Today, my dad told me that “those people” attacked the U.S. because of their religion.

I watch 911: In Plane Site

Meh.  I think on a lot of stuff, they were really s-t-r-e-c-h-i-n-g on many things.  The 2nd plane is sketchy though.  The flash just as the plane makes contact (steel on steel) seems obvious to me.

Everyone yelling “I heard an explosion” as evidence of some conspiracy is ridiculous, because folks were also saying the Capital was bombed w/ a car bomb, etc etc.  A lot of stories were happening that day, and even the next day, many of which were incorrect.

Building 7 - no idea.  If it was under a controlled demo, why?  No one gave a shit about building 7.  It was just another building.  So why “pull it”?

I do wonder what happened at the Pentagon.  The pics of the plane on the surveillance cam is one thing, but how many cameras are around the pentagon, the most secure building in the world?!  No other feeds were looked at or released?  Fishy.  They also mislead on that one, because the 14ft hole in the wall was allegedly the front of the fuselage coming to a stop.  Makes sense, on one hand.

People can say Bush did it to get into Iraq, avenge the attack on his father, control oil, or whatever, but why are so many people coming out and saying Bush was warned about an eminent attack and that he ignored it, then it was too late?  Was there really an attack planned by 19 people who successfully pulled it off?  

The film is kooky, and probably made to continue on the 9/11 hype train, especially after other more important films.  The whole thing seems like it was made in a basement.

Ultimately, I don’t have a huge opinion on the events of 09.11.01.  I don’t think it was all government instigated but who knows.

The way in which “America’s soul is totally poisoned” is evident in virtually every debate over US policies of militarism. Over the weekend, several pro-war national security “experts” argued: “I’d pay closer attention to critics of drone strikes if they explained their recommended alternative.” This is a commonly heard defense of Obama’s drone assaults: I support drones - despite how they constantly kill innocent adults and children - because the alternative, “boots on the ground”, is worse.

Those who argue this are literally incapable even of conceiving of an alternative in which the US stops killing anyone and everyone it wants in the world. They operate on the assumption that US violence is and should be inevitable, and the only cognizable debate is which weapon the US should use to carry out this killing (drones or “boots on the ground”?). Even though they have no idea who the US government is killing, they assume, with literally no evidence or basis, that those being killed are “terrorists” who want to attack the US and that therefore they - and anyone close to them - must be killed first. As Jonathan Schwarz noted on Sunday, they have literally embraced the same mindset as the Terrorists they claim to loathe: we must use violence and killing, even if it means we kill innocents, because we simply cannot conceive of any alternative.

Never once do they stop and wonder: why are there so many people in the world who want to attack the US? Never once do they do what King so bravely and rather subversively urged: “the true meaning and value of compassion and nonviolence” is it “helps us to see the enemy’s point of view, to hear his questions, to know his assessment of ourselves”. King explained: “from his view we may indeed see the basic weaknesses of our own condition, and if we are mature, we may learn and grow and profit from the wisdom of the brothers who are called the opposition.” King thus urged the nation to “understand the arguments of those who are called enemy.”

Glenn Greenwald, MLK’s vehement condemnations of US militarism are more relevant than ever (via maarnayeri)

Boston bombing suspect ‘cites US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as impetus for attacks’ — RT USA

The surviving Boston Marathon bombings suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev told interrogators that US-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan spurred him and his brother to carry out last week’s deadly assault, US officials told media.

US officials believe Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev acted on their own when targeting the Boston Marathon and were not linked with any terror cell, AP reports quoting its own sources.

The hospitalized 19-year-old suspect, who has been upgraded to fair condition, specifically provided the US invasion of Iraq, which officially ended in December 2011, and the ongoing US-led mission in Afghanistan as inspiring the brothers to carry out the attack, the Washington Post reports.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev further took responsibility for his role in planting explosives near the marathon finish line last week. Despite his role in the assault, he had previously said his brother was the primary driver behind the terror plot.

The elder Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, died on Friday after a fierce gun battle with police.

However, the Boston Globe reported on Tuesday that Tsarnaev offered up his admission of guilt on Sunday, when he had not yet been read his Miranda rights.

While attorney’s for the suspect are likely to challenge the legal admissibility of his statements, including claims that he and his brother acted alone, a senior police officials said authorities already believe their case is watertight based on eyewitness testimony from the man who the brothers abducted late Thursday night.

“We just killed a cop. We blew up the marathon. And now we’re going to New York. Don’t [expletive] with us,” the witness recounts one of the suspects as telling him when the carjacking first commenced.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was charged with using and conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction and with malicious destruction of property resulting in death. He is accused of setting off pressure-cooker bombs that left 3 killed and wounded 264 during the Boston Marathon on April 15.

