Another day in the Empire
March 11, 2010

Another defeat for the minority “American Party” yesterday when the Kucinich H. Con. Res. 248 fell short . In a shameless example of Media Blackout, nothing was mentioned on the MSM filters. In a landslide COMMITTEE conspiracy, the vote was 356-65 against the resolution.

The Palm Beach Post writes:

“Opposing the resolution was easy for almost all Republicans, who have been solidly behind Obama’s decision to increase U.S. troop strength in Afghanistan from 70,000 to 100,000. Only five Republicans supported the measure.
 
It was a harder vote for some Democrats, particularly in an election year where opposing the war can be equated with opposing the troops. Several expressed discomfort with a war that has lasted 8 1/2 years and cost the nation more than 930 American lives and the treasury more than $200 billion, but said they were voting against the resolution because it was ill-timed and unrealistic.”

 

This is a perfect example of Warmonger Politics that has invaded our government.  While millions lose their jobs, lose their healthcare, lose their homes and lose their peace of mind, we can count on the global corporate shills and foreign bagmen in Congress to use this logic. Can you imagine that you are not supporting the troops, when your aim is to get them out of harms way and out of an illegal occupation in a country that has never declared war.  Or is it just another endeavor by the Global Cabal in search of blood and treasure.

Is it ill timed? Unrealistic?  That would better describe the entire agenda of the current regime.  Supporting the troops would be taking care of the emotionally and physically damaged people that have returned from these empire building false flags theatres and World Bank ventures. Not a very good track record.

The cost of this war will eventually tally up to the current national debt. That is if  we end up doing the right thing and take the responsibility to provide all the necessary action to truly support our troops. We must remember though, the Empire really looks at our troops as useless eaters and just another piece of military hardware similar to the boots and bullets and of course the depleted uranium which will kill thousands for years to come.

Some notable speeches from the debating floor.

Patrick Kennedy – Excellent

President Obama’s batting line up

Advertisements

N.W.O. and Shrimp Politics
December 12, 2009

   

The elitist, Obama’s famous campaign promise, claiming to have ALL troops out of Iraq by the end of 2009 was slightly modified as we all knew to residual troops in Iraq until 2011, and the majority of troops not leaving Iraq until August 2010.

Obama has reportedly made his decision on approximately 35,000 troops to be deployed to Afghanistan to ultimately set up the same permanent base that Cheney and PNAC masterminded in Iraq. While the need for Afghanistan to become the pivot point for Pakistan, India is critical in the TRIAD for the final lock on the Gulf, so goes the recent state dinner.

Expect more elitist butt smooching with Israel, China and India by the little prince to insure the the ensuing travesty of continued genocide. Obama and his court wrote off the Goldstone Report which contained immaculate research by an unimpeachable investigator. This position was purposely offered to quell the double standard hipocracy appearance and gain the support of blue pill takers who may sit on the fence regarding world order war council decisions for Afghanistan and Iraqi occupation.

Obama has been instructed to ratchet up the revival of al-Quada, the largest figment of the COMMITTEES imagination. Tick-Tock, Tick-Tock goes the clock on the ambitious TRIAD for Iran and Pakistan. It’s almost like the last meal for India before they become the next major player in the hottest of spots. The danger of Pakistan-India and Muslim resistance to dying via a [western] cowboy and indian movie. Imagine those heathen savages thinking we won’t annihilate them from the bottom up which generally starts with the children, as that will aid in turning the peaceful into the imaginary spirit of al-Qaeda versus a human being who has lost everything and has only the [V]endetta left to console them.

Just as the 911 crisis was manufactured, manipulated by the COMMITTEE, Defence Secretary Rumsfeld proposed bombing Iraq instead of Afghanistan. Proposed was not the reality. The decision was laid out in this TRIAD long before we were attacked by the Quartet’s super secret inner circle. Being far too difficult to sell Afghanistan as a country able to have WMD or the ability to have the means to be conducting a WMD program, the decision for Suddam, the shill, was COTO obvious one.

Don’t confuse Iran in this mix. The TRIAD at play in Persia is going to plan. Just as the necessity to eliminate Benazir Bhutto, who interfered with the COMMITEES plans, Ahmadinejad’s win in the election was critical for the advancement to establish the need for U.S. I.M.C. building, despite the blue team’s rhetoric and stomping about the validity of the election. Ahmadinejad, an administrator, will fulfill his orders as did all the previous ME players as directed by Putin and will go out as the largest fraud to date.

