WTF... In America?????????

It's an all-too-common story in America.

A law-abiding citizen makes a simple procedural error...one that has no criminal intent and injures no one...and he or she faces years in prison.

Here's a case of a woman, a licensed concealed carry weapon holder, who faces a MINIMUM of three and a half years in New York State prison for
making an honest mistake.

We live in a country where police are not legally obligated to come to you aid,
but we punish responsible people who take steps to insure their own safety. It's nuts.​













:hmm:
 
Do you remember this???​


Back in October of last year (just over two months ago) Brasscheck posted a video of an Occupy Oakland protester who was critically injured and being carried away from the fracas by fellow protesters.

That protester was Scott Olsen.

Olsen is a 24-year old former U.S. Marine who survived two tours in the Iraq war only to shot in the head with a police projectile at Occupy Oakland.

After causing his injury, police then fired a flash grenade, seemingly to prevent others from coming to his aid.

Other protesters manged to spirit him away to where he could receive medical attention for a fractured skull and brain swelling.

He has recovered well and has been given the chance to tell his story and discuss why he was there among the protesters at Occupy Oakland.

Scott Olsen speaks...​













:hmm:
 
I'm still a peak oil agnostic.

I don't trust the oil companies and the paid off clowns (i.e. journalists)
who report on them.

But I also have trouble envisioning a global conspiracy to fake oil
reserve shortages.

Anyway, here are the likely consequences if peak oil is real.​









Go GREEN!




:hmm:
 
Here's an interesting view from a uniformed soldier that you don't generally hear in the lame stream media.

"Well, I think it would be even more dangerous to start nit-picking wars with other countries. Someone like Iran... Israel is more than capable... "

Oops! Nevermind. Five seconds into his explanation of why he supports Ron Paul's foriegn policy CNN drops the news feed and cuts to something they feel is more appropriate.

Of course, it is possible that it was just a coincidence. An accident, if you will. I mean, these things happen, right?

I suppose I should let you decide...​








I'm sorry... did we pull the plug on your ass??? :confused:





:hmm:
 
Didn't we go through this with Iraq?

I can't imagine people falling for this AGAIN.

More than ten years later, a U.S. judge claims Iran was complicit in the attacks of September 11th 2001. This, at a time when our government and every presidential candidate, besides Ron Paul, appears desperate to go to war with Iran over their nuclear program.

It's simply unbelievable...​










:hmm:

The Childish asleep American Public will fall for this bullshit hook line and sinker once again! WWIII will start soon with Iran, with China or Russian joining in! This new fabrication of Iran being complicit is complete and utter BULLLSHHITTT!!!!!!!!:smh::smh::smh::smh:
 
The Childish asleep American Public will fall for this bullshit hook line and sinker once again! WWIII will start soon with Iran, with China or Russian joining in! This new fabrication of Iran being complicit is complete and utter BULLLSHHITTT!!!!!!!!:smh::smh::smh::smh:

Preaching to the choir Bruh...:hmm:
 
It was unwise of the Japanese to attack the US, but the US had pushed and pushed with sanctions on Japan until Japan felt it was backed into a corner and was forced to react.

That reaction was Pearl Harbor. Japan was made out to be the aggressor and the war was on.

The situation currently evolving with Iran has surpassed the usual 'saber-rattling' that goes on. Iran has threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz, and has threatened to act should any US warships return to the Persian Gulf.

Why?

Because sanctions are an act of war, and when you back a nation into a corner they react. What will Iran's reaction be?​














:hmm:
 
In 2006, it was reported that 151 members of Congress had up to $195.5 million of their personal assets invested in defense corporations.

It's now 2012 and I can only imagine that those Congressmen have made a good deal of return on their investments.

These are the same people who vote to keep funding all the wars we fight and insure that we are in continued conflicts world wide.

Moreover, the CEO's of these 'defense' corporations sit on advisery boards that draft and implement foriegn policy. Clearly, anybody can see that 'peace' is not good for their business, so in who's interests are they advising?

War is a racket.

