ISIS beheads journalist. How does the United States need to respond?

         ISIS, also known as ISIL or Al Quadea in Iraq has struck a nerve with United States population. James Foley was kidnapped, held hostage and then beheaded by the terrorist organization.  This is just weeks after they attacked a rare religious sect in Iraq. Just weeks after President Obama authorized strategic airstrikes. It seems as if ISIS is tempting the United States back into Iraq. The war mongers are pounding their drums louder now.

ISIS had convinced the Iraqi people that they were unbeatable. ISIS owes much of its success to the fact that Iraqi military officers who were ousted by the U.S. have joined there cause. ISIS has not suffered many, if any losses until faced by the Peshewars and the United States military. When faced by these two ISIS backed off. ISIS claims that they are the leaders of the Muslim world. Where in truth, most Muslims want nothing to do with them. They are a radical element that Republican Marco Rubio says needs to be exterminated.

People were upset that the U.S. would not pay 100 million euros or $132 million dollars for the release of Foley. The U.S. does not pay ransoms to terrorist organization or any organization. If a group or family decides to do so, the government typically will let them do so, despite that money assisting a terrorist organization. It is a horrible tragedy and no one deserves to be harmed like that. But I am sure Foley knew what the dangers of this assignment were. Again that does not make them right, but he had to be aware of the risk he was taking. Anyone going over there, soldier, reporter or medical workers should have these risks presented to them.

When I heard President Obama authorized air strikes I was appalled. I knew it wouldnt be long until we had soldiers over there fighting again. Today I have heard that it may be happening much sooner then I thought. We do not need to fight another war. Our country is tired, devastated and broke because of the last 2. Our soldiers need to recover and be with family. This is not the answer. We have many special operations units and drones to do this work. Yell about drones all you want. I DO NOT WANT ANOTHER AMERICAN TO DIE IN IRAQ!!!!!! I cannot stress that enough. It will not end well. I agree that action needs to be taken. But noy another war.

I am an adamant President Obama supporter. I love many of his policies and agree with even more. His whole presidency has been one tough decision after another. This is no different. Congressman John McCain has been beating his war drum for years. The Republicans and there puppeteers have been trying to get us in every country that has a case of marital discord. President Obama and Democrats have held strong until now. The region has always had issues, religious zealots tend to hate a lot of people. We are not the country to fix it. I do not know if Iraqis are better off now or before the war but our country is not better off. We have recovered quite a bit but not enough to go to war again. Please President Obama, I implore you, do not go to war.

President Obama authorizes airstrikes on ISIS in Iraq.

     Much to my dismay President Obama authorized airstrikes in Iraq. I realize that President Obama had only bad choices in this matter, but in Iraq again. Really? We supposedly stopped military operations in 2011. We were supposed to be teaching Iraqi forces to handle these situations without losing control. It seems the only military presence in Iraq is militias. As of now President Obama has limited military action to airstrikes. How long will that last.

As always the Republican war machine has its wheels turning. John Boehner said the bombings were appropriate but will not be enough. John McCain, the biggest war monger of them all, referred to the strikes as pin pricks. Then followed by saying the Obama administration will not move forward to finish the deal. Peter King said the strikes will not be enough alone. Are these leaders calling for boots on the ground? Of course Democrats are calling for no more then air strikes. Nancy Pelosi commended the President saying that air strikes will help and that she admired his commitment to not putting soldiers in danger.

Why did it take us so long to get involved? Iraqi official have asked the President for help earlier in the year. He said no, because he wanted Iraq to stand on their own as a soveirgn nation. He said that Iraq needed to learn how to handle these situations themselves. Essentially to grow as a government and country. Was this the right strategy? Of course the opinions are split. I do not want soldiers on the ground and it seems as if the American people do not either. But honestly what choice was left.

ISIS is the Islamic State of Iraq and Levant. It is essentially Al Queda in Iraq. It was also very involved in Syria. It is a self proclaimed caliphate and claims authority of Muslims all over the world. It aspires to bring much of the Muslim inhabited regions of the world under its direct political control, according to Wikipedia. ISIS us currently targeting the Yazidis. The Yazidis are a Kurdish minority that is isolated from the majority of the population due to their ancient beliefs. Members of the group are believe in an ancient religion linked to Zoroastrianism and are considered herectics by radical Ialamists. ISIS growth in power has made it easier for them to target the Yazidis.

