Although I have no clue what we are still doing in Afghanistan, any sound bite caught from RT is highly suspicious and not at all credible.
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 4:43 PM, plainolamerican <[email protected]>wrote: > a military that has not defended authentic American liberties for > decades. > --- > I've been seeing a tv show promo about some some soldiers in > Afghanistan. > One of the soundbites for the promo shows a soldier saying ... 'we're > fighting for each other.' > > US soldiers in Afghanistan are not fighting for their country or their > flag, but rather for each other, war reporter and filmmaker Sebastian > Junger told RT. > “What I realized in the five months that I spent at this little > outpost at the Korangal Valley in eastern Afghanistan -huge amount of > combat, very isolated place – what I realized is that the guys were > not fighting for flag and country,” he said. “They may have joined up > for those sorts of reasons, but once they were there, they were > fighting for each other and there was a completely kind of fraternal > arrangement that had very little broad conceptual motivations behind > it.” > Not many American soldiers in Afghanistan take their time to reflect > on why they are fighting this war, they are just fighting it, Junger > said. > “They did not debate why are we in Afghanistan very much,” he said. > “It is like, well, 9/11, 3000 Americans were killed by attacks coming > out of Afghanistan and we had to go to that country and fix it and > find the people who killed our American brothers and sisters, and that > is about the extent of their analysis.” > > On Jun 14, 12:44 pm, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ilana Mercer:“‘Thank You For Your Service, Mr. Snowden’” is my current > column, now on WND. It ends thus: "Come every Memorial Day – more aptly > called 'Dying For Nothing Day' – we direct a commonplace saying at members > of a military that has not defended authentic American liberties for > decades. It is, however, to a young man such as [Edward Snowden] that we > should say: > > “Thank you for your service, Mr. Snowden.” Read the other 1080 words @ > http://www.wnd.com/2013/06/thank-you-for-your-service-mr-snowden/"Come > every Memorial Day -- more aptly called “Dying For Nothing Day” -- we > direct a commonplace saying at members of a military that has not defended > authentic American liberties for decades. It is, however, to a young man > such as this that we should say: > > "“Thank you for your service, Mr. Snowden.”"RETURN TO REASONThank you > for your service, Mr. Snowden'Let us prove ourselves worthy of his > sacrifice'14 June 2013 > > Ilana Mercer > > A heroic American whistleblower chooses, oh-so wisely, to expose Uncle > Sam’s usurpations to the veteran reporters of the British Guardian and not > to the partisan hacks of the American press. This fact tells you all you > need to know about U.S. presstitutes. > > Confirmation of the degree to which American media have been co-opted by > power came on June 10, again, via a British newspaper. The Mail Online > divulged that Edward Snowden had “first approached the Washington Post with > his leaks, but the newspaper refused to comply with his publishing demands.” > > You see, the Washington Post had to hotfoot it back to Big Brother Obama > before it would do its journalistic due diligence. “The Post broke the > story on PRISM two weeks later, on Thursday, after consulting with > government officials,”confirmedthe Mail Online. > > Even after being scooped by the Guardian, the Obama embeds at the > Washington Post saw fit to inform their readers about PRISM on a purely > need-to-know basis, “reprinting only four of the 41 PRISM PowerPoint > slides” and generally misrepresenting the nature of the program known as > PRISM. The manufactured-in-America version of PRISM thus contradicts the > “internal NSA documents” leaked to the Guardian. > > According to the guardian of American freedoms at the Guardian, reporter > Glenn Greenwald, the 41-slide PowerPoint presentation he acquired from > Snowden has been authenticated as a document “used to train intelligence > operatives on the capabilities of the program.” The presentation,pictorials > with captions, handed out by the National Security Agency, boasts of having > “direct access to the systems of Google, Facebook, Apple, Yahoo, PalTalk, > YouTube in 2010; Skype and AOL, and other servers.” > > Contrary to what you’re being told, “the world’s largest surveillance > organization” can and does “obtain targeted communications without having > to request them from the service providers and without having to obtain > individual court orders.” And it is contrary to the Bill of Rights, the > Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, in particular. It specifies that > “warrants shall issue” only “upon probable cause, supported by oath or > affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the > persons or things to be seized.” > > Tellingly, the tools of Big Media and big government are not apprising > you of these