Tag Archives: Terrorism

Follow Brother Nathaniel!

When Murder is just Tough Love: the Culture and Practical Reason of Terrorism after the Quatorze Juliet

A close friend sent me a cute French electronic card for Bastille Day 2016.   And what a Bastille Day it turned out to be, eh?  Think about it!!! A third massive attack on the French people in about a year… But… Cui Bono? What is an attack but an invitation to a counterattack? So if you’re going to start a war, your attack should always be something that weakens the enemy in some regard, right? But NONE of these stupid Muzzies seem to get that, do they? They always attack innocent civilians—everywhere they go, or at the most they attack government bureaucrats….What kind of logic is that? You attack people to prod them into attacking you, but all of your attacks seem carefully designed to arouse ire and anger among the populace while leaving the infrastructure of war that will be used against you completely intact and untouched. Is it just me or is there something wrong with this picture? It’s almost like the people making the attacks ONLY want to make the people MORE willing to counter-attack them back? How is that logical?

Holidays are very important, especially those with fireworks.  I have never lived in France or Quebec, but by the time I was 18 I had lived in London, Dallas, Los Angeles, New Orleans, and Honduras, and whether it’s New Years’ Eve, Guy Fawkes’ Day, the Fourth of July, the 15th of September, or the Queen’s Birthday, fireworks celebrations are really great.  So I try to imagine what would have happened if there had been a bombing during one of those holidays in any of the places I ever habituated…. and what would have been the purpose.  

And what of the Quatorze Julliet?  My grandmother was a Francophone and Francophile native of Louisiana and my Texas-born grandfather’s life took him from Galveston to “the City” on a regular basis, plus I took French in High School and College, and several of my professors were Francophones and Francophiles at Tulane and during those years—including  Archaeologists Harvey Bricker and Cynthia Irwin-Williams who had both studied under Hallam Movius, and from them all, I obtained a love for and habit of celebrating July 14, Bastille Day.

Terrorism, traditionally understood, is a species of poor-man’s war or revolution.  As such, it is inherently secretive and illegal.  War is open and honest: Austria declared war on Serbia, so Russia declared war on Austria, Germany was required by treaty to go to war with Russia to defend Austria, Britain was required by treaty, etc., and so the Great War of 1914-1918 began.  BUT EVERYBODY KNEW IT.

When terrorist organizations claim responsibility after the fact for their crimes… they are doing just that, they are claiming criminal responsibility… and when criminals claim responsibility for anything, you have to wonder: why?

And so I think to myself, what do the April 1995 Bombing of the Oklahoma City Federal Building, 9/11/01 in New York City and Washington, 7/7/05 in London, Dylan Storm Roof’s murderous assault in Charleston last June 17, Charlie Hebdo in France, and now this latest atrocity in Nice all have in common?  

Well, they neither advance any coherent revolutionary plan, nor weaken the countries they attack.  They all happen either on days with interesting numbers or anniversaries.   But the truck bombing that took out 84 yesterday, including two American tourists apparently, just “takes the cake” on Bastille Day—which now joins Guy Fawkes Day and 9/11, 7/7 and 6/17/15 anniversary of the collapse of Denmark Vesey’s 1822 slave uprising in Charleston as “false flag” or stage events of terrorism.

Bastille Day was already a slightly fictitious holiday because, as Louis XVI wrote in his diary, on 14 July 1789, “Nothing Important Happened.”  A mob knocked down an old prison with one prisoner, but the embattled King with a short life-expectancy didn’t even notice, under his peculiar circumstances.  As my son likes to say—the 14th of July was really a tragedy for the future of French Tourism—the Bastille, Mediaeval relic fortress that it was, would have been a major attraction had it survived…  But the French know how to make a good party out of a bad deal—and very few American Fourth of July Cookouts EVER equal the average 14 July party in France or among Francophile/Francophones worldwide… the comparison of the food and wine alone…. oh well, never mind.

But I keep trying to think to myself: if I were an Islamic Freedom-Fighter or would-be Caliph, would attacking innocent people over and over again at random make any sense?  What would I be hoping to accomplish?  What would be my goals?  What good TO ME AND MY CAUSE could possibly inure from committing such crimes?

A sophisticated and coordinated attack in the United States followed by a similar attack in London, and then a decade later two similarly “low tech” attacks in France, and a bunch of random attacks in the meantime… scattered around the world.  Shootings at Fort Hood in Texas, connected or not?  Who knows?  The Boston Marathon whatever it was, connected or not?  Who knows?  The Chattanooga, TN veteran shooting, connected or not?  Who knows?

What is absolutely certain is that SOMEONE wants to create the image of Islamic terror as a world-wide phenomenon that requires  coordinated security and response.  If I were an Islamic Freedom-Fighter or would-be Caliph, would this kind of premonitory strategy seem like a good idea to me?   The answer is NO.

Revolutionary terrorism needs to be targeted on ONE government, one regime, one power structure—and it needs to be consistent and persistent enough to destabilize a society or at least an elite.  The pattern of Islamic Terror since the original 1993 World Trade Center bombing is NOT THAT.   The movement around the map, the focus on NON-STRATEGIC, NON-MILITARY, NON-INFRASTRUCTURE targets is very consistent.

The murder of innocent people was an integral part of Timothy McVeigh’s and Dylan Storm Roof’s approach in distinctly non-Islamic terrorist events in the United States—and their two attacks had no more coordinated relationship to any ideological goals than the long line of supposed Islamic terrorist events.  Even my dearly departed, mild mannered, deeply religious late mother said, way back in April 1995, “if they call themselves Patriots and wanted to make a meaningful statement, they really should have bombed the IRS.”  And if Dylan Storm Roof were really a racist White Supremacist, the LAST associations he would have wanted to make were the killing of elderly black people during a prayer meeting at a conservative African Methodist Episcopal Church on the 193rd anniversary of the Suppression of one of the most famous Slave Rebellions in U.S. History: this sort of symbolism all plays for the OTHER side—and so does bombing the French Riviera during Bastille Day celebrations.  

