Terrorism

Submitted by fyl on 4 July, 2007 - 13:19.

NL member Jim Richard likes to say "western policy doesn't create terror, terrorists do". It's a nice on-liner but you can't explain everything in one line. Some points:

Who Uses Terrorism?

Western policy is filled with actions that create terror/encourage terrorism. I will try to keep this related to the region but clearly the actions are not only here.

  • The US blew up fuel storage tanks in Corinto harbor.
  • The US mined Corinto harbor. (Barry Goldwater, writing to Bill Casey, then head of the CIA at the time about this incident started his letter with "I'm pissed off." Clearly Goldwater recognized terrorism when he saw it.
  • The US funded a terrorist force called the Contras.
  • US master-terrorist Luis Posada Carriles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Posada_Carriles) certainly was an important part of western terrorist activity against Cuba and Nicaragua.

Why Use Terrorism?

If we ask the CIA, I expect their answer would be something along the lines of either they couldn't take an "official action" or it's effective. Either seems to make sense. Or, in The Praetorian Guard, written by ex-CIA agent John Stockwell, we find terror/terrorism mentioned often. From page 22:

We also know that the CIA's 1980 contra program later managed to get Luis Posada Carrilles [incorrect spelling] out of prison in Venezuela. They put him to work for Feliz Rodriguez, who was reporting directly to then Vice-President Bush's Office. As Felix Rodriguez told the press, "We needed him." He was referring to Carrilles, the terrorist airplane bomber.

Who Are the Terrorists?

The unfortunate answer seems to be "anyone the government wants to portray as the bad guy". From page 105 of Stockwell's book:

To cite a more specific example, in 1985, peace activist Brian Willson was registered by the FBI as a terrorist because of a non-violent fast he did on the steps of the U.S. Capitol in Washington. Later in 1985, he did a sit-in on the railroad tracks that carried shipments of ammunition from the Concord Naval Weapons Station in California. The FBI informed the station's security officers who advised the engineers of the train that some "known terrorists" were preparing to try to stop the train, in spite of the fact that Willson and the other protesters had abundantly advised the Navy and local civilian security officers of the utterly peaceful nature of their protest. They had also invited press coverage, again of their peaceful demonstration. The train engineers, however, were terrified at the thought of having their train seized by terrorists. Instead of stopping, they sped up the train and ran over Willson, cutting off his legs.

So, today, we talk about Islamo-terrorists. This web site is about Nicaragua and I don't want to start a detailed discussion about this "new flavor of terrorism" but, if you are interested, I suggest you take the clues here related to Latin America and see if you can find some parallels that "created" Islamo-terrorism (where, in case you didn't get it, created is being used in the sense of "your government decided you needed to get the terrorism word attached to something to push your buttons).

‹ Gringo Retirement in Central America CAFTA and Maquilas in Nicaragua ›
( categories: )

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Freedom Fighter's Manual

Submitted by fyl on 16 July, 2007 - 08:47.

There seems to be some debate over a CIA-published book on human rights and a CIA-published booklet on terrorism. (You can see the discussion below.) In any case, I uploaded a copy of the booklet here.

Grove Press obtained a copy of the original and added an English translation. The original was only in Spanish. To put the potential impact into perspective, think what such a publication might do if given to disenfranchised people in, say, Los Angeles.

A joke (maybe)?

Submitted by carina_cisneros on 20 July, 2007 - 01:17.