Foreign policy and war profiteering...​











:hmm:
 
Great stuff Lick!!

I gotta get caught up on your thread, been real busy at work.


Here's a fun one for you. This is a clip from the movie Key Largo, released in 1948. The scene is a little dissertation from the bad guy, played by Edward G. Robinson on 'how politicians are made'.


 
Here's an interesting view from a uniformed soldier that you don't generally hear in the lame stream media.

"Well, I think it would be even more dangerous to start nit-picking wars with other countries. Someone like Iran... Israel is more than capable... "

Oops! Nevermind. Five seconds into his explanation of why he supports Ron Paul's foriegn policy CNN drops the news feed and cuts to something they feel is more appropriate.

Of course, it is possible that it was just a coincidence. An accident, if you will. I mean, these things happen, right?

I suppose I should let you decide...​









I'm sorry... did we pull the plug on your ass??? :confused:





:hmm:

I saw that yesterday, and it's beyond obvious they killed the feed. Bitch thought she was gonna get cute by asking a 'dumb grunt' that salty question.

They didn't like it when he came back with a quick answer. :lol:
 
Max Keiser and co-host, Stacy Herbert, discuss the US State Department's genetically modified retaliation against France, more missing billions in Afghanistan and shopping frenzies in Britain. In the second half of the show, Max talks to author and blogger, James Howard Kunstler, about shopping stampedes and revolutionary times.


 
Great stuff Lick!!

I gotta get caught up on your thread, been real busy at work.


Here's a fun one for you. This is a clip from the movie Key Largo, released in 1948. The scene is a little dissertation from the bad guy, played by Edward G. Robinson on 'how politicians are made'.




Damn... life imitating art or the other way??? Ether way it is sad and sadder we don't do anything about it.
 
I'm still a peak oil agnostic.

I don't trust the oil companies and the paid off clowns (i.e. journalists) who report on them.

But I also have trouble envisioning a global conspiracy to fake oil reserve shortages.

Anyway, here are the likely consequences if peak oil is real.​












:hmm:
 
This video is a little late. Sorry.

We were busy trying to figure out where exactly Grandma went. She called, said she was getting on the airplane, and that was the last we heard from her.

Grandma's Christmas trip...










Funny :lol: and not:angry:...​




:hmm:
 
I do not want a nuclear 'armed' Iran. But then I don't want a nuclear 'armed' Israel or United States for that matter.

The kind of destruction nuclear weapons offer is unacceptable.

However, I can not help but recoil in disgust at the levels hypocrisy coming from the nuclear armed nations currently pushing for a war with Iran over their nuclear 'energy' program.

You don't hear any of these war hungry nations offering to dismantle their own nuclear 'weapons'.

Israel has two nuclear research centers - at Dimona and Soreq.
Israel refuses to allow inspections or sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which safeguards the sale of nuclear material.

The latest estimates suggest that Israel has produced at least 118 warheads with weapons grade plutonium and they have the missiles to carry them.

You see, control freaks are terrified of dealing with others on equal footing...​








Now... I would NOT trust these MOFO's with anything!​







:hmm:
 
The Romney Con! Flip-Flopper Is Just Another Word For Habitual Liar!
Don't be conned into nominating Mitt Romney!

The only candidate we can trust is Ron Paul. He has NEVER compromised his principles of honoring his oath of office, to protect and defend the Constitution, to protect and defend our unalienable rights above all else.

Government is constituted to do just that, protect our freedoms and liberties. It is not constituted to give those with the most wealth and power the means to impose their will on the rest of us by seizing the coercive powers of government for to advance their own selfish purposes.

Brought to you by the Kick Them All Out Project:​






:hmm:
 
Why we crashed - and why we will crash further

And how it could have been prevented




If there's anybody left who doesn't understand what happened in 2008 - and why - this testimony by William Black before Congress sums it up nicely.

It's also a pretty good predictor of what we can expect next. Hint: Look out below.​



















:hmm:
 
Mitt Romney, like most Americans, really hates taxes.