IF you want to make sure to build your enemies’  anger and take every step possible to ensure that NOBODY has any sympathy for your cause, (a) make sure nobody knows what your cause is and (b) do things in random places but on important days to make sure people remember the randomness.

In short, to my mind, there is absolutely ZERO chance that the Nice attack on Bastille Day was organized by anyone sincerely to advance the Islamist cause.   You want to bomb a target on a holiday?  If you’re a real revolutionary, you seek a target like an electrical power plant or water pumping station or even a sewerage processing plant where you can disable your opponents entire city and infrastructure in some really inconvenient and expensive way.  Osama bin Laden was a structural engineer and IF he had been in charge of 9-11, as a plot against the United States, I’ve always said his targets of choice would have been the undefended dams along the Colorado River, in order to cutoff the water supply to evil sinful cities like Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Phoenix, and the California “Inland Empire.”

So none of these attacks, my friends, are about an Islamic agenda for World Domination or even in revenge for the (indisputable) wrongs suffered by the Arab and Islamic people generally at British, French, and most recently American Imperialist hands….

WHO WANTS TO DIVIDE AND CONQUER THROUGH TERROR?  The Radical Islamic World?  Or Powers, Princes and Potentates MUCH Closer to Home!

All these attacks, in my opinion, reflect a “tough love” strategy of the United States, French, and British Governments to “soften up” the people and by long-term repetitive pseudo-Pavlovian conditioning make them (i.e. US, the free and responsible people of America and Europe) willing to accept an all-encompassing, eternal “Thousand Year” Police State—exactly what Strom Thurmond predicted was the goal in his “Dixiecrat” Platform of 1948.  They want to impose the police state for our own good and our own protection, don’t you understand?  That’s why modern government false-flag murder is just TOUGH LOVE.  And if you don’t like it, well, tough s__t, you know, my fellow Americans: “We have to break a few eggs here and there to prepare for you our New World Order of Omelette—-they’re all for you, you know!  But we know you’re too stupid to want this wonderful highly organized Police State where we can organize and regulate all of your lives, so we have to scare you into it.”  

In other words: Tales of Terrorism function for the modern media  motivated masses exactly the way Perrault’s or Grimm’s Fairy tales did in days of yore…. scary stories are INSTRUCTIONAL!  You need to scare the children by telling them about the BIG BAD WOLF and what he did to Little Red Riding Hood, or about what the Witch did to Hansel & Gretel with her candy house, so that they will live in constant fear of strangers and of attempting to strike out on their own.  FEAR!  FEAR!  FEAR!  “You’ve got to be taught to hate and fear, it’s got to be taught from year-to-year, it’s got to be drummed in your dear little ear, You’ve got to be carefully taught.”

DALLAS WAS JUST PERFECT!

The Dallas Police Murders last week, which suspiciously took place on the now recurring date of 7/7, were not Islamic either, but they served the fear purpose and the “Divide and Conquer” purpose to a degree unmatched in any other attack.  Black people killing black cops—a recipe made by Machiavelli in Hell….

Peaceful black protesters complaining about police brutality were forced to hide behind the police lines when one or more black gunmen murdered 5 and injured 7 more.  DID THIS ADVANCE THE CAUSE OF “BLACK LIVES MATTER”?  No, but it was a boon for American Renaissance (and I write this as a regular reader  of and a subscriber to AmRen).

To feed the ignorant white suburban paranoia of blacks attacking whites was a simple stroke of Genius on the part of the Obama administration—all of a sudden, we have forced a portion of the black population into making a choice: either they act out the worst fears of the white middle class suburbanites or they support the Police.  Obama, as usual, was totally two-faced, but two-faced is how the supporters of the police state need to be: they need to FOMENT inter-racial violence on the one hand and then condemn murder on the other, because THIS STRATEGY SUPPORTS INCREASING THE POWER AND THE EFFICACY OF THE STATE.

The way to satisfy the Black Lives Matter movement is to suppress white-conservative expression and culture and desires to be left alone in an essentially segregated society.  To satisfy the White AND Black Middle and Upper Classes, the government must enlarge (a better word might be to engorge) the police state and enhance the power of the police to protect them from the rising black tide.

Now I read AmRen and similar publications and websites because I support what I perceive as their key long-term goals, namely segregation of the races to maintain cultural continuity.  Strangely enough, many black civil rights advocates share these goals, and I wholeheartedly support those who do.  BUT I HATE INJUSTICE, UNFAIRNESS, and  OPPRESSION and the way the POLICE STATE MAXIMIZES all three.  And the only thing that all the terrorist murders of the past 21 years since Oklahoma really have in common is: they justify oppressive measures and unfair oppression.

I totally disagree, then, with the advocacy of increased police power and authority which the reaction to Dallas has engendered both among the White and Black Middle Class.   Whites may believe that the police are on their side, but my experience in life is quite the opposite.  The calibre and IQ of men (and women) who opt for a career in law enforcement are not the highest, and police ONLY support the “side” that pays them directly (namely the State and City power structures, and the banks and other large institutions who support those) AGAINST ALL THE PEOPLE, REGARDLESS OF RACE CREED, OR COLOR.

