and Wahhabi, allied to draw the US deeper into Arabia and Persia, both.
Who was the weapons supplier to the Mujaheddin in Afpakistan?
The US and Saudis paid, the Israeli delivered.
On the hush hush, of course.
Where was Obama, in Pakistan.
Visiting friends.
Like John Brennan, new head of the CIA.
The only Obama conspiracy theory boobie will not buy into, the only one that ...
DeleteThe odd thing is, this outline explains every single disconnected theory, reconciles all the fragmented narratives, and actually solves all the disjointed narratives simultaneously.
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/01/10/john-brennan-the-cia-zibgnew-brezinski-columbia-university-and-obama/
I recall rufus once mentioning that Obama's mother worked for the CIA, too.
Not much more than that was said.
Who could enter the Hawaiian data base, the State Department passport files, etc, etc, ...
DeleteThe CIA, personified by John Brennan and Z. Brzezinski, of course.
Connect the dots, boobie.
Obama is, always was, CIA.
Just like Bush Sr.
Who but the CIA could falsify that birth record?
DeleteInsert the birth announcement in the paper, when the baby was not there?
Who could smuggle a black baby 'Out of Africa' and into Hawaii, other than the CIA?
How deep is Obama's cover?
Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries.
ReplyDeleteZbigniew Brzezinski
The love of Truth can unite all the people.
DeleteIt's either that or Coca-Cola :)
My money is on Coca-Cola.
Delete.
DeleteZiggy doesn't quite get his facts correct (Christians over Muslims 3:2)but what the heck, he is trying to make some kind of point.
.
Here is a funny item
ReplyDeletewww.economist.com/blogs/.../2007/03/a_new_brain_for_barack_obama
Mar 14, 2007 – A NEW brain for Barack Obama! It's 78 years old and it still works perfectly. It belongs to Zbigniew Brzezinski, the peppery ex-national security ...
New brain, written in 2007, when the reality, Obama and his 'New" brain go back to Occidental University, 1979 – 81.
Comical reporting.
When the wife and I came into town today, we were met by Monsanto Protestors.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Mopnsanto+protests&qpvt=Mopnsanto+protests&FORM=VDRE#x0y0
They looked fierce, militant.
Ready to storm the Castle.
Not just the young, plenty of older Q Type Aging Hippies among them, some with pitchforks.
Along with a few protesting the weather.
Seemed unconcerned about the tendency toward totalitarianism manifesting in the USA these days, or the middle east.
Just wanted their corn with some black kernels, and worms.
Occupy Monsanto Now!!!
DeleteDown With Monsanto's War On Hunger!!
Delete'Q' Type Aging Hippie -
Deletehttp://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Mopnsanto+protests&view=detail&mid=8DBE5F412A7929BCF26A8DBE5F412A7929BCF26A&first=141&FORM=NVPFVR
boobie says "I believe..."
ReplyDeleteboobie says "I think..."
boobie emits bird shit!
Excellent Bob.
DeleteAnother over statement, boobie.
Delete.
ReplyDeleteWe were leaving the cool of the mahogany bar at The Imperialist and we all had been drinking heavily, and Q was way over his limit. He had taken it into his mind to pay the bar bill for the all of us, but after the fourth credit card was declined over limit I stepped in and paid with cash. I do not know if Q knew his cards would be rejected. Perhaps he did and was simply trying to build sympathy, or to show his good will. Hamdoon had instructed us all to go to our respective rooms and individually think over his suggested plan. It was a longshot. We were to meet at the Pow Wow of The 500 Nations. A critical element was getting Umatilla a Press Pass, and into the Press Conference the President was holding there. Only Native Americans were to be allowed at this Press Conference. We were going to our rooms and I was thinking Q might actually provide some value here, what with his expertise in creating fraudulent documents.....
