Once per week, I share comments I’d posted to articles appearing on Yahoo News. These were posted between May 29 and today, though appear below in no particular order. As is my usual custom, if I open with a quoted item, that’s from the article itself.
Posted on Yahoo! News
ONE:
[This is my comment on an article concerning the A-12 stealth spy plane, which featured a photo of that craft taken on the infamous Area 51 military base sometime in the 1960’s. The caption stated that the motionless plane, hovering upside-down maybe ten feet off the ground without any visible means of support, was being “radar-tested.]
"Radar testing?" What bull! Any meaningful "radar testing" takes place while the plane is in flight - that is, if you can see it with your eyes but can't see it on the radar screen, it passes! Anyway, there is no crane holding that plane up - it's levitating. You might call the A-12 a "gift" from above...from "waaay above." We got that kind of technology, back in '63, from the same place the Nazis got theirs. Check out Jim Marrs' intriguing book, The Rise of the Fourth Reich."
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"Careful, gentlemen, when you make deals with the devil, he'll want his due. Tell me, how much are we really in hock for the gifts we were 'given?'"
TWO:
"...cyberattack could result in real-world military retaliation, although analysts say it could be difficult to detect its origin with full accuracy."
We wouldn't even bother to try for anything near "full accuracy." We'd just lash out...you know...based on how we usually react to crises. The anarchists of the 21st century (or our own Black Ops) will go for that cyberattack ... fully hoping for that "real-world military retaliation." Nothing's more pitiful than seeing a blinded giant lashing out, so we'd better get our act together real fast.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"I mean our ethical act - we've got enough of the other stuff."
"I mean our ethical act - we've got enough of the other stuff."
THREE:
[The article I’m commenting on here was covering a rocket attack by a rival tribe, which ended up wounding Yemen
Gee, I wonder where they got the rockets. Maybe on some future date we'll be asking, "Gee, I wonder where they got the mini drones."
Ah, the mini's...Private developers in the US Afghanistan
But…this will turn out to be a disaster of the first order, when (as will be inevitable) our enemies buy, bribe, or steal this technology. Case in point: Israel Israel
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“This is where Been-Jammin’ Knittin’-Yahoo is badly miscalculating. He thinks there is no new thing under the sun, which will allow Israel to continue running roughshod over the West Bank .”
FOUR:
The operation was aimed at putting "additional pressure on the Gadhafi forces who continue to threaten the civilian population," he said.”
Question: Those “Gadhafi forces who continue to threaten the civilian population” couldn’t also be those very same forces claimed (by this article) to be “trying to hide in populated areas.” Let me emphasize, “trying to hide.” Doesn’t sound to me like they were threatening the civilian population, unless of course by simply being there they were (by NATO definition) threatening the civilian population.
Libyan civilians aren’t the only ones being threatened. British and French civilians, who are being ruthlessly lied to by their governments, are also being threatened. When those governments operate outside the rule of law, they become outlaw governments. Are the civilians of France and Britain
Good citizens, here’s what’s really happening: Your countries’ elites are reveling in a power-induced drunkenness so they can relive the bygone days of empire. It felt good back then to bomb the hell out of the heathens; feels pretty good now. But beware: Those “heathens” have long memories.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“We are so addicted to instant gratification, we simply couldn’t wait for events to unfold gradually and under the watchful eye of Libya
FIVE:
"His killing would likely be seen as a huge achievement in the United States ..." [This had to do with a US
Mark those words carefully. If that's our idea of a "huge achievement," no wonder we're losing this war.
But that's been one of our weaknesses when fighting insurgents. We tend to think, "If we knock off their leaders, our job will be 90% done." Well, that couldn't have worked during our little adventure in Vietnam
Our fixation with leader-killing has roots similar to our fixation with celebrities (Dancing with the Stars, anybody?) or (if you happen to be English) with royalty. Think about it this way, “If your willingness to fight for your cause evaporates because your leadership has been killed, that cause couldn’t have been worth the risk of your life in the first place.”
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Maybe part of the problem is with the people who remotely control those drones. They don’t really risk their lives for their cause, now do they?”
SIX:
“Egypt Egypt ends up with weapons — but the money actually goes to U.S. firms and helps create U.S.