One feature of modern society that deeply distresses me is the increasingly lack of respect among people.  The police do not respect anyone’s rights, as can be seen from countless examples in various fields of law enforcement, from domestic relations to enforcement of judicial foreclosures.  But ordinary people, too, do not respect each other’s rights, space or property, and depend for all protection on the police or state power generally as arbiters of everything.  Individuals need to take responsibility for all things, including their own protection and that of their loved ones and property.

Concern over lack of respect is, I think, a unifying theme in both the radical White and radical Black Lives Matter movements.  

Quatorze Juillet  (Edith Piaf)

Il me vient par la fenêtre
Des musiques de la rue.
Chaque estrade a son orchestre.
Chaque bal a sa cohue.
Ces gens-là m’ont pris ma fête.
Je ne la reconnais plus.

Dans ma chambre, je me chante
L’air que nous avons valsé.
Je regarde la toquarde
Où tes doigts se sont posés.

Tu m’as dit : “Tu es si belle.”
Et tu as, l’instant d’après,
Ajouté : “La vie est bête.”.
J’ai compris que tu partais.
Si tu ne reviens jamais,
Il n’y aura plus de quatorze juillet.

Il me vient par la fenêtre
Un murmure qui s’éteint,
Les chansons d’une jeunesse
Attardée dans le matin.
N’allez pas troubler mon rêve.
Allez rire un peu plus loin.

Que m’apporte, que m’apporte
Cette joie de quelques heures ?
Je suis morte, je suis morte
Et je t’ai déjà rejoint
Et mon corps est près du tien
Mais personne n’en sait rien…

The 14th of July

He comes to my window
The music in the street
Each stage has its orchestra
Each dance has its crowd
These people took my celebration
I don’t recognize it anymore

In my room, I sing to myself
The air that we waltzed in
I watch the infatuation
Where your fingers encountered mine

You tell me “you are so beautiful”
And you after a moment
Added “life is stupid”
I understood that you left
If you never come back
There will not be another 14th of July

He came to my window
A murmur that has extinguished
The songs of youth
Lingering in the morning
Don’t go troubling my dream
Laughing one step further away

That brings me, that brings me
The joy of a few hours
I’m dead, I’m dead
And I already reached you
And my body is close to yours
But nobody knows anything…

Remember James Holmes and the Aurora-Batman Premier Shooting? Do Obama’s Flying Monkeys lack the same skill as Bush’s at setting up False Flag Incidents?

http://unifiedserenity.wordpress.com/2012/10/06/james-holmes-found-unconscious-or-incapacitated-at-theatre/

I guess it is a matter of personality—do you believe what our government says or not?  I have not been keeping up, blow-by-blow, with James Holmes since the early days after July 19-20 in Aurora—the shooting looked totally fake to me then, DURING the UN Small Arms Conference to abolish the Second Amendment which ended ten days later.  

Then in August, there was the bungled “Libyan attack” on a (previously) non-existent consulate or embassy in Benghazi which looked like stagecraft in preparation for war—only this and nothing more (the U.S. State Department had never listed a U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi ever before—so far as we can tell).   But so long as they keep the public flitting from fake crisis to fake crisis—nobody will ever have time to think through the details.

Creating a nation of attention deficit disorder sufferers is the best solution for a deceptive, soulless government which depends on the maintenance of terrorism to justify its very existence….. Well, terrorism as a form of public welfare, I guess…..

Fear of Speech, Fear of Life = Loss of Freedom, Loss of Life: SPLC and Federal Government are the “Uber-Bullies” Who Now Want to Outlaw Bullying…. I FOR ONE SAY—ALL FREE PEOPLE SHOULD STAND UP FOR THE RIGHTS OF NON-GOVERNMENTAL BULLIES, AND OTHER PEOPLE WITH BAD MANNERS—especially individual children who need to learn through play, even rough play, trial, and error….

Who could possibly argue against a Federal government project “to develop a national strategy aimed at ensuring a safe, healthy learning environment for students?”  Well, regular readers of this blog know who can: I can, I do, I will.  Especially when this policy involves the assertion that the Federal government sets national norms of behavior regarding what is or is not “bullying.”  Reality check and translation here: “a national strategy aimed at ensuring a safe, healthy learning environment” means that the Federal Government Departments of Education and Health & Social Services are going to start monitoring what your children (or probably you, if you’re an adult student) say to everyone else, how they say it, what they do by way of non-verbal communication, and then they (the Federal Departments of Education and  Health & Social Services, will decide whether your children’s speech, behavior, and demeanor creates a “safe environment” from the standpoint of those who are most politically and socially persnickety, politically correct, sensitive, and snobbish—glass cats with a chip on their shoulder will RULE THE WORLD because every chip on the shoulder knocked off will be an act of bullying.

I am not sure how they want to define “bullying” but I know what it basically means: “somebody pretends he’s better and smarter, better looking, or stronger, than you are and tries to get you to accept and acknowledge his superiority.”  I suppose all sports are really just matters of bullying, aren’t they?  All contests, especially beauty contests, result in and from bullying?  Even a spelling bee is really a kind of bullying, when you come right down to it…. “Bullying” like “Terrorism” means whatever you want it to mean…. kind of like “the unauthorized practice of law”—which basically covers every kind of political argument, every discussion of what the law could or should be, and of course every political argument inevitably also involves “bullying” to a greater or lesser degree…..

Humans are a strange and weak bunch of creatures.   I for one hate to yell and hate raising my voice, but I hate it even more when people attack me and cause me to yell back.  But I learned at an early age, from one of the quietest men I ever knew, specifically, my grandfather, that if you can’t yell back at people who yell at you, you will never know peace or quiet, because you will live in constant fear.