He is also due to be charged separately with the killing of a Massachusetts Institute of Technology police officer shot during the manhunt on Thursday.

While there is no excuse for attacks that purposefully target civilians, the fact that the suspects cite US foreign policy as a primary motivating factor in the bombings should come as a surprise to no one, John Glaser, an editor at, told RT.

“Every attack that wasn’t an FBI-hatched sting operation since 9/11 has had that component. All of these terrorists that want to attack the United States and commit heinous violence on us have in their mind some motivation of US foreign policy; US aggression in the Middle East.”

The next step in the investigation is expected to be an indictment, during which new charges could be added.
A possible hearing was set for May 30, with two death penalty lawyers appointed to represent Tsarnaev, AP reported.

Meanwhile, police are continuing to look into the suspects’ online and telephone communications to prove the younger Tsarnaev’s statement.

Currently, about 50 people remain in hospital, with three of them in critical condition. At least 14 of the wounded lost all or part of a limb, while three others lost more than one limb.

CCTV cameras captured Dzhokhar manipulating his cellphone and lifting it to his ear just moments before the two blasts, according to the FBI.

With the legal process against Dzhokhar Tsarnaev commencing, there are still those who believe he is innocent. A group on Facebook in his support has attracted about 11,000 supporters over the last week.


You know, this isn’t really news - at least to those who understand the why’s of attacks on the U.S.

See - the United States government is a bully.  Most of its citizens are stupid & blind enough to be bullies by proxy, whether shaming someone for not voting, or dismissing them as crazy for speaking out against the government in general.  All this happens while the same masses extol the virtues of free speech, and supporting the troops.

The United States has repeatedly pushed its way into other countries, either to establish a political influence (ie: imperialism), or to overturn its leader in favor of said imperialism as well.  War is good for business, yet it’s never good for human beings.  Those human beings affected by war are the ones speaking out.  Oddly, most citizens don’t realize just how affected they are, by war.

There’s a system in place with drones called “double tap”.  Whether in Boston, New York City, or Afghanistan, when a bomb explodes in public, the first thing that happens is first responders run to the scene to assess human damage, and tend to those who have been wounded and injured.  Double Tap sends a second drone strike shortly after its first to destroy the first responders.  It’s a bit like the Boston bombings.  First bomb went off, people started running away from it, and what was waiting for them down the road?  Another bomb, mere seconds later.

If China, or North Korea, or Russia had opened the playing board & were striking on the United States, and their soldiers were occupying the streets of our neighborhoods with tanks, military trucks decorated with guns and other weapons - there is no doubt that the locals would create IED (improved explosive devices) to constantly fight back against those military persons from another country.  

All that being said, how does anyone not expect Afghans, Pakinstanis, Iraqis or otherwise to not do the same?  How can we not expect people whose extended families, neighborhoods, and cities are being destroyed by the U.S. military to not blow up that military at every chance?  If it happens on U.S. soil - so be it.  The same day as the Boston bombings, there was a drone strike of a wedding in Afghanistan.  Thirty people were killed, and a hundred or more injured.  No al Qaeda or Taliban were near it.  The U.S. admitted “oops, we might have missed our target”.  Yet thirty people are dead. Double Tap works.  It’s a murder machine, even shaming Josef Mengele’s efforts. 

I’m an Anarchist.  I don’t believe in violence, other than to defend myself or my family, or anyone that would call on me for help.  I don’t believe in aggression against my neighbor either in the next apartment, or the next country, or the next continent.  I don’t believe in an eye for an eye, because that leaves the whole world blind (to quote Gandhi, another pacifist who was an anarchist as well).  Unfortunately the military hasn’t learned that yet. They never will.  Neither will the government.  The government will never try to understand the people that attack the U.S., because its arrogance won’t let it.  The U.S. waging war is good and honest and patriotic.  But Iraqis or Afghans fighting back against that aggression is somehow wrong?  

Expect more attacks.  Either from two boys who had motivation for the wars overseas, or from a larger more organized community.  They will not stop, until the U.S. stops first.  That’s the simple truth.

Exploding Like A Bomb In Boston

The fucking media.  The news anchors with crinkled brows, leaning into the camera, and emoting like a motherfucker - makes me sick.  

It’s not that I don’t think that they are void of feelings, but gheezus.  ”Terrorism In Boston!”  Red letters, exclamation points.  It’s all very tabloidish.  While I understand it’s a developing story, even near-24 hours later, the over-stating of the tidbits of information that comes out, it’s like a grizzle to a hungry, rabid dog.