Q entered his room at the Imperialist Hotel and turned off the air. The room was musty and dark and stank with the pungent tang of mildew and the residual if telltale odor of the thousands of sweaty bodies that had spent a week, a night, or only a single passionate hour here. He unlatched the door that opened on to his balcony and went out. It was late afternoon and the wind had died. The sun was just setting and it was a comfortable and pleasant, the temperature in the mid 60’s. He brushed the bugs off of one of the two rickety rattan chairs there and sat down. He crossed his legs on the ancient patio table. It rocked dangerously as he maneuvered to take out his gold cigarette case, open it, and light up one of the cigarettes he had rolled earlier in the day. They contained the last of the kif he was able to smuggle out of Bagdad when the arms deal went south.
Looking out over the balcony railing three feet away, he thought to himself, for such a dump, the view isn’t all that bad. He could see the sun setting on his left, Arlington Cemetery on his right, and straight on, the planes landing at Dulles Airport. Of course he had to look past the 495 to see the cemetery and past the Merrifield exchange to see the airport, but still he’d stayed in worse dumps.
.
.
DeleteHe looked at the ornate gold cigarette case he held in his hand. It was his favorite. He paid a small fortune for it once while visiting Rangoon on a job. It was intricate and beautiful and he was assured it was once owned in ancient days by the Maharaja of Uttarakhand. If it weren’t for the fact that it would occasionally turn his fingers slightly green when he sweated, it would have been perfect.
Q finished the kif and after a moment went into the apartment and grabbed a bottle of Jack Daniels from the desk and a glass from the bath room and then returned to the balcony. He poured two fingers of Jack into the glass and drank half of it in one swallow. Then he lit another cigarette and sat back thinking. After five seconds, he said, “Well that should do it”, and then finished the rest of the drink.
The kif was working and he was starting to feel really mellow. He poured himself another large drink but this time sipped it slowly. As he sat there one thought kept floating through his mind, “Why am I wasting my time with these nitwits?”
Of course, the free booze was nice, but it didn’t offset the knife would in his thigh or driving that car into the Reflecting Pool. I still don’t know whose car it was. And then they run off to Bagdad for the arms deal and leave me hanging. And on top of that, all they do is bitch. UJ, the little shit is still complaining about the broken leg he got in the Reflecting Pool accident as if it was my fault. And B is still complaining about me ending up in Bangkok rather than Bagdad, but I still contend it was him that gave me the wrong directions. And then there is Hamdoon, that pompous ass, always talking about the plan, how this was going to be the big one, how we all have to bring our A game.
Crazy Arab or whatever the heck he is.
.
.
DeleteQ took another swig of the whiskey but this time directly from the bottle as he thought to himself,
We spend all afternoon ‘planning ‘ for the big one as Hamdoon puts it before he finally gets around to saying "We all have to meet for the big Pow Wow of the 500 Nations," whatever the heck that is.
“Why,” I ask.
“That info is on a need to know basis only, my friend.”
“Don’t I need to know?”
“No,” said H.
“This is bullshit.”
“Don’t be getting difficult again, Q, especially after stiffing us on the drinks.”
“Stiff. I didn’t stiff anyone. I offered to pa…”
“Let me at that SOB,” roared UJ as he struggled to get his crutches under himself and failed ending up on the floor instead, his face even redder than usual."
“Come on, break it up you guys,” said B, “I’m popping for the drinks, ok. Do as H suggested and head on up to your rooms to think over the plan.”
Q had been pissed but he had turned to head up to his room. At the door he hesitated. And as B was signing the check for the bar bill, Q signaled the waiter to bring him another drink and to put it on B’s tab.
Now, sitting on the balcony reflecting on all that happened over the past few days, Q lost his train of thought. He lit another cigarette and took another swig of the Jack.
.
It is hard to get a good read on the negotiations between Syria and Israel over the Golan Heights. There are many articles which take differing views.
ReplyDeleteReport: Netanyahu agreed to full Golan Heights withdrawal
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4291337,00.html
Netanyahu Syria Golan Heights negotiation
http://video.forward.com/video/Netanyahu-Syria-Golan-Heights-n;Jewish-News-One
and a hundred others.