facts. Like a tortoise in its shell, they’ve retreated from > the watersheds that are theAP,theIRSand the NSA scandals, informing you > only of what New York and Northeast elites think is important:“Most of you > still like Obama.” > > In light of “the disclosure that the federal authorities routinely > collect data on phone calls Americans make, regardless of whether they have > any bearing on a counterterrorism investigation,” the Gray Lady endeavored, > fleetingly, to shake off a flea or two and adopt a slightly less > reverential tone toward the godhead Obama. The New York Times quickly lay > down with dogs again; the paper rushed to restore Obama’s bona fides the > following day. > > As to other “nimble” minds in media:Andrea Tarantula,one of the > interchangeable females on a Fox News idiot’s extravaganza called “The > Five,” said that, “If they are competent with my information; they can have > it. If not, let me have my freedoms back.” > > To Andrea (who is, admittedly, not as invincibly stupid as the statist > Dana Perino), the inviolable “right of the people to be secure in their > persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and > seizures” is subject to the efficiency of a naturally illicit search. > > Not for Greg Gutfeld are arguments from principle. Sitting in for Bill > O’Reilly, Gutfeld declared that “this” was not about surveillance but about > a progressive government that could not be trusted. The majority of > Americans are equally adrift, oblivious to the individual liberties > American Constitution makers bequeathed them. The individuals questioned by > the polling professionals at the Pew Research Center were inclined to > approve of the phone-call tapping of millions, if conducted by the party > for which they voted. > > Lawrence O’Donnell and his entourage at MSNBC -- Alex Wagner and Chris > Hayes, the most enthusiastic Obama bobbleheads on TV -- acted all surprised > about rudderless America, never implicating their daily, partisan > promotionals in the process. The hosts harped on the fact that no harm had > come from the NSA PRISM program. And, after all, was Obama not obligated to > continue the incursions into liberty begun by Bush?C’est la vie. Wagner did > display a modicum of remorse for her cover-up. She admitted that Obama had > gone beyond the call of duty in expanding counterterrorism and state > surveillance. > > Neoconservatives such as Bill Kristol of the Weekly Standard, the > editorial board of the Wall Street Journal, retired U.S. Army Lt. Col. > Ralph Peters and radio talker Hugh Hewitt all pronounced the NSA data sweep > a non-scandal. Another neocon, Charles Krauthammer, saw Obama’s infractions > as a vindication of Bush’s. The columnist invited Democrats now excusing > Obama to pardon Bush and … party on. > > Snowden came forth, in his words, “to reveal criminality.” But Fox News’ > Megyn Kelly chose to mine crime from the ore of virtue. Kelly summoned a > two-bit profiler, allegedly from the FBI’s Behavioral Analysis Unit -- who > sounded like she’d been plucked from the set of“Criminal Minds”-- to expose > “this guy.” Not to be outperformed by Kelly, the profiler unloaded terms > like “loser” and “drop-out” on a man who has held many responsible > positions within the intelligence community in his young life. > > Yet another Fox News personality, Neil Cavuto, went on to compare > Snowden to celebrity seducer Roman Polanski, who, in 1978, sought asylum in > France after being convicted of sleeping with an American minor. Chimed > Cavuto, “We don’t know why [Snowden] did what he did.” > > Oh yes we do. Contra Cavuto, Snowden forsook creature comforts and > worldly possessions to speak truth to power -- and not to any power. The > 29-year-old NSA contractor has gone up “against the world’s most powerful > intelligence agencies,” as he stated soberly. Snowden understands his > chances of prevailing are not good. “[T]ey’re such powerful adversaries > that no one can meaningfully oppose them. If they want to get you, they > will get you in time.” > > In Snowden’s poignant words, “You can’t wait around for someone else to > act. I had been looking for leaders, but I realized that leadership is > about being the first to act.” “I’m neither traitor nor hero. I’m an > American,” he summed-up so simply. > > Yes, we need fewer personalities like Cavuto and more men of character > like Snowden. > > Those who’re not suspended in the moral abyss with mainstream media > already know that Edward Snowden is the best of America. Let us prove > ourselves worthy of his sacrifice. > > Come every Memorial Day -- more aptly called “Dying For Nothing Day” -- > we direct a commonplace saying at members of a military that has not > defended authentic American liberties for decades. It is, however, to a > young man such as this that we should say: > > “Thank you for your service, Mr. Snowden.” > http://www.wnd.com/2013/06/thank-you-for-your-service-mr-snowden/ > > -- > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "PoliticalForum" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