The money “actually” goes to U.S. firms – which means taxpayer dollars have been funneled to our homegrown Merchants of Death for 30 years, which (almost as an afterthought) “helps create U.S.
This is how the Egyptian man in the street views all that weaponry we’ve been providing, mostly to Mubarak. He’d been using that to help suppress his own people! And you’d better believe that man in the street knows this. Think of all the love our money has bought us – NOT! Egypt Israel Egypt Libya Sudan
Jimmy Carter and every succeeding president has been playing us for fools for 30 years – by giving Egypt (AND Israel
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“No real and sustainable economic recovery could nor should be dependent on arms sales.”
SEVEN:
[This comment is my response to “TomS” who challenged my comment (immediately above).]
@ TomS, Are you trying to say it's alright with you that our taxpayer dollars are being used as welfare payments to our Merchants of Death? That if we don't do this, some other country will? That kind of ethic sounds like a pretty horrible basis for a country's morality. Come to think of it, using that kind of ethic contributed to the downfall of the USSR China US
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"Ethics are important - there, I said it. Somebody has to."
"Ethics are important - there, I said it. Somebody has to."
EIGHT:
Don't expect Romney to explain how he intends to "fix things." After all, we didn't ask candidate Obama anything even remotely resembling such a hard question. So why pick on Mitt?
If the Pubbers end up giving the nomination to MR (or to anybody else for that matter), it will simply be because it's considered bad form to not even field a candidate. Mitt will lose. But unlike other potential GOP nominees, who would also lose, Mitt won’t suffer grievously – he has a personal fortune to fall back on and no political career to nurture. As for any personal expenses he might incur, not to worry - some way, somehow, he'll be reimbursed. Not in any [publicly] accountable way, to be sure, but a lot of our so-called "public life" really works exactly like that.
As long as Mitt mouths the right platitudes, the Pubber Base will be satisfied. Or as satisfied as that cranky lot will ever be. Though sooner or later, he'll have to confront what a lot of folks consider the 'strangeness of being a Mormon' - he'll not be able to song and dance his way around that one. As long as Mitt doesn’t panic, seem evasive, or claim “Americans aren’t voting for a Preacher in Chief, they’re voting for a CINC,” he’ll do just fine.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“If Obama managed to survive his religious test, so will Mitt – unless he reacts badly if a reporter asks to see his underwear.”
NINE:
Why on earth would anybody care what George Will thinks? Why should even George himself care? [And, no George, that question about Palin doesn't "answer itself" - if you want to make the point, you'll have to work a little harder than that.]
As for Palin being entrustable with the nuclear football, who would have thought (and why?) Obama should have been so entrusted? What does one have to do, in Will's mind, to be "ready" to handle the nukeball?
All of this is actually moot, though, since no US US
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Think about it this way: If a newly-elected president said to his aide “Get that thing [the nukeball] away from me – I want nothing to do with it,” do you really think we couldn’t walk into Armageddon if the [real] Powers-that-Be so decreed?”
TEN:
"...hundreds of millions of dollars backed by frozen assets of Gadhafi's regime."
Wait a minute. Freezing assets is one thing. But is Italy
Since the rebels are so keen that Gadhafi relinquish power, maybe he should turn the tables by asking: “If I leave, how will you [the rebel leadership] determine who or what ends up being in charge? For example, will you call for elections? Can anybody run for office? Could I run for office?!! Suppose I am reelected, do you rebel all over again or do you support me?”
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Not only is NATO violating its mandate (as any child can see), but not enough people are asking pretty basic questions.”
ELEVEN:
"After previous denials by military officials..." [that Egyptian security forces subjected female prisoners to “virginity checks”].
Why deny what was done? Are they not proud of doing their duty for the good of the state? Surely there must be some kind of military medal in this for the "testers." Let's see, the citation could read, "For courage above and beyond....while in the act of probing enemy territory."
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"If asked to do something you wouldn't want widely known, DON'T DO IT."
TWELVE:
@ Murray... You claim, "And Israel would never use a nuclear weapon except in self defense. Everyone knows that."
Well, I for one, don't "know that." Perhaps by "self defense" you include Ye Olde Pre-emptive strike based on speculation and exaggerated intel? Sorry, but that's not my idea of self-defense. Perhaps what Israel
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"No good can come from putting greater faith in nukes than in your Lord."