However, it's frowned upon when the average citizen tries to skate out on actually paying their taxes.

It's really bad when a Presidential candidate does it...​















:hmm:
 
Mitt Romney, like most Americans, really hates taxes.

However, it's frowned upon when the average citizen tries to skate out on actually paying their taxes.

It's really bad when a Presidential candidate does it...​















:hmm:
 
At first glance, I thought that it was excellent news that President Obama was cutting back on troops and military expenditures. I've always believed that our aggressive presence world-wide created more resentment towards the U.S. than it did
provide security.

Well, apparently, reducing our military footprint was the "spin" and the message I was meant to take away from the news, but the truth is another story altogether.

The U.S. will still be projecting force and raining death from above world-wide, it's just that now we'll be doing it by remote control. That's right, taken straight from the movie 'Terminator', our new military will be killer flying robots...​
















:hmm:
 
This video is not about the school system we should have, it is about the school system we DO have.

And it's scary.

Operant conditioning, negative reinforcement, behaviorism...

Our school's are not designed to teach and enlighten, but to train and condition good workers.

Watch this video on the human herding system and see for yourself...​













:hmm:
 
Last edited:
The Constitution, in which our three branches of government are defined, delegates the authority to legislate to the Congress.

President Obama has, on several occasions, suggested bypassing Congress altogether and legislating from the oval office, thereby claiming the powers of a dictator. He was cheered on by crowds each time he made the suggestion.

Obama's comments echo the comments of Gov. George W. Bush in December 2000. "If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator."

Of course, Obama is actually doing it...​














:hmm:
 
To follow-up and accentuate yesterday's video on the public school/prison system, this news clip elaborates on the increasing police presence in schools and the drastic increase in students being arrested.

On the surface you might think that the numbers would be related to increased drug usage or violence, and there is that, but look deeper and you'll find that much of it is due to a ridiculous and ever expanding list of arrestable offenses and increasing police presence.

I, myself, can remember a time when a senior prank was just a prank, not a felony.

The criminalization of youthful behavior promotes both conformity and disenfranchisement, so at the end of the day we are left with a bunch of mindless automatons (good citizens) or thoughtless rebels (who will eventually populate the real prison system).

School police increasingly arresting American students...​














:hmm:
 
Of all the crazy claims I've heard from Presidential candidates thus far, this is a whopper.

"There is no such society that I am aware of, where we've had radical individualism and that it succeeds as a culture." - Rick Santorum

Really? Ever heard of AMERICA, Rick?

Santorum then elaborates on how the government should be involved in every aspect of our lives. Apparently, he wants to be the next Micromanager-in-Chief.

As one of BrasscheckTV's subscribers recently put it, "Micromanagement equals bad leadership."

Check it out​



















:hmm:
 
Mark Twain railed against it.

Said it was poisoning America's soul.

The original regime change/occupation of a country that did not ask for our "help."

A new film by John Sayles.​















:hmm:
 
Maybe you will find this comforting.

The SEC has just enacted a new regulation that sounds good...but changes nothing.

Financial regulation in the Age of Window Dressing.​













:hmm:
 
This guy was murdered with a magnetic shape charge, attached to his car door by a dude on a motorcycle, as he was driving!





That’s some James Bond stuff right there!


Wednesday, Jan 11, 2012 3:57 AM Eastern Standard Time
More murder of Iranian scientists: still terrorism?

By Glenn Greenwald

car-bomb-iran-l3-460x307.png


In this photo provided by the semi-official Fars News Agency, people gather around a bombed car in Tehran, Iran, Wednesday, Jan. 11, 2012 (Credit: AP Photo/Fars News Agency, Mehdi Marizad)






(updated below – Update II – Update III)
Several days ago I referenced a controversy that arose in 2007 when the law professor and right-wing blogger Glenn “Instapundit” Reynolds criticized President Bush for not doing enough to stop Iran’s nuclear program and then advocated that the U.S. respond by murdering that nation’s religious leaders and nuclear scientists. “We should be responding quietly, killing radical mullahs and Iranian atomic scientists . . . ,” he argued. The backlash against Reynolds’ suggestion was intense, especially among progressive writers.


