MEMORIAL DAY 2010 EDITION a tribute to our fallen
| by: AJA BROOKS, OFFICIAL INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM VOLUNTEER FOR THE BLACK RIBBON OFFENSIVE CAMPAIGN AGAINST MEDIA BIAS AND GA LOBBYIST FOR "LIFE AND LIBERTY" |
| WHAT IS "THE SYNTHESIS"? The synthesis is an objective analysis of political journalism, an assessment of the perception of the facts, a political digest for the common man. DISCLAIMER: IF YOU'RE IGNORANT, A HYPOCRITE, OR NOT A FAN OF RAW JOURNALISM, THIS MAY NOT BE FOR YOU, AND YOU SHOULD JUST STOP READING NOW AND DELETE THIS, NOT SEND ME AN EMAIL BACK WHINING ABOUT IT, BECAUSE YOU'RE JUST GOING TO GET IT FORWARDED BACK TO YOUR OWN BOX --- just ask Carolyn Cary of "The Citizen" Fayette Edition! There are no spam laws in GA, and just because I use my freedom of speech in a way that challenges you doesn't necessarily mean anything in a court of law, or by you threatening to send me a summons in the mail just because your sensibilities are different than mine: it doesn't make me "scum"; it just makes your political philosophy as stale and decrepit as your existence and attitude....(if you're curious, see the archive at the end of this edition.) I have even found that those in law enforcement are seemingly oblivious to our current laws and how the laws are supposed to be interpreted properly by through the Constitution, so I encourage you to exercise your rights, before they disappear from American culture. You don't have to write a newsletter like this one, but you surely can forward it to your friends, and you can even talk about it around the water cooler!! This publication is brought to you by people like us, who seek out the truth, an online collaboration of discussion topics for your perusal. *If you're being threatened with legal action for telling the truth, you're on the right side of the law*. |
MANY OF YOU MISSED THE FUNERAL ON WEDNESDAY FOR THE WORKERS WHO DIED IN THE EXPLOSION ON THE OIL RIG... I WOULD LIKE TO PERSONALLY CONVEY MY CONDOLENCES, AS SOMEONE WHO EXAMINES AND VOLUNTARILY REPORTS ON NEWS STORIES, I HAVEN'T SEEN SOMETHING QUITE SO CHILLING AS 5 SHIPS SPEWING WATER FROM ALL SIDES AND IN THIS PICTURE, WHAT APPEARS TO BE A PERSON ON THE EDGE OF THE RIG ABOUT TO JUMP OFF OR BE KILLED IN THE EXPLOSION, THAT IS NOT BEING QUENCHED FROM 5 HUGE AIR-BORNE RIVERS OF WATER! WHICH IS WHY I THINK THAT YOUR LOVED ONES WEREN'T JUST VICTIMS OF A TRAGIC WORK ACCIDENT, BUT SOMETHING MORE SINISTER, MAYBE EVEN AN ACT OF WAR ON THE UNITED STATES:
IT IS HARD FOR ME TO SEE HOW 11 PEOPLE WOULD'VE PERISHED, GIVEN THAT THERE IS WATER ON ALL SIDES AND THEY COULD JUMP TO SPARE THEMSELVES AT THE FIRST RUMBLE OF AN EXPLOSION, WHICH TELLS ME THAT THEY WERE CAUGHT OFF GUARD OR INTENTIONALLY DESTROYED. WHILE THIS ANGLE HAS YET TO BE INVESTIGATED BY THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA, I ASSURE YOU THAT IT DID NOT GO NEGLECTED BY ME. IN FACT, WHEN I INQUIRED WHY WERE WE SO FOCUSED ON THURSDAY'S VOTE OF REPEALING "DON'T ASK... DON'T TELL", AND I INCLUDED THE DONOR LISTING OF THAT $24,000 FROM HAMAS, AND THE MOTIVE BEHIND THE DONATIONS WITH THE TIES TO HAMAS, GOOGLE LOCKED ME OUT OF MY SECONDARY ACCOUNT FROM SENDING ANYTHING ELSE TO ANYONE ALL DAY--AS I SENT THAT OUT AT 9:11 AM, TO REMIND EVERYONE WHAT WE SHOULD BE FOCUSING ON. PEOPLE GOT THE MESSAGE, AND WITHIN MINUTES OF COMPOSING MY 2ND EMAIL CIRCULAR TO SEND FROM A DIFFERENT ACCOUNT ON GOOGLE BY 10AM, GOOGLE PUT MY SECONDARY ACCOUNT ON INDEFINITE LOCK DOWN, IN FACT EATING THE EMAIL THAT EXPOSES ROY BARNES AS A "PRIMO" CAREER POLITICIAN!
WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'M SORRY IF THIS HAS GONE UNACKNOWLEDGED BY THE PERSON CURRENTLY POSTING UP IN THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT, BUT HE HAS LIED ABOUT SO MANY THINGS, I DON'T EXPECT HIM TO LEND HIS SYMPATHIES TO YOU, FOR IT WOULD SURELY INCRIMINATE HIM AS BEING GUILTY OF TREASON, FOR HIM TO ACKNOWLEDGE THIS AS SOMETHING MORE THAN JUST A GLARING SAFETY VIOLATION AND TO HAVE TO KNOWLEDGE AND INVOLVEMENT IN IT AS AN ACT OF TERRORISM... SOMETHING THAT BENEFITS HIS GAZA STRIP BUDDIES WHO GAVE HIM $24,000 IN THE FORM OF CAMPAIGN DONATIONS FOR THE NEW PALESTINE.
IT'S NOT ENOUGH FOR PALIN TO SAY ON "FOX NEWS SUNDAY" RECENTLY THAT PEOPLE SHOULD RESEARCH OBAMA'S TIES TO BIG OIL DONORS, THAT IS WHAT SHE IS FOR, AND AFTER THE 2008 CAMPAIGN, SHE SAID THAT THE ADVISORY FOR THE MCCAIN CAMPAIGN THOUGHT THAT HER AND MCCAIN BOTH SHOULD TURN DOWN THE ANTI-OBAMA RHETORIC, FOR FEAR OF DISCONNECTING WITH VOTERS OVER NEGATIVITY IN CAMPAIGNING OR APPEARING TO BE "RACIST". I'VE NEVER HEARD THE TERM "OREO" BEFORE OBAMA TOOK THE STAGE... IT IS A RACIAL INSULT THAT INDICATES YOU'RE NOT OF A PURE HERITAGE, THAT YOU'RE OF AN UNDESIRABLE UNION OF BLACK AND WHITE/THAT YOU'RE ALSO SEXUALLY IMPURE... IT IS A WAY OF CALLING SOMEONE THE N-WORD WHO IS ONLY PARTIALLY THE N-WORD, BUT SOMEONE WHO IS DRESSED UP IN A MEDIA-LIKE MARKETABLE WAY, A TASTY SINFUL TREAT TO FEED THE PUBLIC WITH...