And while the fact that an 8 year old boy lost his life yesterday, I dread the press using him & his life as the poster child for horrors in the world.  An hour or two after the thing happened, I shut off the television.  I was already tired of that VINE video (that I posted earlier) of the bomb going off.  How many times can we see it?!  How can anyone wonder why people are so desensitized to violence in culture, when it’s beaten into your head non-stop from many sources? There’s no contrast anymore.

Anytime bombs are used to target innocent civilians, it is an act of terror.

murderer-in-chief barry obama, in the most ironic statement you’ll hear all damn day, as he addressed the nation today at 11:33am ET about the explosions in Boston.

Billions of US tax dollars potentially funding Afghan terrorism – report

Grey areas in US legislation could mean that taxpayer money is financing Afghan terrorism, a report has revealed. It calls on Congress to change the $100,000 threshold on reconstruction contracts to include the 80 percent that evade scrutiny.

The “alarming” findings were greeted with calls for urgent action to mend the weak links in US regulations.

The report, titled ‘Contracting with the Enemy’ and published by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), draws attention to the mismanagement of the Department of Defense’s (DOD) funds.

According to the document, such oversights mean that “millions of contracting dollars could be diverted to forces seeking to harm US Military and civilian personnel and derail the multi-billion dollar reconstruction effort.”

Last year, the US invested around $1.7 million and awarded 9,733 contracts in Afghanistan; it is unclear how much of this may have been diverted to the insurgency.

Criticism in the report focuses on Section 841 of the National Defense Authorization Act 2012 and its ambiguous wording. The legislation allows the DOD to discontinue a contract with a company found to have links to Afghan insurgent groups.

However, blunders in the section’s wording make it likely that US money is slipping through the net and contributing to terrorism.

Firstly and most importantly, Section 841 only applies to contracts over $100,000 which excludes approximately 80 percent of Afghan contractors. Secondly, the report found that many of the contractors are not made aware of their legal obligation to avoid companies with insurgent links.

Furthermore, information on companies that have been blacklisted under Section 841 is not properly disseminated by the DOD: “CENTCOM [Central Command] began posting Section 841 designations on its public website in January 2013; however, contracting officers and prime contractors are not required to regularly review the information,” the report explained.

Finally, Section 841 will expire when US forces pull out in 2014, increasing the danger of funds being funneled to extremist groups.

“SIGAR currently has 73 open recommendations. If all of them were accepted, the U.S. government could potentially save about $450 million,” said John Spoko, Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction to press. He went on to say that the US government had failed to implement an anti-corruption plan that had been previously put forward.

“More than two years ago, SIGAR recommended that the United States develop an integrated anti-corruption strategy. Although the U.S. Embassy in Kabul produced a draft strategy, it was not adopted,” he said.

This is not the first time the US has come under fire for its mismanagement of funds in Afghanistan. In July of last year, SIGAR warned that many of the reconstruction projects that the US had invested in were behind schedule, and would not be finished before the full troop withdrawal in 2014. SIGAR said the “expectations gap” caused by the unfinished projects could impair stabilization efforts.

Meanwhile, as the deadline for the US withdrawal closes, there is little evidence to suggest Afghanistan will be in stable condition when the US leaves. A coordinated insurgent attack on April 3 killed 34 civilians and 10 security force members in the most deadly attack in over a year.


I’ve talked about this before, but not on this specific level.  See - when a government needs to exert its power, and moreover assure its own existence, it creates an enemy.  It has to have a muse (albeit a twisted one) to go to war, & invade countries, and practice Imperialism.  So, they create an enemy.  Police do it, local & state governments do it, and the federal level does it.  Saddam Hussein never had WMD that we saw or knew, yet it gave Dubya great reason to invade Iraq, kill Hussein, and …..oh yes, get the oil.  (I also think Dubya had a revenge motive as well, since his papa was the target of an assassination plot in Kuwait, in 1993.)  War is profitable, and even if the U.S. “accidentally” leaks money to its alleged enemy, it gives them great reason to go after that enemy.  It’s like picking at a sore, and simultaneously trying to put a bandage on it.  The one cancels the other.

Now, do I believe the U.S. is providing funds to its enemies abroad, in the purpose of continuing war against them?  I don’t know, probably not.  But I also don’t put anything past the U.S. government in its game of thrones, framed in coercion, fear tactics, and propaganda.    I do believe that there is a lot more going on behind the scenes that we don’t know about, and would probably be the ultimate point of critical mass with the public were it ever found out by the public.  I also believe most amurrikans believe that some secrets are solely those of the government’s, and we’re better off not knowing those “top secret” situations.  I say bullshit.