randall_s
01-05-2014, 03:01 PM
News came yesterday that the Iraqi government had lost control of Fallujah, the ancient city in central Iraq dating back to Babylonian times. Fallujah has fallen to al Qaeda (or “al Qaeda-linked” groups, as the newest euphemism from government deniers and their sycophants in the press phrases it). According to CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/police-center-of-fallujah-falls-to-qaeda-linked-fighters/):
“The city center of Iraq's Fallujah has fallen completely into the hands of fighters from the al Qaeda-linked Islamic State in Iraq and Levant, police said Saturday, yet another victory for the hardline group that has made waves across the region in recent days… The group is also one of the strongest rebel units in Syria, where it has imposed a strict version of Islamic law in territories it holds and kidnapped and killed anyone it deems critical of its rule. Also on Saturday, it claimed responsibility for a suicide car bombing in a Shiite-dominated neighborhood in Lebanon.”
Sounds an awful lot like plain old vanilla al Qaeda to me.
In 2004, during the Second Battle of Fallujah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Battle_of_Fallujah), a total of 107 coalition soldiers, including 95 Americans, were killed taking Fallujah from, I guess you could say, al Qaeda and “al Qaeda linked groups.” In 2003, the First Battle of Fallujah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Battle_of_Fallujah), in which coalition forces suffered defeat at the hands of al Qaeda, 27 coalition soldiers were killed (more than 90 were wounded).
John Kerry today announced (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/05/kerry-vows-support-for-iraq-government-in-fallujah-but-wont-send-us-troops/), to a stunned country who assumed Iraq was relatively stable after Petraeus and Bush-led surge, that while the U.S. would support the Iraqi government’s offensive to retake the city, “We are not contemplating putting boots on the ground… We are going to do everything that is possible. I will not go into the details.”
Surely this means special some number of special forces, air strikes, logistics support, and other things like that… which the Obama administration has been known to do in such places as Libya and Syria, where they have been supported (http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/does-obama-know-hes-fighting-on-alqaidas-side-8786680.html) “al Qaeda linked groups.”
How’s the rest of Iraq fared under the watch of the Obama administration? Terribly, to be blunt. In 2013, the UN said (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/02/civilian-death-toll-in-iraq-highest-in-years-fueling-concern-about-al-qaeda/) that 7,818 civilians were killed in terrorist attacks – the highest level since 2008. For example, there was a string of bombings (http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/12/christmas-bombers-target-christians-iraq-201312263451677794.html) aimed at Christians in Baghdad on Christmas that killed (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/25/us-iraq-violence-idUSBRE9BO02R20131225http:/www.leaderpost.com/news/Iraqi+police+city+centre+Fallujah+falls+fully+into +hands/9350524/story.html) 34 people. Presumably, these too were perpetrated by “al Qaeda linked groups.”
Sure, they may bomb civilians with impunity and may have just taken a major city in Iraq. But don’t worry, al Qaeda has been “decimated (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/08/09/obama_decimated_al_qaeda_has_metastasized_into_reg ional_groups.html),” isn’t that right Obama?
How about Afghanistan? Surely this country, the one that Obama claimed was the right war, is under well-enough NATO control? You’ll be surprised to know that, like Iraq, large parts of Afghanistan have been ceded to the “al Qaeda linked” Taliban. On December 21, 2013, the southern province of Helmand was ceded (http://news.antiwar.com/2013/12/16/afghan-military-cedes-checkpoints-to-taliban-in-helmand/) to the Taliban. And a new American intelligence report (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-us-intelligence-takes-gloomy-view-of-afghanistans-future-20131229,0,2918780.story) (take that with a grain of salt – thanks, Clinton) published in late December predicts that by 2017, “the gains the United States and its allies have made during the past three years are likely to have been significantly eroded.”
This comes only months after the news that opium production hit a record high in Afghanistan in 2013: an astounding (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/13/afghanistan-record-opium-crop-poppies-un) 200,000 hectares were dedicated to producing narcotics. Alarmingly, not only was production increased in the Taliban areas in the South, but “strongly increased” around the capital of Kabul. These profits end up in the coffers of “al Qaeda linked” Dawood Ibrahim (http://nyyrc.com/blog/2013/08/who-is-dawood-ibrahim/).