PALIN ADMITTED AFTER THE FAILED UNDERWEAR BOMBER ATTACK THAT SHE AND JOHN MCCAIN SHOULD'VE IGNORED THEIR CAMPAIGN ADVISORS AND SHOULD'VE AGGRESSIVELY GONE AFTER OBAMA ON HIS TERRORIST TIES IN 2008. INSTEAD OF SPOON FEEDING AMERICANS, THEY DECIDED TO LET AMERICA MAKE UP THEIR OWN MIND AND LET THEM RESEARCH SOME OF OBAMA'S SHADY TIES. THERE ARE OTHERS, OTHER THAN JUST BILL AYERS, BUT WITH BILL AYERS OF THE CHICAGO WEATHERMEN, THE DOOR IS OPENED TO AN ASSOCIATION OF MUSLIM MODERATE FUNDRAISERS, WHO DO NOT PUBLICLY ENDORSE ACTS OF TERRORISM NOR DIRECTLY ASSOCIATE THEMSELVES WITH TERRORIST GROUPS, BUT WHO MAY INDIRECTLY FUND THEM THROUGH A NETWORK OF RELIGIOUS MUSLIM ORGANIZATION LIKE C.A.I.R.:
AS YOU CAN SEE, WE'RE NOT DOING OURSELVES ANY FAVORS! AT SOME POINT A RELIGIOUS ORDER WILL BE DECREED OR THESE PEOPLE WILL RISE UP AGAINST AMERICANS IN AN INDOCTRINATED FEAR THAT THEY'RE BEING DISCRIMINATED AGAINST, AND THIS IS WHAT WILL BE KNOWN AS THE THREAT THAT AL QAEDA WILL CARRY THROUGH ON, SAYING THAT IF WE PENETRATED YEMEN OR INVADED THERE, THAT THEY WOULD ISSUE FULL-SCALE JIHAD. IF YOU RECALL, THAT WAS THEIR RESPONSE TO THE BOMBING OF A MOSQUE, AS THE MUSLIM CLERIC WAS HIDING SOMEONE WHO HAD BEEN RUNNING FROM THE FBI FOR YEARS!!
Al Qaeda In Iraq Confirms The Death Of Top 2 Figures
April 25th, 2010 | 
Author: KurtTheInfidel 
BAGHDAD (AP) — An al-Qaida front group in Iraq has confirmed the killing of its two top leaders but vowed in a statement that its members were not cowed by their death and would continue to fight.
“After a long journey filled with sacrifices and fighting falsehood and its representatives, two knights have dismounted to join the group of martyrs,” the statement said. “We announce that the Muslim nation has lost two of the leaders of jihad, and two of its men, who are only known as heroes on the path of jihad.”
The four-page statement by the Islamic State of Iraq was posted on a militant website early Sunday.
It concluded: “The war is still ongoing, and the favorable outcome will be for the pious.”
The statement comes a week after Iraqi and U.S. security forces raided a safe house near Tikrit, Saddam Hussein’s hometown north of Baghdad, killing Abu Omar al-Baghdadi and Abu Ayyub al-Masri.
The Islamic State of Iraq is an offshoot of al-Qaida in Iraq. Al-Baghdadi was its self-described leader and was so elusive that at times U.S. officials questioned whether he was a real person or merely a composite of a terrorist to give an Iraqi face to an organization led primarily by foreigners.
Al-Masri, a weapons expert who was trained in al-Qaida camps in Afghanistan in the late 1990s, was the shadowy national leader of al-Qaida in Iraq.
Their deaths were triumphantly announced last Monday by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. U.S. Vice President Joe Biden called the killings a “potentially devastating blow” to al-Qaida in Iraq.
But four days later, officials believe al-Qaida struck back, bombing mosques, shops and the office of an influential Shiite cleric to kill 72 in Iraq’s bloodiest day of the year so far. Homes of police also were bombed. Al-Maliki said the insurgents were fighting back after the deaths of their two leaders.
The new statement does not mention the Friday bombings, and no group has claimed responsibility for them yet. But the statement signals that al-Qaida will remain a threat to Iraq even without its top two leaders, and urges its members and supporters to stay the course.
“Commit to what those two leaders stood for,” the statement says. “Transform the blood of those two leaders into light and fire — a light which will illuminate the path before you and facilitate your ability of speech, and a fire against the enemies of the creed and the religion.”
Al-Maliki has seized on the militants’ killings to show he can restore stability to Iraq after years of bloodshed. Following his political coalition’s second-place finish in the March 7 parliamentary elections, al-Maliki is locked in a tight contest with secular challenger Ayad Allawi to see who will form the next government.
Al-Maliki’s coalition trails Allawi’s bloc by two seats in the 325-seat parliament, and neither has yet been able to secure enough support from other parties to muster a majority.
Meanwhile, the police chief in Hawija, 150 miles (240 kilometers) north of Baghdad said troops raided the nearby town of al-Safra and arrested Burhan Mahmoud Mohammed, a local leader of the Islamic State of Iraq.
Col. Fatah al-Khafaji told The Associated Press that troops acted on intelligence but did not indicate exactly where the information came from. Iraqi officials have said the investigation into al-Baghdadi and al-Masri, especially the arrest in March of a senior al-Qaida official, has also led them to a number of other leaders associated with the insurgency.
Also Sunday, an explosion in the northern Iraqi city of Irbil inside an iron factory killed five workers, including two Indians, two Arabs, a Kurd, and wounded 15. Workers from India, Bangladesh, Pakistan and other Asian nations have flocked to the Kurdish region in recent years as the economy there has grown.
Police Chief Abdul-Khaliq Talaat said the cause of the explosion on the outskirts of the city of Irbil was not immediately known. But the owner, Ali Ibrahim, said the iron factory works with military scraps that might have included rockets.
Irbil is located in Iraq’s Kurdish-controlled north about 217 miles (350 kilometers) north of Baghdad.
An Irbil hospital worker confirmed the deaths.
HE SERVED HIS TIME FOR CRIMES OF TERRORISM AND THEN, HE WENT RIGHT BACK TO THAT KIND OF LIFE. I'M SORRY, BUT THAT'S WHY I FEEL THOMSON IS A JOKE.... HERE IS YOUR PROJECTED STATE-OF-THE-ART, TERRORIST-RESCUE HOUSING UNIT: WHICH INSTEAD OF HEALTH CARE, YOU WILL GET THIS BUILDING, AND MORE STATE FUNDING FOR JAILS AND FEDERAL PRISONS, AS THE FIRST 150PGS. OF THE HEALTH CARE BILL, OBAMA'S RECONCILIATION ACT, IS FOR PRISON EXPANSION AND GENERIC DRUGS--NOT HEALTH CARE REFORM:
BECAUSE WHEN YOU SWEAR AN OATH TO ALLAH, IT IS TO YOUR DEATH THAT YOU PROMOTE AND ESTABLISH ISLAM AS THE DOMINANT RELIGION, AND A PRISON SENTENCE GIVES YOU A PLACE TO REST, TO CONVERT OTHERS, AND TO INFORM THE TERRORIST NETWORK OF THINGS EVEN BEHIND BARS!! I JUST SHOWED YOU A MAP OF HOW THEY INTEND TO USE MUSLIMS WHO LIVE HERE TO ACCOMPLISH THEIR AGENDA, AS THEY'VE SET UP SHOP IN EVERY MAJOR U.S. CITY.
AND THIS IS WHO OBAMA IS TAKING MONEY FROM !!!!
MAYBE 2 YEARS AGO, YOU WEREN'T READY TO HEAR THIS, BUT WHY DOES IT TAKE 9 ATTACKS ON OUR COUNTRY IN LESS THAN A YEAR PERIOD TO GET YOUR ATTENTION THAT THE CAMPAIGN DONATIONS WERE RECORDED 2 YEARS AGO, AND ONLY NOW DO I DISCOVER THE ACTUAL DONORS AND ONLY NOW WOULD YOU EVEN CONSIDER LISTENING TO WHAT MCCAIN AND PALIN WERE TRYING TO TELL YOU ALL ALONG!! NOT RE-ELECTING MCCAIN TO THE SENATE WOULD BE A MISTAKE--WE CAN'T AFFORD TO LOSE LEADERSHIP WHO HAS YOUR BEST INTEREST AT HEART:
According to Federal Election Commission filings, Barack Obama has received illegal donations from Palestinians living in Gaza, a hotbed of Hamas terrorists.