Back then, I wrote about Reynolds’ suggestion several times, but I was far from alone. Law Professor Paul Campos wrote a column in the Rocky Mountain News denouncing Reynolds for publicly advocating “murder,” which, he pointed out, is exactly what this would be given that the U.S. is not at war with Iran (he went on to suggest that targeting civilian religious leaders and scientists would still be murder even if the U.S. were at war with Iran); Campos added: “government-sponsored assassinations of the sort Reynolds is advocating are expressly and unambiguously prohibited by the laws of the United States.” Law Professor Kevin Jon Heller documented with absolute clarity that such assassinations would be illegal in the absence of a formal war.


But the angriest reactions came from progressive bloggers, who widely denounced Reynolds as “contemptible” for suggesting this; one progressive writer, Lindsay Beyerstein, was horrified that one could even suggest such a thing, explaining that she ”despair for our society when it’s necessary to supply a rigorous analytical exposition of why our government shouldn’t have scientists and religious leaders whacked.” Scott Lemieux railed against what he called Reynolds’ “kooky scheme for illegal death squads” as “crackpot,” “dumb” and “nuttier than a Planters factory.” And Kevin Drum, then of Washington Monthly, went the furthest of all — in a post he entitled “Terrorism” — branding the killing of Iran’s scientists as “Terrorism”:
I imagine a lot of people agree with [Reynolds], but his recommendation really demonstrates the moral knot caused by George Bush’s insistence that we’re fighting a “war on terror.” After all, killing civilian scientists and civilian leaders, even if you do it quietly, is unquestionably terrorism. That’s certainly what we’d consider it if Hezbollah fighters tried to kill cabinet undersecretaries and planted bombs at the homes of Los Alamos engineers.
If you think Iran is a mortal enemy that needs to be dealt with via military force, you can certainly make that case. But if you’re going to claim that terrorism is a barbaric tactic that has to be stamped out, you can hardly endorse its use by the United States just because it’s convenient in this particular case.
What is most amazing about all this is that, a mere three years later, some combination of Israel and the U.S. are doing exactly that which Reynolds recommended. Numerous Iranian nuclear scientists are indeed being murdered.


In January, 2010, a remote-controlled bomb attached to a motorcycle killed Masoud Ali Mohammadi, 50, who “taught neutron physics at Tehran University.” In November, 2010, two separate car bombs exploded within minutes of each other on the same day, one that killed nuclear scientist Majid Shahriar and wounded his wife, and the other which wounded another nuclear scientist, Fereidoun Abbasi, along with his wife. Then, in July of last year, Darioush Rezaei, 35, was shot dead and his wife was wounded by two gunmen firing from motorcycles outside of their daughter’s kindergarten; Rezaei “did his doctorate in neutron transport – which lies at the heart of nuclear chain reactions in reactors and bombs” and “was a member of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, the country’s official atomic energy commission.”


And now, yet another Iranian scientist has been killed. According to Iranian media, a 32-year-old university professor, Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan, died when an assailant riding on a motorcycle attached a magnetic bomb to his car, which then detonated and killed him. According to The Washington Post‘s Thomas Erdbrink, a conservative news outlet in Iran reported that the young scientist “was believed to be involved in procuring materials for Iran’s main nuclear enrichment facility in Natanz.”