President Obama said these strikes may save women and children stuck on a mountaintop. His decision seems to have been made by ISIS. Iraqi militias stopped the ISIS march into the capital. But ISIS has been very successful in other regions. I am disapointed that it has come to air strikes. I believe we did the right thing allowing Iraq to handle the situation themselves, we essentially did that in Syria. This is a rock and a hard place situation. Any decision will involve loss of human life. I am happy to say President Obama waited until he could wait no longer. I just home the war machines reach ends at air strikes.

GOP insists President Obama is a dictator as they try to take away our religious freedom.

          GOP reaction to President Obama using executive orders borders on hilarity. He is using executive orders to raise the minimum wage for federal contractors in the future. He is also going to use them to stop gun sales from overseas, to starting a database of those with mental illness, none if these are meant to confiscate even assault weapons.

President Obama has issued 167 executive orders. President Reagan about 390, President George W Bush issued 291 and President George H W Bush issued 165 in one term. Obviously issuing executive orders is not unconstitutional or an impeachable offense. One party seems to defer to their corporate sponsors whims on the majority of issues. Before anyone goes off about corporate sponsors, yes both party’s have them. But the majority of the GOP campaign contributions in 2012 came from big business. How can you dispute this?

I hear all of this conspiracy nuts calling him a dictator. Obviously facts are trumped by beliefs in this case, as in many other political cases. He took over a horrible economy, a banking sector and investment sector full of criminals and a Republican party that was bent on his failure at any cost. The American people ceased to matter. We had been thrown to the side. Yet the Tea Party took their false grass roots movement to the people. False because grass roots are not funded by billionaires like the Koch Brothers. They screamed about protecting the Constitution, while stealing your rights behind your back.

In North Carolina people’s rights to protest are stamped upon. People are arrested for peacefully protesting the Governor’s radical agenda. In Louisiana they are teaching creationism in public schools, which the Supreme Court ruled was unconstitutional. In Louisiana a Muslim boy was told to change his religion or pick a different school. This again is a violation of the First Amendment. Is this how you protect the Constitution? By picking and choosing what works for you.

I do not blindly follow President Obama. I do not agree with the TPP, I believe it is inherently bad for our manufacturing sector. It is not right to ask private companies to compete with government subsidized ones. That is just part of my dislike. The Monsanto Protection Act is a horrible piece of legislation. It offers zero protection to consumers. But for the GOP to harp on controversies that were proved to be false is ridiculous. Benghazi is yheir answer to everything. Republicans falsified emails, concocted stories and cut funding to give more security, but never mention any of that. It is time to govern, not sully a Presidents reputation.

We are recovering despite obstruction from certain groups. The stock market is higher than ever. The ACA is up and working, helping many Americans. There has been job growth for quite some time. The debt is falling, government spending is falling, why is he looked on so disdainfully? I see people saying he is the worst President ever and shake my head. What did President George W Bush do? Is that immediately forgotten? We have a good man in office, who like any other man makes mistakes, but he cares and tries to do the right thing. I think that is how he should be remembered.

Conservatives refuse to acknowledge Bush 43.

             Yesterday on Twitter I debated one, then several Republicans. Started off with one, then it became 6. I do not understand how their set of facts and truths are so different from mine. Nor do I understand how they refuse to blame George W. Bush for anything. I actually had one tell me that Bush was trying to fix the Banks, according to them he did not deregulate anything.

As the conversation went on, they blamed Bill Clinton and President Obama for everything that happened during Bush 43’s 2 terms. According to these people Clinton caused the financial collapse and housing market collapse. Bush did nothing to cause this, although he was President for 7 years when all of this happened. According to these people the Iraq and Afghanistan wars were run properly and there was no hidden agenda.

