Nur Posted January 22, 2010 The Terrorism Conundrum By Philip Giraldi January 21, 2010 "Antiwar" -- Jan. 20, 2010 -- In the wake of 9/11, almost anything the US government did was accepted uncritically by the public. The Patriot Act was quickly passed, abridging the freedoms that Americans had enjoyed for more than two hundred years with barely a whimper from Congress and the media. George W. Bush declared war on the world, defining his security doctrine as the right of the United States to act preemptively anywhere and at any time against any nation that the White House perceived to be a threat. Bush also declared his global war on terror, committing his administration to intervene using military and intelligence resources wherever his definition of terrorists was to be found. It was a devil’s bargain, reassuring the American people that the government was doing something to make them more secure while at the same time stripping them of many fundamental rights and turning topsy-turvy the international order where acts of war had hitherto been condemned as the gravest of crimes. Right from the beginning, some voices even in Congress and the mainstream media urged calm, but they were overwhelmed by those who were crying out for revenge. Revenge soon morphed into a number of ill-advised policies leading to the disastrous invasion of Iraq. Looking back on those years from the perspective of 2010 it is possible to see that it was fear that drove the nation at that time. Fear enabled the process that turned America down a dark path and was itself fed by the shapeless threat of terrorism, which was regularly invoked by those in the government. Unfortunately little has changed since 9/11 and it would be easy to close one’s eyes in Barack Obama’s America and imagine that it is 2001 and that George Bush is still president. American soldiers are ensconced in Iraq, surging in Afghanistan, and poised to intervene in places like Yemen and Somalia. Hellfire missiles fired from pilotless drones rain down on Pakistani tribesmen more frequently now than under George W. Bush. Guantánamo Prison is still open and Bagram Prison promises to become the new Abu Ghraib. And there is still fearmongering to drive the entire process, solemn words from the White House warning the American people about the continuing global terrorist threat. From the start many Americans were skeptical of George Bush’s global war on terror, recognizing it for the sloganeering that it was, security policy by bumper sticker. Terror is not a nation nor is it a group. It is a tactic. It has existed since men first picked up rocks to strike each other but in its modern form it was developed in Palestine in the 1940s when the Haganah and Stern Gangs struck against civilian targets like the King David Hotel to drive the British out. It was then used by the nascent state of Israel against Palestinian Arabs to force them to leave their homes. Terrorism consists of attacking civilian targets to demoralize the local population and weaken its ability to resist. So a terrorist must be someone who uses terror, right? Well, by some definitions yes, but not really and the word terrorist is ultimately no more enlightening than references to terror. It is much more useful to regard the groups that employ terror as political entities, using the tactic in support of what is almost invariably a broader agenda. Recognizing that reality, it has become cliché that today’s terrorist can become tomorrow’s statesman as the political winds shift. One might profitably look at some examples from groups currently or at one time considered to be “terrorist” by the world community, like Hezbollah. Hezbollah became prominent because it resisted the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon. To be sure, it used the terror tactic to attack Israeli civilians in the settlements in the northern part of the country, but its principal objective was to drive out the Israeli occupiers. It finally did so in 2006, using conventional military tactics, not terror, while burnishing its reputation by providing goods and services to many of the poor in the area where it holds sway. It has become a partner in government in Lebanon, morphing into a largely conventional political party. It still skirmishes with Israel along the border between the two countries but its ability to threaten the rest of the world and, more particularly the United States, is zero. And then there were the Viet Cong in Vietnam. Did they use terror? Certainly. But they did so to establish political control over a large part of the countryside and also to spread fear in Vietnam’s cities. When they felt themselves strong enough they also engaged in stand up fights with US forces and the South Vietnamese Army. And they were overwhelmingly a political group with a political objective, i.e to replace the US puppet Vietnamese government. Did the Viet Cong ever threaten the United States through its ability to employ the terror tactic? Not in the least. Finally there is the example of the Taliban. The Taliban is referred to by the US government as a terrorist organization and it has indeed killed civilians to establish control over parts of Afghanistan. But it also fights against US and NATO forces in a conventional fashion, has worked to defeat the warlords and root out corrupt government officials, and has promised equal justice under Islamic Sharia law for the Afghan people. In many areas it is more popular than the government of President Hamid Karzai. When