Are you makings a joke? The original manual was never distributed so any claim that is was or was to be found by Grove would have to be a lie or misstatement of fact. The original manual exceeded 110 pages in lenghts. It was nevers evers a "booklet". The next version of the manual that was also not distributed but later given to the press was not a purely illustrated manual either, as seen in that link. Ands the critical U.S. press was well aware that they were criticizing a book that was not being used and its was nearly 100 pages long. So to clear the air here on the site you submits or pasted in 16 cartoons as best that I can tell. You do not even have the right book. You are not even close to having the right book. You do not even have the right text nors the right title. I think almost anyone can tell this is not the book that was never actually used but did miraculously still made it to the World Court in the case and was introduced as evidence by Commander Louis Carrion (he got his books from left leaning U.S. reporters who got them in Honduras, which is not in Nicaragua but that is another storie). I am not sure how somone could confuse a nearly 100 page book with mediocre cartoons or why they would fear L.A. citizens sight of it. If you ever get to read the real book notice how much it has in common with the advice so freely passed out by Che, Fidel, early Daniel, Commander Zero, etc., etc., etc. Too bad Grove Press is not more honest. They were the ones who published Fanon's books in Enlgish and many other works by people seeking freedom. Too too bad they let schoolboy politics blind them to what freedom fighting is or how you actually do it. The CIA book is not a murder manual and as countless translators have pointed out the use of words murder and assasination are not evens in the nearly 100 pages. Why not upload the real text of the real book in question? To criticize this book is to also criticize every left wing revolutionary cause they all say the basic same thing and advocate the same means for the same end. Forget the fake cartoons and read the read writings. When you find the real writings, please post all the murderously bad and other bad things said in there, and point out how they are any shread of different from Che or Daniel or Zero or any of them. You will no be able to do so (no one can cause it aint logically possible - it dont even have to do with politics). Could it be that maybe that is why the real book is not linked here and some pathetic cartoon book is passed off as the reals thing?

2 books

Submitted by Jinoturistica on 20 July, 2007 - 03:35.

Carina,

the existence of one book, 110 pages long, does not mean the non-existence of another one much shorter copied by Phil here.

That is faulty logic.

The book Phil copied here exists, I held it in my hand 3 days back. How it came into existence and the honesty of Grove Press, I have absolutely no idea.

But it exists just as much as the 110 page book you reference.

Tony X Robins, Jinotega

stopping terrorism

Submitted by Jinoturistica on 12 July, 2007 - 09:03.

Stop me when you disagree. Most of this is factual.

Terrorist - one who uses extreme violence to cause panic and disturb a status quo in a society. Usually for some societal cause such as rebellion.

Can a terrorist or terrorist organization ...

  1. be internal to a country at peace Yes - Oklahoma, IRA
  2. be citizens of a country at peace Yes - Oklahoma, IRA
  3. be blocked at a border No - Oklahoma / 9-11
  4. be blocked from materials No - fertilizer at Oklahoma and boxcutters 9-11
  5. be blocked financially Yes - but only when the terrorism is being driven almost exclusively by a strong financial backer, Contras, possibly FARC
  6. be identified by nationality, religion, race, or DNA No - IRA, Oklahoma
  7. be blocked from targets No - bridges, buses, power plants, refineries too many, economically and logistically impossible
  8. be blocked by negotiation No - too late once concept is under way, Palestinians
  10. be blocked by armed force Yes and No - If there is a very limited subset of people unlikely to infect others with their cause. Red Army faction in Germany, whoever they were in California, Basques in Spain. However, if infection into a general population can occur such as a rebellion against an occupying force, no chance - Washington, Palestinians, France in 1943, Iraq, India under the Raj. One dies another 10 arise
  11. win their cause No - Leastways, not as a Terrorist because they have no continuity, no positive building, no development, just destruction. But they can change
  12. transform into a peaceful person or organization Yes - Fidel, Mao, Washington - but only after the old regime is gone
  13. in general be blocked at root cause Yes

The bottom line on terrorism is that there is usually a reason. Wiping out all infidels is a reason, but not enough to sustain a terrorist organization. Not enough motivation. No money in it. No future in it.

A reason could be an occupation - the terrorists would call themselves resistance fighters or freedom fighters, many US citizens would be these if the Chinese invaded the US. This is why the US cannot possibly win in Iraq; occupation of a homeland.

