101–110 of 124 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well said - similar happened in Europe during the 1970s with people being classified as (left-wing) terrorists (and a few might have certainly been) and being "transported" between countries by so-called freelancers - TMK quite a few did not survive the travel and definitely no obituaries in the press.
There's a great movie set in this context, "Munich"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Iraq, and Afghanistan are also apparently "terrorist nations"... but not Pakistan? Or Yemen? (Despite Al-Qaeda having proven links to both). But why is NK having nukes a problem? There is no proof they want to use them. Just posturing... Very similar to India and Pakistan. Edit: Did the CIA get upset when France developed and tested nuclear weapons? Do some countries deserve trust while others don't? What has North K…
I can't speak about everything because I don't keep up with most of this. But frankly, the situation is shaky. Pakistan is fairly developed considering the region it's in. It's also unstable because of the military from what I can understand. So it's reasonable not to label them as a terrorist nation and possibly pushing them into a more unstable state. That's the analysis that I've heard, but I don't know much about…
Parts of the ISI, their counterpart to the CIA, helped foster terrorist training camps in Afghanistan with the aid of American weaponry and money during our covert push against the Soviets. This was partly done so that fighters trained in those camps could then be shipped to Kashmir to do battle against the Indian army in that region.
Pakistan is a very difficult topic. I recommend two books by Steve Coll to understand it better, "On the Grand Trunk Road" and "Ghost Wars," two fascinating books on the recent history of this region. I recently read both and they're worth your time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought they had changed their name to Xe services. What sort of name is Academi for a private mercenary company?
Blackwater -> Xe -> Academi. For trying to get away from the story book evil sounding-ness of an entity named "Blackwater", they sure didn't do very good with "Xe", which sounds even more mysterious and potentially evil-doing IMO. Academi sounds a lot better though. And they do a lot US LE/gov't/etc. training which is probably what they would rather emphasize than their being a "private mercenary company".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>There is a view that the US actions are unfair and unjust. >The delivery method is not terrorism but the end result is indistinguishable in terms of justness or fairness. For example, torturing a man not found guilty of any crimes. How is the delivery method not terrorism? If a guy named Muhammad kills 12 ordinary civilians he is a terrorist but if a guy named Andy/Joe/Steve kills 12 / 112 people in Iraq / Afghanist…
Muslimy named guy at Fort Hood? He is a Muslim! According to eyewitnesses, Hasan had taken a seat at an empty table and bowed his head for several seconds when he suddenly stood up, shouted "Allahu Akbar!"
when an American (white Christiany) kills innocent CIVILIANS (whether American civilians in Colorado or Iraqi or Afghan civilians) he is not called a terrorist
but when an American (brown, Muslimy) kills SOLDIERS he is called a terrorist.
What is terrorism? Killing soldiers (who are trained to kill people) or killing civilians (who did not sign up for any murder and terror)?
Or is terrorism the act when non-white folks (Americans or otherwise) or non-Christians or non-Americans kill anyone? Apparently it's not called terrorism when Bush kills 1 million people or Obama kills Afghan women and children who are celebrating at weddings.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is an Epic Level difference between a government agency who is ultimately responsible for their conduct to their citizens, one way or another having a secret assassination program, and a government paying a 3rd party to carry out assassinations. One particular way in which this is different, is that the CIA can't go out and decide that it (as an organization) wants to freelance for other nations or organization…
They're not moonlighting for the Zetas or the Russian mob because if they were, they'd lose billions of dollars of CIA money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Muslimy named guy at Fort Hood? He is a Muslim! According to eyewitnesses, Hasan had taken a seat at an empty table and bowed his head for several seconds when he suddenly stood up, shouted "Allahu Akbar!"
And you completed ignored my point that: when an American (white Christiany) kills innocent CIVILIANS (whether American civilians in Colorado or Iraqi or Afghan civilians) he is not called a terrorist but when an American (brown, Muslimy) kills SOLDIERS he is called a terrorist. What is terrorism? Killing soldiers (who are trained to kill people) or killing civilians (who did not sign up for any murder and terror)? O…
Killing unarmed soldiers doing administrative work in their own country when they are not on combat duty is terrorism.
Obama trying to kill a terrorist and then accidentally killing civilians is not terrorism.
It all comes down to intent, no?
Having NGOs conduct killing on behalf of the government is a tried-and-true method of counterinsurgence (South American paramilitary death squads for example). The plausible deniability introduced by working through a proxy allows the government to conduct more politically risky operations (including false flag attacks if public support is waning). Criticizing the government becomes riskier. And, if not held in check…
What puzzles me is why the person delegating authority is not considered responsible for the actions of those whom authority has been delegated to. Authority was delegated, not responsibility.
Having NGOs conduct killing on behalf of the government is a tried-and-true method of counterinsurgence (South American paramilitary death squads for example). The plausible deniability introduced by working through a proxy allows the government to conduct more politically risky operations (including false flag attacks if public support is waning). Criticizing the government becomes riskier. And, if not held in check…
What puzzles me is why the person delegating authority is not considered responsible for the actions of those whom authority has been delegated to. Authority was delegated, not responsibility.
Political abstractions may be leaky, but they hold water long enough to get the job done.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And you completed ignored my point that: when an American (white Christiany) kills innocent CIVILIANS (whether American civilians in Colorado or Iraqi or Afghan civilians) he is not called a terrorist but when an American (brown, Muslimy) kills SOLDIERS he is called a terrorist. What is terrorism? Killing soldiers (who are trained to kill people) or killing civilians (who did not sign up for any murder and terror)? O…
Timothy McVey was was most certainly labeled a terrorist. Violent anti-abortionists who randomly murder doctors are labeled as terrorists. Killing unarmed soldiers doing administrative work in their own country when they are not on combat duty is terrorism. Obama trying to kill a terrorist and then accidentally killing civilians is not terrorism. It all comes down to intent, no?
>Obama trying to kill a terrorist and then accidentally killing civilians is not terrorism.
>It all comes down to intent, no?
Oh yeah, when we bomb wedding parties out intent is good, when they killed civilians their intent was bad, that was simple, now I get it.
https://www.google.com/search?q=afghanistan+wedding+bombed
Clinton knowingly bombed Sudan pharmaceuticals factory (I have posted the link somewhere on this page) and killed half million infants by sanctions alone (1996 UN estimate of the period 1991-1996), Bush knowingly went to Iraq when there was no link to any attack on US, Obama went into Libya for no good reason (oil contracts), Obama has killed hundreds of civilians in Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan and Afghanistan with unmanned drone attacks and his latest piece of art is to label all adult males present in the site where he wanted to bomb as "militants".
That's neat of Pres Obombya, Americans own the whole world; the Afghans, Somalis, Yemenis, Pakistanis just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, so they are all terrorists. Let's kill them and call them militants unless proven otherwise (just imagine Osama using the same logic, oh there were bad guys in those buildings, the intent was to kill only those who were bombing Iraq).
http://www.juancole.com/2012/05/how-obama-changed-definition...