it previously ruled Afghanistan, it introduced strict religious rule but also eliminated drug production and warlordism. So calling it a terrorist group and indicating that you will not deal with it, except by imprisoning or killing its adherents, means that you are missing something. The group is essentially political and sees itself as a potential party of government only using terrorism as a tactic when it considers it to be necessary. The US government has essentially adopted an Israeli paradigm in refusing to deal with political opponents who employ terror. Its dismissal of groups like the Taliban as terrorists means that opportunities to engage them in terms of their true interests are being wasted. And it also makes for convenient political shorthand, rendering it unnecessary to consider the possibility that the groups involved have either legitimate grievances or positive motives. And it shapes the entire argument so as to avoid conclusions that might be considered unpleasant. It is frequently argued that the US is fighting in Afghanistan because it is better to fight “them” over there than over here. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The Taliban has absolutely no interest in the United States except insofar as the US is occupying Afghanistan. As Ron Paul puts it, correctly, when there is a terrorist incident they are only over here because we are over there. When we leave “there” the “they” will not be coming over here because they have no reason to do so. So the problem is that the language we use shapes how we think about an issue. Once you get rid of the buzz words terror and terrorist, meant to create fear and uncertainty, it is possible to come to grips with a reality that is quite different. The groups that the White House and State Department calls terrorist are really political organizations that seek change that will favor their own assumption of power. There have always been such groups and always will be. Most want US forces to leave their countries, many want Washington to stop supporting corrupt and autocratic Arab governments, and nearly all want the US-tolerated Israeli humiliation of the Palestinians to cease. Looking at them in that light, it is not difficult to discern what their motives are in opposing the United States. And it is also possible to see the various groups as individual cases that have to be dealt with selectively, not as part of a nonexistent worldwide conspiracy. The truth is that the US government prefers to have an enemy that can be defined simply, in Manichean terms. It seeks to create fear among the American people by presenting terrorism as some sort of monolith while it is in reality little more than a hodge podge of diverse political groupings that have varying motivations and objectives. The only thing that they have in common is that they sometimes use terror as a tactic. And the terror tactic is itself losing appeal. The only reason that groups that espouse terror appear to be increasing in numbers is because the countries the US is occupying or attacking are also growing in number, but nevertheless the numbers are unimpressive. There are certainly fewer than a couple of thousand adherents to groups that use terror worldwide. Young Muslim men are increasingly reluctant to be drawn into the fray and there are signs that the allure of jihad as a religious duty has waned. And those who use terrorism are themselves becoming more marginal and amateurish, as was evident in the Nigerian underwear bomber, a plot that could hardly succeed even with the best of luck. If there had not been errors made in the security process and exchange of information, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab would have been detained before boarding the plane in Amsterdam. Americans should no longer talk of terrorism or fear it because it is largely an empty threat. One is more likely to be eaten by a shark than killed in a terrorist attack. The effectiveness of the US government in sustaining fear through its combating of terror guarantees continuous war, makes for big government, and blinds America’s policymakers to reality. There are many groups out in the world vying for power. Some are unscrupulous in how they would achieve control, including willingness to employ terror. But most could care less about Washington as long as the United States leaves them alone. Leaving them alone might well be the best foreign and security policy that the United States could embrace. Philip Giraldi, a former CIA Officer, is a fellow with the American Conservative Defense Alliance. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nur Posted March 27, 2010 Deep Background By Philip Giraldi March 26, 2010 "American Conservative" -- Even in World War II, the United States did not attempt to assassinate U.S. citizens who went over to the enemy, but that has now changed with President Obama’s overseas contingency operations. On Feb. 3, Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair told the House Intelligence Committee that the United States government has developed procedures for killing American citizens abroad who are “involved” with groups threatening to carry out terrorist acts directed against other Americans. Three U.S. citizens have already been approved by the White House for summary execution as soon as actionable intelligence is developed to enable a pilotless drone’s hellfire missiles to do the killing. One is Yemeni cleric Anwar al-Aulaqi; the second is American al-Qaeda member