What’s most remarkable here is to compare the boisterous, furious denunciations of the mere suggestion by a blogger on the Internet that Iranian scientists be killed, versus the relative silence in the face of its actually being done in real life, now that the corpses of murdered Iranian scientists are beginning to pile up. Does anyone doubt that some combination of the two nations completely obsessed with Iran’s nuclear program — Israel and the U.S. — are responsible? (U.S. officials deny involvement while pointing the finger at Israel, whose officials will not comment but “smile” when asked; the CIA has “targeted” Iran’s scientists in the past, several of whom have disappeared only to end up in U.S. custody, including one who “resurfaced in the United States after defecting to the CIA in return for a large sum of money”). At the very least, there has been no denunciation from any Obama officials of whoever it might be carrying out such acts.
I have no doubt that Professors Campos and Heller would apply the same legal rationale now that it’s actually being done, but what about the progressives who so stridently denounced Reynolds? Does Lemieux still believe that whoever is responsible — Israel, the U.S., or some combination — is guilty of dispatching “illegal death squads”? Does Beyerstein still “despair for our society” that such acts could even be contemplated? Does Drum still believe that whichever political leaders are responsible for these killings are Terrorists; specifically: if, as is widely assumed, the Israelis are responsible, does that mean that Israel is a Terrorist state, and if U.S. agencies are complicit in some way, does that mean President Obama is a Terrorist, a state sponsor of Terrorism or, at the very least, a supporter of Terrorism?


In general, the American covert war against Iran is extraordinarily dangerous and probably illegal (it’s certainly unauthorized), but in particular, the assassination of Iran’s scientists is just reprehensible. Now that it’s actually happening, one wishes the reaction to it were even partially as aggressive as it was when a right-wing blogger suggested it.
* * * * *
Three other brief noteworthy items: (1) yet again, the New York Times’ Public Editor admonishes that newspaper for baseless reporting about Iran that overstates the threat it poses (specifically for overstating the IAEA’s assessment of Iran’s nuclear program); FAIR first raised objections to the offending article last week; (2) here is a telling scene from Tom Friedman’s current field trip to Cairo; and (3) a sixth-grader named Wolf writes a nice little school report for his civics class on the presidential race.

UPDATE: This morning, Haaretz has a timeline of what it calls “Mysterious deaths and blasts linked to Iran’s nuclear program” — and by “linked to,” they mean: “aimed at” (h/t James Carter). It includes the murder of these scientists as well as various explosions killing many people. If you removed the proper nouns from this timeline (Iran, Ahmadinejad, Natanz), very few people would have any doubt that this is Terrorism.

UPDATE II: The right-wing religious extremist Rick Santorum said previously: ”On occasion scientists working on the nuclear program in Iran turn up dead. I think that’s a wonderful thing, candidly”; he added: “I think we should send a very clear message that if you are a scientist from Russia, North Korea, or from Iran and you are going to work on a nuclear program to develop a bomb for Iran, you are not safe.” This is how he justified all that:
If people say, “well, you can’t go out and assassinate people” — well, tell that to Awlaki. OK, we’ve done it. We’ve done it to an American citizen, so we can certainly do it to someone who’s producing a nuclear bomb that can be dropped on the state of Israel . . . .
We better hope and pray Rick Santorum never becomes President or else the legal prohibitions against assassinations will simply be ignored and that will become standard American policy — oh, wait. Meanwhile, long-time commenter DCLaw1 poses this question:
Even for people who don’t believe the US has anything to do with the assassination of Iranian scientists, just flip the scenario: how would they react to news that Israeli scientists were being systematically murdered, and Iranian officials just smiled and acted coy when asked about it? What would they say about that, and what would they say the US and Israel would be justified to do in response?
To answer that, just consider the consensus outrage that spewed forth when it was claimed (ridiculously) that Iran was sponsoring a Terror plot on U.S. soil to have a failed Texan used car salesman to hire Mexican drug cartels to kill the Saudi ambassador: Terrorism!

UPDATE III: Lemieux responds by saying: “If the United States was involved in the killings — and we should stress the ‘if’ here — the Obama administration’s actions were both illegal and immoral, for the same reasons stated in my earlier posts.” Similarly, Drum strongly implies that he believes the assassinations are Terrorism. Meanwhile, Professor Campos, writing on the blog where Lemieux writes, tries to explain to Lemieux’s angry commenters what the point is of asking these questions and what the benefit is of hearing denunciations not only when a right-wing blogger proposes it, but also when it’s done in reality (in comments, David Mizner attempted the same).
For its part, the U.S. denied involvement in today’s murder and said they “strongly condemn all acts of violence, including acts of violence like what is being reported today,” while ”in Israel . . . the denial was much more vague. Brig. Gen. Yoav Mordechai, the Israeli military spokesman, wrote on his Facebook page that ‘I don’t know who took revenge on the Iranian scientist, but I am definitely not shedding a tear,’ Agence France-Presse reported.” Nonetheless, “Theodore Karasik, a security expert at the Institute for Near East and Gulf Military Analysis in Dubai, said the assassination fit a pattern over the past two years of covert operations by the West and its allies to ‘degrade and delay’ Iran’s nuclear program.”