They blame President Obama for not creating jobs, but put no blame on Republican led House, although they shot down a Veterans Jobs Bill and a Jobs Bill. Collectively they would have created as many as 1.5 million jobs, effectively lowering the 7.6 unemployment rate and helping economy. They do not recognize this as happening. They attack President Obama about Benghazi, but say the 11 embassy attacks and near 60 deaths in Bush term were acceptable because we were at war. War on Terror is still in progress, not all embassy attacks happened in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The whole Republican party philosophy shows here. If they cannot convince you that act like young children. Yes it devolved to them calling names and cursing. If you disagree with their views, you are dumb, stupid, a terrorist and a Muslim. Apparently religious views are no longer protected by their beloved Constitution, which Democrats protect more. This is why Congress is in gridlock. Republicans have own facts and refuse to acknowledge any other views. In my experience many, not all are bigoted, short sighted people. It only matters when it happens to them. Of Trayvon Martin was their child, their opinion of him being responsible for own death would be different. We live in a country of many views and ethnicities, people need to be more open minded.

Representative Elijah Cummings calls out Representative Darrell Issa for dishonesty over IRS Scandal.

                 Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md) threatened to release the full IRS transcripts if House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Ca) refuses to. Cummings said ” I want every syllable of those transcripts released. If he does not release them, I will. Period.” Issa’s response was that he thought releasing them would be reckless. Reckless to the Republican crusade to impeach President Obama?  Staying true to his word Cummings released them.

The transcripts appear to contradict what Issa said. There was zero evidence that the White House ordered the targeting of Tea Party groups, which Issa said was the case. The Huffington Post reports that Republican and Democrat staffers interviewed IRS official John Shafer on June 6 about the agency’s decision to target Tea Party groups applying for 501 (c)(4) tax exempt status. Shafer is a self described Conservative Republican.

Via the Huffington Post.

Throughout most of the interview, Shafer describes the mundane bureacratic challenges of dealing with incoming applications for non-profit status. He said his team the firsr Tea Party application because it appeared to be a high profile case and he wanted to be sure all high profile cases recieved similar attention. “What I am talking about here is that we end up with 4 applications coming into the group that are pretty similar and we assign them to 4 different agents, we don’t want 4 different determinations. It’s just not good business. It’s just not good customer service.”

When asked plainly “Do you have any reason to believe anyone in the White House was involved in ths decision to screen Tea Party cases?” Shafer replied ” I have no reason to believe that.” Asked if he ever communicated with then IRS Commisioner Douglas Shulman about the screening of Tea Party cases. Shafer replied “I have not.”

Interviewers also asked Shafer if he told his screeners to specifically pull team party cases. He replied “Again I was not asking them for those kind of cased. If I would have directed them to pull our Tea Party cases, little Susie’s Tea Party would have been pulked and it wasn’t.”

Rep. Issa and the Republican party are guilty of overeach in their quest to discredit President Obama. Issa was convinced he had the goods to dicredit the Obama administration, when he found out he didn’t, he hid the truth. This narrative is strikingly similar to the Benghazi “scandal”. Where a Republican doctored the emails before passing them on to the press. That’s a no-no. This is why in a previous post I focused on Rep. Issa’s criminal history. It is important because it showed ge was willing to do illegal things to get what he wants. It showed what he was capable of and my reason for publishing it prove true. This is proof of the Republican party’s utter disregard for truth to get their desired outcome.

Arming Syrian rebels is an iffy proposition.

                 President Obama with the support of many Senatorsand Representatives has decided to arm the Syrian rebels. Of course according to some Republicans he is not doing enough. Yet there is bipartisan opposition to increasing U.S. involvement in the conflict. Once again a difficult decision for President Obama is made worse by the polarization in Congress.

The Syrian rebels record with handling the Humanitarian Aid we have sent them is spotty, to say the least. The food, medicine and other lifesaving supplies often face long delays because of political rivalries between rebel factions. One shipment was held up for 2 weeks over whose label should be attached to the goods. Planes filled with supplies have landed in neighboring countries with no trucks at the landing sights to move the goods into Syria. Funds the U.S. was prepared to provide to an opposition political office were rejected. Do we know who the wespons are really going to go to?

Despite this being nothing new, it is getting increased scrutiny because of the decision to send weapons to the Syrian rebels. Though the administration has not publicly said what they were going to do, Secretary of State John Kerry held 2 classified briefings with members of Congress. Obviously this is not something that should be released to the press because of Russian and Chineese dissent.

