Archive for 9/11

The War On Terror, That Campaign Without End Launched 14 Years Ago By George W Bush, Is Tying Itself Up In Ever More Grotesque Contortions.

Posted in Condi Rice, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, George W. Bush, ISIS, Tony Blair with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on November 16, 2015 by sheriffali

On November 9, 2015 The Trial In London Of A Swedish Man, Bherlin Gildo, Accused Of Terrorism In Syria, Collapsed After It Became Clear British Intelligence Had Been Arming The Same Rebel Groups The Defendant Was Charged With Supporting.

ISIS - GEORGE W BUSH 4

The prosecution abandoned the case, apparently to avoid embarrassing the intelligence services. The defense argued that going ahead with the trial would have been an “affront to justice” when there was plenty of evidence the British state was itself providing “extensive support” to the armed Syrian opposition.

 

That didn’t only include the “non-lethal assistance” boasted of by the government (including body armor and military vehicles), but training, logistical support and the secret supply of “arms on a massive scale”. Reports were cited that M16 had cooperated with the CIA on a “rat line” 

ISIS - GEORGE W BUSH

 ISIS - GEORGE W BUSH 2

Of arms transfers from Libyan stockpiles to the Syrian rebels in 2012 after the fall of the Gaddafi regime.

 

Clearly, the absurdity of sending someone to prison for doing what ministers and their security officials were up to themselves became too much. But it’s only the latest of a string of such cases. Less fortunate was a London cab driver Anis Sardar, who given a life sentence a fortnight earlier   for taking part in 2007 in resistance to the occupation of Iraq by US and British forces. Armed opposition to illegal invasion and occupation clearly doesn’t constitute terrorism or murder on most definitions, including the Geneva Convention.

 

But terrorism is now squarely in the eye of the beholder. And nowhere is that more so than in the Middle East, where today’s terrorists are tomorrow’s fighters against tyranny – and allies are enemies – often at the bewildering whim of a western policymaker’s conference call.

 

For the past year, US, British and other western forces have been back in Iraq, supposedly in the cause of destroying the hyper-sectarian terror group Islamic State (formerly known as al-Qaida in Iraq). This was after Isis overran huge chunks of Iraqi and Syrian territory and proclaimed a self-styled Islamic caliphate.

 

The campaign isn’t going well. Last month, Isis rolled into the Iraqi city of Ramadi, while on the other side of the now nonexistent border its forces conquered the Syrian town of Palmyra. Al-Qaida’s official franchise, the Nusra Front, has also been making gains in Syria. 

 

Some Iraqis complain that the US sat on its hands while all this was going on. The Americans insist they are trying to avoid civilian casualties, and claim significant successes. Privately, officials say they don’t want to be seen hammering Sunni strongholds in a sectarian war and risk upsetting their Sunni allies in the Gulf.

 

A revealing light on how we got here has now been shown by a recently declassified secret US Intelligence report, written in August 2012 which uncannily predicts – and effectively welcomes – the prospect of a “Salafist principality” in eastern Syria and an al-Qaida-controlled Islamic state in Syria and Iraq. In stark contrast to western claims at the time, the Defense Intelligence Agency document identifies al-Qaida in Iraq (which became Isis) and fellow Salafists as the “major forces driving the insurgency in Syria” – and states that “western countries, the Gulf states and Turkey” were supporting the opposition’s efforts to take control of eastern Syria.

 

Raising the “possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality”, the Pentagon report goes on, “this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran)”.

 

Which is pretty well exactly what happened two years later?  The report isn’t a policy document. It’s heavily redacted and there are ambiguities in the language. But the implications are clear enough. A year into the Syrian rebellion, the US and its allies weren’t only supporting and arming an opposition they knew to be dominated by extreme sectarian groups; they were prepared to countenance the creation of some sort of “Islamic state” – despite the “grave danger” to Iraq’s unity – as a Sunni buffer to weaken Syria. 

 

 That doesn’t mean the US created Isis, of course, though some of its Gulf allies certainly played a role in it – as the US vice-president, Joe Biden, acknowledged last year. But there was no al-Qaida in Iraq until the US and Britain invaded. And the US has certainly exploited the existence of Isis against other forces in the region as part of a wider drive to maintain western control.

 

The calculus changed when Isis started beheading westerners and posting atrocities online and the Gulf States are now backing other groups in the Syrian war, such as the Nusra Front. But this US and western habit of playing with jihadi groups, which then come back to bite them, goes back at least to the 1980s war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, which fostered the original al-Qaida under CIA tutelage.