Former Israeli Prime Ministers have tried unsuccessfully to find a way to a peace agreement about the Golan Heights.
Hamdoon, at my urging, finally authorized Q to create a fraudulent Press Credential for Umatilla. Q was pleased with this assignment and conducted himself with great elan, even to the point of stopping his drinking for some days. The final product was very good. Q had to pickpocket, no real problems for Q, a valid version of the Press Credentials from a Shoshone named Chief Many Loses. Having obtained the official seal which he artfully transposed it to another document, and he changed Umatilla's name to Chief Sleeping Wolf of the Lakota Sioux, a representative of the publication New Sioux News (NSN) A recent photo of Umatilla was incorporated, and we seemed set.
ReplyDeleteSleeping Wolf was to position himself at the Press Conference so he would be likely to be called upon to ask the Great White Father at least one question. He was to be dressed in the very best Native American garb, with magnificent head dress, war paint, and sleeping pillow, so as to stand out from the crowd.
We were called together by Hamdoon to discuss the creation of the question we desired in such a manner that the Great White Father would be forced to answer in the affirmative, or look cold hearted and racist.
Our success rode on the outcome of this Press Conference....
.
DeleteWe were called together by Hamdoon to discuss the creation of the question we desired in such a manner that the Great White Father would be forced to answer in the affirmative, or look cold hearted and racist.
Q had for some reason started drinking Southern Comfort Manhattans and being a strict carnivore he now had seven cherries lined up in front of him. He leaned back in his chair, stifled a belch, and said, "Ask him if he has stopped beating his wife yet."
.
harharhar
Delete>>Not a lot of Muslims want to go to the trouble of chopping your head off, but when so many Western leaders have so little rattling around up there, they don’t have to. And, as we know from the sob-sister Tsarnaev profiles, most of these excitable lads are perfectly affable, or at least no more than mildly alienated, until the day they set a hundred cars alight, or blow up a school boy, or decapitate some guy. And, if you’re lucky, it’s not you they behead, or your kid they kill, or even your Honda Civic they light up. And so life goes on, and it’s all so “mundane,” in Simon Jenkins’s word, that you barely notice when the Jewish school shuts up, and the gay bar, and the uncovered women no longer take a stroll too late in the day, and the publishing house that gets sent the manuscript for the next Satanic Verses decides it’s not worth the trouble. . . . But don’t worry, they’ll never defeat our “free speech” and our “way of life.”<<
ReplyDeleteMay 24, 2013 6:00 PM
To the Slaughter
British lions come up lambs in Woolwich.
By Mark Steyn
baaaa
Anyone with me in hoping that if this occurred here some Concealed Carry person would gun them down so as to eliminate the possibility they might behead someone else?
Delete>>It’s not clear how the Supreme Court will rule in the Myriad Technologies case, but this much is more certain than the fact there’s not going to be a sequel to Salt: As Obamacare kicks in, groundbreaking genetic tests and preventative surgeries will remain elusive perks of the privileged, as innovation and patient choice are always the first things to go when bureaucracy and the state take over health care.<<
ReplyDeleteForget Angelina Jolie: How Obamacare Endangers Your Breasts
Kennedy, Nick Gillespie & Joshua Swain | May 24, 2013
http://reason.com/reasontv/2013/05/24/forget-angelina-jolie-how-obamacare-enda
I hope American women would think about such things.
Not only was Obama's mama CIA, she was a "close associate" of Brzezinski. Close enough that Zbigniew rescued Obama from Occidental College, and drug him up to Columbia.
ReplyDeleteThe rest, as they say, is History.
The man is a creation of the CIA, and the Military Industrial Complex. Far more dialed in to the intricacies of the world power structures than his republican critics could ever hope to be.
DeleteWhy in the hell did you vote for him then?
Delete