Another reason could be an invasion where the enemy had overwhelming force. That becomes guerrilla warfare, a form of terrorism. Vietnam was perceived by the US as 2 nations so it wasn't an invasion. The NV considered it one country, as it was and now is, so the US army was an invader. The war could not possibly be won by conventional means against the vastly superior American forces.

Genuine rebellion - South Africa under a repressive regime, Sandinistas under Samoza, Russians under the Czar. Home grown internal contained within borders.

The most repugnant style of terrorism is when an outside force decides to take down a government with no plan or intention to do anything else. Terrorism for the sake of ego, vanity, power urge, political posing. There is only one example of this happening that I know of. The Contras.

Tony X Robins, Jinotega

9/11

Submitted by Sue on 15 July, 2007 - 11:13.

was an inside job

maybe maybe not

Submitted by Jinoturistica on 16 July, 2007 - 18:35.

Do you mean the US government used imagination, forethought and planning, recruited 20 odd arabs, kept the whole thing secret for almost a year? And then managed to keep it covered up for almost 6 years?

Doesn't sound very likely, does it?

Tony X Robins, Jinotega

Loose

Submitted by Sue on 17 July, 2007 - 01:57.

Change

agreed

Submitted by Jinoturistica on 17 July, 2007 - 05:24.

Tony X Robins, Jinotega

yes....

Submitted by Che Guevara on 15 July, 2007 - 15:44.

shhhhh! wait, i hear 'em! gotta go! i hear the black helicopters! they are after me! i'll post again soon, if i am able.

You forgot the Nicaraguans

Submitted by thunderdial on 12 July, 2007 - 09:35.

You forgot the Nicaraguans under Ortega as an oppressive regime - probably didn't have enough room, huh?

14. wiped out by nukes?

Submitted by Che Guevara on 12 July, 2007 - 09:26.

14. be wiped out by nukes? kamikazes/japan softened their hearts with only 2 nukes and saved 100,000 american lives! and done by a democrat commander in chief against a group that did a sneak attack like 9/11.

Boy, the way Glenn Miller played songs that made the hit parade. Guys like us we had it made. Those were the days.

Didn't need no welfare state. Everybody pulled his weight. Gee, our old LaSalle ran great those were the days.

And you knew who you were then, Girls were girls and men were men. Mister we could use a man like Herbert Hoover again. People seemed to be content. Fifty dollars paid the rent. Freaks were in a circus tent. Those were the days.

Take a little Sunday spin. Go to watch the Dodgers win. Have yourself a dandy day that cost you under a fin. Hair was short and skirts were long. Kate Smith really sold a song. I just don't know what went wrong. Those were the days.

Glenn Miller?

Submitted by Jinoturistica on 12 July, 2007 - 10:46.

He was MIA when the atomic bombs were dropped.

And, yes, I agree, the atomic bomb wad dropped to instill terror in the population of Japan. That makes the US a terrorist organization - maybe. Never understood why the US would have to invade an island nation that imported most of its food and all of its fuel oil. Sit back and wait would have been much longer but 'way more practical.

But take Pearl Harbor and compare it to the attack by F111 bombers on Tripoli Libya. Both were unannounced acts of war without a declaration of such. Both designed to terrorize. In some opinions, the attack cost the lives of those on Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie Scotland.

It would appear that people of the right can remember December 1941 but somehow conveniently forget Tripoli (April 1986).

Tony X Robins, Jinotega

The Bomb and Japan

Submitted by Atento on 13 July, 2007 - 18:31.

What maost people don't know is that Japan was trying to surrender before the bombs were dropped, but Harry Truman wanted to show not only Japan, but the world especially Russia that America did have the bomb and that we were not afraid to use it and that it was a kick-ass weapon. That makes him a terrorist.

Revisionist history

Submitted by zenpilgrim on 13 July, 2007 - 19:19.

While many theorize that Truman wanted to show off the bomb and our new power to Stalin, that is still not a highly regarded and accepted theory by historians.