All this year I have been watching on Third-Street in Santa Monica and elsewhere in Los Angeles as bright red  Izod shirted, smiling, clean cut boys and girls, 99% of them white and 100% under the age of 30, solicited signatures for the SPLC’s anti-bullying campaign.  “Bullying” is such a vague concept.  It was obnoxious, especially when I know what hopeless bullies the SPLC are everywhere, scorning everyone who doesn’t conform with their vision of political correctness, but when I asked them about freedom of speech and due process/void for vagueness prosecution they assured me, as if it were well-scripted, that they were only involved in advocating education and awareness of the emotional harm that bullying can do.  Well, now, the Obama administration (totally predictably) has come out in favor of using the power of the Federal Government to suppress bullying.  This means MORE Federal regulation of school behavior, MORE Federal scrutiny of private family life, and in general, LESS freedom to assuage the fears and trepidations of people, especially children.  Now there will be bureaucracies to decide what “bullying” is and who is a “bully”.  But of course the government must protect who either haven’t learned to ridicule in retaliation or yell back, can’t learn to ridicule in retaliation or yell back, or just people whom the government want to protects from ever having to do anything so arduous as to defend their own rights—from private individuals.  And of course, what this level of protection does is, it lessens the individual’s autonomy and utterly prohibits the notion of individual responsibility for freedom or self-development.   NONE OF US WHOM THE GOVERNMENT PROTECTS FROM BULLYING WILL EVER BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND HOW TO RESIST GOVERNMENTAL BULLIES.

I cry once again for the demise of “the land of the free and the home of the brave”—if we cannot teach our children the good manners not to be bullies themselves and the strength to fight back when other children try to bully them, then we must consign ourselves to being the most miserable of slaves…. the most miserable of perpetually handicapped children.

When Bullying is outlawed—all the bullies will get GOVERNMENT JOBS—especially in the police who regulate and restrict and PUNISH “bullying”—I cry for my beloved country and its dismal disgrace:

Anti-bullying ad campaign targets parents

Associated PressBy JOSH LEDERMAN | Associated Press – Mon, Aug 6, 2012

WASHINGTON (AP) — Parents are urged to teach their kids to speak up if they witness school bullying in new ads that target an issue that top Obama administration officials vow to make a national priority.

A long-term campaign featuring television, print and web ads was unveiled Monday and will start running in October. The campaign is a joint effort by the Ad Council, a nonprofit that distributes public service announcements, and the Free to Be Foundation, a group that includes entertainersMarlo Thomas, Alan Alda and Mel Brooks.

In one television ad, two girls are seen bullying a schoolmate, mocking her appearance and telling her that nobody likes her. A fourth girl looks on but doesn’t intervene.

“Every day, kids witness bullying,” says a narrator. “They want to help, but don’t know how. Teach your kids how to be more than a bystander.”

Online and print ads will warn parents that their kids regularly encounter negative messages such as “you’re worthless” and “everybody hates you.”

The ads were unveiled Monday at an annual anti-bullying summit hosted by the Department of Education in Washington, where lawmakers, educators and government officials convened to develop a national strategy aimed at ensuring a safe, healthy learning environment for students. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius addressed the summit Monday, and Education Secretary Arne Duncan will deliver a keynote speech on Tuesday.

Once considered an unpleasant but inescapable part of adolescence, bullying has been thrust into the national conversation by a string of high-profile suicides by students who were later revealed to have been bullied.

Of particular concern to education advocates is bullying directed against students perceived to be gay or lesbian — such as Tyler Clementi, the 18-year-old who killed himself in 2010 after allegedly being bullied online by his college roommate, who was convicted of invasion of privacy and other charges for using a webcam to film Clementi and another man kissing.

Sebelius told the summit that suicides by teenagers and children had served as a national wake-up call.

“Bullying is not just a harmless rite of passage, or an inevitable part of growing up,” Sebelius said. “It’s a systematic situation that threatens the health and well-being of our young people. It’s destructive to our communities and devastating to our future.”

Sebelius said school districts and states are aggressively working to quell school bullying, noting that 36 state anti-bullying laws were enacted in 2009 and 2010. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has added bullying to its regular survey of risk behavior in schools.

She added that cyberbullying has become a top concern as students increasingly communicate through social media, text messages and the Internet.

“We are all responsible for our children’s safety,” Sebelius said. “And no one can afford to be a bystander.”

___

Online:

http://www.stopbullying.gov

ALL AMERICANS MUST OPPOSE AND FIGHT THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT (aka Senate Bill 1867)—We all have a stake in this: It just won’t be America Anymore if the Government Details All Opponents as “Terrorists”—“Cry, the Beloved Country”—Above All, in California, We Need to Remove Boxer and Feinstein who BOTH Supported this Bill: And they call themselves (small-d) “democrats”?

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT–Press Conference & Rally

Added by WeAreChangeLA
WeAreChangeLA 9-11 Truth – Los Angeles Meetup – wacla.org
When: Where: RSVP:
Sunday, December 4, 2011
3:00 PM
Los Angeles City Hall
200 N Spring St
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Yes
No
Today Time 3:00pm until 8:00pm Description
The General Assembly of Occupy Los Angeles adopted the following statement and demand on Saturday, December 3, 2011:Occupy Los Angeles Rejects the National Defense Authorization ActOccupy Los Angeles…

Learn more

More Meetups from this group

DEC
11

2:30 PM

WeAreChangeLA Monthly Meeting

Cafe Tropical

2900 W. Sunset Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90026

Let’s move forward together. Come join in the fun as we meet at the Cafe Tropical in the back room. 🙂 People around the world are motivating. Let’s see how we can participate in this momentum. Share your ideas, talk about all that we’ve done ove…… MORE