I rest assured that establishing the permanent base in Afghanistan is solely for Pakistan, who remains the key to completion of the the ninth kingdom. One more down and one to go.

So while the Pawns munching on Prawns and sipping Grenache, which is the wrong wine to serve with this dish, I am reminded it is just another mistake served to the people of the world by the cretins who don’t know a Puligny Montrachet or Sauvignon Blanc was the right wine decision.

Once again we are the Prawns and are taking it again up the poop-chute.

LIAR LIAR

www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkavQvA1S9s

FACTS

http://usliberals.about.com/od/homelandsecurit1/a/IraqNumbers.htm

Combat Without Cognizance – or Murder by Joystick?
April 5, 2009

drone_418733a-copy

I have spent no more time on any other cause in my life than I have protesting and vocalizing my opposition to government sponsored death. Be it the death penalty or military engagement, I have never wavered in this
position and that includes Roe v Wade and the ongoing abortion issue. I do not advocate state sponsored death. Therefore I want government out of the issue as well.

I accept and defend the rights of others to disagree. If your notion of capitalism and free markets in today’s environment doesn’t give you pause to consider the effects on our military engagement policies into international territories I suggest you consider it through some investigation.  Some might argue that our military has become nothing more that a collection of Private Defense Agencies [PDA] positioned globally to protect the interests of an Anarcho-Corporatist consortium of private businesses. I tend to agree with that assessment.

In lieu of the limited infomation or biased reporting we must find a position on such matters. Taking your position without the facts or truth is mere philosophical opining and detrimental in the ultimate goal of progress? Well progress itself is defined as;

Miriam Webster

1 a (1): a royal journey marked by pomp and pageant (2): a state procession b: a tour or circuit made by an official (as a judge) c: an expedition, journey, or march through a region
2: a forward or onward movement (as to an objective or to a goal) : advance
3: gradual betterment ; especially : the progressive development of humankind

whereas;

Dictionary.com – 2. a developmental activity in science, technology, etc., esp. with reference to the commercial opportunities created thereby or to the promotion of the material well-being of the public through the goods, techniques, or facilities created.

What? From where did that definition come from? For the sake of this opinion I choose to use it. So please, establish your position in regards to military engagement and the Rules that govern it. Combat is waged by State Military as well as CIA, Mossad, MI6 Intelligence, Blackwater [Xe] type state sponsored and independent mercenary and terrorist organizations which might at some point be called “freedom fighters” or extremists. The designations seem to vary depending on your interpretations. I accept the rules of engagement as defined from what I can find currently.

Air Force Pamphlet 110-31, International Law [AFP 110-31], p. 5-9. These requirements restate almost verbatim the provisions in Protocol I, Article 57.—The Conduct of Armed Conflict and Air Operations, instructs that, applying international legal limits to air attacks, planners must take the following precautions:

(a) Do everything feasible to verify that the objectives attacked are neither civilians nor civilian objects…
(b) Take all feasible precautions in the choice of means and methods of attack with a view to avoiding, and in any event to
minimizing, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, and damage to civilian objects; and
(c) Refrain from deciding to launch any attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.

So what about Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles? What are the concerns regarding the logistics, legalities and ethics?

Some of the logistic and legal concerns are price. The UAV cost to the Defense budget is considerably less than traditional F series fighter aircraft and range and fuel costs are nearly 90% less but do not require a trained pilot to operate. This is a considerable plus for the global military combines and their financial resources as well as taxpayers, though it potentially puts another pilot out of work.

There are issues regarding FAA and NORAD operations and traffic control related to available airspace and concerns over the the UAV ability to react or respond without human visual capabilities.

The US military’s increasing use UCAV (armed) development, requires the US aviation community to rewrite the rules regarding UAVs and to draft and publish rules and regulations governing the use of UCAVs in national airspace as well as the International Civil Aviation Organization and public concerns.