Obama received more than $24,000 in campaign contributions over a period of two months last fall from three Palestinian brothers from the "Edwan" family in Rafah, Gaza, which is a Hamas stronghold along the border with Egypt. The story was uncovered by Pamela Geller of the Atlas Shrugs blog. (see Federal Election Commission report)
Attorney and conservative commentator Debbie Schlussel notes foreign nationals are barred from making contributions in connection with any election -- federal, state, or local -- and an individual is allowed to give only $2,300 per election to a federal candidate or the candidate's campaign committee.
"The donations are basically through and through illegal -- that's number one. And number two is how the Obama campaign tried to conceal it," Schlussel 
chides. "They listed the campaign contributions as coming from Rafah, Georgia. They used the 'GA' from Gaza so it makes it look like it's legal; and then for the zip code it says '972,' which is actually the area code to dial over to Gaza," she contends.
The attorney comments that if the Obama campaign is willing to "accept thousands of dollars beyond the legal limit and they're also going to flout [Federal Election Commission] restrictions...that's very indicative of what kind of president [Obama] is going to be."
"They're not going to be worried about the details and they won't mind if they break the law to get to the final result that they want," adds Schlussel. She believes it is a "major news story when a presidential candidate receives money from 'a bastion of Islamic terrorism.' And Schlussel argues that the media is "bending over backwards to help Barack Obama and cover up any negative news about him."
Schlussel says Pamela Geller will likely file a Federal Election Commission complaint against the Obama campaign for violating restrictions and limits on campaign contributions.
You may view Matt Friedeman's video commentary on this story by clicking here.
   |
I want to start off here by saying that we're living in dark times, as in, Armed Forces Day/Armed Services Day was an over-commercialized production in my hometown of McDonough: there was the Geranium Festival extending the boundaries of "THE SQUARE" all the way to the back parking lots of the now dual judicial buildings, as justice has not expanded but crime. "THE SQUARE", which used to really be a circle, which is now just one way streets around a patch of grass and a Civil War monument, was filled with 2/3 less people than what people would usually expect for the town happening:
United States
In the United States, Armed Forces Day is celebrated on the third Saturday in May. It falls near the end of Armed Forces Week, which begins on the second Saturday of May and ends on the third Sunday of May.[12]
The day was created in 1949 to honor Americans serving in the five U.S. military branches – the Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, and Coast Guard – following the consolidation of the military services in the Department of Defense. It was intended to replace the separate Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard Days, but observance of these days, especially within each particular service, continues to this day.[13]
The first Armed Forces Day was celebrated by parades, open houses, receptions and air shows. In 1962, President Kennedy established Armed Forces Day as an official holiday. The United States' longest running city-sponsored Armed Forces Day Parade is held in Bremerton, WA. In 2009, Bremerton celebrated the 61st Armed Forces Day Parade([14]).
Because of their unique training schedules, National Guard and Reserve units may celebrate Armed Forces Day/Week over any period in May.
HOW ELSE WAS THIS MILITARY CELEBRATION RECOGNIZED IN MCDONOUGH, GA:
There were displays of patriotic memorabilia at the Dollar Tree and Wal-mart, but no one was buying it, and they were completely deserted while the other areas of the store were swarming with people. No one was wearing flag shirts, hats, or pins whatsoever. Probably why my 9-12 decorated pants and "RETIRE PELOSI" protest shirt attracted so many wide-eyed stares from white people, sneers from black people, and Mexicans who drifted to the other side of the aisle to avoid me entirely. I say this quite amused, because Native Americans get these reactions anyway to some varying degree naturally, but all the more so when I was dressed in my political gear!! Funny how people view a political movement by just looking at your clothing, and most people not quite knowing that I'm Native American, but still how people tend to think that what they see and hear on tv aren't "real" political battles that actually do occur while they work, and how they tend to hit the off button to the world's worries when that Friday whistle blows. Somehow seeing me silently work my way through Wal-mart made politics a reality to them:
For me, as I'm known in my hometown for playing trumpet and for being an intellectual and never associating myself in the political realm until 2008, the message was that much more grave and serious, seeing me wearing it emblazoned on my shirt and pants. I didn't have to wave a sign, shout from a megaphone, or stand around with a clip board collecting email addresses and holding meetings at my house: I simply had to wear something with a message that got my point across: YES PELOSI, the Easter Bunny will take back the health care bill as a bad egg!!
SO NOW THAT WE'VE REPEALED THE MILITARY POLICY OF "DON'T ASK... DON'T TELL", WE NOW HAVE NOT A COMMANDER IN CHIEF, WE HAVE A BUTT-F*CKER IN CHIEF:
I HATE TO SOUND OVERLY-CRITICAL, BUT IT MUST BE SAID: THE REASON THAT YOU DON'T PUT A DIVA IN CHARGE OF THE MILITARY IS BECAUSE THE FOCUS AND GOALS ARE ABOUT HOW IT MAKES THEM LOOK, NOT ABOUT SOUND MILITARY POLICY!
SINCE JOE SOLMONESES THINKS "DON'T ASK... DON'T TELL" IS WHAT HAS WEAKENED OUR NATIONAL SECURITY, WE HAVE A MAJOR PROBLEM OF PRIORITIES!!
"This is the beginning of the end of a shameful ban on open service by lesbian and gay troops that has weakened our national security," Joe Solmonese, president of Human Rights Campaign, a leading gay rights organization, said after the Senate panel's vote.
THIS WAS OBAMA'S QUESTIONNAIRE ANSWERS IN 1996, AND THIS IS WHY YOU DON'T VOTE FOR SOMEONE JUST BECAUSE YOU THINK YOU LIKE THEM, AS THIS SHOWS HOW THE OBAMA AGENDA HAS INFILTRATED EVERY AREA AND INTERPRETATION OF LAW AND WILL BE COMPLETELY POLLUTED BY KAGAN:
FIRST IT'S REPEALING "DON'T ASK...DON'T TELL", AND THEN THIS IS OBAMA'S TO DO LIST ON HOW TO HOMOSEXUALIZE THE ENTIRE COUNTRY, AND THESE ARE THE ONLY LAWS THAT HE'LL BE FOCUSING ON.
SO I ASK AGAIN:
WHY ARE WE MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THE LOGISTICS OF "DON'T ASK...DON'T TELL" WHEN OUR #1 PRIORITY SHOULD BE NATIONAL SECURITY?!
Instead of the gov.t focusing on national security as priority#1, given the fact Obama took campaign donations from Hamas for the New Palestine, and with the fact that we've had 9 attacks over the course of less than a year period than in the previous 10yrs./since 9/11/01, why are we more concerned over the logistics of a policy implemented to protect a person's rights/"Don't Ask-Don't Tell"??!! If you keep focusing your attention on distraction, there won't be anyone straight or otherwise left to worry about whether you're hetero or homo!
America put Obama on a pedestal, why us Southerners call him "POST TURTLE": you who support him cheated the election to get him in there, people are still getting offended about slavery and the K.K.K. when they never endured it themselves, cops are still being fingerpointed
for the death of children in making arrests, black people in office are corrupt, and Obama has not brought any order to America or united anyone. In fact, not much has changed, except maybe for the worse!
People are abusing their freedoms at the expense of others, from the religious realm to the business world. In the religious realm, Westboro Baptist Church has been protesting our soldiers' funerals, among other peoples' funerals!!!
(the message from Westoboro's pulpit is clear: "GAWD hates ALL of YOU~, except for the sheep of Westboro...)
Many of you have personally enjoyed the music of Dio and Paul Gray through such controversial bands of Black Sabbath and Slipknot. Many of you also enjoy the freedoms guaranteed to you by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, one of them being the right to free speech at the price purchased by the blood of our soldi.ers who serve, fight, and die for you -- to protect you from the enslavement of man, to give you a choice in what and whom you serve.