RSVP →
DEC
11

3:00 PM

Orange County 9-11 Outreach (HB Pier)

Huntington Beach Pier

100 main Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648

1 attending

Please join OC 9-11 Truth as we enlighten people about the events that took place on 9-11-01. We have had good responses to our information for the last several months. The Huntington Beach Pier is a good location because there are a lot of peopl…… MORE

RSVP →
JAN
08

3:00 PM

Orange County 9-11 Outreach (HB Pier)

Huntington Beach Pier

100 main Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648

1 attending

Please join OC 9-11 Truth as we enlighten people about the events that took place on 9-11-01. We have had good responses to our information for the last several months. The Huntington Beach Pier is a good location because there are a lot of peopl…… MORE

RSVP →

Who is this Anders Behring Breivik and what the hell is going on in Norway with this bizarre psycho-criminal process? (I wonder whether the CCHR has looked into Psychiatry in Norway? Could it be just as bad and corrupt as portrayed in Sweden in the highly realistic if substantively fictional “Millennium Trilogy”?

What is going on in Norway as they investigate the Anders Breivik case?  Thanks go to my Facebook friend, Lara Zhivago, originally from  Irkutsk by Lake Baykal in Siberia but now lives in the city of George, West Cape Province, South Africa, for this translation of the latest, published at: http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/oslobomben/artikkel.php?artid=10024406 (Lara lists her religious and political views as “Radical Honesty Population Policy Common Sense”—most of us really can’t be bothered with such disturbing thought processes, but input like this comes in handy I think…

Lara writes, “Breivik says every single page of report contains factual errors, and accuses Psychiatrists of being incapable of understanding political ideologies that are different to their own.”

TRANSLATION:(AP) Wearing handcuffs noted Anders Behring Breivik avid defenders then read out parts of rettspsykiaternes report to him. Almost on every page says Breivik errors.Breivik can not even see the report, but must sit behind a glass window while the defenders Odd Ivar Green and Isolated Ground reads aloud from the report. Friday, he read up about half of the part that is made available to him. The oral review would take six hours.

– How do you react Brevik on the content?

– We are waiting with his final conclusion until he has submitted the report and have the whole picture. We have gone through much of the report concerning conversations he had with psychiatrists. He reacts to what he believes are the facts wrong, lying, that his statements are taken out of context and that much is wrong made, says Green.

– Slightly stated

The report is written by the right-appointed experts, psychiatrists Torgeir Husby and Synne Sørheim. It is based on 13 conversations they had with the mass killing the man. They have also undergone over 130 hours of police questioning. The report is about 240 pages, but some parts are still restricted.

– What is it that rebel Breivik most?

– It’s only about the fact that many of his statements are taken out of context in the report, says Green.

– How did he react physically?

– He is normally very calm and polite. He shows signs that he is somewhat abandoned, but beyond that there is no physical reaction. He is very interested in what it says in the report.

The report concludes that Anders Behring Brevik was insane when he killed 77 people.

– He does not agree with that conclusion. He is concerned that the
experts do not have the necessary experience with political ideologies. He can say things that they perceive as bizarre, but that is not bizarre in his opinion. He has not reconciled itself with that they think he is insane, but we will wait to conclude until he has seen the entire report.

Going carefully through

Green says that Breivik stops on almost every page to point out errors.

– He is thorough and note diligently all the way, says Green.

Breivik think that this is a very cumbersome way to go through the report.

– Now we will continue working for him to get access to as much as possible in the report. He wants to have it physically in hand, so that he can read it and work on it yourself.

Green says that the defense hopes that Breivik will be presented to the rest of the report during the next week.

Why is Senate Bill 1867 so bad? In the Exercise of Absolute Power, Justice Forbids Status Crimes and Requires Blindness to all Categories of People (Prejudicial legal Classification of “Protected” or “Disfavored” Groups ALWAYS violates due process and leads down a short, steep, and very slippery slope straight into Totalitarianism)

Someone named “Jonathan” wrote in and asked: “So I’m just curious to know whether you would extend miranda rights to foreign terrorists operating on American soil? Why should an American who joins say Al Qaeda be entitled to a trial or a lawyer or any other right under our Constitution?”***(note below)

My answer to these questions [and the pathetic Senate debate excerpted here from the December 7, 2011 Daily Show with Jon Steward (http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-december-7-2011/arrested-development)] is that, contrary to current civil rights practice in the United States, governmentally imposed categories and mandatory categorization of people NEVER promotes equality but ALWAYS tends to support and advance both tyranny and real inequality.  Nobody said it better than Rand Paul: “Detaining citizens without a trial is not American.”

By contrast, voluntary categorization, classification, and all assertions of identity originating from the people are among the surest guarantors and symptoms of freedom and genuine equality.  In fact, I would submit that the voluntary and intentional creation and maintenance of identity is one of the Great Traditions of the United States of America which has defined some of the greatest and most distinctive events in the history of this Continent, from the settlement of the Pilgrim Nonconformist Separatists in New England in the 17th Century through the “Great Awakening” of the 18th Century, the Mormon emigration Westward (and many smaller “separate community, separate lifeway” experiments) in the 19th Century (including the Amish), right up until the Cultural upheaval of the 1960s, when “Hippies” and “Flower Children” sought to give a new meaning to Freedom in America.   The decision to maintain cultural separateness has historically been protected by the United States Supreme Court in the greatest of its “substantive due process” decisions (e.g. Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399, 401 (1923) and Wisconsin v. Yoder,  406 U.S. 205, 232—233 (1972)).**  

I would go so far as to maintain that involuntarily classifying people  or sorting them into “favored” and “disfavored” groups as a matter of law without trial always leads to violations of due process.  No movies or other literature ever illustrated this inherent injustice in the prejudicial and discriminatory processes of classification and labeling people one way or another than V-for-Vendetta in 2005 and Paul Verhoeven’s Black Book in 2006.  