No details emerged about the type of weapons to be sent. The lack of clarity has caused problems for the warmongering right wing and the left who are against it. Republicans didn’t want any military in Libya, so President Obama effectively helped overthrow a dictator without any American lives lost. Senator John McCain believes we need to put American lives at risk, despite his party’s resistance to a Veterans Jobs Bill, to take out the Syrian air assets. While Senator Tom Udall, Senator Mike Lee, Senator Chris Murphy abd Senator Rand Paul introduced a measure to prohibit the President from using any money to increase U.S. involvement. Specifically it bans the Pentagon, CIA and othet itellegence services from funding military, paramilitary or covert operations in Syria.

We can all agree something needs to be done about tg e Syrian rebellion. Obviously what needs to be done is a contentious issue. For the people in that country and the region itself something has to be done. But any action taken we lead to consequences. No action leads to more deaths and more doubt about America’s place in the world. Military action can lead to involvement from Russia and China. There is no easy or right decision, but I believe we have the right man and staff in the White House to make the best decision possible.

Radicalization and Terrorism. Can we stop the process?

            First the excusr that Jihadist Terrorism being a response to American foreign policy must be scrapped. Or the percieved difficulty faced by Muslim youths trying to intergrate into American society. Most Muslims are not terrorists and in fact most abhore the actions of the zealots who pervert their religion. The only way to defear radical Jihadists is not by beating the violence, but the underlying ideology of hate.

As of 2012 according to Wikipedia, the American government, CIA, FBI, DEA, the police and the military have prevented 29 terrorist attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11. In that time there has been one successful terrorist attack on U.S. soil. The Boston Marathon Bombing, which was committed by 2 Chechens, one who was interviewed by the FBI. If Russia g ad shared the information they had, that one would have been prevented as well.

We are never going to prevent Radicals from hating America, regardless of changes in our foreign policy. George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan indirectly or dirictly complied with terrorist by removing U.S. soldiers from a specific area, it did nothing to change the Radical attempts to harm our country or our citizens in foreign countries. Radicals twist religious teachings to fit their hate, their mental instability and the fact that their situation was caused by Radicals before them. They prey upon weak people, lost souls and those looking for a group identity. These people are so immersed in their leaders teachings, they cannot see the forest for the trees. They do not realize that they are pawns in a sick game of revenge on a society not the individual “evil doer”. They also don’t realize their leader does not put themselves in harms way unless it comes to them, despite their claims that dying whole killing the infidels is glorious and guarantees a spot in heaven. They manipulate the weak minded, they are predators.

We can stopp planned attacks, which has been proven. The Intellegence Services pick up “chatter” and then figure out how to handle it. They usually find out if the “chatter” is true, narrow down the conspirators and then strike. We need to stop assisting countries that support or allow terrorist to hide in their lands, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran- which is subsidized by wealthy Americans like Mitt Romney and their controlling interests in the oil fields. Drone strikes make a lot of sense in these cases, cross border attacks on terrorist hideouts and training camps. We have made a lot of progress, but as a Free Society we will always be open to attacks. If we became a police state, the terrorists woukd have won and we still wouldn’t be safe.

Our leaders, intellegence services, police and other organizations have done an admirable job stopping attacks. Lone wolf attacks like the Boston Marathon Bombing or the attack on the British soldier will continue to be a thorn in our side. It shows how terrorists are adapting to our methods, finding alternate means of communication. If we cannot pick up any information about an attack, it cannot be prevented. We will never stop radicalization, we can change how we are percieved worldwide, it doesnt matter what we do. It us not our policies they disagree with, it is our freedoms and it is their theory that all people should live by Sharia Law. As we deal with more of this maybe we can develope nethods to stop radicalization.
In closing, Republucans; Democrats, President Obama or Joe the Plumber are not the cause, we are the victim. You cannot stop insanity, you hospitalize and medicate it. For radicalization to stop, it must be felliw Muslims that stop it. They need to preach what their religion is really about and erase the perversion done by zealots. All we can do is stop what we can and react well when it happens. We cannot kick people out of the country or hate all because of the actions of a few. We are America, we are better than that.

Radicalism and Terror, How?

