Posts Tagged ‘terrorism’
Coming off the heels of the 8-year anniversary of 9/11, now insidiously dubbed “Patriots Day,” I think it important for Americans to seriously question our outlook on terrorism. Indeed, September 11, 2001 was a tragic day for our nation’s history. However, I believe we as a nation should look to the acts committed on 9/11 as a way to connect with the rest of the world, which seems to bare the brunt of all atrocious acts we hear about on a daily basis.
I would first like to point out that I believe it takes a skeptical mind to tackle the true definition of terrorism. Relatively speaking, one person could view a violent act as terrorism while another could view it as honorable. So it is important to understand the motive behind any violent act if we have any hope of entering a peaceful world.
It is no stretch for one to conclude that terrorism has replaced socialism as the new perceived threat to America. Our government has found it exponentially more convenient to use mythical terrorist threats to scare US citizens into saluting the flag and pledging support for all horrendous atrocities being carried out in our names. These scare tactics are to be expected post Cold War because America needs a new reason to justify its empire, as well as its increasing control over the lives of the population. However, a recent court case has me questioning the arbitrary definition our government has placed on terrorism.
According to Al Jazeera, A US court recently sentenced the former heads of the charity organization Holy Land Foundation to 65 years in prison for providing funds to Hamas. Prosecutors claimed that the charity was spreading Hamas ideology by providing aid to its schools, hospitals, and social welfare programs inside Palestinian territories. They also accused the charity of allowing Hamas to fund its fighting with the charitable donations. Bush labeled this case another battle in the War on Terror. However, while I would not agree with this charity funding Hamas’s violent actions, the case does expose the hypocrisy of the US government in dealing with Israel and Palestine.
The leading advocate for liberty in Congress discusses the dubious history of the Federal Reserve System and the dangers of the Afghanistan War.
The Missouri Information Analysis Center recently released a report to over 1,000 of its law enforcement officials warning that “violent” militia members are usually supporters of Ron Paul and Campaign for Liberty. Oh yea, they are also usually characterized by their support of the Constitution.
So there you have it! It has finally been done. The men and women of America who actually believe in and support the US Constitution have been labeled terrorist threats! One state down, 49 to go.
This comes, of course, on the eve of the UM Constitutionalists trip to St. Louis, Missouri to attend the Campaign for Liberty Regional Conference. We are now considered terrorist threats in the state we are about to enter, I wonder if we will be arrested with no charges, sent to Bagram Base in Afghanistan and tortured by Obama’s watchmen.
If you want to read the story on this go here: http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20090317.html
Also, please sign C4L’s pledge in response to this ridiculous report. Go here: http://www.campaignforliberty.com/campaigns/citizenspetition.php
President Obama recently stated that he was going to move 100,000 troops from Iraq to Afghanistan. In no particular order, I tried to justify the most common reasons for continued occupation:
1. To Capture Osama/Al Qaeda: While it is clear Bin Laden is no where near Afghanistan (and why would he be, he’s not even from there), someone in the country might know where he is. Also, none of the 9/11 terrorists were from Afghanistan, and the bulk of Al Qaeda is spread amongst 45 different countries (according to CIA reports). Therefore, a surge is needed in Afghanistan to enable us to move to the next country harboring Al Qaeda terrorists. If the occupation’s true intention is to capture and kill all of Al Qaeda, why would we ignore their presence in the other 44 countries? Al Qaeda in Afghanistan are just as dangerous as Al Qaeda in Pakistan or Saudi Arabia, one of which is housing Osama and the other produced nearly all of the 9/11 terrorists.
2. Eliminate Terrorism: Terrorism can not be eliminated if there are no terrorists to eliminate. Since Al Qaeda is using our occupation as a recruiting tool, it is likely our evacuation would reduce the amount of terrorists (violent dissenters) available to eliminate. Thus, only by continuing our occupation can we create enough terrorists to be able to wage a war to eliminate terrorism.
In a recent article, Senator Fritz Hollings asks a very important question: Why are we in Afghanistan?
After years of brutal failure in Iraq, you think the US would have learned its lesson when it comes to fighting wars which have no good rational behind them. So just why exactly do we need more troops in Afghanistan?
Killing Innocent People is the Problem, Not the Solution: Syria Condemns US Attack as “Terrorist Aggression”
Who are the bad guys? Who are the terrorists in the “war on terror?” This week, the terrorists are hiding behind stars and stripes and the most overbearing military in the history of the world. It does not come easily for me to admit this, but the most recent attack by the US military proves that our foreign policy in the absurd “war on terror” contains repulsive acts of terror itself.