Can you provide support for the fact that Japan was trying to surrender before the bomb or any historical facts that Truman just wanted to impress Stalin?

Don't get me wrong, I hate the fact we did what we did, but I also like to stick to history that is factual or at least logically suported. Revisionist history is fine if it can be supported.

For a good synopsis of what may have been behind Truman's decision see http://oror.essortment.com/presidenttruman_rywp.htm

People's History

Submitted by fyl on 14 July, 2007 - 08:31.

Try pages 422-424 of Howard Zinn's People's History of the United States for starters. On page 422, there are a couple of contemporaneous quotes.

From Hanson Baldwin, New Yrok Times military analyst shortly after the war:

The enemy, in a military sense, was in a hopeless strategic position by the time the Potsdam demand for unconditional surrender was made on July 26. Such then, was the situation when we wiped out Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Should we have done it? No one can, of course, be positive, but the answer is almost certainly negative.

And from the Unites States Strategic Bombing Survey set up by the War Department in 1944, a study interviewed hundreds of Japanese civilian and military leaders after Japan surrendered:

Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.

Now, this is (shortly) after the fact analysis. But, Zinn then goes on to discuss that. Here is the beginning of what he says.

But could American leaders have known this in August 1945? The answer is, clearly, yes. The Japanese code had been broken, and Japan's messages were being intercepted. It was known the Japanese had instructed their ambassador in Moscow to work on peace negotiations with the Allies, Japanese leaders had begun talking of surrender a year before this, and the Emperor himself had begun to suggest, in June 1945, that alternatives to fighting to the end be considered. On July 13, Foreign Minister Shigenori Togo wired his ambassador in Moscow: "Unconditional surrender is the only obstacle to peace ... ."

There is a lot more but the point is that there was information at the time but that may not have been what was "popular to report".

This may sound strange but I had the rare pleasure of having a US History teacher in high school named Tazuko Takasago. She was a small child who spent World War II in a detention camp for the crime of having a Japanese-born father that was "caught" on a southern California beach with a lantern the night after Pearl Harbor. Admittedly, he had fishing gear with him and was a fisherman but that's how justice for Japanese-Americans worked then. She was the first to teach me that history books don't tell the whole story. Many years later, Eduardo Galeano said "History is taught from the point of view of the victor" and everything became clear.

very good argument....

Submitted by Che Guevara on 12 July, 2007 - 10:58.

very well reasoned and thoughtful. whether you are a freedom fighter or a terrorist depends on your perspective. if i were al quaeda and my "religion" told me that the world should be islam, lie and kill to make it happen. i might think my war was ordained by god. if i believed there were no absolutes, who am i to judge someone else's belief.

i don't want to convert and i don't want to worry about my children. i believe in the us constitution as providing as many freedoms as one can have in this world. freedom isn't fair, but it allows opportunity.

Go find a MIL forum for this stuff

Submitted by Jinoturistica on 12 July, 2007 - 13:54.

Tony X Robins, Jinotega

are you talking to fyl or me??????????

Submitted by Che Guevara on 12 July, 2007 - 15:54.

are you talking to fyl or me.....you see it was his thread? he owns the site, so not very nice to tell him what to do on his own site!

if you are talking to me, i don't take to kindly to being told what to do. maybe that's why folks didn't cotton to you too much in texas? didn't take to kindly to being told what to do in the military, really don't now. i googled "mil forum" and asian pacific, math, airplanes, and military came up. which did you mean? i am not leaving unless i am thrown off. i have been very respectful to you tony, esp since i am in your circle.

Subject Change Alert

Submitted by fyl on 12 July, 2007 - 09:36.

While you have an interesting subject to talk about--somewhere--it has nothing to do with terrorism. It has to do with war--just like all so many wars the US has started. Iraq is the current example. The "removal" of Noriega in Panama is another good example.