I would also say that the only real PURPOSES people EVER have in classifying their fellow man (and woman) into involuntary groups is to deny them due process, and that this is simply intolerable under the American Constitution.

Note that the Bill of Rights contains no categories of persons, but only restrictions on the power of government: absolutely and unqualifiedly stated.  Rather, Amendments I, II, IV, IX, and X refer simply to “the people.”  Amendment V refers to “no person” and “any person”, since criminal prosecutions are almost always, by definition, brought on a one-by-one individual basis.  Even Nazi Germany, for example, never indicted “the Jews”, nor, during the 1950s, were there ever prosecutions against “the Communists”.  Due process of  law simply does not allow for categorical indictments.

Finally, Amendment VI refers only to “the accused”, again an individual classification.  (Despite the customary usage of the masculine gender throughout the bill of rights when referring to individuals, no one has ever suggested that the framers intended these rights only to apply to men: it was the grammatical economy of the time not to say “he and she” or “his and hers” or “him and her” as it is sometimes thought more acceptable to do now.)

So these are the major reasons why, in response to Jonathan’s question, I believe that “Miranda rights” (i.e. the full inventory of rights Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights) should be extended to all “foreign terrorists operating on American soil.”  To do otherwise would be to “prejudge” both who is foreign and who is a terrorist, and would  make both words “foreign” and “terrorists” into prejudicial, disfavored categories exactly analogous to “Negro” under Jim Crow in the South, “Jew” in Nazi Germany, and “Bourgeois” or “Capitalist” in Stalinist Russia.

What the 1996 AEDPA, the 2001 PATRIOT Act, and the Senate in passing S.B. 1867 have done, though, is actually MUCH worse than MERELY “discriminating against foreigners and terrorists” and in fact, much worse than “merely discriminating against, Blacks or Jews or even (to give two give two examples of a super-irrationally feared and overused but extremely vague pair of categories in modern law) “Sex Offender” and “Illegal Immigrant.”  No, the Category of “Terrorist” alone is “void for vagueness” as a matter of law.  See Papachrisou v. Jacksonville, 405 U.S. 156, 169-170 (1972), and Kolender v. Lawson (Kolender v Lawson, 461 U.S. 352 (1982), attached here in adobe.pdf):

. . . “As generally stated, the void-for-vagueness doctrine requires that a penal statute define the criminal offense with sufficient definiteness that ordinary people can understand what conduct is prohibited and in a manner that does not encourage arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement.” Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352, 357, 75 L. Ed. 2d 903, 103 S. Ct. 1855 (1983). 

(On the whole, the text of Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville is more amusing for its analysis of how the distinction between “idle rich” and “vagrant” under the City of Jacksonville, Florida’s “Vagrancy” ordinance blurred into meaninglessness….Papachristou v City of Jacksonville 405 US 156 92 SCt 839 02-24-1972).  “Terrorism” as a status crime under S.B. 1867 or category of criminal conduct is void for all the same reasons as was “vagrancy.”

What the Senate has done in S.B. 1867 is worse than “mere discrimination” against any of those categorical groups because in each case (Black, Jew, Sex Offender, Illegal Immigrant) there is at least a fairly narrow and objectively determinable set of traits or characteristics which define membership in the group.  There may be ambiguity at the edges, people of mixed race and ethnicity, “sex offenders” convicted of “statutory rape” where the girl lied about her age in  an objectively credible way, cases of “illegal immigration” where family hardship brought or kept people together for mutual support in violation of immigration laws, but on the whole, Blacks, Jews, Illegal Immigrants, and Sex Offenders all know who they are, and they can either “lie low” or decide to leave the country if they are able.

What is so totally monstrous about the category of “terrorist” in particular and “foreigner operating on American soil” is that theses terms are simultaneously vague, overbroad and subject to arbitrary and capricious application to the degree that even racial categories and categories based on convictions for violation of laws are not.    And in the context of modern America, merely calling someone a terrorist MAKES them a terrorist, especially (but not only) when it is a member of the government making the accusation.  To allow denial of Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights to individuals accused of terrorism is simply to allow the government to deny these rights to anyone it wants, whenever it wants, for any reason it wants.  We now have a “Government of the Dictators, by the Dictators, and For the Dictators” (as Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address should honestly and probably have been written).   The dictatorial decision about who is a terrorist is left open—WIDE OPEN.   The Office of the Attorney General of the State of Texas (Greg Abbott and James Carlton Todd) have been calling the author of this blog a “dangerous paper terrorist” since 2005.  (Yes, I admit it, I have occasionally thrown paper airplanes at government buildings in protest against policies with which I disagree, OK?   So I guess that means I’m off to Guantanamo Bay? or the Domestic Equivalent?   In fact, when arrested by Live Oak at the edge of the Suwannee River on the order of Houston Federal Judge Lynn N. Hughes in August 2006, they raised the prospect of Guantanamo Bay for me in Jacksonville, only half joking…at most half….or maybe not at all I’m still not sure, but here I am in West L.A./Santa Monica).   It is not trivial at all.  They have been throwing around these terms like “paper terrorist” ever since 9/11, and the purpose is, frankly, to create an atmosphere of terror and prejudice against the people so labelled.  After that experience, I just “went with it”.  But even in 2005, there was another disbarred attorney (Zena D. Crenshaw NJCDLP “National Judicial Conduct & Disability Project) who came in from Indiana to help Francis Wayne Williams-Montenegro with my family law case in 2005.  She tried to show that the Attorney General was trying to prejudice the Court against me (it was difficult to make the Williamson County 395th Judicial District any more prejudiced against me than it was) by calling me “the most dangerous paper terrorist” in Texas, but it didn’t go anywhere.  Zena rightly predicted that they were trying to sweep all Judicial Reform activists into the category of “terrorists.” In fact, Judicial Reform, Anti-Income Tax/IRS Reform, Prison Reform, Anti-Big Oil Activists, we’re ALL terrorists now.  The FBI has guidelines and we “fit” even before S.B. 1867 became law.  I said to Zena in 2004-5 and I say now that to be accused of anything so preposterous is a “red badge of courage” and I wore it proudly (still do in fact), despite the fact that my saying so on videotape resulted in my getting arrested AGAIN in December 2007 in Mexico City and brought to Los Angeles (this time on the order of Judge Janis Graham Jack of Corpus Christi, in the same Southern District of Texas in which Judge Lynn N. Hughes sits, and which George H. W. Bush [Bush 41st] calls “home”).