             I know the why of Radicalization covered part of the how, but I want to find out how one goes about becoming radicalized. The recruitment part seems to b e the finalization of the radicalization process. The person then becomes indoctrinated and is a part of something “bigger”. The unemployed, minorities, minority religions and other people seen as being vulnerable are the main targets of the radical element.

Communication may include preaching, email posts, one on one calls and many other methods. While they do not radicalize alone, they lay the foundation, the first step in communicating urgency and outrage. As time goes on the message intensifies moving the subject towards action. The recruiter feeds the subject hate and enhances their need to belong, dragging the subject along, entrenching the beliefs into their way of thinking. Without absolute belief, radicalization cannot be completed. Free thought needs to be removed.

A very critical part of Radicalization is making the message part of everyday life. It is not just thought of in the group, but alone as well. It must become a part of the subject’s unconscious thought process. For radicalization to work best, the convertion should be contained. All contrary messages must be kept at bay, isolating the subject to insulate them from external discussion. When this isn’t possible, Groupthink and other social means of ensuring conformance may also be used to keep the subject on track.

The leader will then require action of some kind from the subject. The action can be a protest, to small acts of criminality, as the subject works his way up to a larger terrorist attack. The limited success can escalate the acts of aggression. Many leaders build committment from the subject with requests. Starting of with small tasks and as the subject show his worthiness, the tasks become more important.

Fulfilling your duty is often linked to a promise of glory, from the admiration of peers to a guaranteed place in heaven. People who have taken action and succeeded are regarded as heroes. Their actions are glorified, which causes others in the group to strive for this success. All they need to do is something that the group truly believes in. This works best with people who are searching for meaning in life. They believe they are making a difference and therefore it creates self worth.

This sounds like something a scientist thinks of, not a group of terrorists hiding in camps across the globe. But this some of the how of radicalization. It takes a sickness and turns it into a plague. It takes lost and weak individuals and turns them into living missles. Because of the dehumanization of the enemy, it becomes easier to kill them. The preperation for the attack forces the subject to act, to back out would let down their “mentor” and group.

Republicans, Democrats, the Military, CIA, FBI, DEA or any other group cannot contend with this. The blind passion and hate of a radicalized group consistently finds ways around the people trying to stop them. For every attack that is stopped, their are 2 more ready to be launched. The only protection from these attacks are vigilance, by government agencies, the police and the people.

Radicalism and Terrorism, Why?

              What exactly is radicalization and what draws people to it? The process of radicalization often starts with some form of transgression by the other side. By breaking the rules the subject holds as very important. A common theme is mistreatment, typically by authorities or the military using methods that cause extreme pain or mental distress. More often then not it is not the subject being radicalized that is mistreated. It is most often other people are deemed martyrs and heroes. It can also be historical and go backs 100s of years.

In order to become radicalized, you need a movement or a cause. In order for the outrage to manifest it needs to be converted into an organization for action. Typically these groups seek vengeance that is outside the law. There needs to be a core organization to set up and drive actions. The core leaders generally preach or write their beliefs to firmly entrench them in the minds of their subjects. The key part to this is this is emphasizing the nessage, the message calls to those looking for similar thinking people.

There arw also a certain amount of radicalized terrorists who have a spiritual mentor. In 20% of cases it is a more experienced Muslim who gives specific instructions and directions during the radicalization process. The mentor may be accessed by a Mosque or the Internet. The mentor helps keep the radicalization process on track. They feed into the anger the subject feels to keep him coming back for more. These mentors twist the teachings of the Koran to make it fit their needs. One study said that 25% of terrorists had a percieved religious authority who provides specific theological approval for their activities, violent or not.

The ideology in much of the radicalization person meets the subject halfway. It gives them people with similar ideas and a safe outlet for their anger. Many teach the us versus them mindset, which appeals to the subject of the radicalization.The beliefs are regarded as absolute truth, dissuading critical thinking or questioning of the mentors teachings. In essence it eliminates dissent of any kind. It also adds a moral authority to the us versus them ideology. Core leaders consistently remind their subjects that the us is always under threat from the them. The need to join together with like minded individuals is intensified abd creates an illusion of safety. They keep building on the reasons why the subject searched them out, while expanding the subjects belief system. The mentor uses the hatred the subject feels to dehumanize their enemies, therefore making the idea of violence easier to understand.