A bit of research will show that Pearl Harbor was expected and, in fact, radar showed it was happening but was ignored. Beyond that, it was a governmental military attack on military facilities of another government. I don't think that qualifies as terrorism.

terrorism is a tool of war....

Submitted by Che Guevara on 12 July, 2007 - 09:44.

terrorism is a tool of war....a vestige of an ignoble savage.

and war is a matter of will. why can't liberals have a liberal definition for war?

Neither of your definitions is known

Submitted by Jinoturistica on 12 July, 2007 - 11:46.

According to google "terrorism is a tool of war" has 4 references, none of which reflect your point.

"vestige of an ignoble savage" has zero hits and Google is usually good at finding quotes using odd words like vestige.

so, having presented 2 statements in an authoritative manner as though they were famous or known when in fact you invented them, you then ask for a liberal definition.

No sale.

Just for fun, here are 2 actual quotes.

"In general, the greater the understanding, the greater the delusion: the more intelligent, the less sane. One clear illustration of this is the fact that war hysteria increases in intensity as one rises in the social scale."

So THAT's why Nicaraguans don't give a hoot about Iraq.

"... the purpose of the war is to destroy manufactured products and thus keep the workers busy..."

Almost too obvious for words. Works well.

Tony X Robins, Jinotega

Hitting the nail on the head

Submitted by Atento on 13 July, 2007 - 18:38.

Tony quoted,

"... the purpose of the war is to destroy manufactured products and thus keep the workers busy..."

And I say so Corporate America gets richer.

None are so blind as those who will not see.

i suspect there is....

Submitted by Che Guevara on 13 July, 2007 - 20:14.

some sad truth in that statement. but when humvees and apc's get blown up, so do people. no one should be happy about that.

those are originals.....

Submitted by Che Guevara on 12 July, 2007 - 11:52.

i coined them. i don't just repeat others' thoughts. i came up with them. consider the substance of what i am saying. terror is a tool of war. and war is a matter of will. it is the islamofascists' will to conquer or convert. and al quaeda will go to some pretty far extremes to convert or conquer. they use terror, not fairness, to further their agenda.

Are you

Submitted by GranadaSherif on 12 July, 2007 - 18:57.

really a judge in the US justice system? Scary!

btw...

Submitted by Che Guevara on 12 July, 2007 - 20:22.

what did i say that was disrespectful or scary? i am waiting.

ad hominem attacks

Submitted by Che Guevara on 12 July, 2007 - 20:18.

are really low. aren't you better than that? is that the best you got at arguing the merits of terrorism? i am, by supreme court opinion, allowed to express a political opinion. and my opinion is that your argument is low brow ad hominem attack.

from wikipedia, "An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the person", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. It is most commonly used to refer specifically to the ad hominem abusive, or argumentum ad personam, which consists of criticizing or personally attacking an argument's proponent in an attempt to discredit that argument."

i told tony that he is in my circle (he understands that) and that i treated him with respect. in fact, i like him. former nl member and i are thinking about going up to visit him in jinotega. you, i don't know that well. not a good first impression. good luck with your second impression.

'ignore user' feature on NL

Submitted by Jinoturistica on 12 July, 2007 - 15:58.

Please please please phil, I need an 'ignore user' feature. I dont want to see a single word he writes.

And, yes, I would be on lots of peoples Ignore Tony list. I can live with that.

Tony X Robins, Jinotega

that works on so many levels

Submitted by Che Guevara on 12 July, 2007 - 16:04.

indifference is the opposite of love.....

can i bury my head in the sand and make the world go away.

Make the world go away Get it off my shoulder Say the things we used to say And make the world, make it go away

Do you remember when you loved me Before the world took you away Well if you do, then forgive me And make the world, make it go away

Make the world go away Get it off my shoulder Say the things we used to say And make the world, make it go away

Now I’m sorry if I hurt you Let me make it up to you day by day And if you will please forgive me And make the world, make it go away

Make the world go away Get it off my shoulder Say the things we used to say And make the world, make it go away

Indifference......

