#2
Nice for an also-have, but I prefer God, Madonna, + My Ancestors, some of whom I's heard or talked with in death's spirit before I'd actually met them in life, + are still alive.
Then there's that whole Jedi-Sith Tele/Psychokinesis thingy + other.
I urge President Obama to ban firearm possession in America. He is the president of the United States. He can change the country. He can do it today. I believe in him. Me, too. I believe Obama is an existential threat to personal liberty and to the nation.
I voted for Barack Obama. Twice. During his 2008 presidential campaign, my two daughters, partner, and I ate every meal in our house on Obama placemats. We bought these at our local supermarket, plastic-coated, plate-sized paper rectangles with an image of his face framed by colors of the flag. While politically minded, I am not overly patriotic, so this mealtime ritual of American allegiance was odd for me. Still, we looked at the image of his face each day and we believed that he really could be the change in America. "Not overly patriotic" is a tremendous understatement, you treacherous egghead. Your worship of a miscreant who is only part of the problem nationwide destroying personal freedom is quaint as something to ridicule and revile.
As Obama’s 2012 campaign approached, I was a little jaded. Some of his promises to our country did not come true, and I was anxious about rising social tensions he and his administration faced. Racial inequality plagued the news, gender-based violence grew in global proportion, and women’s reproductive freedoms had become increasingly vulnerable. We don't read the same publications, I guess.
Still, I did not waver. I dug into our old dining room cupboards, and found our worn but resilient Obama placements. I dusted them off, and once again, my family and I ate all of our meals looking at his image. I would have to add a small aperitif, such as 1.75 liters of Smirnoff, neat, in order to choke down food looking at his mug on something other than a post office wall.
In his presidency, we still imagined a country on the edge of change.
Today, I write this letter with a bleeding heart. I admire Obama. But he has let me down. I am disappointed because his presidency could have done more for our country, and sadly, the many taken lives who cannot read this essay. A fair number of them your former students, I s'pect.
I still worry about urgent social tensions facing our nation, and I recognize their ongoing complexities in policy and legislative action. But gun violence can be averted. Can our country ever be free from senseless gun-crime? When is "gun crime" ever sensible?
Firearm possession should be banned in America; President Obama can orchestrate this directive. His presidency can be remembered as a remarkable turn in United States history where a progressive leader forever changed the landscape under which we live and work. This is his legacy. To establish gun control laws in America that will reduce high levels of male violence and usher in a culture of peace and civility. Pile them even higher. Increase the number from the 20,000 laws we currently have to 40,000. It will make no difference. Gun control laws fail on so many levels and on the fundamental level it fails the test of "Consent of the Governed". If you look at the most recent infringements on gun ownership passed by the legislatures in New York, Connecticut, Oregon and Washington, you will see implementation of those laws as a massive failure. Laws which fail the test of "consent of the governed" serve only the government, not the people those laws are supposed to serve; they make gun owners criminals in the eyes of the population at large, and by the specific directive of fascists such as this teacher.
Barack Obama is the president of the United States. He can change the country. He can do it today. I believe in him.
#1
Barack Obama is the president of the United States. He can change the country. He can do it today. I believe in him.
I will be so glad when Jan 20, 2017 rolls around. The worst part is having to hear the simpering tone of worship coming from these mental defectives. *retch*
#2
Nguard - I'd be happy to put up with the tone. It means that BO is leaving lawfully. My guess is he will try to suspend elections "for our safety" and remain in power.
#3
If Clinton is the Dem nominee and is indicted, the Dems will scream foul and demand an election postponement. Obama has the power to timeline such an event. The "third term" trial balloons have already been released. Clinton laughs at media questions pertaining to Benghazi and the emails, meanwhile Slick plays golf with Obama. Could the fix be in ?
Obama has never stopped his political fund raising activities and the witless Joe Biden has initiated his own 'would be off-set' fund raising exploratory effort sans 2016 election commitment.
Failing any other legacy, the only third term president since FDR.
[Hurriyet Daily News] Now I know how it feels to be hopeless! There is nothing left to be said: The Sick Man of Europe Turkey ...the only place on the face of the earth that misses the Ottoman Empire.... is fast heading toward destruction! Even after the latest tragedy in Ankara, nothing has changed: there is no remorse, no sensibility, no sobriety and no dignity from the president and his party.
Business goes on as usual; everybody else but the government is responsible for the grave atrocity, according to government party supporters.