The why of radicalization is like walking the pathway of insanity. To hurt people who had nothing to do with yout percieved wrong is a distorted version of reality. But in order to become radicalized your morality must have already been compromised. Terrorists bring the wrath of the rest of the world on their people, but blame the U.S. and the rest of the world for their problems. My answer, yes very opinionated it may be, stop being secular lunatics and deal with things like an adult. I did not have anything to do with what happened to your ancestors, just as an Italian neighbor had nothing to do with the treatment of my Irish ancestors a hundred years ago. Get over it, worship your god and realize life goes on. Attack those who personally attack you, not cowardly attacks on women and children.

Radicalism and Terrorism, Introduction

               Many of us have the same question, what is causing the radicalization of so many young people? Why the need to hurt others for a religious belief? What kind of political statement are you making by bombing innocent people? Then after they commit an atrocity, they don’t seem to understand why people would hunt them down. Claiming we just go after them because of their religious beluefs, no people chase you down because of your actions. The man who killed the British soldier said, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. To hold anyone responsible for the actions of several hundred years ago is ludicrous.

I am going to do several pieces on Radicalization, the why, the how and can it be stopped. Hopefully it will be a window into a world where murdering innocents is praised. A sane person cannot understand this, but maybe we can find a way to keep their recruitment lower. I will focus on Islam, although other religions might nit produce terrorists, they do produce some things that are disturbing.

We need to truly understand what terrorism is, by definition. Wikipedia defines it as, the systematic use of terror, often violent, especially as a means of coercion. The International community does not have a legally binding, criminal law definition of terrorism. Another definition, the use of violence and intimidation in the pursiit of political aims. According to Laura Beth Nielsen, Associate Professor of Sociology and Director of Legal Studies at Northwestern University, said n a write up fo ALJAZEERA English. She said that the most obvious definition is that terrorism is meant to terrorize. All these definitions say basically the same thing, using force to make a political statement.

Where did terrorism begin? The concept of terrorism dates back to the days when Rome invaded Judea. In the first century zealots and Sicarii would break into the homes of the Roman soldiers and kill them in their sleep. The attacks were selective and occurred in heavily defended areas. It continued until the Sicarii committed mass suicide. During the 11th century the Hashshashin (assasin) an offshoot of Shia Muslims opposed Fatamid rule. They attacked various forts and were successful, but did not have a large enough force to attack directly. The greatest perpatrators of terrorism were the Thugi cult of India. The Thugi (Thugee) existed for centuries attacking anyone, at anytime, in any part of the land. Theur weapon of choice was the garrote. The total death count varies anywhere between 100, 000-200, 000 because the total number of Thugi was unknown, as was India’s population. In 1883 the British army killed of the Thugi cult.

Why do terrorists kill innocent people? Terrorists target people least prepared for an attack. In the terrorists eyes these people are not innocent as part of a community that is their enemy, therefore in the eyes of the terrorist they are the enemy. Hypocritical, I know, they do not want us to judge all Muslims, but they judge all others. The way terrorists view it, being innocent is impossible if you live in their enemies country. Why do they attack other Muslims? Easy answer, different offshoot of Islam. Their term Jihad, means broad struggle. If you do not agree with them, you are the enemy.

Why do they hate America? One answer is that after WWII, we sat down and drew borders for these countries without their input. We backed leaders, who were unpopular with their people, but friendly to us. We intervened in a lot of their affairs, creating dissent. Another reason is our support for Israel. After 9/11 Al Qaeda said they attacked because of the Pro-Israel and anti-Palestine foreign policy. Obviously there are many different and ddifficult reasons why we have become a focus of terrorism. But in the mind of the terrorist it makes perfect sense.

To me it is hogwash. None of these reasons are important enough to kill children and innocent people for. These terrorists are willing to provoke other countries but act as if they are persecuted for no reason other than religion. Any religion that rewards you for killing others must have been perverted. I cannot see how any God or cleric can condone that. But then again I am rational and not a zealot. I am writing this for insight for myself and anyone else who reads them. Not to humanize an animal who kills non military combatants puposely.