I wish Republicans would make up their minds on whether Saddam was responsible for 9-11.......or the 5 Taliban members Obama traded Sgt. Bergdahl for last weekend....
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on Sunday called the five Guantanamo detainees released in a prisoner swap for Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl "hardcore military jihadists who are responsible for 9/11" and said he expects them to return to fighting against the U.S.
I realize it is oh-so-uncivil to bring this up, but Mr. McCain is full of shite. The Taliban tried repeatedly to turn over Bin Laden before, and after, W. declared them just as guilty as the 19 hijackers for "harboring al-Qaeda." So, no, the Taliban is not al-Qaeda, even though it was convenient for the Bushies to confuse the two in the minds of Americans who were being propagandized at the time.
As far as the 5 released Taliban members in exchange for Sgt. Bergdahl.....not only is McCain a liar about them being "responsible for 9-11" but also that they are the "worst of the worse."
There are several pieces up now refuting the notion that these 5 released Taliban members were "hardened jihadist fighters" who would immediately return to the "battlefield", a topic I'll get to in a minute. Here's a short excerpt from an L.A. Times article on the subject.....
A closer look at the former prisoners, however, indicates that not all were hard-core militants. Three held political positions in the Taliban government that ruled Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001 and were considered relative moderates. A fourth was a mid-level police official, experts say.
Former FBI tough-guy, and current anti-Obama Chair of the House Intelligence Committee, Mike Rogers, took the baton from the lying John McCain calling.....
.....the U.S. deal with the Taliban for the release of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl a “serious geopolitical mistake,” and said he is “absolutely convinced” that the five Taliban members transferred from the Guantanamo detention center will return to the battlefield against the United States.
It's worth mentioning here that Rogers is retiring this year and heading into a winger welfare job as a radio talker. I guess there are not quite enough liars defending failed conservatism on AM radio right now.
Rogers, like dozens of other screechers on the right, brought up the threat of 5 released Taliban prisoners "returning to the battlefield." Yes, yes, I realize that words no longer have any meaning except for the intended meaning of the speaker at the time......but haven't we been under the impression that the entire world is the "battlefield?"
May 16, 2013...
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: OK. Do you agree with me that when it comes to international terrorism, we’re talking about a worldwide struggle?
MICHAEL SHEEHAN: Absolutely, sir. [inaudible]
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: Would you agree with me the battlefield is wherever the enemy chooses to make it?
MICHAEL SHEEHAN: Yes, sir, from Boston to the FATA [the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan].
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: I couldn’t agree with you more. We’re in a—do you agree with that, General?
BRIG. GEN. RICHARD GROSS: Yes, sir. I agree that the enemy decides where the battlefield is.
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: And it could be anyplace on the planet, and we have to be aware and able to act. And do you have the ability to act, and are you aware of the threats?
"the enemy decides where the battlefield is".......and that "battlefield" can be "anyplace on the planet."
That is precisely why declaring "war" on al-Qaeda, a non-state sponsored, loosely affiliated band of extremists never made any sense except as an excuse to expand our military dominance and reach in the world. If the U.S. is at "war" with a tiny group of non-state affiliated radical Islamics.....then by definition, and regardless of the wording of the AUMF......the U.S. is at war all over the globe. The world is the "battlefield." That is why the question of whether the "Homeland" should be included in that "battlefield" has been argued so vigorously.
According to Huckleberry.....and Pentagon officials....there can be no question that the "Homeland" is also part of the "battlefield".....because "the enemy decides where the battlefield is."
Now let me ask......given the clear dialogue between Huck and the Pentagon official....if the whole world is the "battlefield" what part of the world would be exempt from U.S. military intervention? That's right.....no part of the world. Under the current working understanding by elected officials, the Pentagon, the CIA, etc.....there is no place on earth where the AUMF doesn't apply.
Of course, all of this makes a total mockery of words and their meanings.....and no less so than Johnny Mac explaining, just yesterday, how 9-11 was planned and carried out by 5 Taliban prisoners released a week ago.
We've all been sold a pig in a poke. As I've said for years, there is no war on terror. After 9-11, the "GWOT" was the slogan of choice to distract Americans away from any notions that the U.S. was simply taking the opportunity of 9-11 to expand our nation's global military dominance.
Everything that the likes of McCain and Rogers say today are for the purpose of keeping those slogans and deceptions alive and well. Permanent "war" has been the goal from the beginning.
About This Blog