As with any technology relying on human operation and like aircraft, UCAVs can experience engine problems, loss of communication, and weapon malfunctions. Unlike manned aircraft, UCAVs must be programmed with precise instructions and procedures to follow. These instructions and procedures may include a preplanned orbit point to regain communications and control, a preplanned self-destruct point, or an autonomous recovery-and-landing option. The potential for loss of life increases significantly in the case of armed, pilot-less aircraft.

Since these are chip programmable and involve wireless communications, the enemy could hack into the system and sieze control over or sabbotage the mission.

The United States must consider the rules that govern flight operations in national and international airspace, the Laws of Armed Conflict (LOAC), and rules of engagement (ROE) when the use of UCAV to execute combat-attack operations. I have not been able to find the specific laws or rules in respect to UCAV’s and their use in combat but I have considered these issues.

Under the LOAC, if the controller pilot of the UCAV is in Langley, VA and the programmer is in San Jose, CA while the operation or intelligence base is in Kabul the enemy under the same rules would be able to launch an attack a counter strike in Virginia, California as well as Kabul. I’m sure that would be of deep concern to the local residents.

Recently we have come to the knowledge of the US CIA UAV attacks in Pakistan. President Obama can take responsibility for the half dozen attacks and the eighty or so deaths from UCAV missions in the Kurram region of Fata. Though sources say it was successful in taking out the targets, the nearby school was leveled as well and it is uncertain to the number of innocent casualties or injuries. These strikes are carried out by Predator unmanned aircraft and use the hellfire rockets as their weapon of choice.

Similarly, the Israeli attacks with UCAW’s has confirmed massive civilian damage and raises the concerns of the ability to direct investigation as to the reasons. With drone air attacks it brings the question of human, mechanical or intelligence errors.

Please refer to the UK. Guardian Report

Haaretz has reported the possible war crimes and violations during it’s Israel Defense Forces “Operation Cast Lead”

Article one

Article two

In this case the soldiers had direct contact with the targets that ended up being partly women and children included in the casualties. The testimonies and investigations into the possible criminality are in progress.

What needs to be said here is war and conflict regardless of means is tragic, heartbreaking and often criminal. There is a distinction to made between the technique of Operation Cast Lead and the use of Drones. If we must as a species continue to kill each other for any reason under the Military, LOAC and RoE, I think we should continue to operate with face to face annihilation of our supposed enemies. The use of UCAV’s may seem to some as a means to prevent the death of ones forces or manpower, but it leaves the personal intercourse, witnesses, testimonies, human reaction that may avoid a deadly encounter and most important accountability.

Who bears the responsibility for an autonomous attack when things go wrong? Can a computer determine proportional response? Can the computer mimick humanity? Can this technology weigh casualties against advantage anticipated? Can an autonomous system differentiate between unnecessary suffering or injury? Sanitizing and dehumanizing these factors will open the doors to what I believe will be unspeakable disregard for humanity and the necessary processes of distinction.

I apologize to the families who have lost love ones but I stand fast on this point. If you enlist to fight for your country, you enlist to kill for your country and you risk dying for your country as well. How you deal with these in your time of service are what will progress our hopeful enlightenment to an end to war and armed conflict and an avoidance of assured mutual destruction.

It is foolish for the public to be aghast at the tragedies such as Israel’s possible crimes or the matter of Lt. Calley in the Mei Lei massacre in Vietnam. It is the harsh realities and bitter pills that we must swallow until we address the real issues of leadership, our military agendas, the industrial military corporations and the men who wear the star clad shoulder bars and ribbons, for they are the ones who back and support the technology of killing without faces, without feeling and without accountability. This is another slippery slope that if we do not consider the inevitable desensitizing effect of this kind of combat and the long war mentality, then powers behind the creations of these conflicts will be happy to run drone and joystick wars in the backrooms of their stores for years to come while ringing their cash registers.

“Sometimes I think it should be a rule of war that you have to see somebody up close and get to know him before you can shoot him.” ~M*A*S*H, Col. Harry Potter

This statement is not particularly clever or brilliant but it has so much in it for one who understands how war works.

Our New Vietnam
March 13, 2009

sst

Afghanistan, another victim of U.S. Freedom Marketing by the club we have come to know oh so well.::::::::

Make no mistake GW Bush did his job. Of course his job was only to secure US firmly into Iraq. Had GW, had a third term he would have had us out in the same timeline that Obama has committed, maybe even sooner.