The way “Jonathan’s” questions above are written actually illustrated just how bad S.B. 1867 is: After asking whether I would “extend Miranda Rights to foreign terrorists operation on American soil” (I submit that such rights have existed ever since the adoption of the Bill of Rights and the problem is not “extending” such rights under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, but in taking them away), “Jonathan” then asks: “Why should an American who joins say “Al Qaeda” be entitled to a trial or lawyer or any other right under our Constitution?”

This question is probably the scariest of all, if serious and not merely rhetorical. My answer is simple: BECAUSE AN AMERICAN WHO JOINS AL QAEDA IS STILL AN AMERICAN, THAT’S WHY.  But Again, to Repeat, and this is SO IMPORTANT: the Bill of Rights do not discriminate between Citizens and Non-Citizens, Americans and Non-Americans, just “people” and “persons” (so the only categorical distinctions made implicitly, if any, would be those between “people” or “persons” and animals [sorry, PETA][or plants I guess—wheat plants have any Constitutional rights before being eaten…even for arbitrary and capricious purposes as being ground into flour and made into extremely unhealthy and fattening cakes or cookies….]) .

But then that does wrap up this little exercise about why S.B. 1867 is such a very bad law: Americans can be characterized as “terrorists” and reduced to ashes by such categorization.    And it could be that “Jonathan” has more confidence in the meaning of these terms than I do.  I happen to believe that “Al Qaeda” was basically created and established, fostered, aided, and abetted, by the Bush-Reagan administration and set loose to create “domestic terrorism” to justify the very repression of civil liberties which have taken place since the Fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989-90 and the consequent evaporation of the Cold War as a reason for suppressing freedom and the Bill of Rights.  So I think “Al Qaeda” is a government made fraud, that 9/11 was a U.S. government-sponsored “false flag” attack, and that Oklahoma City MAY have been a government-sponsored incident of false terrorism.  (Please view this brilliant 5 minute summary, text also copied below at Note*: http://www.corbettreport.com/911-a-conspiracy-theory/)

In support of these hypotheses of mine, I can only point to patterns of history: from 1963-1972, from John F. Kennedy through George Corley Wallace,  a series of public assassinations by public shootings of “troublesome” non-conformist politicians took place in a waive of “lone gunmen” with no precedent in American History, and no tradition that survived.  The failed attacks on Ford and Reagan were just that, failures, and were easily traceable either to Squeaky Fromm/ Manson or John Hinkley personal and family psychological problems.

It is hard to believe that the generation that came of age during the decade 1963-1972 simply bred a series of “lone gunmen” who acted without obvious motive (but all happened to oppose, directly or indirectly, the policies and power of Lyndon Baines Johnson, even though John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Jr., and George C. Wallace were all at least nominally allies or at least in the same [Democratic] Party at one time or another, though Wallace ran Third-Party [American Independent] in 1968 and Malcolm X, though he hated all Democrats “categorically” as “Dixiecrats” was partially allied with Johnson on the question of Civil Rights).

It is equally hard to believe that another Decade long episode, namely the series of incidents of Domestic “Terrorism” or at least confrontation between Federal and Private parties that the Government sought to characterize somehow as “terroristic” from Ruby Ridge in 1992-9/11/2001, was merely a historical accident and not planned.  ALL the major terrorist acts since 9/11 have occurred in Europe….THAT is the legacy of 2001-2011.  Every decade has a different set of problems, with no overlap at all between the “Assassination” decade and the “Terrorism” Decade (unless you count the early 70s epidemic of hijacking which led to early restrictions on air-travel as partly overlapping with the decade of assassination).   No, it seems that the Government picks its crisis formula based on what it wants to achieve and then “stages” criminal acts and history accordingly.   So, Jonathan, whoever you are, does this answer your question?  Do you really want to live in a country where they can decide, tomorrow, that YOU are a terrorist and lock you up forever?

****I know only a few Jonathans… I hope that “Jonathan” who is the author of these questions is posing them only for rhetorical purposes to test my commitment to moral consistency and philosophical coherence.  Because, if the author of these questions is serious, and if he reflects widespread opinion in America, then…. I’m even more depressed about the passage of Senate Bill 1867 than I was before.  I can only hope this Jonathan is Dr. Jonathan Harris Levy (Brimstone & Co.)(http://www.brimstoneandcompany.com/), formerly attorney for noted Orange County Dentist Orly Taitz and (the one and only) other William Howard Taft Law School graduate I’ve ever encountered, because that would just confirm my suspicion that Orly supports the 93 bad guys who voted for this bill….  If it’s anyone of any higher level of academic achievement in law than the William Howard Taft Law School involved in presenting these questions, well that’s just demoralizing….