Submitted by Atento on 13 July, 2007 - 18:51.

Jim, I beg to differ, Love is a feeling that causes the lover to wish only the best for the lovee. Hate is a feeling that causes the hater to wish only the worst for the hatee. Both require the lover/hater to care. Therefore, love is the opposite of hate... indifference goes to a whole new level it is the lack of feeling toward the indifferenceee(I invented a new word aren't you proud of me?). You must care to hate or love, but with indifference you don't care , you have no feeling. But it is not the same as the "no feeling" you have toward someone you've never met.

greater minds than mine came up with these.

Submitted by Jinoturistica on 13 July, 2007 - 21:26.

Dear Atento,

thanks for the support, appreciate it. Just wanted to pass along some of my favorite quotes relevant to this topic.

Jonathan Swift We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another.

Yoda: fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.

Martin Luther King: I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great a burden to bear.

Don Marquis: if you really make them think, they'll hate you

Charles Degaulle: Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first

and my all time favorite from Thoreau

Those whom we can love, we can hate; to others we are indifferent

Re: Tonys circle:- if it has human DNA then its in my circle. That doesn't mean I like, or love everyone, it means I accept everyone. If that sounds complicated and you have an easier religion then go for it; I can accept that. Peace.

Tony X Robins, Jinotega

very good points....

Submitted by Che Guevara on 13 July, 2007 - 20:04.

i thought i was refering to a point tony made about indifference towards muslims being a cause of their hatred.

one could argue that love and hate both involve caring and indifference involves none. therefore they would be opposites. feelings vs no feelings. but i am indifferent to this argument, so i will conclude you probably win. i do care about all people and hence my hatred of terrorism.

Feelings, nothing more than feelings, trying to forget my feelings of love. Teardrops rolling down on my face, trying to forget my feelings of love.

Feelings, for all my life I'll feel it. I wish I've never met you, girl; you'll never come again.

Feelings, wo-o-o feelings, wo-o-o, feel you again in my arms.

Feelings, feelings like I've never lost you and feelings like I've never have you again in my heart.

Feelings, for all my life I'll feel it. I wish I've never met you, girl; you'll never come again.

Feelings, feelings like I've never lost you and feelings like I've never have you again in my life.

Feelings, wo-o-o feelings, wo-o-o, feelings again in my arms. Feelings...(repeat & fade)

Feelings

Submitted by Atento on 14 July, 2007 - 04:54.

I think that song was really written for "Little Richard", wooo.

coffee alert....

Submitted by Che Guevara on 14 July, 2007 - 06:15.

there is coffee all over my keyboard. got any ideas how to clean between the keys?

cleaning keyboards

Submitted by Doug on 14 July, 2007 - 08:18.

I haven't tried this but an instructor for my A+ class ("born and bred in Dallas, by God, Texas") swore that he just took his into the shower with him, used shampoo, rinse well and lay out in the sun for at least two days. His son had spilled a chocolate milkshake on it, said it worked fine.

I tried taking the keys off once, but the damn things wouldn't go back on right.

good luck

-Doug

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate

thanks...

Submitted by Che Guevara on 14 July, 2007 - 08:20.

i'll live with the sticky keys. i do have one missing key that one of my 1 year olds pulled off. thanks goodness it was a shift key, 2 of those and as you can tell i don't use caps!

You guys need to break down

Submitted by thunderdial on 14 July, 2007 - 18:59.

You guys need to break down and shell out $11.00 for new keyboards...

ok, $11 i can afford....

Submitted by Che Guevara on 15 July, 2007 - 08:44.

how do i take the current keyboard off of my laptop to put the new one on? should i take the old one with me to walmart to size up the new one?

Laptop ???

Submitted by Doug on 16 July, 2007 - 20:19.