THIRTEEN:
“the progress and stability the EU sought in the Arab world would depend on an improved relationship between religions there.”
Is that so? Is that what the … EU … wants? If so, would it matter at all what the locals might want? Or will those same locals start to feel the heavy hand of EU politically-correct colonialism at work in their homelands?
“European Union leaders assured senior religious figures on Monday they would defend the freedom of belief in the Middle East …” Good men and women, it is not your place to “defend the freedom of belief in the Middle East .”
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“The EU has enough problems of its own which these leaders should be attending to – such as, how on earth did the EU get sucked into the US
FOURTEEN:
QUOTE: Obama hailed Dempsey as "one of our nation's respected and combat-tested [huh????] generals. :UNQUOTE.
Please, somebody correct me if I’m wrong, but I have failed to find any evidence that General Dempsey ever saw a single day in combat. Yeah, he had “led” troops as their headquarters commander, but that’s not the same thing. I wonder if this guy had ever been shot at or even had gunfire directed toward his general vicinity.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“You know, one of the reasons we engage in these strategically-unimportant (and expensive) wars is to give desk-jockeys a chance to ‘earn’ some medals. Looks good on the resume. Just saying.”
FIFTEEN:
[This recent story concerned one man single-handedly fighting off 30 Taliban in Afghanistan
I wish the entire cast of "The Expendables" could have sat down and watched a video of Pun's actions, with a narrator telling them, "THIS is how it's done."
On a more serious note: I wonder what motivates Pun. Does he have any thoughts on the politics of this war? Is he a willing member of an army who places total trust in his Queen that she is doing the right thing? Or what?
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"These private motivators are as much of what makes a man as is his physical courage. Without asking about these, then we'd be saying we don't care much about him as an individual - only as an example of courage and good fortune."
SIXTEEN:
"In recent days, [2008 presidential candidate Edwards’] legal team also argued that the secret spending was designed to hide the affair from his wife, Elizabeth, who died of cancer in December, and not to aid his campaign."
Let me see if I understand this: Two wealthy supporters (note the word “supporters”) dished out all this money so that Edwards could “hide the affair from his wife?” Their “support” had nothing to do with protecting Edwards’ image which, if sullied, would have sunk his bid for the White House?
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“If a former FEC chairman could actually have the balls to say (which he did say) the payments did not violate the law, that shows where he’s coming from – and challenges that body’s credibility.”
SEVENTEEN:
RULE #1: Don't trust any of the Dem/Pubs. Only by voting for independents will we free ourselves from political party infighting.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"Join the New American Revolution: Declare your independence by voting for independents. There is no other way."
EIGHTEEN:
@Miriam, This is precisely how we lose our liberty to the whims of ever expanding executive power. To wit:
The 2002 Resolution included these words [emphasis mine]: “The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States AS HE DETERMINES to be necessary and appropriate…”
As for the 2001 Authorization [per Wikipedia, again with my emphasis]: ‘The authorization granted the President the authority to use all "necessary and appropriate force" against those whom He DETERMINED "planned, authorized, committed or aided" the September 11th attacks.’
Suppose the President had decided to use nuclear weapons against (say) three mountain hideouts (just to be sure we "got him"], one of which (though not knowing which one] was where he “knew” Bin Laden was hiding. Since the Authorization allowed all “necessary and appropriate force” as determined by the president, nukes and overkill wouldn’t have been taken off the table. I have a problem with that, and so should have Congress.
And finally we have this, from the Constitution: “The Congress shall have power to…declare war.” It doesn’t say Congress shall have power to grant “authorizations” or “resolutions” – for neither is a declaration of war. Basically, by allowing the president to make sole determination, the Congress passed the buck. Personally, that’s not why I vote for my Congressman – to be a buckpasser.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“We’re still very primitive when it comes to worshipping a strongman and letting him have his way, be it some tinhorn dictator or our own president. We can’t seem to just say NO.”
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party
“Just for once, I’d like to see some type of cataclysmic world-changing political event take place that would be too overwhelming for the news media censors to spin, minimize, or cover up. Come to think of it, my campaign for the
Contract me a bpa_cinc@yahoo.com
No comments:
Post a Comment