**If we desire homogeneity in this Country, we are well on the way to a “shake and bake” society of people no more different than one box of hamburger helper is from another.  I do not personally desire such homogeneity, but I think it is best left to the people to make voluntary associations and define local color and establish meaningful cultural diversity by devolving power downward rather than concentrating it upward.

Note*:

Everything you ever wanted to know about the 9/11 conspiracy theory in under 5 minutes.

(Watch FrenchGermanSpanish or Portuguese translations of this video.)

TRANSCRIPT: On the morning of September 11, 2001, 19 men armed with boxcutters directed by a man on dialysis in a cave fortress halfway around the world using a satellite phone and a laptop directed the most sophisticated penetration of the most heavily-defended airspace in the world, overpowering the passengers and the military combat-trained pilots on 4 commercial aircraft before flying those planes wildly off course for over an hour without being molested by a single fighter interceptor.

These 19 hijackers, devout religious fundamentalists who liked to drink alcoholsnort cocaine, and live with pink-haired strippers, managed to knock down 3 buildings with 2 planes in New York, while in Washington a pilot who couldn’t handle a single engine Cessna was able to fly a 757 in an 8,000 foot descending 270 degree corskscrew turn to come exactly level with the ground, hitting the Pentagon in the budget analyst office where DoD staffers were working on the mystery of the 2.3 trillion dollars that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had announced “missing” from the Pentagon’s coffers in a press conference the day before, on September 10, 2001.

Luckily, the news anchors knew who did it within minutes, the pundits knew within hours, the Administration knew within the day, and the evidenceliterally fell into the FBI’s lap. But for some reason a bunch of crazy conspiracy theorists demanded an investigation into the greatest attack on American soil in history.

The investigation was delayedunderfundedset up to fail, a conflict of interest and a cover up from start to finish. It was based on testimonyextracted through torture, the records of which were destroyed. It failed to mention the existence of WTC7Able DangerPtechSibel EdmondsOBL and the CIA, and the drills of hijacked aircraft being flown into buildings that were being simulated at the precise same time that those events were actually happening. It was lied to by the Pentagon, the CIA, the Bush Administration and as for Bush and Cheney…well, no one knows what they told it because they testified in secretoff the recordnot under oath and behind closed doors. It didn’t bother to look at who funded the attacks because that question is of “little practical significance“. Still, the 9/11 Commission did brilliantly, answering all of the questions the public had (except most of the victims’ family members’ questions) and pinned blame on all the people responsible (although no one so much as lost their job), determining the attacks were “a failure of imagination” because “I don’t think anyone could envision flying airplanes into buildings ” except the Pentagon and FEMA and NORAD and the NRO.

The DIA destroyed 2.5 TB of data on Able Danger, but that’s OK because it probably wasn’t important.

The SEC destroyed their records on the investigation into the insider trading before the attacks, but that’s OK because destroying the records of the largest investigation in SEC history is just part of routine record keeping.

NIST has classified the data that they used for their model of WTC7′s collapse, but that’s OK because knowing how they made their model of that collapse would “jeopardize public safety“.

The FBI has argued that all material related to their investigation of 9/11 should be kept secret from the public, but that’s OK because the FBI probably has nothing to hide.

This man never existed, nor is anything he had to say worthy of your attention, and if you say otherwise you are a paranoid conspiracy theorist and deserve to be shunned by all of humanity. Likewise himhimhim, and her. (and her and her and him).

Osama Bin Laden lived in a cave fortress in the hills of Afghanistan, but somehow got away. Then he was hiding out in Tora Bora but somehow got away. Then he lived in Abottabad for years, taunting the most comprehensive intelligence dragnet employing the most sophisticated technology in the history of the world for 10 years, releasing video after video with complete impunity (and getting younger and younger as he did so), before finally being found in a daring SEAL team raid which wasn’t recorded on video, in which he didn’t resist or use his wife as a human shield, and in which these crack special forces operatives panicked and killed this unarmed man, supposedly the best source of intelligence about those dastardly terrorists on the planet. Then they dumped his body in the ocean before telling anyone about it. Then a couple dozen of that team’s members died in a helicopter crash in Afghanistan.

This is the story of 9/11, brought to you by the media which told you the hard truths about JFK and incubator babies and mobile production facilitiesand the rescue of Jessica Lynch.

If you have any questions about this story…you are a batshit, paranoid, tinfoil, dog-abusing baby-hater and will be reviled by everyone. If you love your country and/or freedom, happiness, rainbows, rock and roll, puppy dogs, apple pie and your grandma, you will never ever express doubts about any part of this story to anyone. Ever.

This has been a public service announcement by: the Friends of the FBICIANSADIASECMSMWhite HouseNIST, and the 9/11 Commission. Because Ignorance is Strength.

If you would like to help the fight for “corny old values” like Truth, Justice, and the American Way, for Family, Home, and Freedom, and to add one Senator for the Bill of Rights and against Indefinite Detention, against the PATRIOT ACT, and against the use of United States Troops in this Country against its own citizens, please support Charles Edward Lincoln, III, for U.S. Senator from California.  We are fighting one of the most entrenched establishment seats in Congress—Dianne Feinstein who tried to make cosmetic changes in S.B. 1867 to hide and disguise its truly oppressive nature (and to claim she had “done the best she could”, perhaps?)—and we ask you to send your check or money order to Lincoln-for-Senate 2012 to Charles Edward Lincoln, III, 952 Gayley Avenue, #143, Los Angeles, California 90024.  Call 310-773-6023 for more information.