Obama was selected for coronation into power for one reason only. Afghanistan and the need to surge us into another “no back out scenario” With the Taliban we face challenges for sure but everytime we bomb a villiage, mostly women and children, those we do not kill become the thing that justifies the Elite, Corporatists and IMC effort to push the free markets of hell down their throats, much as they did to us a long time ago.

Oh yes, we are free to speak and free to dissent, but we are prisoners of the free market. If you can’t see this, you need to pause and check your bank account, balance sheet and prospects.

BUSH’s IRAQ – OBAMA’s VIETNAM

Afghanistan represents the same situation as Vietnam. Not in terrain but in geography.  Only bush monkeys and tunnel rats could navigate the Dien Bien Phu. But similarly we find the US in another conflict where they cannot fight the enemy under rocks.

South Vietnam was about 67,000 square miles of hills and jungle and at peak in 1969 the US had 550,000 troops in Vietnam and Laos. Whereas Afghanistan has over 251,000 square miles and we currently have roughly 38,000 troops.

Vietnam – 1 troop for every .12 square mile

Afghanistan – 1 troop every 6.6 square miles

Not quite a winning formula, yet the Taliban enemy doesn’t meet the number in Ho Nguyen Tat Thanh’s army. Yet it’s uncanny how we are staged to escalate the troops there for a surge that cannot achieve success. The plan of the New Order must be the same as they had in Vietnam.

A. Stage the Gulf of Tonkin and stage 911 to set the entry into the conflict.

B. Deploy troops in measured movements while lengthening the arms and weapons production for Corporatist profiteers.

C. Root out Communists  – Extremists and Rejectionists and place a democratic capitalist sympathetic government. Not.

We are not fighting an army, a political ideology or a genocidal fascist dictator. We are fighting a shadow that moves around the globe like the shadows of night to day. From the US to the Phillipine Islands, terrorists are present.

Terrorism and the war on terrorism is simply a state sponsored attack at a particular location to allow the state or authority to perpetrate a larger crime, be it pre-emptive war, martial law, human rights violation or simple fear and intimidation. The Corporatists don’t mind, it’s good for business. The governments don’t mind as it gives them a job and it never involves their military service and rarely that of their children. And finally the New Order [bankers] are the ultimate winners.

State sponsored terrorism has been around for a couple hundred years. You have to look at it from a business point of view. Bill has a bank. He makes money loaning money. Zeb has a bomb manufacturing plant and he makes weapons for protection. Bob has left the military, has no job but wants to be rich so he applies for work with Zeb. Bill has loaned Zeb money and Zeb has produced and sold some inventory. That’s great, but Bill wants to loan Zeb some money. Zeb says he doesn’t have the orders to pay the loan. Easy, Bill hires Bob to start a war. Now Zeb has the new orders to pay the loan. Bob runs for office paid for by Bill through Zeb. Bob will get rich and powerful and he won’t forget Bill and his generousity. Bill reminds him that he will hire more Bobs to go through the same ranks as he did. Bob understands. Bob is glad to have other friends that he can relate with. Bob is not a racist. He likes all military types no matter what color they are. They share a tradition of special service.

Bill tells Bob that his friends need to prove themselves and Bob needs to help them and protect them. Bob agrees. Meanwhile Zeb is bringing his friends to Bill and Bill is loaning to all Zebs friends. All Zebs friends are finding Bobs of their own. This goes on until they realize they need to start a fellowship, an organization, a private club for all members. So they meet and make their charter and begin their club. A group made up of nothing but “BillZebBobs”

As Obama [Bob] has a membership in the club, we can look forward to eighteen more months of Iraq, followed by an Afghanistan escalation and another LBJ Vietnam followed by another election of a Bob and another location for the club to initiate. Without reservation I state that we would be better off outside of the Middle East and outside the influence of the club.

We can take our chances and wait for the club to make the mistake and get caught with their hands in the cookie jar or if America can’t grasp the idea of electing a Ron Paul or Ralph Nader next time, we will be in conflict for eternity while we watch our friends and families die.

We can continue to watch our tax dollars go to the club members who loan it back to us at high interest while they play us for fools in the halls where once great men stood. Please see Robert Greenwalds “Why I am going to Afghanistan”