 

It was recalibrated during the occupation of Iraq, when US forces led by General Petraeus sponsored an El Salvador style dirty war of sectarian death squads to weaken the Iraqi resistance. And it was reprised in 2011 in the Nato-orchestrated war in Libya, where Isis last week took control of Gaddafi’s home town of Sirte.

 

In reality, United States and western policy in the conflagration that is now the Middle East is in the classic mould of imperial divide-and-rule. American forces bomb one set of rebels while backing another in Syria and mount what are effectively joint military operations with Iran against Isis in Iraq while supporting Saudi Arabia’s military campaign against Iranian-backed Houthi forces in Yemen. However confused US policy may often be, a weak, partitioned Iraq and Syria fit such an approach perfectly.

 

What’s clear is that Isis and its monstrosities won’t be defeated by the same powers that brought it to Iraq and Syria in the first place, or whose open and covert war-making has fostered it in the years since. Endless western military interventions in the Middle East have brought only destruction and division. It’s the people of the region who can cure this disease – not those who incubated the virus.

 

 

Twitter @sheriffali

 

British Guardian Link

http://gu.com/p/49f8p/stw

 

In A Blistering Op-Ed 9/11 Widow Kristen Breitweiser Rips Condoleezza Rice, George W Bush Dick Cheney And Others – “Stop The Lies!”

Posted in 9/11, Condi Rice, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, George W. Bush, WIDOW kristen Breitweiser with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on November 2, 2015 by sheriffali

KRISTEN BREITWEISER - 9-11 WIDOW

“Dear Condi:

 

I’m going to keep this really simple.

 

In response to your comment that you could personally “plead guilty” to not having imagined terrorists would use passenger aircraft as weapons→please stop lying.

 

 

As proof, I provide the “Iron Man” documents from the Asymmetrical Threats Division of Joint Forces Intelligence Command (JFIC), also known as DO5, whose task it was to track UBL from mid 1998-mid 2001.

 

 

I would first note that you were National Security Advisor to the President of the United States — that means that you had pretty much access to anything and everything available regarding terrorist threats from groups like Al Qaeda.

 

Fourteen years later, everyone now knows about the summer of 2001 and the more than one dozen intelligence reports blinking red about an impending Al Qaeda terrorist attack. There was the August 6 PDB, FAA reports, CIA reports, DOD reports, and FBI reports — all indicating and discussing terrorist cells inside the US planning attacks inside the US.

 

What most people don’t know about is the smoking gun report from JFIC, DO5.

 

According to the report written in the summer of 2000: “The WMD Threat to the U.S.” (information cut off date 16 July 2000) the briefing slides emphasized that NYC was the most difficult consequence management problem and recommended using NYC as the model for planning/exercises. 

 

The oral briefing itself was much more sensitive, indicating that the World Trade Centers #1 and #2 were the most likely buildings to be attacked in the U.S., followed closely by the Pentagon. The briefer indicated that the worst case scenario would be one Tower collapsed onto the other. 

 

 

The possibility of striking the buildings with a plane may have been discussed then — it was certainly discussed in the Red Cell Analysis leading up to the briefing period. The acting Deputy of DO5 (name redacted), proposed in the Red Cell Analysis that the building could be struck by a jetliner. Discussion followed on contacting World Trade Center security and engineering/architectural staff, but the idea was not further explored because of a command climate discouraging contact with the civilian community.

 

 

So please Ms. Rice — with all due respect — stand down and stop spouting lies like, “The idea the president of the United States was warned that Al-Qaeda was going to attack the United States and did nothing about it. Really? Do you think any president of the United States, if he had even an inkling there was going to be an attack, they wouldn’t have moved heaven and earth to try to stop it?”

 

Because neither you nor President Bush nor DCI George Tenet, nor Vice President Dick Cheney, nor Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, nor FBI Director Robert Mueller, stopped these terrorists from killing 3,000 people.

 

You had the information; you saw the reports. You were given the briefings. You all knew the facts. Indeed, many in our intelligence community were tracking the 9/11 terrorists and knew more than an “inkling” about their plans. And none of you did anything to stop them. In fact, many of the teams tracking these terrorists were inexplicably thwarted, blocked, and ordered to STOP their surveillance, investigation, and analysis of the 9/11 terrorists who went on to kill 3,000 innocent people like my husband.

 

READ THE DOCUMENTS.

KNOW THE FACTS.

3,000 PEOPLE WERE KILLED.

NOT ONE PERSON HAS BEEN HELD ACCOUNTABLE.