Sorry, don't know how to imbed LiveLeak vids.


http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=4e0_1326290656
 
This guy was murdered with a magnetic shape charge, attached to his car door by a dude on a motorcycle, as he was driving!





That’s some James Bond stuff right there!


Wednesday, Jan 11, 2012 3:57 AM Eastern Standard Time
More murder of Iranian scientists: still terrorism?

By Glenn Greenwald

car-bomb-iran-l3-460x307.png


In this photo provided by the semi-official Fars News Agency, people gather around a bombed car in Tehran, Iran, Wednesday, Jan. 11, 2012 (Credit: AP Photo/Fars News Agency, Mehdi Marizad)






(updated below – Update II – Update III)
Several days ago I referenced a controversy that arose in 2007 when the law professor and right-wing blogger Glenn “Instapundit” Reynolds criticized President Bush for not doing enough to stop Iran’s nuclear program and then advocated that the U.S. respond by murdering that nation’s religious leaders and nuclear scientists. “We should be responding quietly, killing radical mullahs and Iranian atomic scientists . . . ,” he argued. The backlash against Reynolds’ suggestion was intense, especially among progressive writers.


Back then, I wrote about Reynolds’ suggestion several times, but I was far from alone. Law Professor Paul Campos wrote a column in the Rocky Mountain News denouncing Reynolds for publicly advocating “murder,” which, he pointed out, is exactly what this would be given that the U.S. is not at war with Iran (he went on to suggest that targeting civilian religious leaders and scientists would still be murder even if the U.S. were at war with Iran); Campos added: “government-sponsored assassinations of the sort Reynolds is advocating are expressly and unambiguously prohibited by the laws of the United States.” Law Professor Kevin Jon Heller documented with absolute clarity that such assassinations would be illegal in the absence of a formal war.


But the angriest reactions came from progressive bloggers, who widely denounced Reynolds as “contemptible” for suggesting this; one progressive writer, Lindsay Beyerstein, was horrified that one could even suggest such a thing, explaining that she ”despair for our society when it’s necessary to supply a rigorous analytical exposition of why our government shouldn’t have scientists and religious leaders whacked.” Scott Lemieux railed against what he called Reynolds’ “kooky scheme for illegal death squads” as “crackpot,” “dumb” and “nuttier than a Planters factory.” And Kevin Drum, then of Washington Monthly, went the furthest of all — in a post he entitled “Terrorism” — branding the killing of Iran’s scientists as “Terrorism”:
I imagine a lot of people agree with [Reynolds], but his recommendation really demonstrates the moral knot caused by George Bush’s insistence that we’re fighting a “war on terror.” After all, killing civilian scientists and civilian leaders, even if you do it quietly, is unquestionably terrorism. That’s certainly what we’d consider it if Hezbollah fighters tried to kill cabinet undersecretaries and planted bombs at the homes of Los Alamos engineers.
If you think Iran is a mortal enemy that needs to be dealt with via military force, you can certainly make that case. But if you’re going to claim that terrorism is a barbaric tactic that has to be stamped out, you can hardly endorse its use by the United States just because it’s convenient in this particular case.
What is most amazing about all this is that, a mere three years later, some combination of Israel and the U.S. are doing exactly that which Reynolds recommended. Numerous Iranian nuclear scientists are indeed being murdered.