How do you think the White House would perceive an attack on American soil from Syrian planes, assuming Syria did not seek permission from the US government beforehand? Would Americans justify the deaths of eight fellow countrymen so long as Syria claimed it was acting out of self-defense, perhaps aiming for Christian Fundamentalists? This is a ridiculous proposition. The attack would be considered terrorism and the US media would endorse the government’s perception of Syria as “evil.” Syria would become a sandy parking lot in a matter of hours. The anti-Islamic sentiment in the US would explode, support of “shock and awe” military tactics would approach consensus, and Americans would be terrified. Why should we expect a different sentiment among Syrians?
Seven weeks after illegally dropping bombs in Pakistan and killing dozens of civilians, the Bush Administration is at again. Eight Syrian civilians were killed in broad daylight by US bombers. Understandably, Syria is outraged. Bush’s trigger-happy days are still in full gear, making the world an even more violent, polarized, anti-American place. Yet another preemptive strike under the guise of “self-defense” has been committed with fighter jets and soldiers bearing our flag. OUR flag, not the war-mongers’ in the White House who disgrace it time and time again. The symbol of our flag has already lost much of its prestige internationally, and this week will only exacerbate the fading of the stars and stripes that once gleamed so brilliantly in a free and prosperous land. It’s time we take our flag back and restore its dignity. It’s time for a new foreign policy, or rather, an old foreign policy that has been abandoned by ambitious tyrants who continue to disgrace our nation. We the People of the United States cannot allow our politicians to start any more wars. It is in our best interest, our children’s best interest, the WORLD’S best interest to put an end to this military madness! It is our duty to say, “no more!” and do whatever we can to curtail the ill-fated path of the government’s quest for world domination. The time for action is now!
Read the rest of this entry »
So the debate has come and gone and while we no longer have the ability to walk around on campus with a high probability of being interviewed, we have been left with a few memorable moments. I personally didn’t find anything either candidate said during the debate laudable. However, I now believe my suspicion about their foreign issue stances to be affirmed. That suspension was that their foreign policy is nearly identical.
I have for a long time now been totally ashamed of American foreign policy. I am ashamed, not just because it doesn’t work in accomplishing its goals, but because it shows a complete lack of respect for human life. If I asked you how many countries we are involved in hostile relations with, how many would you guess? To tell you the truth, I am not even sure of the number. However, I know that right now we are still involved in a war in Iraq. We also have the blood of thousands of Somalians on our hands after we paid and trained the Ethiopian army to invade Somalia and overthrow their government. This crisis has been called one of the worst humanitarian disasters in the world today with tens of thousands killed and millions left homeless. We’re constantly threatening Iran and are chomping at the bits to attack them. We’re picking a fight with Russia for retaliating against Georgian advances into South Ossetia. We want to send more troops into Afghanistan, and we’re beginning to pick a fight with Pakistan for not allowing the US to kill anymore innocent Pakistani civilians. Are we insane? Do we not think people within these countries are going to react negatively toward our actions? These are human beings we are murdering.
With all of these issues weighing on my mind, I get frustrated when people ask me how I felt about the debate. I honestly didn’t see much of one. Did Obama or McCain address the crisis we created in Somalia? Not to my knowledge. Where was the disagreement over what should be done about Russia? Did either of the candidates admit Georgia actually started the conflict or suggest ceasing with the threats in order to prevent a reemergence of the Cold War?
I think the most shocking moment of the debate to me was when Obama, talking about Pakistan’s unwillingness to aid in capturing Bin Laden or other Al Qaeda members, said, “If Pakistan is unable or unwilling to act, then we should take them out.” This is a sign to all you Obama supporters who think he is the peace candidate. If you look at the situation in Pakistan, you will understand why this comment he made is totally abhorrent. The main reason Pakistan has been pushing back against helping the US is because their country is falling apart due to all the bombings we are initiating inside their territory. So maybe we kill a few Al Qaeda leaders here and there, but how many innocent civilians are being killed during these bombings? How long do you think Americans would put up with another country bombing us in order to kill a few enemies of theirs? I believe the US would have launched a retaliation strike before the first bomb hit our soil, yet these people have been putting up with it for years now. Why is it that we can murder innocent people but nobody in foreign countries can even burn our flag without Americans talking about how evil they are?
Now, Obama is saying he is going to send troops into Pakistan. Pakistan is already threatening to retaliate against the US because we have been killing Pakistani civilians in cross-border attacks, yet Obama is going to provoke a nuclear armed country by sending troops within their territory against their will. This could start a Vietnam type war except this time our opponent would have nuclear weapons. That is a war the Bush Administration would have trouble dreaming up, yet people see this man as the anti-war candidate. Of course the response McCain gave to Obama launching military strikes into Pakistan was, “You don’t say that out loud.” Lord help us!
Americans need to begin seeing the people we kill in reality. Thousands of people are dying at the hands of our government, and they are not our enemies. These people are innocent civilians, and we have sunken to the level of threatening to attack other countries because they are finally saying they will no longer allow us to murder its citizens.