"If you blame me [President Recep Tayyip Erdogan ... Turkey's version of Mohammed Morsi but they voted him back in so they deserve him... ], you are with terrorists," he said, in his own words. After that, it emerged that the bombers were members of the Islamic State ...formerly ISIS or ISIL, depending on your preference. Before that al-Qaeda in Iraq, as shaped by Abu Musab Zarqawi. They're very devout, committing every atrocity they can find in the Koran and inventing a few more. They fling Allah around with every other sentence, but to hear the pols talk they're not really Moslems.... of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), but "wait a minute, there is a press ban on the news for the sake of inquiries." Then, government circles started to claim that "maybe it is a PKK, or at least a joint ISIL-PKK operation." If the question is, "Is it possible for those who are fighting each other in Syria to engage in a joint venture in Turkey?" Here is the answer: "Why not, after all, they are both enemies of Turkey."
This is what you read, hear and are supposed to be convinced about regarding the devastating blast that killed more than 100 in Ankara. If you are unconvinced, "you are no better than the snuffies and are part of a great plot against Turkey;" indeed, it is the great powers that are behind the plot to destroy Turkey, even when they are supposedly our allies and friends. If the question is, "Why are our so-called friends all against us?" then the answer is also ready: "Well, it is a long story which begins with the Crusaders; it's a war against Islam. They managed to destroy the Ottomans and now Turkey's rise frightens them, so they are doing everything to stop it."
If you ask "what 'rise' are you talking about?" here is the answer for those "who are unaware of the importance of Turkey": "Under the leadership of Erdogan, the rules of the game started to change. Erdogan is the only modern Muslim leader who challenged the imperialistic West, that is why they are trying everything to silence him: the end of Erdogan is the end of Turkey; the end of Turkey is the end of the Muslim world. This time, they will not succeed!"
Imagine you live under the rule of those who believe in this narrative. Their worldview is a blend of conspiratorialism, nationalistic paranoia, xenophobia and a Dire Revengeful kind of nostalgia. Since the leadership and majority of the AKP's supporters are genuine believers, it is scary to think that a considerable portion of the country that you live in has this sort of mindset. There are also those careerists who have nothing to do with Islamism and/or nationalism but pretend to be converts. It is not only something scary but also sickening. It is the most difficult part of life under authoritarian rule and in times of crises; it is a paradise for sycophants, opportunists and hypocrites and, contrastingly, a hell for anybody who cares about human integrity and dignity.
After all, it was a Western-educated, Western-oriented, female academic who recently became the European Union ...the successor to the Holy Roman Empire, only without the Hapsburgs and the nifty uniforms and the dancing... minister that claimed that "there are great powers behind this," referring to the Ankara blasts. So, often you have to choose between an idiot and a hypocrite, between a narrow-minded person and an opportunist or between a fanatic and a lunatic.
Now I know how it feels to become "cynical" -- something that I have politically despised for so long! Now I know how it feels to be defeated.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/19/2015 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The military had to impose a non-religious government. It is only a matter of time until it has to do it again.
Posted by: Sven the pelter ||
10/19/2015 0:30 Comments ||
Top||
#2
True, the military is the only thing that (repeatedly) has kept Turkey from being Yet Another Islamic Mess, but can they do it again? Erdogan has devoted quite a bit of effort to making sure it won't happen by purging the higher ranks.
[Hurriyet Daily News] The legal restrictions imposed on the media over news of the Oct. 10 Ankara suicide kabooms - in which the number of deaths hit 102 on Oct. 16 (with many heavily maimed victims still in hospital) - did not work well this time.
Despite possible legal probes, most newspapers (including pro-government ones) have started to report the details of the blast - the bloodiest terrorist attack in The Sick Man of Europe Turkey ...the only place on the face of the earth that misses the Ottoman Empire.... 's history. It was clear from the second day onward that one of the two jacket wallahs might be Yunus Emre Alagöz, the brother of the bomber (Seyh Abdurrahman Alagöz) who killed 34 people including himself in Suruc on July 20. The two suspects were part of the same entourage at the "Islam Tea House" in the southeastern town of Adiyaman, together with another Islamic State
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
10/19/2015 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under: Islamic State
[Hurriyet Daily News] The bomb in Suruc went kaboom! on July 20. The Sick Man of Europe Turkey ...the only place on the face of the earth that misses the Ottoman Empire.... opened Incirlik airbase to the United States with a telephone conversation between U.S. President Barack Obama I am the change that you seek... and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
10/19/2015 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under: Islamic State
[WeaselZippers] The debate about whether the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action with Iran regarding its nuclear program stabilized the Middle East's strategic framework had barely begun when the region's geopolitical framework collapsed. Russia's unilateral military action in Syria is the latest symptom of the disintegration of the American role in stabilizing the Middle East order that emerged from the Arab-Israeli war of 1973.