In January, 2010, a remote-controlled bomb attached to a motorcycle killed Masoud Ali Mohammadi, 50, who “taught neutron physics at Tehran University.” In November, 2010, two separate car bombs exploded within minutes of each other on the same day, one that killed nuclear scientist Majid Shahriar and wounded his wife, and the other which wounded another nuclear scientist, Fereidoun Abbasi, along with his wife. Then, in July of last year, Darioush Rezaei, 35, was shot dead and his wife was wounded by two gunmen firing from motorcycles outside of their daughter’s kindergarten; Rezaei “did his doctorate in neutron transport – which lies at the heart of nuclear chain reactions in reactors and bombs” and “was a member of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, the country’s official atomic energy commission.”


And now, yet another Iranian scientist has been killed. According to Iranian media, a 32-year-old university professor, Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan, died when an assailant riding on a motorcycle attached a magnetic bomb to his car, which then detonated and killed him. According to The Washington Post‘s Thomas Erdbrink, a conservative news outlet in Iran reported that the young scientist “was believed to be involved in procuring materials for Iran’s main nuclear enrichment facility in Natanz.”


What’s most remarkable here is to compare the boisterous, furious denunciations of the mere suggestion by a blogger on the Internet that Iranian scientists be killed, versus the relative silence in the face of its actually being done in real life, now that the corpses of murdered Iranian scientists are beginning to pile up. Does anyone doubt that some combination of the two nations completely obsessed with Iran’s nuclear program — Israel and the U.S. — are responsible? (U.S. officials deny involvement while pointing the finger at Israel, whose officials will not comment but “smile” when asked; the CIA has “targeted” Iran’s scientists in the past, several of whom have disappeared only to end up in U.S. custody, including one who “resurfaced in the United States after defecting to the CIA in return for a large sum of money”). At the very least, there has been no denunciation from any Obama officials of whoever it might be carrying out such acts.
I have no doubt that Professors Campos and Heller would apply the same legal rationale now that it’s actually being done, but what about the progressives who so stridently denounced Reynolds? Does Lemieux still believe that whoever is responsible — Israel, the U.S., or some combination — is guilty of dispatching “illegal death squads”? Does Beyerstein still “despair for our society” that such acts could even be contemplated? Does Drum still believe that whichever political leaders are responsible for these killings are Terrorists; specifically: if, as is widely assumed, the Israelis are responsible, does that mean that Israel is a Terrorist state, and if U.S. agencies are complicit in some way, does that mean President Obama is a Terrorist, a state sponsor of Terrorism or, at the very least, a supporter of Terrorism?


In general, the American covert war against Iran is extraordinarily dangerous and probably illegal (it’s certainly unauthorized), but in particular, the assassination of Iran’s scientists is just reprehensible. Now that it’s actually happening, one wishes the reaction to it were even partially as aggressive as it was when a right-wing blogger suggested it.
* * * * *
Three other brief noteworthy items: (1) yet again, the New York Times’ Public Editor admonishes that newspaper for baseless reporting about Iran that overstates the threat it poses (specifically for overstating the IAEA’s assessment of Iran’s nuclear program); FAIR first raised objections to the offending article last week; (2) here is a telling scene from Tom Friedman’s current field trip to Cairo; and (3) a sixth-grader named Wolf writes a nice little school report for his civics class on the presidential race.

UPDATE: This morning, Haaretz has a timeline of what it calls “Mysterious deaths and blasts linked to Iran’s nuclear program” — and by “linked to,” they mean: “aimed at” (h/t James Carter). It includes the murder of these scientists as well as various explosions killing many people. If you removed the proper nouns from this timeline (Iran, Ahmadinejad, Natanz), very few people would have any doubt that this is Terrorism.