Adam Perlman, who goes under the name Adam Yahiye Gadahn; and the third is believed to be a Somali from Minnesota who has joined the al-Qaeda affiliate al-Shabab in the Horn of Africa. Anwar al-Aulaqi, linked in the media to the Christmas underwear bombing and with Major Malik Nadal Hasan, the Fort Hood shooter, has denied any involvement in either incident. Perlman, a propagandist for al-Qaeda, is in Waziristan. Killing these men would involve using military drones to attack targets in three countries with which the United States is not at war. The Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution guarantee a citizen due process and a public trial, as well as the right to confront his accuser. The Obama administration is arguing that these American turncoats do not have constitutional rights because they are not physically in the United States and are actively engaged in planning terrorist acts that the government has the right to disrupt by killing them preemptively. Blair has also explained that there are “defined policies and legal procedures,” but as the criteria for inclusion on the kill list are secret, due process is likely limited to the ruminations of a senior bureaucrat and a government lawyer, neither of whom has a mandate to protect the rights of the suspect. Furthermore, Blair’s use of the world “involved” suggests that the definition of terrorist activity might be somewhat elastic. The result is that secret information used to make a secret decision can very definitely get you killed in the Obama White House’s Brave New World. It will also kill many of your friends and family, as the hellfire missiles are notorious for their infliction of collateral damage. Killing dissident citizens without due process is not a unique practice. Libyans, Iranians, and Soviets all did it in the 1980s and 1990s. But it is unusual in a liberal democracy where there are restraints on depriving a citizen of his life. The odd thing is that no one who matters seems too disturbed. No congressional committee protested, the New York Times only ran a short discussion thread on its online opinion page, and the Washington Post relegated the story to page 3 without any follow-up. Philip Giraldi, a former CIA Officer, is a fellow with the American Conservative Defense Alliance. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nur Posted May 15, 2010 Let’s Rejoice in Terror’s Benefits! By John Kirby May 14, 2010 "Providence Journal" -- On May 6, The New York Post ran the following story on its front page: “THANKS, FAISAL! Inept terror thug saves 900 cop jobs” “That’s how many cops were going to be cut before Faisal’s botched bid at Times Square terror. His effort prompted the city to restore $55 million to the NYPD, saving those jobs and making New York a safer place.” Though The Post didn’t mention it, Faisal wasn’t able to save 6,700 teaching jobs, 75 senior centers, 20 fire companies, nurses in elementary schools, and an unknown number of day-care centers and other programs for children, due to be cut by Mayor Bloomberg this year. But this still seems like a good time to pause and reflect on all the blessings we have received from Terror and the war thereon. Here is the short list of “thank you’s” I’d like to see from other terror beneficiaries who have plenty of reason to be grateful: • A much-belated "God Bless You!" from former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who on Sept. 10, 2001, announced that the Pentagon had “misplaced” $2.3 trillion. “Thanks, Osama! Your timing couldn’t have been better if I had planned it myself! In the chaos that followed, no one ever asked about all that money — and they still haven’t!” • A big high-five from Larry Silverstein, who took possession of the twin towers just two months before the attacks and who collected $4.55 billion in insurance money for World Trade Center’s One and Two and $861 million for the third building to collapse that day, World Trade Center Seven. (For those who may have forgotten or never known, WTC 7 was not hit by a plane, had only minor damage and had just a few small fires burning inside it when it mysteriously collapsed into its own footprint around 5:20 p.m. on Sept. 11, 2001.) “Thank you so much! I know I’m only a small investor in this Terror thing, but I’m truly grateful for whatever crumbs that fall from the Big Terror table!” • Here’s a heartfelt salute from the senior officers of our Armed Forces, who had run clean out of enemies by the turn of the millennium: “Thank you, Terror! When Soviet Communism collapsed, our whole reason for being collapsed with it. This wonderful, permanent war against ‘fear itself’ has a lot more juice than the War on Pinkos ever had! We have the largest military empire the world has ever seen, and we owe at least half of it to you!" • A hearty handshake from the shareholders and chief executive officers of Raytheon, McDonnell-Douglas, Lockheed-Martin, Boeing and the countless junior members in good standing of the Military-Industrial Complex: “To al-Qaida, Pakistani intelligence, and the CIA: Many thanks! Your inflated threats and geopolitical tinkering have meant inflated profits for us! And thanks, of course, to the taxpayers of America. The buck starts with you!" • And here’s a special thank you from the National Security State as a whole to the American people: “Thanks for swallowing what is so clearly a fairy tale (spiced up with real death!). It’s been so great for us, and incidentally has kept the public very safe (give