In the aftermath of that conflict, Egypt abandoned its military ties with the Soviet Union and joined an American-backed negotiating process that produced peace treaties between Israel and Egypt, and Israel and Jordan, a United Nations-supervised disengagement agreement between Israel and Syria, which has been observed for over four decades (even by the parties of the Syrian civil war), and international support of Lebanon's sovereign territorial integrity. Later, Saddam Hussein's war to incorporate Kuwait into Iraq was defeated by an international coalition under U.S. leadership. American forces led the war against terror in Iraq and Afghanistan. Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf States were our allies in all these efforts. The Russian military presence disappeared from the region.
That geopolitical pattern is now in shambles. Four states in the region have ceased to function as sovereign. Libya, Yemen, Syria and Iraq have become targets for nonstate movements seeking to impose their rule. Over large swaths in Iraq and Syria, an ideologically radical religious army has declared itself the Islamic State (also called ISIS or ISIL) as an unrelenting foe of established world order. It seeks to replace the international system's multiplicity of states with a caliphate, a single Islamic empire governed by Shariah law.
ISIS' claim has given the millennium-old split between the Shiite and Sunni sects of Islam an apocalyptic dimension. The remaining Sunni states feel threatened by both the religious fervor of ISIS as well as by Shiite Iran, potentially the most powerful state in the region. Iran compounds its menace by presenting itself in a dual capacity. On one level, Iran acts as a legitimate Westphalian state conducting traditional diplomacy, even invoking the safeguards of the international system. At the same time, it organizes and guides nonstate actors seeking regional hegemony based on jihadist principles: Hezbollah in Lebanon and Syria; Hamas in Gaza; the Houthis in Yemen. Paywall to originating WSJ article.
#1
I seem to remember another time and another region with tens of thousands of Americans dead, and an American pull-out leading to disaster. Is this Kissinger's 'shambles' frame of reference ?
[Yahoo] Why does the United States shy away from confronting Pakistan about its continued export of terrorism? The simple answer is nukes. Pakistan has been steadily increasing fissile material for its nuclear stockpile and now produces enough for between 16 and 20 warheads per year. Its justification was initially New Delhi's nuclear program, except that India produces material for only around 5 warheads per year. India has a stockpile of an estimated 90 to 110 warheads in reserve; Pakistan is thought to have between 110 and 130 (though some experts believe it's possible "to calculate a number twice this size"). But it's not an arms race if only one party is racing.
Since seeking nuclear parity with India now has little credibility as an excuse, Pakistan has resorted to several flimsy reasons to justify its nuclear expansion. The one that gained the most traction blames an Indian Army doctrine, Cold Start, which would have involved punitive incursions into Pakistan following a terrorist attack. The Indian Army certainly considered Cold Start in 2004 -- but the Indian military or government never formally adopted it. Pakistani strategists, many with ties to the military, have also blamed India's defense spending, military modernization, and even its purportedly belligerent rhetoric as reasons for Islamabad to rely on nuclear weapons to compensate for the growing disparity between the two countries. These have never been more than convenient pretexts for a Pakistani nuclear arms buildup.
The real reason for Pakistan's nuclear expansion isn't India -- it's for blackmailing the United States. So fearful has Washington been of Pakistan's nukes being sold, stolen, lost, sabotaged, or accidentally used that during George W. Bush's administration, it reportedly spent as much as $100 million trying to secure the arsenal. Since 2001, the Pakistan Army has also received more than $20 billion in military support from the United States, even as it has continued to support groups like the Haqqani network that have killed hundreds of Americans. This is the greatest shakedown in history.
What makes this ploy all the more brilliant is that the blackmail victim doesn't even realize it.
#2
Yeah really someone spends billions of dollars on nuclear weapons to take a chance on getting 100 million in foreign aid?
I would suggest a possible reason maybe Saudi Arabia which is said to have funded Pakistan’s continued expansion of its nuclear stockpile in return for a guarantee that Pakistan would provide Saudi Arabia with a weapon or a nuclear shield in the case of Iran getting a bomb.
#3
for a guarantee that Pakistan would provide Saudi Arabia with a weapon or a nuclear shield
That may have been the plan, but the Saudis must now be feeling uncertain about that guarantee, given Pakistan's refusal to provide troops for SA's Yemen adventure.
[FrontPage] ...Terrorism can never be defeated by fighting terrorists. Combine massive wealth in some parts of the Middle East with staggering poverty in other parts and the supply of mercenaries is nearly endless. Syrian Jihadists are being paid $150 a month by QatarÍž a good salary for an unskilled laborer in a region where life is cheap and every family has plenty of surplus sons and mouths to feed. A barrel of oil can buy the services of a killer for a month and Qatar pumps out millions of barrels a day.
Terrorism is cheap for the sponsors, profitable for the participants and hideously expensive for the targets. A soldier in a First World nation can cost six figures. For that same amount, a backward oil tyranny can field a hundred men. When those hundred men kill a soldier, then his nation will be heartbroken and question the costs of war. When those hundred men die, their mothers will ceremonially wail and cry out for more martyrs to avenge them. And the terror will go on.
Islam makes the process easier. Like Palestinian nationalism, it is a war machine whose ideas lubricate the recruitment, rampages and replenishment of fresh cannon fodder for the wars of the old rich men of the region.
That difference in attitude and ideology is at the heart of the power imbalance. As long as that imbalance exists, then a hundred poorly trained fighters who can hardly shoot without killing themselves will still edge the Army of One.
...Muslims have gone from nonentities in the Western political sphere to huge power players not through oil, but through the terror that they bought with that oil. Americans paid little attention to Muslims until September 11. Since then Muslims have been flattered and promoted, their political interests have been pandered to and their leaders have gained an enormous amount of influence. Not only has all this pandering failed to stop terrorism, it has instead provided a compelling motive for more terrorism.
Terrorism saw its field test in Israel where it successfully disrupted the national way of life. And then that weapon was deployed on a large scale in New York, Washington DC, London and Madrid.
...Until we accept that the terrorists matter less than their sponsors, we will be stuck fighting terrorism without end.
[Daily Caller] Ted Cruz says Barack Obama is "an apologist for radical Islamic terrorists" and that Libya, under dictator Muammar Gaddafi, was "better for US interests than the chaos now." Yet another Rantburg plagiarism.
Cruz, appearing on NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday insisted, "Look, toppling Gaddafi, Gaddafi was a bad guy but you know what? Libya is an absolute chaos and war zone where jihadists are battling back and forth and here's."
Host Chuck Todd asked Cruz, "Would the Middle East be more stable today if you had the strong men there?" Cruz replied, "Of course, it would. Of course, it would. It-- it wasn't even close."
Todd continued to press Cruz, "Gaddafi, Saddam, Assad, if they're strong men, they keep stability?" Cruz responded, "It wasn't even close that Libya under Gaddafi was better for US interests than the chaos now that is allowed jihadists to gain strength."
Todd then asked Cruz, "What about Iraq under Saddam?" Cruz responded, "It-- it wasn't-- it wasn't even close." Cruz then used the example of Egypt suggesting, "It wasn't even close that Egypt under Mubarak was a much stronger ally than it was under Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood. And now you have President El-Sisi. You know, one of the things that I've talked about many times, President El-Sisi, I'm very glad he's leading Egypt. He's been one of the most courageous Middle East leaders."
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[WeaselZippers] The debate about whether the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action with Iran regarding its nuclear program stabilized the Middle East's strategic framework had barely begun when the region's geopolitical framework collapsed. Russia's unilateral military action in Syria is the latest symptom of the disintegration of the American role in stabilizing the Middle East order that emerged from the Arab-Israeli war of 1973.
[Yahoo] Why does the United States shy away from confronting Pakistan about its continued export of terrorism? The simple answer is nukes. Pakistan has been steadily increasing fissile material for its nuclear stockpile and now produces enough for between 16 and 20 warheads per year. Its justification was initially New Delhi's nuclear program, except that India produces material for only around 5 warheads per year. India has a stockpile of an estimated 90 to 110 warheads in reserve; Pakistan is thought to have between 110 and 130 (though some experts believe it's possible "to calculate a number twice this size"). But it's not an arms race if only one party is racing.