UPDATE II: The right-wing religious extremist Rick Santorum said previously: ”On occasion scientists working on the nuclear program in Iran turn up dead. I think that’s a wonderful thing, candidly”; he added: “I think we should send a very clear message that if you are a scientist from Russia, North Korea, or from Iran and you are going to work on a nuclear program to develop a bomb for Iran, you are not safe.” This is how he justified all that:
If people say, “well, you can’t go out and assassinate people” — well, tell that to Awlaki. OK, we’ve done it. We’ve done it to an American citizen, so we can certainly do it to someone who’s producing a nuclear bomb that can be dropped on the state of Israel . . . .
We better hope and pray Rick Santorum never becomes President or else the legal prohibitions against assassinations will simply be ignored and that will become standard American policy — oh, wait. Meanwhile, long-time commenter DCLaw1 poses this question:
Even for people who don’t believe the US has anything to do with the assassination of Iranian scientists, just flip the scenario: how would they react to news that Israeli scientists were being systematically murdered, and Iranian officials just smiled and acted coy when asked about it? What would they say about that, and what would they say the US and Israel would be justified to do in response?
To answer that, just consider the consensus outrage that spewed forth when it was claimed (ridiculously) that Iran was sponsoring a Terror plot on U.S. soil to have a failed Texan used car salesman to hire Mexican drug cartels to kill the Saudi ambassador: Terrorism!

UPDATE III: Lemieux responds by saying: “If the United States was involved in the killings — and we should stress the ‘if’ here — the Obama administration’s actions were both illegal and immoral, for the same reasons stated in my earlier posts.” Similarly, Drum strongly implies that he believes the assassinations are Terrorism. Meanwhile, Professor Campos, writing on the blog where Lemieux writes, tries to explain to Lemieux’s angry commenters what the point is of asking these questions and what the benefit is of hearing denunciations not only when a right-wing blogger proposes it, but also when it’s done in reality (in comments, David Mizner attempted the same).
For its part, the U.S. denied involvement in today’s murder and said they “strongly condemn all acts of violence, including acts of violence like what is being reported today,” while ”in Israel . . . the denial was much more vague. Brig. Gen. Yoav Mordechai, the Israeli military spokesman, wrote on his Facebook page that ‘I don’t know who took revenge on the Iranian scientist, but I am definitely not shedding a tear,’ Agence France-Presse reported.” Nonetheless, “Theodore Karasik, a security expert at the Institute for Near East and Gulf Military Analysis in Dubai, said the assassination fit a pattern over the past two years of covert operations by the West and its allies to ‘degrade and delay’ Iran’s nuclear program.”



Sorry, don't know how to imbed LiveLeak vids.


http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=4e0_1326290656


[FLASH]http://www.liveleak.com/e/4e0_1326290656[/FLASH]


:hmm:
 
The face of citizen journalism is changing rapidly with new technology.

That's a really good thing if you're a citizen trying to expose corruption and abuse, or if you're just trying to become more informed. It's not so good for people trying to keep their dirty secrets.

Legislators to the rescue!

The state of Florida is trying to make it illegal to film or photograph farms in order to stem the tide of exposure of animal cruelty in Big Agra factory farms.

Apparently, they're not concerned the conditions and abuses these animals suffer, they're concerned about us and our cameras exposing it...​












:hmm:
 
The face of citizen journalism is changing rapidly with new technology.

That's a really good thing if you're a citizen trying to expose corruption and abuse, or if you're just trying to become more informed. It's not so good for people trying to keep their dirty secrets.

Legislators to the rescue!

The state of Florida is trying to make it illegal to film or photograph farms in order to stem the tide of exposure of animal cruelty in Big Agra factory farms.

Apparently, they're not concerned the conditions and abuses these animals suffer, they're concerned about us and our cameras exposing it...​













:hmm:

This shit is vile, and is part of why people are getting sick from the food we eat. :smh:
 
[COLOR
Bradley Manning was held in solitary confinement for the first 10 months of his incarceration. During this time he was denied meaningful exercise, social interaction, sunlight, and was occasionally kept completely naked.

These conditions are illegal even under US military law as they amount to extreme pre-trial punishment and it's not over for him yet.

This is what he got for telling the TRUTH about the Iraq War.

George W. Bush lied about the Iraq War and was re-elected.

If you see something, say something... unless it's a war crime.​
="DarkSlateGray"][/COLOR]

















:hmm:
 
Back
Top