or take a few teachers, children’s programs and innocent bystanders). Thanks, Terror! If you didn’t exist, we’d have to invent you! © 2010 The Providence Journal Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nur Posted May 28, 2010 Humanitarian Flotilla Vs Evil Navy By Gilad Atzmon May 27, 2010 "ICH" -- Haaretz reports today that Israel will attempt to block the humanitarian Freedom Flotilla heading toward Gaza. However, according to the Israeli paper, the humanitarian cargo would then be unloaded, inspected and sent to Gaza overland via the United Nations. Typical for Israel, it tries to win a lost battle. On the one hand, by stopping the flotilla Israel attempts to maintain its regional status as an omnipotent super power that controls the land, the air and the sea. On the other hand, the Jewish state pathetically also wants to evoke sympathy for being ‘sensitive’ to humanitarian issues and the Palestinian plight. The Israeli government fails to gather that the tide has changed. We see through them. We all know what the Jewish state stands for. We all know about the devastation in Gaza, we know about the siege, the destruction and the crimes against humanity. We all watch the Israeli separation wall cutting through Palestinian family's houses and olive orchards. We also follow the racist ethnic cleansing in East Jerusalem. The Israelis better save us from their spins and manipulations. In case the Israelis still fail to see it, they are dealing this time with an international flotilla that is sailing under Turkish and Greek flags, a fleet that carries 800 enthusiast activists from all over the world. The Israelis are dealing with peace lovers who are determined to break through the siege and deliver medical aid, cement, paper and food. On the deck we have 35 European parliamentarians who must have decided to say NO to Zionist fund raisers. This flotilla is a clear signal to Israel that the game is over. Israel is now all but officially isolated. All that is left for Israel is to come to terms with its true nature: a shameless racist, murderous and terrorist state. Militarily and politically Israel locked itself into a limbo. For the Israelis it is a “no win situation. The Israelis may have the military means to stop the flotilla from accomplishing its humanitarian mission. The Israeli Navy can easily block the flotilla's way, it can also impose an electronic blackout around the ships, such an act may lead to the loss of communication with the humanitarian mission. Israel would then have to act militarily. Yet, taking control over 8 ships and 800 activists armed with relentless will and backed by many cameras is not going to serve the Israeli interest. If Israel dare use force, this will backfire. We also have to bear in mind that this time the Turkish Government is closely monitoring the situation and openly supporting the mission. Israeli aggression at sea could lead to an evolving incident with some unpredictable consequences. Israel better give up on any attempt to stop the flotilla. On a further note, the Israeli Government and the Israeli people better start to come to terms with the fact that the game is soon to be over. The Zionist project and the Israeli state is in a state of moral bankruptcy. From that perspective the flotilla is not just a humanitarian mission, it is actually a reminder for all of us of the true meaning of humanism. Gilad Atzmon was born in Israel in 1963 and had his musical training at the Rubin Academy of Music, Jerusalem (Composition and Jazz). Atzmon's essays are widely published. His novels 'Guide to the perplexed' and 'My One And Only Love' have been translated into 24 languages. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nur Posted May 31, 2010 Israeli Butchery at Sea An institutional failure of a morbid society By Gilad Atzmon May 31, 2010 "ICH" -- As I write this piece the scale of the Israeli lethal slaughter at sea is yet to be clear. However we already know that at around 4am Gaza time, hundreds of IDF commandos stormed the Free Gaza international humanitarian fleet. We learn from the Arab press that at least 16 peace activists have been murdered and more than 50 were injured. Once again it is devastatingly obvious that Israel is not trying to hide its true nature: an inhuman murderous collective fuelled by a psychosis and driven by paranoia. For days the Israeli government prepared the Israeli society for the massacre at sea. It said that the Flotilla carried weapons, it had ‘terrorists’ on board. Only yesterday evening it occurred to me that this Israeli malicious media spin was there to prepare the Israeli public for a full scale Israeli deadly military operation in international waters. Make no mistake. If I knew exactly where Israel was heading and the possible consequences, the Israeli cabinet and military elite were fully aware of it all the way along. What happened yesterday wasn’t just a pirate terrorist attack. It was actually murder in broad day light even though it happened in the dark. Yesterday at 10 pm I contacted Free Gaza and shared with them everything I knew. I obviously grasped that hundreds of peace activists most of them elders, had very little chance against the Israeli killing machine. I was praying all night for our brothers and sisters. At 5am GMT the news broke to the world. In international waters Israel raided an innocent international convoy of boats carrying cement, paper and medical aid to the besieged Gazans. The Israelis were using live ammunition murdering