You could be forgiven for thinking that Obama himself was “al Qaeda linked,” or at least a good number in his cabinet. Does that sound too harsh? Consider…
On Christmas, the Egyptian government got around to officially declaring (http://news.yahoo.com/egypt-names-muslim-brotherhood-terrorist-group-155212405.html) the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist group. The Brotherhood, it will be remembered, attempted to assassinate Nasser, did assassinate Sadat, and wanted to condemn Mubarak to death. Once in power, they turned Egypt into a living nightmare, spooking the population through random acts of terror, and systematically targeting Coptic Christians in a way that would make the Nazis proud. The Brotherhood has been a terrorist group since its inception, complete with a “secret apparatus” that functions much like the S.S. and Gestapo, terrorizing the population and conducting surveillance through covert networks. The Egyptian government, who has been jailing and killing the roving/marauding Brotherhood for months, merely gave themselves additional legal justification.
The designation, you would think, would be uncontroversial. Yet in a matter of days, both the State Department and Department of Defense lectured the Egyptian government, telling them that they should be “politically inclusive” of the terrorist group. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel (http://gulfnews.com/news/region/egypt/hagel-stresses-need-for-inclusive-egypt-1.1272081) “expressed concern” over the designation, and “stressed the role of political inclusiveness.” Secretary of State John Kerry (http://www.voanews.com/content/kerry-concerned-at-egypts-crackdown-on-muslim-brotherhood/1818353.html) was also “concerned” that the Egyptian government did something they should have done 60 years ago. According to the State Department, Kerry “underscored the need for an inclusive political process across the political spectrum that respects the fundamental human rights of all Egyptians in order to achieve political stability and democratic change.”
May I wonder aloud, under our glorious first amendment which we’ve so disregarded over the last 5 years? What the hell kind of government welcomes terrorists into their homes, offices, parliaments, bureaus, mosques, churches, synagogues, families? What role does “inclusiveness” have when dealing with bloodthirsty murderers and psychopaths?
Or is the “inclusiveness” that Obama and his cronies have in mind like the inclusiveness of Fallujah and Helmand, the ceding of territory to barbaric Islamists whose dedication to indiscriminate slaughter of innocents is shared only with their love of narcotics trafficking?
Someone in the White House press pool want to start asking these questions until we, the American citizens for whom our “president” works, get some answers? I’ll give you one, short and simple: Mr. Carney, is the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization and does the President renounce American association with terrorists?
Now just ask that at every press conference until the sheep around you catch on.
Original article here: http://nyyrc.com/blog/2014/01/as-fallujah-goes-so-goes-america/
“The city center of Iraq's Fallujah has fallen completely into the hands of fighters from the al Qaeda-linked Islamic State in Iraq and Levant, police said Saturday, yet another victory for the hardline group that has made waves across the region in recent days… The group is also one of the strongest rebel units in Syria, where it has imposed a strict version of Islamic law in territories it holds and kidnapped and killed anyone it deems critical of its rule. Also on Saturday, it claimed responsibility for a suicide car bombing in a Shiite-dominated neighborhood in Lebanon.”
Sounds an awful lot like plain old vanilla al Qaeda to me.
In 2004, during the Second Battle of Fallujah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Battle_of_Fallujah), a total of 107 coalition soldiers, including 95 Americans, were killed taking Fallujah from, I guess you could say, al Qaeda and “al Qaeda linked groups.” In 2003, the First Battle of Fallujah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Battle_of_Fallujah), in which coalition forces suffered defeat at the hands of al Qaeda, 27 coalition soldiers were killed (more than 90 were wounded).
John Kerry today announced (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/05/kerry-vows-support-for-iraq-government-in-fallujah-but-wont-send-us-troops/), to a stunned country who assumed Iraq was relatively stable after Petraeus and Bush-led surge, that while the U.S. would support the Iraqi government’s offensive to retake the city, “We are not contemplating putting boots on the ground… We are going to do everything that is possible. I will not go into the details.”
Surely this means special some number of special forces, air strikes, logistics support, and other things like that… which the Obama administration has been known to do in such places as Libya and Syria, where they have been supported (http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/does-obama-know-hes-fighting-on-alqaidas-side-8786680.html) “al Qaeda linked groups.”