Minor omission there Jim, the shower is a no no for laptops!!!

http://www.sparepartswarehouse.com/Laptop,Keyboards.aspx

not to tough to open the case depends on manufacturer, if I remember right a new KB for my Dell laptop, would have been, $80-90 range. I did lift and reseat a few keys, had some fast moving little green caterpiller dive under a key, refusing to come out, a couple hours and a few Tona's was all it took.

Chinese USB keyboard sound a heck of a lot easier

Good luck

-Doug

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate

you plug the new keyboard

Submitted by arlington on 15 July, 2007 - 08:50.

you plug the new fullsize keyboard into the USB port of the laptop, and away you go.

The elephant in the room

Submitted by Jinoturistica on 11 July, 2007 - 12:37.

I don't dislike the Israelis. This is about the state of Israel.

The entire middle east brouhaha comes from one source. Unmitigated, unbending, bottomless wallet, mindless, uncritical US support for Israel.

Israel is very very expensive to maintain and its time for some tough love. We are Big Daddy and need to straighten out our beloved son who has a very serious credit card issue. We have been paying his debts for years. Even though we love him most dearly, we need to call a halt. He's running a million dollar apartment in NYC, has a Ferrari and a Porsche. 'Hey, son, get on home and bring the cars with you.'

If he was an employee he would have a nice shiny new desk - right outside the bosses office.

Israel is about the size of a mid western state. Let the US offer them Kansas. With the billions of dollars the various middle east issues have cost, are costing, will cost the US, the price of Kansas pales into insignificance.

As the gaza strip shows clearly, once the Israelis have gone, the Arabs have no unity whatever and just fall all over themselves. Goodbye terrorists.

If you want your great grandson to be involved in the war on terror, just ignore or slam this post. *I* won't mind, but your great grandson will never forgive you.

Tony X Robins, Jinotega

aid to israel

Submitted by Jinoturistica on 14 July, 2007 - 06:45.

a PM caused me to research aid to Israel from the US.

Just taking the main identifiables, ignoring fringe aid, the US is into about $3 billion a year to Israel with 6 million people. That is roughly 30% of the US aid budget. That is more than the total aid to Central and South America combined. Almost all of it is gifts, not loans. 60% of it is military aid.

Context: 6 million people, $3 billion dollars means that every man woman and child in the US donates $10 tax to give every man woman and child in Israel a gift of $500 EVERY YEAR.

No wonder there is absolutely no interest from the Israelis in creating peace and harmony - who in their right mind would want to turn off a deluge of moolah of that size?

... and we talk of Iran and Syria funding terrorists! The US supports the worlds only bastion of apartheid, one that bombs and assassinates people in a neighboring defenseless so called independent state. Israel is a terrorist state and the US finances it to the hilt then vetoes anything in the UN that even mentions Israel.

Time for a change. Cut the cash.

Tony X Robins, Jinotega

Gaza Events

Submitted by GranadaSherif on 11 July, 2007 - 13:28.

The events and the people behind the events in Gaza are the reason that, as you say, "Arabs" seem not united. Things are a lot more complex than what they seem, you have money involved, you have elections and interference and manipulation (by the US and Israel) in that process, you have have issues of freedom, and much more.

16 years ago the policies of the US, Europe's (not all) and Israel (in Israel) were the cause of most "terrorist" activities, but that changed in 1991 after the first Iraqi war.

Today I would say that Terrorists have many more reasons (thanks to the US and specifically the Bushes) than just Israel and the Palestinian issues.

Handling terrorism on NL

Submitted by Jinoturistica on 10 July, 2007 - 11:10.

Open the database and key in

Delete * from comments where commenttext like 'islam' or commenttext like 'terror' or length(commenttext) < 55

Press enter, click OK.

Yes, I know it IS theoretically possible to say something useful about nicaragua in less than 55 letters or use the words terror or islam usefully - but statistically, 99.8% of the deleted thousands of entries would be garbage.