and injuring everything around them. Today we will see demonstrations around the world, we will see many events mourning our dead. We may even see some of Israel’s friends ‘posturing’ against the slaughter. Clearly this is not enough. The massacre that took place yesterday was a premeditated Israeli operation. Israel wanted blood because it believes that its ‘power of deterrence’ expands with the more dead it leaves behind. The Israeli decision to use hundreds of commando soldiers against civilians was taken by the Israeli cabinet together with the Israeli top military commanders. What we saw yesterday wasn’t just a failure on the ground. It was actually an institutional failure of a morbid society that a long time ago lost touch with humanity. It is no secret that Palestinians are living in a siege for years. But it is now down to the nations to move on and mount the ultimate pressure on Israel and its citizens. Since the massacre yesterday was committed by a popular army that followed instructions given by a ‘democratically elected’ government, from now on, every Israeli should be considered as a suspicious war criminal unless proved different. Considering the fact that Israel stormed naval vessels sailing under Irish, Turkish and Greek flags. Both NATO members and EU countries must immediately cease their relationships with Israel and close their airspace to Israeli airplanes. Considering yesterday’s news about Israeli nuclear submarines being stationed in the Gulf, the world must react quickly and severely. Israel is now officially mad and deadly. The Jewish State is not just careless about human life, as we have been following the Israeli press campaign leading to the slaughter, Israel actually seeks pleasure in inflicting pain and devastation on others. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nur Posted August 15, 2010 Somalia will never have peace and stability without US approval! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nur Posted October 4, 2010 What Tyranny Looks Like Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nur Posted November 12, 2010 Zero Based Terrorism By Philip Giraldi November 11, 2010 "CFL" -- Nov, 09, 2010-- There is every indication that the new Republican majority in the House of Representatives will support an open ended policy to "win" in Afghanistan, whatever that means, giving President Barack Obama a free pass to pursue any option he chooses, even if it entails an endless series of escalations. The Republicans would also support extending the war on terror to include the most recent bête noir Yemen and the perennial favorite Somalia. The only fly in the ointment is the presence of a substantial bloc of Tea Party Republicans in the new majority, a group that might be inclined to reflexively support American imperialism in all its glory but will almost certainly be opposed to paying for it through higher taxes and an expansion of the military to actually do the fighting. Before actually voting on any continuing resolution or new budget, it would behoove the Tea Partiers to do some loss versus gain budget analysis on the nine years of war on terror. The Obama Administration has recently revealed that it is budgeting $80 billion for intelligence programs for 2011. That figure is almost certainly too low, probably by at least 25%, as many programs are hidden in other budgets or secretly funded because of their sensitivity. And it is reasonable to assume that the intelligence budget has been at that elevated level since 9/11, meaning that something close to a trillion dollars has been spent. If one also includes part of the defense budget, which has doubled since 2001 based on the terrorist threat, the numbers are staggering, with Washington spending a minimum of two to three trillion dollars countering the terrorist menace, creating a massive governmental and private sector infrastructure ostensibly dedicated to keeping Americans safe. And now, in the wake of a series of letter bombs which did not explode and did no damage, the call is for increased security, almost certainly costing many more billions of dollars which will enrich former senior officials like Michael Chertoff. Chertoff, who headed the Department of Homeland Security under George W. Bush, now is a partner in a company that sells security equipment for airports. He has been on television frequently since the first letter bomb was discovered, recommending better and more intrusive security without revealing in any way his own ties to the industry that provides the necessary equipment. He is not alone. Security has become a vast and lucrative enterprise for those in position to cash in. If America's visible empire is its string of hundreds of bases and deployments worldwide, the hidden empire is the military industrial complex with tentacles into nearly every congressional district that supports the endeavor. And what about the terrorist threat itself? To note that it has been greatly exaggerated would be the understatement of the century. Most Americans would be surprised to learn that no US citizen has been killed in the United States since 9/11 by an actual member of any of the groups that the State Department defines as "terrorist." Recent attacks were carried out by "loners," individuals who wanted to get even for US attacks on Muslim civilians worldwide, not members of militant groups or motivated by any desire to convert the world to Islam. As Ron Paul has noted, they have attacked us because we are over there, in