Well it seems that there is a group of people who profess to be Christians who will be protesting Paul Gray's funeral this Sunday, and this same group, Westboro Baptist Church has also protested Dio's funeral and the funerals of our fallen soldiers!
I'm asking that you support those who are mourning and grieving for the loss of their loved ones by wearing black now through Monday, or some form of patriotic clothing on Memorial Day. We are to weep with those who mourn, and to rejoice with those who rejoice, so in keeping with a loving and peaceful spirit, in a show of solidarity and unity in using free speech in a graceful way, I'm just asking that you show support and show that you care, that you're grateful for the sacrifices that these individuals have made whether through the art of music or the art of war to make your life better and what it is today.
Some of you think serving the military is a suicide mission, and our society has lost what it means to live and die sacrificially:
The Philistines occupied the five cities of Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Ekron, and Gath, along the coastal strip of southwestern Canaan, that belonged to Egypt up to the closing days of the Nineteenth Dynasty (ended 1185 BC). The biblical stories of Samson, Samuel, Saul and DavidIsraelite conflicts. The Philistines long held a monopoly on iron smithing (a skill they possibly acquired during conquests in Anatolia), and the biblical description of Goliath's armor is consistent with this iron-smithing technology.[citation needed] include accounts of Philistine-
According to the Bible, the Philistines made frequent incursions against the Israelites. There was almost perpetual war between the two peoples. The Philistine pentapolis were ruled by seranim (סְרָנִים, "lords"), who acted together for the common good, though to what extent they had a sense of a "nation" is not clear without literary sources. After their defeat by the Hebrew king David, who originally for a time worked as a mercenary for Achish of Gath, kings replaced the seranim, governing from various cities. Some of these kings were called Abimelech, which was initially a name and later a dynastic title.
The Philistines lost their independence to Tiglath-Pileser III of Assyria by 732 BC, and revolts in following years were all crushed. Nebuchadrezzar II of Babylon eventually conquered all of Syria and the Kingdom of Judah, and the former Philistine cities became part of the Neo-Babylonian Empire. There are few references to the Philistines after this time period. However, Ezekiel 25:16, Zechariah 9:6, and I Macabees 3 make mention of the Philistines, indicating that they still existed as a people in some capacity after the Babylonian invasion. The Philistines disappear as a distinct group by the late fifth century BCE.[8] Subsequently the mixed people of the former Philstine cities were converted to Judaism by the Hasmoneans.
The name "Palestine" comes, via Greek and Latin, from the Philistines; see History of Palestine.
While we may see the church of Westboro as our spiritual Philistines, or while we may see those who want the New Palestine at the expense of Israel and the Jewish people, you must realize that in this life, we may face very real enemies: some in human flesh, some spiritual, and some spiritual forces at work upon human flesh. Sometimes, it is not easy to fathom the war that takes place over our very souls, as God's armies of angels are there fighting for us, just like when Elisha prayed that his servant may see God's protective forces that surround us:
Bible in Basic English
Then Elisha made a prayer to the Lord, saying, Lord, let his eyes be open so that he may see. And the Lord made the young man's eyes open; and he saw that all the mountain was full of horses and carriages of fire round Elisha.
I hope that no matter what suicide looks like or what you've heard it to be preached about, the Bible not only picks the strongest man as the one who commits suicide, but that there was a purpose in his death that was not readily apparent. Surely if Samson was the strongest, he would've survived! Surely Samson wouldn't have killed himself, which is only considered honorable if avoiding death by the hands of your enemy whereby you would die dishonorably. Surely Samson was so strong, in his own strength, that he didn't need to sacrifice his life or depend on a God who isn't visible to the naked eye... instead by the end of Samson's life, he was willing to rely only upon God and to complete God's purpose for his life.
We may see suicide as bad and not understand how God brings anything good out of it, but the matter to judge a man's eternal soul belongs to God alone. While we may miss someone for how wonderful they were in our eyes, we may not realize why God has called them out of this natural life to the realm of the spiritual.
I hope that this brings all of you comfort in your loss, and while I did not intend to write a eulogy for Paul Gray, I pray that you know the reason for why I wear black, in love and sympathy for all of these people that we've lost, whose lives meant something and had purpose.
We have to confront things with truth, albeit, some seem more challenging and pose a Goliath on how to deal with them:
This started in 1901, but I will skip to the last 30 yrs. of history of this company who produces genetically modified food and animals, like pigs:
Monsanto scientists became the first to genetically modify a plant cell in 1982. Five years later, Monsanto conducted the first field tests of genetically engineered crops.
Through a process of mergers and spin-offs between 1997 and 2002, Monsanto made a transition from chemical giant to biotech giant. Part of this process involved the 1999 sale by Monsanto of their phenylalanine facilities to Great Lakes Chemical Corporation (GLC) for $125 million. In 2000, GLC sued Monsanto because of a $71 million dollar shortfall in expected sales.
In 2001, retired Monsanto chemist William S. Knowles was named a co-winner of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for his research on catalytic asymmetric hydrogenation, which was carried out at Monsanto beginning in the 1960s until his 1986 retirement.
Throughout 2004 and 2005, Monsanto filed lawsuits against many farmers in Canada and the U.S. on the grounds of patent infringement, specifically the farmers' sale of seed containing Monsanto's patented genes. In some cases, farmers claimed the seed was unknowingly sown by wind carrying the seeds from neighboring crops, a claim rejected in Monsanto Canada Inc. v. Schmeiser.[8] These instances began in the mid to late 1990s, with one of the most significant cases being decided in Monsanto's favor by the Canadian Supreme Court. By a 5-4 vote in late May 2004, that court ruled that "by cultivating a plant containing the patented gene and composed of the patented cells without license, the appellants (canola farmer Percy Schmeiser) deprived the respondents of the full enjoyment of the patent." With this ruling, the Canadian courts followed the U.S. Supreme Court in its decision on patent issues involving plants and genes.
As of February 2005, Monsanto has patent claims on breeding techniques for pigs which would grant them ownership of any pigs born of such techniques and their related herds. Greenpeace claims Monsanto is trying to claim ownership on ordinary breeding techniques.[9] Monsanto claims that the patent is a defensive measure to track animals from its system. They furthermore claim their patented method uses a specialized insemination device that requires less sperm than is typically needed.[10]
In 2006, the Public Patent Foundation filed requests with the United States Patent and Trademark Office to revoke four patents that Monsanto has used in patent lawsuits against farmers. In the first round of reexamination, claims in all four patents were rejected by the Patent Office in four separate rulings dating from February through July 2007.[11] Monsanto has since filed responses in the reexaminations.
In October 2008, the company's Canadian division, Monsanto Canada Inc., was named one of Canada's Top 100 Employers by Mediacorp Canada Inc., and was featured in Maclean's newsmagazine. Later that month, Monsanto Canada Inc. was also named one of Manitoba's Top Employers, which was announced by the Winnipeg Free Press newspaper.[12]
In January, 2010, Monsanto was named company of the year by Forbes.
In other words, Forbes has sold their prestigious title of quality to one of only monetary achievement, whose company and ethical practices lack integrity, to say the least. Of course, Forbes is not the only sell-out in these strange and dark times, and instead of a toy in a Cracker Jack Box, this place is giving away something with an order of shrimp tacos:
That is this Admin.'s biggest problem... the failure to lift a finger to do anything unless Obama tells them to! They should already know the regulatory scope and be actively carrying that out than to wait on his every sigh and shake of his head!!
Now with over 39 million gallons of oil erupting into the ocean and mucking up our coastlines for years to come, Obama has been VERIFIED to not to be a citizen by recent inquiry of the Social Security system of using different SS#'s AND BY HIS ACCEPTANCE OF BRIBES FROM HAMAS FOR THE INSTITUTION OF THE NEW PALESTINE, for you have failed to listen to the warnings of the Republican Party and failed to heed the people who've actually researched Obama....
back the people who died on the rig, undo the damage to the coastline by stopping the oil from spewing immediately from it ruining the shoreline for DECADES to come, and to hold to his word about anything he does...
He lied:
1) about his citizenship and allegiance to our country
2) about his environmental policies and went back on oil drilling
(WHICH REMINDS ME: GO SEE "IRON MAN 2", WAY MORE AWESOME THAN OBAMA'S ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES!!)
3) about the health care bill being about reform when it is prison
expansion and contracting with generic prescription pill companies
4) about making legitimate and effective legislation on Immigration
Reform, BECAUSE HE'S NOT A CITIZEN!!
Let me tell you: Sarah Palin set Obama up for the OKEY DOKE with her "DRILL-BABY-DRILL", and Obama played right into it... hook, line, and
sinker. NOW IT'S: "SPILL! BABY, SPILL!"
As already mentioned, did you look closely to see someone on the edge of the rig as it was exploding?
I suspect the rig was sabotaged/this was an act of terrorism, and Obama is a liability to our national security, making us weaker with his lack of integrity.
Not only does he not have the legal authority to occupy the Office, he is a confirmed liability to our national security by accepting bribes from Hamas!! That is what Palin meant by Obama's cozy relationship with people who have ties to oil....
Still not enough for you?
5) about "DON'T ASK...DON'T TELL", as when Obama has had personal relations with men, it's hard for his support of repealing a law to not look like his own personal agenda of that over the military, especially when gay men were murdered to cover up his sordid past, and at the very least, it looks like he places the lifestyle choice and personal identity over the whole group! I don't know where Obama gets any understanding of military training from, but when you put on a military uniform, you're no longer: white, black, red, brown, or yellow --- YOU'RE GREEN! And another point on military unity: you're neither gay, straight, bisexual, or try-sexual (as in, try anything sexual), as you're there to serve your country, not your sexual agenda!!!
6) about job creation: the passage of the financial reform bill creates 4 giant job increases for government jobs only, when this could be outsourced as private sector jobs, and THE STIMULUS MONEY IS STILL UNACCOUNTED FOR, as everyone has been so focused on every other "CRISIS DU JOUR", and now that the stimulus has finished puffing up the stock market, it now dipped below $10,000 again!! AND WE STILL HAVE NO JOB CREATION TO SHOW FOR IT, WITH GA HAVING A STEADY RATE OF UNEMPLOYMENT OF 10% OR MORE FOR OVER 2YRS. NOW !!! BASICALLY, THE GOVERNMENT IS TRYING TO PLAY GOD WITH YOUR MONEY:
Oh, and "LET'S NOT PUT A GOOD CRISIS TO WASTE"... the only sector that has grown in 3yrs. has been government jobs, so maybe if we wouldn't have wasted money on the stimulus or by expanding the government for what they failed to do anyway (REGULATE), then maybe we'd have the money to pay people to clean up the oil spill and charge that to the tab of BP, to make BP pay back the government. The spill is too big to hold them to the legislation enacted in the 90's that makes them solely responsibly for labor and cleanup!!
SO MANY OF YOUR ARE ASKING.... WHAT DO WE DO NOW?? WHAT CAN WE DO NOW BETWEEN SUMMER AND THE NOVEMBER ELECTIONS?
I PROPOSE A COUNTER-TERRORISM STRATEGY!! YOU NEED TO STUDY UP ON YOUR ENEMIES!! SUMMER SCHOOL FOR AMERICANS WHO SHOULD BE PATRIOTS:
TERRORISM OPERATES ON THREE PRINCIPLES:
1) IDEOLOGICAL
2) LOGISTICAL
3) ACTUAL
IGNORING THE PROBLEMS OF CORRUPTION AND WHAT ELSE IS GOING ON IN THE WORLD, WILL NOT MAKE TERRORISM GO AWAY, IN FACT, TERRORISM THRIVES IN ENVIRONMENTS OF COMPLACENCY, GIVING IT THE TIME AND SPACE TO GERMINATE BEFORE EXPLODING INTO SOMETHING UNIMAGINABLY UNMANAGEABLE AND DEADLY. THE BEST WAY THAT YOU CAN HONOR THOSE WHO DIED TO PROTECT YOU AND YOUR RIGHTS TO LIFE, LIBERTY, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS, IS TO LEARN TO PROTECT YOURSELF BY EXERCISING YOUR RIGHTS, FOR EXAMPLE:
HERE ARE YOUR COUNTER-TERRORISM RESPONSE MECHANISMS:
counter-terrorism has a narrower connotation, implying that it is directed at terrorist actors.
Specific types of responses include:
- Targeted laws, criminal procedures, deportations, and enhanced police powers
- Target hardening, such as locking doors or adding traffic barriers
- Pre-emptive or reactive military action
- Increased intelligence and surveillance activities
- Pre-emptive humanitarian activities
- More permissive interrogation and detention policies
- Official acceptance of torture as a valid tool
PICK SOMETHING PERSONAL TO YOU AND GO AFTER IT TO THE BITTER END:
Last year, I went to a training session to become a lobbyist, and I went to a Republican meeting for Karen Handel. After meeting her, I tried to address the issues of corruption in Clayton County by writing the Governor. While she should've been holding Clayton County accountable all along as Secretary of State, she was padding Perdue's numbers until Clayton County's looming budget problems were placing a strain on the state budget. When Perdue confronted her by cutting her budget, she resigned.
I initially went to the military about Clayton County's proliferate drug problems, as CCPD and HCPD were no help in 2006-2009, so the military contacted the FBI. Both CCPD and HCPD violated my Habeas corpus by not following proper arrest procedures and protocol:
The FBI led an inquiry into the former Administration of Victor Hill and into then Chief of Police Jeff Turner for evidence tampering, and an evidence back log of drugs and weaponry that would make Manuel Noriega proud!
(Manuel Antonio Noriega Moreno[1] (born February 11, 1934)[2] is a Panamanian politician and soldier. He was military dictator of Panama from 1983 to 1989.[3]
The 1989 invasion of Panama by the United States removed him from power; he was captured, detained as a prisoner of war, and flown to the United States. Noriega was tried on eight counts of drug trafficking, racketeering, and money laundering in April 1992. Noriega's U.S. prison sentence ended in September 2007;[4] pending the outcome of extradition requests by both Panama and France. France was granted its extradition request in April 2010, and the former dictator arrived in Paris on April 27, 2010.[5])
While the wild stallion operation under Victor Hill was flourishing, I was an undercover journalist waiting tables and trying to get a better job when I was made aware that former Sheriff Victor Hill was contracting with criminals: asking them to run drugs for time off their sentences and turning people in for drug cell cases; without paying undercover officers or properly involving the GBI or FBI for these operations instead. *This is an unethical practice which makes uncontaminated illegal drugs readily available to the public, and while it was lucrative, Karen Handel and Attorney General Thurbert Baker turned a blind eye to the whole thing until Victor Hill had not turned in county funds, when Gibson suspected $1.5 million was being shuffled around in a day trading scheme --- essentially, Hill was collecting illegal drug revenue from his goons and taking Clayton County's taxpayer dollars and gambling it away in the stock market!
None of this surfaced until I had written Victor Hill a letter, saying that the Harold Banke Justice Complex would be issued citations for operating against state standards, for which it is a private facility that receives state funding. He was neglecting the facility and its proper operating procedures. Facing a losing re-election, he declared bankruptcy, sticking Clayton County taxpayers with the tab for his misappropriation and leaving the Council one heck of a mess to clean up, including $60,000 worth of boiler equipment for the facility! If it wasn't for Eldrin Bell's insistence that integrity be maintained, the truth may have never made it through all of the proper channels! As a result of my perseverance, and despite being incarcerated after being threatened by one of Hill's goons, Hill had the goon beaten nearly to death in his own home when I pled not guilty and refused to have the goon's lawyer represent me, Maccione.
*HCPD's office fired my lawyer, and because of the delays, I didn't have a trial within 90days of indictment, so I essentially did the time for the charge as if I were guilty before even having the matter heard!! Judge Crumbley was kind enough to hear the case, saying that I could retry it within 3yrs., but with the subsequent FBI involvement, the investigation isn't complete still, and Perdue told me to approach Superior Court with this matter, as Superior Court issued the order for $12 million in drugs to be burned:
Posted: 10:57 AM Jan 13, 2010
Clayton County, Ga. police burn drugs after audit
Clayton County police say they've burned more than $12 million worth of drugs that had accumulated in their evidence room.
Reporter: Associated Press
Email Address: producers@wrdw.com
January 13, 2010
JONESBORO, Ga. -- Clayton County police say they've burned more than $12 million worth of drugs that had accumulated in their evidence room.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports County police spokeswoman Lt. Tina Daniel says police received a court order from a Superior Court judge to allow them to burn nearly 10,000 pounds of marijuana, crystal meth and other drugs. Daniel says the action came in response to a recent audit of the department.
In criticizing former Police Chief Jeff Turner's management of the department, county Chief of Staff Alex Cohilas described the narcotics evidence room as being "in shambles."
The burn was done with the aid of the Clayton Fire and Emergency Services, the Clayton County Sheriff's Office and the Clayton County District Attorney's Office.
(Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)
I would like to say that being a personal accountant for Perdue doth not a Secretary of State make! While I believe that Victor Hill is now running for Senate to avoid being arrested and charged with misappropriation, you plainly see that former Secretary of State Karen Handel and Attorney General Thurbert Baker have failed to charge him with misappropriation and defrauding a public office....
say did y'all bother to ask him about the rest of those fake badges that he issued when he declared that he would run?!
*At least Perdue has heard our concerns about the health care bill along with the petitions of Deal and Scott, with other matters and relevant legislation, to which he could've just as easily and lazily left office instead of addressing these issues that I laid at his feet, but unlike Handel and Baker, Perdue knows what it means to be entrusted to serve the public above one's own self-serving interests!! Public office is a test of character in itself.
I would like for all of you supporting McBerry to realize that we are warring against powers and principalities, not just politics and personalities! Please choose GA's future leadership wisely, and keep my supplications to you in mind, when you go to vote for GA's candidate for Governor and for the positions within the GA Legislature who sat idly by while this played out in our state.
Thank you for allowing this to be heard and discussed!
IN OTHER WORDS, BE A SPECTATOR WITH A PEN... BE A CITIZEN JOURNALIST... BE SOMEONE WHO DESIRES TO BE AN EDUCATED VOTER:
READ THE FOLLOWING FOR REFERENCE, AND FEEL FREE SUBMIT YOUR SUGGESTIONS TO WIKI:
TO READ IN MORE DETAIL:
Terrorism is a form of antisocial behavior, the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion.[1]There is no internationally agreed definition of terrorism.[2][3] Most common definitions of terrorism include only those acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a lone attack), and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants.
Some definitions also include acts of unlawful violence and war. The history of terrorist organizations suggests that they do not select terrorism for its political effectiveness.[4] Individual terrorists tend to be motivated more by a desire for social solidarity with other members of their organization than by political platforms or strategic objectives, which are often murky and undefined.[4] The word "terrorism" is politically and emotionally charged,[5] and this greatly compounds the difficulty of providing a precise definition. One 1988 study by the US Army found that over 100 definitions of the word "terrorism" have been used.[6] A person who practices terrorism is a terrorist. The concept of terrorism is itself controversial because it is often used by states to delegitimize political opponents, and thus legitimize the state's own use of terror against those opponents.
Terrorism has been used by a broad array of political organizations in furthering their objectives; both right-wing and left-wing political parties, nationalistic, and religious groups, revolutionaries and ruling governments.[7] The presence of non-state actors in widespread armed conflict has created controversy regarding the application of the laws of war. While acts of terrorism are criminal acts as per the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373 and domestic jurisprudence of almost all countries in the world, terrorism refers to a phenomenon including the actual acts, the perpetrators of acts of terrorism themselves and their motives. There is disagreement on definitions of terrorism.
"Terror" comes a Latin word meaning "to frighten." The terror cimbricus was a panic and state of emergency in Rome in response to the approach of warriors of the Cimbri tribe in 105BC. The Jacobins cited this precedent when imposing a Reign of Terror during the French Revolution. After the Jacobins lost power, "terrorist" became a term of abuse. Although the Reign of Terror was imposed by a government, in modern times "terrorism" usually refers to the killing of innocent people by a private group in such a way as to create a media spectacle. This meaning can be traced back to Sergey Nechayev, who described himself as a "terrorist."[8] Nechayev founded the Russian terrorist group People's Retribution (Народная расправа) in 1869.
In November 2004, a United Nations Security Council report described terrorism as any act "intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act." (Note that this report does not constitute international law.)[9]
In many countries, acts of terrorism are legally distinguished from criminal acts done for other purposes, and "terrorism" is defined by statute; see definition of terrorism for particular definitions. Common principles among legal definitions of terrorism provide an emerging consensus as to meaning and also foster cooperation between law enforcement personnel in different countries. Among these definitions there are several that do not recognize the possibility of legitimate use of violence by civilians against an invader in an occupied country and would, thus label all resistance movements as terrorist groups. Others make a distinction between lawful and unlawful use of violence. Ultimately, the distinction is a political judgment.[10]
edit Key criteria
Official definitions determine counter-terrorism policy and are often developed to serve it. Most government definitions outline the following key criteria: target, objective, motive, perpetrator, and legitimacy or legality of the act. Terrorism is also often recognizable by a following statement from the perpetrators.
Violence – According to Walter Laqueur of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, "the only general characteristic of terrorism generally agreed upon is that terrorism involves violence and the threat of violence." However, the criterion of violence alone does not produce a useful definition, as it includes many acts not usually considered terrorism: war, riot, organized crime, or even a simple assault. Property destruction that does not endanger life is not usually considered a violent crime, but some have described property destruction by the Earth Liberation Front and Animal Liberation Front as violence and terrorism; see eco-terrorism.
Psychological impact and fear – The attack was carried out in such a way as to maximize the severity and length of the psychological impact. Each act of terrorism is a “performance,” devised to have an impact on many large audiences. Terrorists also attack national symbols to show power and to attempt to shake the foundation of the country or society they are opposed to. This may negatively affect a government, while increasing the prestige of the given terrorist organization and/or ideology behind a terrorist act.[11]
Perpetrated for a political goal – Something many terrorist attacks have in common is their perpetration for a political purpose. Terrorism is a political tactic, not unlike letter writing or protesting, that is used by activists when they believe no other means will effect the kind of change they desire. The change is desired so badly that failure is seen as a worse outcome than the deaths of civilians. This is often where the interrelationship between terrorism and religion occurs. When a political struggle is integrated into the framework of a religious or "cosmic"[12] struggle, such as over the control of an ancestral homeland or holy site such as Israel and Jerusalem, failing in the political goal (nationalism) becomes equated with spiritual failure, which, for the highly committed, is worse than their own death or the deaths of innocent civilians.
Deliberate targeting of non-combatants – It is commonly held that the distinctive nature of terrorism lies in its intentional and specific selection of civilians as direct targets. Specifically, the criminal intent is shown when babies, children, mothers, and the elderly are murdered, or injured, and put in harm's way. Much of the time, the victims of terrorism are targeted not because they are threats, but because they are specific "symbols, tools, animals or corrupt beings" that tie into a specific view of the world that the terrorist possess. Their suffering accomplishes the terrorists' goals of instilling fear, getting a message out to an audience, or otherwise accomplishing their often radical religious and political ends.[13]
Disguise – Terrorists almost invariably pretend to be non-combatants, hide among non-combatants, fight from in the midst of non-combatants, and when they can, strive to mislead and provoke the government soldiers into attacking the wrong people, that the government may be blamed for it. When an enemy is identifiable as a combatant, the word terrorism is rarely used. [How to reference and link to summary or text]
Unlawfulness or illegitimacy – Some official (notably government) definitions of terrorism add a criterion of illegitimacy or unlawfulness[14] to distinguish between actions authorized by a government (and thus "lawful") and those of other actors, including individuals and small groups. Using this criterion, actions that would otherwise qualify as terrorism would not be considered terrorism if they were government sanctioned. For example, firebombing a city, which is designed to affect civilian support for a cause, would not be considered terrorism if it were authorized by a government. This criterion is inherently problematic and is not universally accepted, because: it denies the existence of state terrorism; the same act may or may not be classed as terrorism depending on whether its sponsorship is traced to a "legitimate" government; "legitimacy" and "lawfulness" are subjective, depending on the perspective of one government or another; and it diverges from the historically accepted meaning and origin of the term.[15][16][17][18] For these reasons this criterion is not universally accepted. Most dictionary definitions of the term do not include this criterion.
edit Pejorative use
The terms "terrorism" and "terrorist" (someone who engages in terrorism) carry strong negative connotations. These terms are often used as political labels to condemn violence or threat of violence by certain actors as immoral, indiscriminate, unjustified or to condemn an entire segment of a population.[19] Those labeled "terrorists" rarely identify themselves as such, and typically use other euphemistic terms or terms specific to their situation, such as: separatist, freedom fighter, liberator, revolutionary, vigilante, militant, paramilitary, guerrilla, rebel, or any similar-meaning word in other languages and cultures. Jihadi, mujaheddin, and fedayeen are similar Arabic words that have entered the English lexicon.
On the question of whether particular terrorist acts, such as murder, can be justified as the lesser evil in a particular circumstance, philosophers have expressed different views: While, according to David Rodin, utilitarian philosophers can in theory conceive of cases in which evil of terrorism is outweighed by goods that can be achieved in no morally less costly way, in practice utilitarians often universally reject terrorism because it is very dubious that acts of terrorism achieve important goods in a utility efficient manner, or that the "harmful effects of undermining the convention of non-combatant immunity is thought to outweigh the goods that may be achieved by particular acts of terrorism."[20] Among the non-utilitarian philosophers, Michael Walzer argued that terrorism is always morally wrong but at the same time those who engaged in terrorism can be morally justified in one specific case: when "a nation or community faces the extreme threat of complete destruction and the only way it can preserve itself is by intentionally targeting non-combatants, then it is morally entitled to do so."[20]
In his book "Inside Terrorism" Bruce Hoffman wrote in Chapter One: Defining Terrorism that
"On one point, at least, everyone agrees: terrorism is a pejorative term. It is a word with intrinsically negative connotations that is generally applied to one's enemies and opponents, or to those with whom one disagrees and would otherwise prefer to ignore. 'What is called terrorism,' Brian Jenkins has written, `'thus seems to depend on one's point of view. Use of the term implies a moral judgment; and if one party can successfully attach the label terrorist to its opponent, then it has indirectly persuaded others to adopt its moral viewpoint.' Hence the decision to call someone or label some organization `terrorist' becomes almost unavoidably subjective, depending largely on whether one sympathizes with or opposes the person/group/cause concerned. If one identifies with the victim of the violence, for example, then the act is terrorism. If, however, one identifies with the perpetrator, the violent act is regarded in a more sympathetic, if not positive (or, at the worst, an ambivalent) light; and it is not terrorism."[5]The pejorative connotations of the word can be summed up in the aphorism, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." This is exemplified when a group that uses irregular military methods is an ally of a State against a mutual enemy, but later falls out with the State and starts to use the same methods against its former ally. During World War II, the Malayan People’s Anti-Japanese Army was allied with the British, but during the Malayan Emergency, members of its successor, the Malayan Races Liberation Army, were branded terrorists by the British.[21][22] More recently, Ronald Reagan and others in the American administration frequently called the Afghan Mujahideen freedom fighters during their war against the Soviet Union,[23] yet twenty years later when a new generation of Afghan men are fighting against what they perceive to be a regime installed by foreign powers, their attacks are labelled terrorism by George W. Bush.[24][25] Groups accused of terrorism usually prefer terms that reflect legitimate military or ideological action.[26][27][28] Leading terrorism researcher Professor Martin Rudner, director of the Canadian Centre of Intelligence and Security Studies at Ottawa's Carleton University, defines "terrorist acts" as attacks against civilians for political or other ideological goals, and goes on to say:
"There is the famous statement: 'One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.' But that is grossly misleading. It assesses the validity of the cause when terrorism is an act. One can have a perfectly beautiful cause and yet if one commits terrorist acts, it is terrorism regardless."[29]Some groups, when involved in a "liberation" struggle, have been called terrorists by the Western governments or media. Later, these same persons, as leaders of the liberated nations, are called statesmen by similar organizations. Two examples of this phenomenon are the Nobel Peace Prize laureates Menachem Begin and Nelson Mandela.[30][31][32][33][34][35][36]
Sometimes states that are close allies, for reasons of history, culture and politics, can disagree over whether members of a certain organization are terrorists. For example for many years some branches of the United States government refused to label members of the Irish Republican Army (IRA) as terrorists, while it was using methods against one of the United States' closest allies (Britain) that Britain branded as terrorist attacks. This was highlighted by the Quinn v. Robinson case.[37][38]
Many times the term "terrorism" and "extremism" are interchangeably used. However, there is a significant difference between the two. Terrorism essentially threat or act of physical violence. Extremism involves using non-physical instruments to mobilise minds to achieve political or ideological ends. For instance, Al Qaeda is involved in terrorism. The Iranian revolution of 1979 is a case of extremism[How to reference and link to summary or text]. A global research report An Inclusive World (2007) asserts that extremism poses a more serious threat than terrorism in the decades to come.
For these and other reasons, media outlets wishing to preserve a reputation for impartiality are extremely careful in their use of the term.[39][40]
edit Definition in international law
There are several International conventions on terrorism with somewhat different definitions.[41] The United Nations sees this lack of agreement as a serious problem.[41]
edit Types
In the spring of 1975, the Law Enforcement Assistant Administration in the United States formed the National Advisory Committee on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals. One of the five volumes that the committee was entitled Disorders and Terrorism, produced by the Task Force on Disorders and Terrorism under the direction H.H.A. Cooper, Director of the Task Force staff.[42] The Task Force classified terrorism into six categories.
- Civil Disorders – A form of collective violence interfering with the peace, security, and normal functioning of the community.
- Political Terrorism – Violent criminal behaviour designed primarily to generate fear in the community, or substantial segment of it, for political purposes.
- Non-Political Terrorism – Terrorism that is not aimed at political purposes but which exhibits “conscious design to create and maintain high degree of fear for coercive purposes, but the end is individual or collective gain rather than the achievement of a political objective.”
- Quasi-Terrorism – The activities incidental to the commission of crimes of violence that are similar in form and method to genuine terrorism but which nevertheless lack its essential ingredient. It is not the main purpose of the quasi-terrorists to induce terror in the immediate victim as in the case of genuine terrorism, but the quasi-terrorist uses the modalities and techniques of the genuine terrorist and produces similar consequences and reaction. For example, the fleeing felon who takes hostages is a quasi-terrorist, whose methods are similar to those of the genuine terrorist but whose purposes are quite different.
- Limited Political Terrorism – Genuine political terrorism is characterized by a revolutionary approach; limited political terrorism refers to “acts of terrorism which are committed for ideological or political motives but which are not part of a concerted campaign to capture control of the State.
- Official or State Terrorism –"referring to nations whose rule is based upon fear and oppression that reach similar to terrorism or such proportions.” It may also be referred to as Structural Terrorism defined broadly as terrorist acts carried out by governments in pursuit of political objectives, often as part of their foreign policy.
In an analysis prepared for U.S. Intelligence[43] four typologies are mentioned.
- Nationalist-Separatist
- Religious Fundamentalist
- New Religious
- Social Revolutionary
Perpetrators
Acts of terrorism can be carried out by individuals, groups, or states. According to some definitions, clandestine or semi-clandestine state actors may also carry out terrorist acts outside the framework of a state of war. However, the most common image of terrorism is that it is carried out by small and secretive cells, highly motivated to serve a particular cause and many of the most deadly operations in recent times, such as 9/11, the London underground bombing, and the 2002 Bali bombing were planned and carried out by a close clique, composed of close friends, family members and other strong social networks. These groups benefited from the free flow of information and efficient Telecommunications to succeed where others had failed.[50] Over the years, many people have attempted to come up with a terrorist profile to attempt to explain these individuals' actions through their psychology and social circumstances. Others, like Roderick Hindery, have sought to discern profiles in the propaganda tactics used by terrorists.
It has been found that a "terrorist" will look, dress, and behave like a normal person, such as a university student, until he or she executes the assigned mission. Terrorist profiling based on personality, physical, or sociological traits would not appear to be particularly useful. The physical and behavioral description of the terrorist could describe almost any normal young person.[51]
[edit] Terrorist groups
Main article: List of designated terrorist organizations[edit] State sponsors
Main article: State-sponsored terrorismA state can sponsor terrorism by funding or harboring a terrorist organization. Opinions as to which acts of violence by states consist of state-sponsored terrorism or not vary widely. When states provide funding for groups considered by some to be terrorist, they rarely acknowledge them as such.
[edit] State terrorism
Main article: State terrorism| “ | Civilization is based on a clearly defined and widely accepted yet often unarticulated hierarchy. Violence done by those higher on the hierarchy to those lower is nearly always invisible, that is, unnoticed. When it is noticed, it is fully rationalized. Violence done by those lower on the hierarchy to those higher is unthinkable, and when it does occur is regarded with shock, horror, and the fetishization of the victims. | ” |
The concept of state terrorism is controversial. [53] Military actions by states during war are usually not considered terrorism, even when they involve significant civilian casualties.[How to reference and link to summary or text] The Chairman of the United Nations Counter-Terrorism Committee has stated that the Committee was conscious of the 12 international Conventions on the subject, and none of them referred to State terrorism, which was not an international legal concept. If States abused their power, they should be judged against international conventions dealing with war crimes, international human rights and international humanitarian law.[4] Former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan has said that it is "time to set aside debates on so-called 'state terrorism'. The use of force by states is already thoroughly regulated under international law"[54] However, he also made clear that, "...regardless of the differences between governments on the question of definition of terrorism, what is clear and what we can all agree on is any deliberate attack on innocent civilians, regardless of one's cause, is unacceptable and fits into the definition of terrorism."[55]
State terrorism has been used to refer to terrorist acts by governmental agents or forces. This involve the use of state resources employed by a state's foreign policies, such as the using its military to directly perform acts of considered to be state terrorism. Professor of Political Science, Michael Stohl cites the examples that include Germany’s bombing of London and the U.S. atomic destruction of Hiroshima during World War II. He argues that “the use of terror tactics is common in international relations and the state has been and remains a more likely employer of terrorism within the international system than insurgents." They also cite the First strike option as an example of the "terror of coercive dipolomacy" as a form of this, which holds the world "hostage,' with the implied threat of using nuclear weapons in "crisis management." They argue that the institutionalized form of terrorism has occurred as a result of changes that took place following World War ll. In this analysis, state terrorism exhibited as a form of foreign policy was shaped by the presence and use of weapons of mass destruction, and that the legitimizing of such violent behavior led to an increasingly accepted form of this state behavior. (Michael Stohl, “The Superpowers and International Terror” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Studies Association, Atlanta, March 27-April 1, 1984;"Terrible beyond Endurance? The Foreign Policy of State Terrorism." 1988;The State as Terrorist: The Dynamics of Governmental Violence and Repression, 1984 P49).
State terrorism is has also been used to describe peace time actions by governmental agents or forces, such as the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 flight. Charles Stewart Parnell described William Gladstones Irish Coercion Act as Terrorism in his "no-Rent manifesto" in 1881, during the Irish Land War.[5] The concept is also used to describe political repressions by governments against their own civilian population with the purpose to incite fear. For example, taking and executing civilian hostages or extrjuducial elimination campaigns are commonly considered "terror" or terrorism, for example during Red Terror or Great Terror. [56] Such actions are often also described as democide which has been argued to be equivalent to state terrorism.[57] Empirical studies on this have found that democracies have little democide.[58][59]
edit Tactics
Main article: Tactics of terrorismTerrorism is a form of asymmetric warfare, and is more common when direct conventional warfare either cannot be (due to differentials in available forces) or is not being used to resolve the underlying conflict.
The context in which terrorist tactics are used is often a large-scale, unresolved political conflict. The type of conflict varies widely; historical examples include:
- Secession of a territory to form a new sovereign state
- Dominance of territory or resources by various ethnic groups
- Imposition of a particular form of government
- Economic deprivation of a population
- Opposition to a domestic government or occupying army
Terrorist attacks are often targeted to maximize fear and publicity. They usually use explosives or poison, but there is also concern about terrorist attacks using weapons of mass destruction. Terrorist organizations usually methodically plan attacks in advance, and may train participants, plant "undercover" agents, and raise money from supporters or through organized crime. Communication may occur through modern telecommunications, or through old-fashioned methods such as couriers.
edit Responses
Main article: Responses to terrorismResponses to terrorism are broad in scope. They can include re-alignments of the political spectrum and reassessments of fundamental values. The term counter-terrorism has a narrower connotation, implying that it is directed at terrorist actors.
Specific types of responses include:
- Targeted laws, criminal procedures, deportations, and enhanced police powers
- Target hardening, such as locking doors or adding traffic barriers
- Pre-emptive or reactive military action
- Increased intelligence and surveillance activities
- Pre-emptive humanitarian activities
- More permissive interrogation and detention policies
- Official acceptance of torture as a valid tool
AND OF COURSE, SHARE YOUR FREE SUBSCRIPTION WITH YOUR FRIENDS, AS TERRORISM FLOURISHES WHEN IGNORANCE THRIVES!!
SYNTHESIS LINKS:
4-25-2010 TEA PARTY EDITION http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AVUUGGGbcuQuZGRya3NyYmZfNjMwZmo5ajI1cDQ&hl=en
5-2-2010&5-9-2010 DOUBLE FEATURE BOY IT SURE LOOKS BAD FOR OBAMA EDITION http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AVUUGGGbcuQuZGRya3NyYmZfNjM4Y2h0M3o4aGM&hl=en
5-16-2010 THE GUESS WHAT?! EDITION https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AVUUGGGbcuQuZGRya3NyYmZfNjY3ZDV4ZHo4ZGY&hl=en
5-23-2010 : 6 MILLION GALLONS OF OIL LATER... your rights and the government EDITION http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AVUUGGGbcuQuZGRya3NyYmZfNjg4Z3h6M2NzZ2M&hl=en
No comments:
Post a Comment