A well sorted garbage pile is still a garbage pile. Time to take the trash out.

Tony

But not too pised off to...

Submitted by carina_cisneros on 4 July, 2007 - 21:34.

Goldwater was given an opportunity to do more than complain in a private letter which does not actually start with words "I am pissed off", but he does say that later. I think the letter was early April. There was opportunity to governmental vote for a condemnation of the mining act on the April 10 vote protesting the U.S. role in the mining of the harbor. It would have to have been a non-binding resolution. Money perhaps 20 million has been appropriated prior to revealed the mining which Casey lied about to intelligence committee and others. When given the chance to condem in a way that would have really meant something, politically anyway, it turns out Goldwater voted against the condemnation. 12 U.S. Senators voted against the condemnation resolution, led by John Tower, Rob Dole and Barry Goldwater. Barry may or may not have actually been pissed off but not pissed off enough to actually really do anything. If you believe other reports he was pissed in another way when he made ramblings on the U.S. floor and did that letter. Some sources say he did this while inebriated - which may or may not be true. It does not have much to do with who is or is not a terrorist but it does have to do with whether or not Goldwater's claim should be evidence that some other people are.

Thanks for this post, on the

Submitted by thunderdial on 4 July, 2007 - 16:19.

Thanks for this post, on the day of our Independence. We appreciate that. Why was Wilson standing on the tracks of an oncoming train? Doesn't sound like a smart thing to do, that is, unless he was trying to do something to the train. You know Fyl, not a lot of people view the Contras as a terrorist group. I believe they were called Freedon Fighters, and if I remember correctly, Ortega was starving his nation, killing folks, etc.

Don't worry, we'll put in a good word for you with the block captain.

Terrorist/Freedom Fighters

Submitted by expatyank on 11 July, 2007 - 07:49.

The only difference between a Terrorist and a Freedom Fighter is "what side are YOU on" knowledge is power

i like the argument.....

Submitted by Che Guevara on 11 July, 2007 - 09:51.

but i hope we can all agree on some indicia of freedom. for example, the ability to vote, the rule of law via democracy as opposed to the rule of man, freedom of speech, freedom to assemble.

so ortega allowed the vote and lost the first time. fidel and saddam never allowed a meaningful vote or the right to dissent.

Cuba libre!

One correction

Submitted by fyl on 11 July, 2007 - 09:58.

Ortega won the vote the first time (1984), lost the second time (1990). The difference is that in 1984, a divided opposition knew they could not win and the major opposition candidate pulled out of the election. In 1990, the opposition was united (a US-created coalition of 16 or 17 parties) and did win.

I don't know enough about Iraq to know what existed there before Saddam but I do know, much like the Shah of Iran, he was "helped into place" by the US government.

As for Cuba, a popular revolution to replace an unpopular dictator (Batista), put Fidel into power. Whether popular or not today, that is how he differs from Saddam, the Shah and all so many other "placed" leaders.

To get the train to stop

Submitted by fyl on 4 July, 2007 - 17:21.

Lots of people were on the tracks. Blocking a car, a truck, a tractor, ... with your body pretty common as a passive resistance technique. Arthur Dent used it against the people who were going to push over his house in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Such actions were very common in Seattle. How deliveries were made from the base had been studied by the activists. They was even speed limit signs in the area for the train. The train sped up substantially. Others made it off the tracks, Willson did not.

I know few people, whether pro- or anti-Contra that, given the facts, could view them as anything but terrorists. If Iran decided to fund an armed force based in Mexico and another in Canada running across the border into the US to destroy infrastructure such as bridges and electricity distribution, murder civilians and rape women, because Iran didn't like US internal policies, would you not call that a terrorist force?

As for Ortega, I think you must have put that in by mistake. You said (my emphasis) "Ortega was starving his nation, killing folks, etc." He, like Somoza, no matter what they were doing, were not a terrorist force. They were the government.

12next ›last »