STOP THE LIES.”

[Huffington Post

 

Twitter @sheriffali

 

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kristen-breitweiser/condi-rice-heres-your-911-smoking-gun_b_8430814.html

President Obama And Hillary Clinton 1 Attack Benghazi 4 Dead: George W Bush 13 Attacks 60 Dead: Ronald Reagan 7 Attacks 94 Dead!

Posted in Benghazi, Politics with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 7, 2015 by sheriffali

If President Obama was in the White House and having had at least 12 months of Intelligence Reports showing Al Qaeda as a detrimental threat to the United States and then on August 6, 2001 he received a Presidential Daily Briefing PDF that stated Al Qaeda determined to strike within the Continental United States and then 9/11 occurred on Obama’s watch, Republicans would have not only impeached Obama, but they would have sought criminal prosecution.

 

And if Obama and Biden along with Hillary Clinton had manipulated the 9/11 tragedy and invaded Iraq that killed 4,500 American Soldiers, Republicans would not have only removed them from Office, but they would have been tried for Treason.

 

When you consider all the criminal wrongdoings by George W Bush and Dick Cheney in the Bush Administration and to this date no one ever had to answer for the Crimes against America and Crimes against foreign countries and their citizens, it is numbing to think that “all of this Criminal Negligence and Criminality was simply water under the bridge.”

 

But to this date and despite Kevin McCarthy Public Statement of Taxpayers Money in the Republican Committee Benghazi Scam Witch Hunt, Republicans are still defending their Criminality; the Media prods along and the Democrats, except for Hillary Clinton and a few others, their silence is deafening.

 

Today October 7, 2015 The House Of Congress Voted 240 – 183 to continue the Benghazi Scam Investigation. It seems self evident that a large number of the American Public are truly uninformed, ignorant, uneducated and brainwashed.

 

America’s New Motto! Lies Prosper – Truth Dies!

 

Twitter @sheriffali @QuoVadisGA

WHITE HOUSE 2016 OBAMA BUSH REAGAN WHITE HOUSE - GOP BENGHAZI SCAM OBAMA HILLARY IRAQ GEORGE W BUSH MESS WHITE HOUSE - 2016 HRC 9-11 

In Defense Of Hillary Clinton Women Who Hate Other Women: The Psychological Root of Snarky [Psychology Dot Com]

Posted in 2016 Presidency, Hillary Clinton, Politics with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on August 15, 2015 by sheriffali

 

As a Man I think it is fair to say that not all but many Men are Misogynists and  Chauvinistic towards women, despite having Mothers, Daughters, Sisters, Aunts and Nieces. Of course this is very damning but what is even worse is when Women hate other Women because they are either intimidated by Women that are highly successful and a force to be reckoned with.

 

CLINTON CAMPAIGN - THE ONLY 2016 CHOICEBARACK - BUSH CHENY PLUS CRIMESIRAQ GEORGE W BUSH MESS

I am supporting Hillary Clinton as I did in 2008 to be America’s First Female President and in comments from my Blog, Facebook Page, Twitter and other Social Media, I am unequivocally surprised at the statements made by other women towards the Former First Lady, US Senator, Secretary of State and the most viable Candidate for President in the upcoming 2016 Presidential Race.

[Psychology Dot Com] “As I overheard a group of women this past week in line at a store verbally tear apart a couple of women within their social circle who happened to be absent, I was taken aback by the vitriol. As I reflected on how women talk about other women, I thought about what I’ve heard so many women say over the years: 

 

“Girls are so much crueler to each other than men.” Based on fifteen years of clinical work with women who represent virtually every possible demographic variable (Come on, I trained in New York City), I can assuredly report that the women I’ve worked with report more critical views of other women than the men do with their own male peers.

 

Most women will tell you that they have survived at least one mean girl in their past: a girl who dismissed, put down, or even socially tormented them. What does the research say? It probably goes without saying that the research is complex, particularly because it is challenging (or impossible?) to measure a critical, negative or hostile attitude given the self-serving bias that makes people want to see themselves as good and upstanding. Fortunately, recent years have seen an uptick in attention when it comes to the research. 

 

Research shows that women during the college years may have negative attitudes about particular types of other women. Vrangalova and colleagues (2013) found that female college students were less likely to want to be friends with another female who was seen as sexually promiscuous, when compared to the rate for male college students who wanted to be friends with a promiscuous male peer. The study showed that the women clearly noticed the promiscuous woman and also had negative beliefs about her as a result.

 

In terms of women’s approach to competition, research from Benenson and colleagues (2011) is particularly interesting. According to the study, women may be more sensitive than men to social exclusion, and when they feel threatened by the prospect of being left out, a woman’s first response may be to socially exclude a third party. Again, for any woman who’s been on the receiving end of a female bully, this will come as no surprise.

 

In addition, Nicki Crick is a true rock star of gender research. Crick has devoted many years to investigating relational aggression, the type of aggression females appear to engage in more regularly than males (who tend to engage in more physical aggression). Crick would most likely argue that women’s negative attitudes are actually a manifestation of relational agression. In a study examining the attitudes and aggressive behavior of fourth and fifth grade boys and girls, Crick and Bigbee (1998) found that girls were significantly more relationally victimized, while boys were significantly more overtly victimized.

 

In talking about the influence a mother has on her daughter, we also have to talk about social learning theory. Social learning theory reminds us that modeling has much to do with how children learn. The real but graphic truth is that there are many mothers out there in the world who aren’t so sweet to their daughters, and readily say and do things that would make many of us cringe. It’s critical to note that much of what is said and done by mothers that is ultimately hurtful was engaged under the veiled intention of having ‘her best interests in mind.’  I have found that women who are mean-spirited about other women were often raised by a mother who probably didn’t like herself and didn’t feel warmly toward women, in general, either.

 

The other factor that I see at work in my practice is anxiety. I find that the majority of female criticism actually stems from feeling inadequate in an area of life they value highly. For example, I have a female client who is extremely critical of other’s parenting styles, but it’s simultaneously worth noting that she has had great difficulty becoming pregnant and is currently in the midst of fertility treatments. With my client, she feels inadequate and defensive, and she defends herself by criticizing other women’s parenting styles. In other words, she’s not critical of other women because she thinks less of them; she is covetous of what they have instead.

 

The women I have seen clinically over the years also have reported far greater anxiety in the appearance department than men, and I see that the pressure women feel from men and the media to fit a certain physical type of thinness and beauty gets transformed to the point that they turn it on each other. Interestingly, one 2012 study from Snapp and colleagues found that young women with high family support and low levels of perceived socio-cultural pressure from family, friends and the media regarding the importance of achieving a ‘thin and beautiful’ ideal had a more positive body image. It makes perfect sense, too, so let’s all agree to watch the amount of pressure we inflict on young girls.

 

I know, I know: Things seem to look good for Hillary in 2016, and there are lots of other examples of the progress American culture has made in terms of gender equality. Yet women continue to earn less money today than men and occupy fewer positions in politics and at the heads of Fortune 500 companies. Independent of what the research shows, it’s understandable on a common-sense level if women feel that they must work hard to secure whatever social power they can, and this may sometimes take the form of exclusionary practices with other women. When it comes to our kids, I believe that there is much we can do and say to give our daughters the sense that their lives will be equally important to those of men, and I’ll teach my daughter that she’ll get there by supporting—and not criticizing—other girls. If I’m careful, one day she’ll be a woman who will speak positively about other women.”

 

 

Twitter @sheriffali

GOP - HYPOCRISY AUG 15 15 GOP - HYPOCRISY AUG 15 15 1

 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/insight-is-2020/201309/women-who-hate-other-women-the-psychological-root-snarky

References

Association for Psychological Science (2011, March 5). Mean girls and queen bees: Females threatened by social exclusion will reject others first. ScienceDaily. Retrieved September 17, 2013, from <a href=”http://www.sciencedaily.com (link is external)¬ ” target=”_blank”>http://www.sciencedaily.com (link is external)¬ </a>/releases/2011/02/110224121907.ht.

American Psychological Association (1998, March 26). Boys And Girls Are Cruel To Each Other In Different Ways — But The Effects Are Equally Harmful. ScienceDaily. Retrieved September 24, 2013, from http://www.sciencedaily.com (link is external)­/releases/1998/03/980326075743.htm

Shannon Snapp, Laura Hensley-Choate, Ehri Ryu. A Body Image Resilience Model for First-Year College Women. Sex Roles, 2012; DOI: 10.1007/s11199-012-0163-1 (link is external)

Springer Science+Business Media (2012, May 9). Self-worth needs to go beyond appearance, experts say. ScienceDaily. Retrieved September 17, 2013, from <a href=”http://www.sciencedaily.com (link is external)¬ ”

  1. Vrangalova, R. E. Bukberg, G. Rieger. Birds of a feather? Not when it comes to sexual permissiveness. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 2013; DOI: 10.1177/0265407513487638