How’s the rest of Iraq fared under the watch of the Obama administration? Terribly, to be blunt. In 2013, the UN said (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/02/civilian-death-toll-in-iraq-highest-in-years-fueling-concern-about-al-qaeda/) that 7,818 civilians were killed in terrorist attacks – the highest level since 2008. For example, there was a string of bombings (http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/12/christmas-bombers-target-christians-iraq-201312263451677794.html) aimed at Christians in Baghdad on Christmas that killed (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/25/us-iraq-violence-idUSBRE9BO02R20131225http:/www.leaderpost.com/news/Iraqi+police+city+centre+Fallujah+falls+fully+into +hands/9350524/story.html) 34 people. Presumably, these too were perpetrated by “al Qaeda linked groups.”
Sure, they may bomb civilians with impunity and may have just taken a major city in Iraq. But don’t worry, al Qaeda has been “decimated (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/08/09/obama_decimated_al_qaeda_has_metastasized_into_reg ional_groups.html),” isn’t that right Obama?
How about Afghanistan? Surely this country, the one that Obama claimed was the right war, is under well-enough NATO control? You’ll be surprised to know that, like Iraq, large parts of Afghanistan have been ceded to the “al Qaeda linked” Taliban. On December 21, 2013, the southern province of Helmand was ceded (http://news.antiwar.com/2013/12/16/afghan-military-cedes-checkpoints-to-taliban-in-helmand/) to the Taliban. And a new American intelligence report (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-us-intelligence-takes-gloomy-view-of-afghanistans-future-20131229,0,2918780.story) (take that with a grain of salt – thanks, Clinton) published in late December predicts that by 2017, “the gains the United States and its allies have made during the past three years are likely to have been significantly eroded.”
This comes only months after the news that opium production hit a record high in Afghanistan in 2013: an astounding (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/13/afghanistan-record-opium-crop-poppies-un) 200,000 hectares were dedicated to producing narcotics. Alarmingly, not only was production increased in the Taliban areas in the South, but “strongly increased” around the capital of Kabul. These profits end up in the coffers of “al Qaeda linked” Dawood Ibrahim (http://nyyrc.com/blog/2013/08/who-is-dawood-ibrahim/).
You could be forgiven for thinking that Obama himself was “al Qaeda linked,” or at least a good number in his cabinet. Does that sound too harsh? Consider…
On Christmas, the Egyptian government got around to officially declaring (http://news.yahoo.com/egypt-names-muslim-brotherhood-terrorist-group-155212405.html) the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist group. The Brotherhood, it will be remembered, attempted to assassinate Nasser, did assassinate Sadat, and wanted to condemn Mubarak to death. Once in power, they turned Egypt into a living nightmare, spooking the population through random acts of terror, and systematically targeting Coptic Christians in a way that would make the Nazis proud. The Brotherhood has been a terrorist group since its inception, complete with a “secret apparatus” that functions much like the S.S. and Gestapo, terrorizing the population and conducting surveillance through covert networks. The Egyptian government, who has been jailing and killing the roving/marauding Brotherhood for months, merely gave themselves additional legal justification.
The designation, you would think, would be uncontroversial. Yet in a matter of days, both the State Department and Department of Defense lectured the Egyptian government, telling them that they should be “politically inclusive” of the terrorist group. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel (http://gulfnews.com/news/region/egypt/hagel-stresses-need-for-inclusive-egypt-1.1272081) “expressed concern” over the designation, and “stressed the role of political inclusiveness.” Secretary of State John Kerry (http://www.voanews.com/content/kerry-concerned-at-egypts-crackdown-on-muslim-brotherhood/1818353.html) was also “concerned” that the Egyptian government did something they should have done 60 years ago. According to the State Department, Kerry “underscored the need for an inclusive political process across the political spectrum that respects the fundamental human rights of all Egyptians in order to achieve political stability and democratic change.”
May I wonder aloud, under our glorious first amendment which we’ve so disregarded over the last 5 years? What the hell kind of government welcomes terrorists into their homes, offices, parliaments, bureaus, mosques, churches, synagogues, families? What role does “inclusiveness” have when dealing with bloodthirsty murderers and psychopaths?
Or is the “inclusiveness” that Obama and his cronies have in mind like the inclusiveness of Fallujah and Helmand, the ceding of territory to barbaric Islamists whose dedication to indiscriminate slaughter of innocents is shared only with their love of narcotics trafficking?
Someone in the White House press pool want to start asking these questions until we, the American citizens for whom our “president” works, get some answers? I’ll give you one, short and simple: Mr. Carney, is the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization and does the President renounce American association with terrorists?
Now just ask that at every press conference until the sheep around you catch on.
Original article here: http://nyyrc.com/blog/2014/01/as-fallujah-goes-so-goes-america/