foreign lands killing civilians. If, as FOX news pundits frequently claim, terrorism is all part of a worldwide "Islamofascist" conspiracy to establish the Caliphate and kill unbelievers, it is all pretty lame. Underwear, SUV, and letter bombs have all failed to explode and experts are divided on whether they can work at all given the limitations of the technology. If I were a terrorist wannabe, I would be laughing all the way to the bank as the US and Europe prepare to pour more money into preventive measures in response to chemical bombs that are often mixed together in somebody's kitchen. Usama bin Laden once predicted that he would break the United States economically and it now appears that he understood very well that every American response to even the most minor threat would be a massive overreaction and overkill, eventually bankrupting the country. And the Tea Partiers should look at both sides of the balance sheet before casting their votes on a continuing resolution to continue the war on terror. Assuming that Washington has spent some trillions of dollars against terrorists, it is important to note what the actual threat is and to evaluate what has been accomplished. It is undeniably safer to fly today, but identifying other areas in which national security has been improved continues to be elusive in spite of the expenditure of vast amounts of money. The fact that both Democratic and Republican administrations have been able to repeatedly cite "terrorism" to justify nearly everything should suggest that either there are millions of terrorists running loose or that the policy to restrain them has failed. In spite of the most intensive manhunt in history, Usama bin Laden might or might not be still alive, but even if he is dead it has not been due to any effort by Washington to kill him. And the money poured down a vast pit called government has not exactly hit the target. The terrorist groups operating in 2001 are still around, possibly by design to justify spending still more money in a never ending cycle until the cash runs out. The Tea Partiers should be asking themselves what exactly all the money is buying and should begin to question the bipartisan national security policy that has the United States invading and occupying country after country in an attempt to fix other people's problems. They should begin to ask just what would happen if the American voters were to finally demand that the Pentagon close its seven hundred bases overseas and bring our people home as part of a policy of non-intervention as envisioned by the Founding Fathers. Would the so-called terrorists rally and follow our soldiers home to wreak havoc? Somehow, I just don't think it would work out that way. America might then become free to be a hegemon based not on military might but on values and good example. Just imagine what that would be like. Philip M. Giraldi is a former CIA counter-terrorism specialist and military intelligence officer who served 19 years overseas in Turkey, Italy, Germany, and Spain. He was Chief of Base in Barcelona from 1989 to 1992, was designated as senior Agency officer for support at the Olympic Games, and served as official liaison to the Spanish Security and Intelligence services. He has been designated by the General Accountability Office as an expert on the impact of illegal immigration on terrorism. Copyright © 2010 Campaign for Liberty Home Of The Free! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nur Posted July 23, 2011 The Second American Revolution: The American Autumn In the year 2450 BC ( As per best estimates) , Pharaoh chased the weak Israelite to a dead end, not their dead end, his. The Red Sea seemed just the right place where Pharaoh's soldiers planned to corner and butcher the weak exhausted, starved, men, women, old and infants to bring them back for more oppression and slavery. ( There were no cameras nor television to cover that misery, but hungry Somali children being bombarded by American Drones is as close it can get) But against all odds, faith defeated sheer power that gloomy day, Pharaoh and his soldiers drowned in the Red Sea, while the oppressed masses of the children of prophet Yaqub ( Israel), may peace and blessings be upon him, were saved by Allah, their only friend and ally, their creator and Sustainer from the punishment that befell Mighty Pharaoh and his cruel soldiers that day. Ironically, the descendants of these freed slaves who have grown financially too powerful throughout the centuries that followed, have used their immense wealth that they have amassed to steal a new nation in the far western corner of the world in a land called called America. They will use America as a horse or a bull to build International Corporatcracy which led to worse oppression to their fellow Palestinians, Iraqis , Afghans and poor hungry Somalis. Today, the people of Middle East are shaking shame off their backs and are in the middle of a revolution to free themselves from the yokes of tyranny and oppression, and in doing so, they have inspired the oppressed people of Columbus and Amerigo Vespucci to regain their freedom from another geographically tiny nation wielding unproportional power. On October the 6th, Autumn of 2011, Americans will take their anger to Washington DC to regain their freedom like the Arabs masses have done so in the Spring of this year. <a href="http://"The Second American Revolution"">The Second American Revolution Nur Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites