suppose i have to
jonny Stewalot has his fingers in it ... but, i don't do the vids at work, so haven't seen what he's hoo-hawin' about.
however, i do have a few thoughts of my own to splurge out regarding the Miami Seven.
If you'd like a skip down insanity lane ... check out the stupid-speak in an article from the "common voice." And if you don't think that's not an influence or a mindset shared by more than a few down-home voters in this country, I point to the current occupants of the White House as evidence to consider.
These geniuses down in Miami that got nailed as 'terrorists' were a few poor as dirt raf-boys who didn't have any contact with Al-Qaeda other than the mutherF'in government informant who gawdamn swore them into the 'organization.' They couldn't even afford a camera to take pictures of their targets - the damn informant had to buy it for them. And these patsies stormed around their neighborhoods in the military uniforms that the government informant paid for, proclaiming they would gladly give their lives for Allah.
Boy, that's some secretive, top-notch training.
the leader of the group, Narseal Batiste, was a "Moses-like figure who would roam the streets in a cape or bathrobe, toting a crooked wooden cane and looking for young men to join his group." Batiste gathered his acolytes in a Miami gym to teach them an obscure religion called "Seas of David," and to practice martial arts. tP
Entrapment - pure and simple.
- - -
I know this world holds no place for rational thought - but this ... this pushes me too far into babblethink. This boggles my mind to such depths of rubixness, that the harddrive comes desparately close to a critical snap, a crash, a meltdown.
vote.
13 comments:
oh no, not the real world again!
I, I can't take it!
I want schmoop or nothing! I'd even settle for a poem...
eoesdfndn,ekvnpo3m ioe
2390f,-
3jl-klk;.dc.
poetry would be nice pab, but I have the real world on my blog too.
The real world is out there and it's a mean and scary place.
Plus, a good scare helps at the polls.
The Politics of Fear.
vote.
that's exactly what our friends in the white house are thinking.
vote.
and make sure you're gawddam good'n scared when you do.
I'm more freaked out by the lasting effects of the current supreme court makeup
good n scared
The sad thing, really, is that the "scare the voter" policy works. And, I guess, I can't blame the politicos for using what works, any more than I blame the bear for getting in the trash can again. They can't help it... it's what they do and it's how they got there in the first place.
In a two party system, there isn't much room for a "voice of reason" party. It just gets drowned out.
As far as the court goes... well, the "scary" justices have found in favor of criminal defendants in 4 or so cases this term, and just a few days ago an employment discrimination claimant, so it's not all bad. But the cops don't need to knock before kicking the door down now, either...
i believe there's a couple of gitmo cases coming down the pipe, yeah?
and i recall an abortion rights case was allowed to be heard on the horizon, as well.
egads.
dunno... you can always check the docket...
My point was that the fear of supreme court appointees is really much of the same as the "if you don't buy a new fridge, the terrorists win" folks. Same crap on the menu, just a different chef.
Really what these folks deal with are very mundane complex points of law. Boring boring boring stuff for the most part (unless the commerce clause gives you a woody... and if it does, well, I don't want to know). Abortion becomes this litmus test, but for the vast majority of us, the court's reach in other, more mundane areas is far more pervasive (Miranda rights, fer one).
I was pretty ashamed of the dems over the Harriet Meyers thing... a remarkably qualified woman who came from outside the Yale/Harvard box, and she got sold out and nobody stuck up for her. Female managing partner in the 80s? That woman kicked the glass ceiling's ass.
GWB's never going to appoint Ralph Nader, you know. So let's get the best we can. Or we can kick his ass for this news cycle... hmmm....
So, what is a terrorist and what do they have to do BEFORE we do something about it?
Obviously we waited too long back in 2001.
Here we may have jumped the gun by hanging a carrot and seeing if they would chase it.
What is the happy medium? You try to get a guy on the inside, hope he has access to the planning, knows when the weapons are purchased, knows what the target is and when the attack will occur?
That's alot of hope and luck when all it takes is a few wayward young men, gathered by a fanatic, incited by a religious calling and backed by a psychopath to blow up your coffee shop or child's school or mother's office.
JMHO
Lothar - i think the issue here is what the Bush administration used this "terrorist cell" for ... to incite fear in the populace.
Fear is a wonderfully effective method to control our US mind(less)ness, it seems.
To trump out the Attorney General and throw down national coverage on a group of bumbling, ineffectual idiots was flat-out obscene (you have seen footage of this 'leader', haven't you ... approximately 4 brain cells and wouldn't be able to wire a bomb if the Anarchist Cookbook were tatooed on his ass). Producing and labeling this group as terrorists was nothing more than a political stunt, an electoral scare tactic.
Let me strongly state, I believe the invasion of Iraq is illegal and morally reprehensible. I know cool dudes and dudettes like you went over there, and go over there still, to do your duty. Can't take issue with that.
However,
This invasion is illegal and immoral. The country of Iraq posed no threat to the US and had not acted aggressively against any of our interests in the world. The country of Iraq was not involved in any way with the attacks of Sept. 11th.
This 'War against Terrorism' we currently wage is a political tool. The attacks of Sept.11 were NOT acts of war. They were criminal acts.
War is a barbaric end, to be used when all other measures have failed. It is a condition between governments, not individuals. The 9/11 attacks were not state-sanctioned. They were organized and implemented by a small group - a criminal group.
They were murderers, not soldiers of a state.
i hate war.
This is such a great discussion...
That's alot of hope and luck when all it takes is a few wayward young men, gathered by a fanatic, incited by a religious calling and backed by a psychopath to blow up your coffee shop or child's school or mother's office.
Columbine; OK City. What's been done to successfully thwart repeats of these? Or is it just luck? What's being done to make sure that meth doesn't make it into my kids' schools? Those issues scare me a lot more.
This 'War against Terrorism' we currently wage is a political tool. The attacks of Sept.11 were NOT acts of war. They were criminal acts.
War is a barbaric end, to be used when all other measures have failed. It is a condition between governments, not individuals. The 9/11 attacks were not state-sanctioned. They were organized and implemented by a small group - a criminal group.
They were murderers, not soldiers of a state.
And by the same token, relying on legal means to bring those responsible for 9/11 to justice would not have worked. Meaning: I don't think the Taliban would have been too keen on arrest and extradition of Osama. Uh, not that we actually caught him.
By extending "war" to everything (drugs, obesity, terror), the word loses its meaning.
Gitmo t'day. Rummy loses.
Post a Comment