[MAIL] A small earthquake shook the greater Los Angeles metropolitan area Friday night, but there weren't any immediate reports of major damage or injuries.
The magnitude-4.3 quake struck shortly after 7:58 p.m. and was centered near Carson, about 21 miles (34 kilometers) southeast of downtown LA, according to preliminary information from the U.S. Geological Survey website.
Its depth was reported at about 9 miles (14 kilometers), the USGS reported.
Some people reported feeling a jolt ranging from a moment to several seconds across the area. It was felt in neighboring cities, including Santa Monica, Torrance and Beverly Hills.
There were reports of a fire breaking out at an oil refinery in Carson, but a Carson city official later explained that flames seen leaping into the sky were part of a 'controlled flaring.'
As a youngster, being a fan of sci-fi apocalypses, I was saddened to learn that the west side of the San Andreas fault was not going to fall into the ocean, but was merely headed north, riding on the Pacific plate.
[American Mind] I reject the terms of surrender offered by Jason D. Hill in his essay "Freedom From ’Blackness,’" recently published in The American Mind, in which he demands that blacks renounce their racial identity and "become a psychologically raceless people and open ourselves to the luminous potential of man and a new birth to the black individual as an individual."
I’m not renouncing a damned thing about my life and heritage in the United States. Professor Hill calls on black Americans to empty themselves of any human identification. He supposes this will make us pioneers of a new "planetary ethic." This proposal is religious in nature. He wants blacks to be the new man of the new creation promised in the Christian Bible, but he wants to arrive at that glorified humanity without the Second Coming of Christ. Hill sounds like Saint Paul: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." Or, to look at it from another perspective, he wants to remake blacks in the image of Homo Sovieticus, starting over at Year One.
Hill presents a warped view of black history and then can’t imagine why blacks embrace it. He pretends the only reason blacks coalesce around a "self hating form of identification" is a "fetishized history." But if Professor Hill weren’t in such a rush to bring about the new Eden he might have examined the motivations of the actual black leaders who were trying to save a people from an overwhelming flood of hatred. Richard Allen, for instance—a prominent black leader in the late-eighteenth century and founder of the African Methodist Episcopal church—said what knits the cause of blacks, from the prosperous and educated to the poor and discarded, is the "bond of suffering and wrong."
Hill’s polemic is also flawed for what it omits. Black Americans have no tribal affiliation. We’re not Masai, Yoruba, or Zulu. We assume whatever political moniker is affixed to us—from Colored to Negro to African American—but we are Americans foremost. Certainly the rest of the world sees us as Americans. The black soldiers I know who served multiple tours in Iraq and Afghanistan can reliably report that when the bullets were flying on the battlefield the jihadis aiming the AK-47s their way certainly thought of them as American. Even wrongheaded and easily manipulated black athletes, from John Carlos and Tommie Smith to Colin Kaepernick, who took a stand against the flag did so because they wanted more of what they conceive to be America—not more of what they conceive of as being black.
American citizenship is our birthright. It rightly offends us when we think it is being denied. Throw away our particular American blackness and you throw away what makes us exceptional. It is odd that Professor Hill made no mention of the very real amor patria black Americans possess. Why not? Has he internalized the racist belief that blacks can never be fully American? Is he projecting his own black self-hatred onto the distant, dumb blacks he psychoanalyzes in his piece? That’s an uncharitable reading, but one worth considering because Hill wouldn’t be the first black in an elite position to look out in despair at the condition of his people and consider them too hopeless to continue as constituted and too embarrassing to be counted as the civil equals of white Americans.
If you still MUST add a Hyphenation in front of it...
Then you might need to visit your Great-Great Grandparents homeland and see why they left or why they still would have it a helluva lot better here than there.
eg. My Grandparents on my fathers side, were sold as indentured labor to a mill in 1898, located Chicoppe, Mass.
If they did not work out the agreed on ## years indentured period, they knew family back in the home country would have been beaten and more.
Never once did I hear them or my Ret. Army CSM father put ____- before American.
[FOX] Aug. 18, 2021 - 3:37 - Investigative journalist Lara Logan has spent her career reporting on various wars and conflicts. Now, she's sitting down with Tucker Carlson for an in-depth analysis of what’s happening in Afghanistan.
^ She's a smart attractive and articulate lady. Perhaps she's not gonna back down. I like her
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/18/2021 10:16 Comments ||
That was worth every second of watching, and sent me to look up the multiple shuras Ms Logan mentions, which led me to a Herald Dawn (Pakistan) article from a few years ago:
Over the years, despite maintaining its ideological coherence, the insurgency has fragmented as its loci of operations have expanded from the south and the east into northern and western Afghanistan. This ‘fragmentation’ has manifested itself in the shape of disputes over the makeup of the central leadership (Quetta Shura), creation of separate governance and control structures and different viewpoints over negotiations with Kabul. Decentralisation and differences of opinion have always existed but the public acknowledgement of Mullah Omer’s death has accentuated the broader fragmentation dynamic, especially along regional lines.
According to a recent report, the insurgency has four main shuras (Quetta Shura, Mashhad Shura, Shura of the North and the Rasool Shura) — a form of leadership council that presides over and controls different Taliban organisations. The ‘old guard’ is based out of the Quetta Shura that has authority over the Miranshah Shura (primarily the Haqqani Network) and the Peshawar Shura. A first source of factionalism can be identified in the divergence of opinions and the emergence of dissidents within this arrangement.
In 2007, the Miranshah Shura declared independence from the Quetta Shura and in 2009 the Peshawar Shura followed suit. The Peshawar Shura, beleaguered by financial difficulties without the support of the central leadership, re-joined in 2016. The Haqqanis re-joined in 2015, only after Sirajuddin Haqqani was promised the role of deputy leader within the Quetta Shura. As of 2017, there seemed to be an ongoing struggle for monopolising control of the Quetta Shura between Haibatullah Akhundzada, his predecessor’s cousin Obaidullah Ishaqzai, and the increasingly dominant Sirajudin Haqqani.
Antonio Giustozzi (who has had access to the leadership of the various shuras and authored the report mentioned earlier), reported that Haibatullah was willing to negotiate with the government and expand non-military activities. On the other hand, hardliners Sirajudin and Obaidullah opposed reconciliation with Kabul and held opposition to attempts by some to open up to Iran.
A second and more prominent feature of the fragmentation is the increasing regional autonomy between the various shuras. At the leadership level, none of the other shuras recognise the authority of the Quetta Shura completely. The Shura of the North only occasionally consults and cooperates with the Quetta Shura and usually only for large-scale military manoeuvres. It cooperates much more readily with the Mashhad Shura. Between 2015 and 2017 the Rasool Shura (that refuses allegiance to Quetta Shura’s leadership) and the Quetta Shura engaged in armed clashes against one another.
The Quetta Shura blamed the Rasool Shura of being pro-negotiations. In an interview in 2015, then leader of the Rasool Shura, Mullah Rasool, stated that he was not opposed to negotiations with Kabul in principle, but was critical of the monopolisation of the peace process by the Quetta Shura and the levy this allowed to the Pakistani authorities. Furthermore, the governance structures the insurgency has employed have also been run separately by the respective shuras. For instance, the Quetta Shura, the Rasool Shura and the Shura of the North have their own respective military, justice and education commissions.
The internal political crisis in Afghanistan, including the one caused by the flight of the United States, fundamentally changed the conditions for the further existence of the CSTO. For the first time in two decades, the participants were required to fulfill their obligations and adhere to the principles underlying the very concept of collective security.
The fact that the overwhelming majority of the session was held in a closed regime for journalists indicates the magnitude of the difficulties and discrepancies that have arisen. However, judging by the well-known results, it was still possible to overcome a significant part of the disagreements.
As a result of the work, the parties signed 14 final documents, of which at least six indicate the deepening of integration and the gradual transfer of the CSTO from a purely political to a collective defensive status.
Although it is too early to talk about complete success, however:
- an agreement on joint material, technical and medical support of the collective forces of the CSTO.
- a plan for equipping them with modern weapons, military and special equipment, special means.
- decision on the scheme of a secure multiservice communication network of the CSTO.
- the decision on the chief of the Joint Staff.
- decision on the composition of military contingents and the formation of special forces of the Collective Rapid Reaction Forces
point to the gradual creation of real military instruments of a collective nature and the structure of their practical use. What can be considered an undoubted success on the way to modernizing the mechanism of the Organization.
In addition, two other fundamental points should be considered positive.
First, the parties agreed on the need for collective participation in the solution of the task of strengthening the Tajik-Afghan border, which has a length of 1,344 km and in many sections passes through hard-to-reach mountainous terrain.
However, so far this agreement is of the most general nature. Tajikistan introduced a certain package of proposals, formalized in the form of a draft Interstate Target Program, which the other participants agreed to "consider and accept as quickly as possible."
Secondly, the CSTO members approved a plan for holding a series of military exercises of the Collective Forces in Tajikistan: Search-2021, Echelon-2021, Interaction-2021 and Cobalt-2021, organized according to a single operational concept.
The first of which is scheduled for October. Although the amount of forces and means involved for its implementation is still unknown, but it is unlikely to be very large. Nevertheless, this will already serve as a significant help in strengthening the security of the Tajik border with Afghanistan.
And most importantly, at the last session it was possible to come up with a mechanism for integrating the CSTO into the UN international security system.
Translated into Russian, this opens the CSTO the opportunity to form collective peacekeeping forces not only on behalf of a regional state (and the CSTO is primarily a regional treaty), but also on behalf of the United Nations. Thus, the channel of Western intervention in the Central Asian region is cut off, allegedly on behalf of "the entire international community."
Summarizing the above, the CSTO summit that took place can be considered generally successful. However, much remains to be done to transform the Organization into a truly effective collective defense mechanism.
Elena Panina is Director of the RUSSTRAT Institute
[NewsNationNow] Proposal to close ‘tax gap’ could give IRS more information about your bank account
Many financial institutions this week, have been warning their customers of a New IRS Account Tracking Proposal.
On the surface it looks like a hunt by Congress for Tax and Spend money. But when reading it deeper, it seems clear, it would allow the IRS to lower the account tracking threshold to $600 and also wants to collect"transaction activities".
Using the adage "Give the Fed's and Inch, they'll take a Mile".
I think (and I will cheerfully confess to error on this) that the end point of this is to track cash transactions, specifically deposits. After all, if you're pulling in money from an under-the-table job, Uncle Sam's not getting his vig, is he now?
And since all checks are now scanned, if you're seen to be writing lotsa checks to someone/something, they're going to take a look at you too.
In the end, it seems to me that you can have as much income as you want, as long as it's from 'approved' sources and you can spend as much as you want, as long as it's at 'approved' places and under 'approved' circumstances. Direct debit for utilities, mortgages, and loans will be the standard whether you want it or not, and you might want to keep receipts if you spend anywhere except the grocery store.
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
09/18/2021 9:31 Comments ||
After another couple rounds of this inflation $ 600.00 will be the price of a happy meal.
Proposing is easy. Passing actual bills in both Houses of Congress that can go to the president for his signature is much harder.
Given that Congress doesn’t seem able to pass even their highly touted multi-trillion dollar budget bills, I suspect this is more wishful thinking than a serious threat on the lawmakers’ side, and overexcited reporting by News Nation Now.
Don't forget, Congress has drooling over private retirement funds like Kamala Harris at a fundraiser for decades. Just think of what it can do with all that funding! Much better than your foolish and selfish decisions! Why it can give everyone an equal and fair retirement!
[NY Post] By Lt. Gen. (ret) Keith Kellogg
Commenting on the recent events by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is not easy for me. For much of his career, Mark Milley served with distinction and honor. I worked hand-in-hand with him during my four years in the White House and I’d like to think we built a rapport based on mutual respect. It is hard to separate that man from the one who has emerged these last months, alongside the alleged actions he has not denied.
Civilian control of the military is enshrined in our Constitution. Article 2, Section 2 is extraordinarily clear — a civilian leader, the elected president, is commander in chief. His senior advisers provide input toward decisions involving use of force and the role of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is to provide his best military advice. He is an advisor who executes the commander in chief’s commands, not the other way around.
Any action on the part of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs that gives the impression that he has traveled outside his lane, however slight, should be met with swift and severe recourse. This is not political; this is about the preservation of our democracy. Resign or be fired. Either way, credibility, honor, and trust is GONE
Unfortunately, recent comments by many in the media, including retired military officials, appear to undermine that hard truth. They are trying to give Gen. Milley a pass, not because they believe this departure from norms is a good thing for our republic, but because they will support anything that portrays former President Donald Trump in a poor light. Such politicization of the responsibilities of the chairman and his critical role does this nation a disservice.
In my lifetime, I have seen military officials removed for overstepping their responsibilities. In fact, I’ve seen officers removed for things that bordered on the silly. The allegations against Milley are anything but.
Unauthorized military discussions with a growing adversary about potential action sends a negative signal to an enemy. It conveys confusion, weakness, and calls into question our ability to control our military forces. It also implies that the military, in fact, calls the shots — not the commander in chief. Any undermining of the civilian control of the military is problematic; this was dangerous.
Moreover, this call was made in the aftermath of a contentious election in the midst of a debilitating pandemic caused and perpetuated by the same country on the other end of the phone. In diplomatic relations, what’s not said often carries as much weight as what is. Milley’s alleged call communicated disarray.
Nothing was further from the truth. I was the longest serving senior national security official in the Trump White House. I was confident then, and confident now, that Trump was a commander in chief that we needed and served us well in multiple crises. You need only look at the fall of Kabul, the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan and our failure to coordinate with our allies, the tragic drone strikes that killed seven children rather than an ISIS-K member, and the French withdrawing their ambassador to see how far we’ve fallen. Peace through strength is more than just a catchphrase.
The Biden administration needs to hit the reset button in more ways than one. President Biden may have confidence in his chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but the American public no longer does.
Keith Kellogg is a retired Army lieutenant general who was an assistant to the president and national security adviser to President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence. He is currently co-chairman for American Security at the America First Policy Institute.
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/18/2021 06:47 ||
Top|| File under: Tin Hat Dictators, Presidents for Life, & Kleptocrats
"He is an advisor who executes the commander in chief’s commands, not the other way around."
As the chairman he's not part of the chain of command though:
In addition to the China call allegations it is claimed that Milley pressured certain military officials to promise not to act on certain orders without informing Milley and getting his approval.
If I'm interpreting this correctly it would have been a direct violation of the Goldwater–Nichols Act if Milley had laid claim to and exercised any such command authority even in concordance with the President's wishes.
Then-CIA Director Gina Haspel told the US's top general that former President Donald Trump was "acting out like a six-year-old with a tantrum" in the wake of the 2020 election, according to a new book.
In addition to refusing to concede the 2020 election to President-elect Joe Biden and pushing groundless claims of election fraud, Trump fired (or tried to fire) a number of top officials — most prominently, Secretary of Defense Mark Esper on November 9.
"Yesterday was appalling," Haspel said in a November 10 conversation with Gen. Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, according to Bob Woodward and Robert Costa's forthcoming book "Peril."
"We are on the way to a right-wing coup. The whole thing is insanity. He is acting out like a six-year-old with a tantrum," Haspel, a 35-year veteran of the agency, said, with the authors writing that she, too, was afraid of being canned.
Milley assured Haspel that "we're going to be steady," according to the book. "Steady as a rock," he added. "We're going to keep our eye on the horizon. Keep alert to any risks, dangers. Keep the channels open."
*Fox is reporting that Milley cleared his conversations with the office of the SECDEF. That seems to be parsing things just a bit - not cleared with SECDEF, but 'with his office'. Curious.
*During the last days of the Nixon Administration, SECDEF James Schlesinger sent out a quiet order that no 'unusual' military orders from the White House were to be executed without his approval. THAT is how this should have been done, if it was necessary at all.
*A lot has been said about 'if' this is true.
I say we absolutely have to believe it, because that nice Mister Woodward fella wrote a book about the Trump Administration a few years ago that had some outrageous things in it...and we were told then that we HAD to believe it.
Milley broke about a dozen or so rules, and if the Chinese had taken that moment to hit something, they would have been crowing to the heavens that America said they wouldn't attack...and that khaki-suited idiot would have had the blood of thousands on his hands. All I have to say is this: in the movies, when someone betrayed his oath, his traditions, and his country like this, they would give him a pistol with one round in it and tell him to do the right thing.
Not like he would.
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
09/18/2021 8:22 Comments ||
/\ Yes, I suspect the General slipped the bounds if not the intent of legal "Foreign Disclosure" AR 380-10 and possibly more.
"Esper requested his deputies use back channels to ensure the Chinese knew we knew what their intelligence said and that their intelligence was wrong. Esper further ordered a postponement of some American naval activities in the Pacific so the Chinese did not get spooked. Gen. Milley was one of the people who worked back channels to defuse the situation." (from Swan via Erickson)
Resign or be fired. Either way, credibility, honor, and trust is GONE
I agree with the sentiment, but credibility, honor and trust are no longer in play. It is all about the will to power now.
#2 My hunch is Milley did not act without backstopping and cover from the SECDEF and powerful members of congress. There is much more to this story. Will it ever be told? Not likely.
That pretty much sums it up, IMHO. Milley may be the visible face on this mess, but he is not the only rat in the cellar. I hate to be pessimistic, but I can't help wondering if the American Experiment is over.
[American Mind] Revelations from a new book, Peril, by Bob Woodward and Rob Costa, reveal just how deep the spiritual rot in the military goes. In the days after the January 6 protest, General Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, promised, in the event of a war, to give aid and comfort to China. According to the Washington Post, after the Capitol protest, Milley sent secret communiques to the head of the People’s Liberation Army, promising that "If we’re going to attack, I’m going to call you ahead of time. It’s not going to be a surprise."
In a decent country such a brazen act of collusion with a foreign power by one of the most prominent leaders of the armed forces would be met with immediate and unrelenting backlash. Instead, this betrayer of the Constitution and the principle of civilian leadership of the military is a liberal darling. At the inauguration, Joe Biden thanked Milley for undermining President Trump in the final weeks of his presidency.
Milley, before reaching out to China, sat down with the service’s top officers and demanded from them what amounted to an oath—none of them would launch a nuclear weapon without his approval. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff went behind the President’s back to secure control over the nation’s most important weapons.
Our generals are losers abroad, and grifters at home. They parrot MSNBC talking points on Twitter and grovel before Fauci. This is bad enough. But Milley’s actions show that America’s top military officers have reached another level of delusion. They fancy themselves a new praetorian guard to protect the nation—as construed by elite editorial boards—from the people’s elected representatives.
Milley, before reaching out to China, sat down with the service’s top officers and demanded from them what amounted to an oath—none of them would launch a nuclear weapon without his approval
The only oath you had -
I ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
Sort of forgot that 'thingy' so long ago. Looks like you instead tried the play the one we were told never to do.
Democrats have established a Chinese (CCP) style communist government. A One Party System. Elections are circumvented so that The Party always remains in control. Until the Party is overthrown, it will continue to gain control of all institutions. The US Military has now under The Party. The FBI, DHS, etc. has already been taken over by The Party.
[RevolverNews] Conservatives often characterize modern America as a "nanny state," but the implications of this label are rarely explored. It’s not just about having a government that passes unnecessary regulations. The Nanny state is more fundamentally about having a government that is feminized at all levels. The past year and a half of Covid-19 tyranny are the apotheosis of the feminized nanny state.
Worrying about safety is an innately feminine trait, and not always a bad one: Women, being weaker, must avoid dangerous men, and mothers must protect children. When adopted as a top national priority, the obsession with "safety" is stifling, destructive, and in fact suicidal to a thriving civilization. Curtis Yarvin famously labeled America’s collection of ruling institutions "The Cathedral," but he might have been more accurate if he called it "The Nursery."
Posted by: The Walking Unvaxed ||
09/18/2021 09:14 ||
Top|| File under:
More from the opinion piece:
And now, to cap things off, we have a vaccine policy that actively puts the health of young boys at risk.
Teenage boys are six times more likely to suffer from heart problems from the vaccine than be hospitalised from Covid-19, a major study has found.
Children who face the highest risk of a “cardiac adverse event” are boys aged between 12 and 15 following two doses of a vaccine, according to new research from the US.
The findings come as Professor Chris Whitty, England’s chief medical officer, prepares to advise ministers on whether there is a wider benefit to society from vaccinating children.
Researchers found that the risk of heart complications for boys aged 12-15 following the vaccine was 162.2 per million, which was the highest out of all the groups they looked at. … The second highest rate was among boys aged 16-17 (94.0 per million) followed by girls aged 16-17 (13.4 per million) and girls aged 12-15 (13.0 per million). Meanwhile, the risk of a healthy boy needing hospital treatment owing to Covid-19 in the next 120 days is 26.7 per million. This means the risk they face from heart complications is 6.1 times higher than that of hospitalisation. [The Telegraph]
^ The CDC liars were aware of the extremely high incidence of myocarditis in boys taking the vaccine, but simply lied about it two months ago during the public hearing.
Their sleight of hand involved conflating all the contraindications into one statistic that effectively buried the fact that for young men, myocarditis from the vaccine is a far greater risk than severe illness from COVID.
The Great Barrington doctors - 43,000 signatories -- pointed this out at the time. This group btw includes three leading experts: Martin Kulldorff of Harvard Medical School, Sunetra Gupta of the University of Oxford and Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford University.
And now Dr. Bhattacharya is being attacked by Stanford's crazy Covidians. They're trying to get him fired. For standing up for medical facts and logic -- and for defending the health of our sons.
The myocites in the heart are not replaced. Once inflamed they'll die and leave scar tissue. We are permanently damaging the hearts of young boys who have -- statistically speaking -- no chance in hell of getting serious COVID.
[ENGLISH.AAWSAT] After 13 months of foundering under caretaker prime ministers, Leb ...an Iranian colony situated on the eastern Mediterranean, conveniently adjacent to Israel. Formerly inhabited by hardy Phoenecian traders, its official language is now Arabic, with the usual unpleasant side effects. The Leb civil war, between 1975 and 1990, lasted a little over 145 years and produced 120,000 fatalities. The average length of a ceasefire was measured in seconds. The Lebs maintain a precarious sectarian balance among Shiites, Sunnis, and about a dozeen flavors of Christians. It is the home of Hezbollah, which periodically starts a war with the Zionist Entity, gets Beirut pounded to rubble, and then declares victory and has a parade. The Lebs have the curious habit of periodically murdering their heads of state or prime ministers, a practice dating back to the heady human sacrifice days of Baal Moloch. In 2020 Hezbollahblew up a considerable portion of Beirut and many of its inhabitants when its ammonium nitrate faci8lity exploded. They blamed it on... somebody else. It wasn't them though. Trust them on that... finally has a government.
That is very good news for a country suffering from the effects of economic collapse, political intransigence, financial malfeasance and the interference of foreign powers. And all that on top of the still mysterious port explosion last year that devastated the capital Beirut.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
09/18/2021 00:00 ||
Top|| File under: Hezbollah
[ENGLISH.AAWSAT] Has the war on international terrorism been lost? Have the US and its allies dropped out of the war on terror that they declared two decades ago? These are some of the questions raised by commentators across the globe last week as the US marked the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. Many commentators answered both questions in the affirmative.
Yes, they said, terror groups are still operating in no fewer than 20 countries while start-up terror outfit have been able to carry out attacks in a number of Western countries including the United States. At the same time, the US has reduced its footprint in a number of countries that continue to shelter terrorist groups.
In some cases the "yes" answer came from professional America-bashers who miss no opportunity to portray the "Great Satan™" either as an earth-devouring monster or a wet mouse looking for shelter from a hailstorm of unpopularity.
Continued on Page 49
"These demands are not open to negotiation or discussion. The Taliban must act, and act immediately. They will hand over the terrorists, or they will share in their fate."
George W. Bush, Statement To Joint Session Of Congress September 20th 2001
The Taliban are stronger now than they were pre 9/11.
The West is paying danegeld to Taliban Afghanistan now which amount to official recognition and submission.
Sponsoring a mass fatality war crime attack on the US is a winning move.
Dismissing official statements by the POTUS made in the aftermath of such an attack as irrelevant bluster is a smart move.
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.