Do Heroes Go to Heaven?

By Ellen Finnigan

April 4, 2015

Over the past decade or so I have witnessed some disturbing trends at church. One would have thought that our Lord Jesus Christ had, himself, worn a government-issued uniform, given how much reverence, gratitude, and appreciation we are led to collectively express for these folks during Mass. At first, it was a weekly prayer “for the troops,” which is fine. There is no human being, alive or dead, who doesn’t need prayers.

However, we never prayed for the innocent civilians in the countries Americans had invaded, who were killed, maimed, and tortured in far greater numbers than Americans.

We never prayed for the loved ones they left behind, the widows, the orphans.

We never prayed for the refugees.

We never prayed for our enemies.

The secular state holidays have become occasion for military remembrance and honorary tribute. On Memorial Day and Veterans Day, the church bulletin includes a message of thanks to veterans for protecting Americans’ freedom, which sends the message to churchgoers that American “wars” abroad have something to do with the Bill of Rights here at home, and the wars are therefore necessary and just (a dubious notion at best). At some point, militarism began to invade Christmas with camouflaged Christmas ornaments and patriotic displays upstaging the Eucharist.

In the last year, the Catholic Church has expanded its prayers to allow more folks in uniforms to get in on the prayer action. In addition to (or in lieu of) praying for military servicemen and women, Catholic Churches are now offering weekly prayers on Sundays for all “first responders.” One wonders how this became a national “thing.” (I have heard it in several states). It seems to mesh nicely with the overall message in the mass media that we are all on the brink of ruin all the time, threatened by an inexhaustible number of enemies and looming crises, and should live in fear and trembling awaiting the next crash, attack, disaster, or pandemic; thus we owe an infinite debt of gratitude to those who offer us safety, order, and protection in such a precarious and nefarious world. (Hm. Who benefits when we have a nation of nervous Nellie’s?)

Things seem to have reached a new threshold with American Sniper. We now have American priests coming right out and saying things in the media like: “Chris Kyle was an American hero.”

The primary concern of the Church is the salvation of souls. 

Christians are concerned with holiness, not heroism. Whether Chris Kyle was an American hero is a secular idea and a moot point, and a strange pronouncement for a priest to make, unless that priest is willing to ask the questions that naturally follow: Does heroism lead to holiness? Do heroes go to heaven? Before you write me an email vilifying me as a “liberal” who “hates” soldiers for asking these questions, let me say: I do not know if “heroes” go to heaven. Nobody knows. Only God can judge the human heart. What I’m saying is: it is dangerous to pretend that they automatically do. It’s also dangerous to pretend that the question I am asking is, itself, a moot point.

When churches and religious leaders constantly adore, praise and worship those who wear uniforms, carry guns, and embody secular ideas of heroism, it leads to misunderstanding and moral confusion among the faithful. People begin to equate this image of heroism with holiness, especially children. If you don’t believe me, all you have to do is take a look at www.nogreaterloveart.com, where uniformed government agents are depicted with angels’ wings, angels of course being spiritual beings who are known for their ability to guard and protect. All you have to do is look at the “Soldier’s Stairway to Heaven,” very popular on Pinterest, or license plates and t-shirts that quote John 15:13 and hold up the service of the soldier as being second only to the “service” of Jesus. 

There is an idea that if you have fought in a war, you have “served your time in hell”; soldiers therefore go straight to heaven. But is such an idea spiritually and theologically acceptable? Does God offer bypasses?

Heroism and holiness have many things in common: They both require strength, courage, devotion, fortitude, self-sacrifice. But all of those qualities could be attributed to people fighting for ISIS just as well, even faith. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church: “The way of perfection passes by way of the Cross. There is no holiness without renunciation and spiritual battle.”  There is no holiness without renunciation; that does not mean that every act of renunciation leads to holiness. The way of perfection requires hardship; not all hardship helps us on our way to perfection. In short, not all suffering is redemptive. Finish reading article

THE WAR PRAYER - Mark Twain *vid*

Uploaded on Apr 13, 2011 
Featured at Animation Film Screening at OSA Archivum in Budapest, Hungary to commemorate UN Human Rights Day, December 9, 2010. 
From OSA Program: The War Prayer (Markos Kounalakis, USA, 2006, 14 min) Based on Mark Twain's piece "The War Prayer," a short story written in the heat of the Philippine-American war of 1899-1902 offering a poignant reflection on the double-edged moral sword implicit to war. 

Followed by discussion with Markos Kounalakis, a Senior Fellow at the Center for Media and Communication Studies at the Central European University in Budapest, Hungary and President and Publisher Emeritus of the Washington Monthly. Moderator -- Oksana Sarkisova, Film Historian, OSA Archivum. 

From Wikipedia Notes: "The War Prayer," a short story or prose poem by Mark Twain, is a scathing indictment of war, and particularly of blind patriotic and religious fervor as motivations for war. The structure of the work is simple, but effective: an unnamed country goes to war, and patriotic citizens attend a church service for soldiers who have been called up. The people call upon their God to grant them victory and protect their troops. Suddenly, an "aged stranger" appears and announces that he is God's messenger. 

He explains to them that he is there to speak aloud the second part of their prayer for victory, the part which they have implicitly wished for but have not spoken aloud themselves: the prayer for the suffering and destruction of their enemies. What follows is a grisly depiction of hardships inflicted on war-torn nations by their conquerors. 

US Militarism Far Bigger Threat to American Liberty Than Russia

 

April 3, 2015

(Jacob G. Hornberger)  George Washington pointed out, “Overgrown military establishments, which under any form of government, are inauspicious to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to Republican Liberty.

Wise words by the father of our country, but ones, unfortunately, rejected by modern-day Americans, who love and idolize the enormously overgrown military establishment that now characterizes our federal governmental system.

Eastern Europeans are getting a gander at America’s overgrown military establishment. Yesterday, the New York Times reported that a huge contingent of U.S. military forces is winding its way through Eastern Europe as some sort of good-will tour and also to serve as a message to Russia that the United States is ready to go to war to protect Eastern Europe from Russia’s aggressive designs.

Never mind that it is America’s overgrown military establishment that gave rise to Russia’s so-called aggressive designs. Ever since the end of the Cold War, NATO has been absorbing Eastern European countries with the ultimate aim of absorbing Ukraine, which would enable the U.S. military to place bases and missiles on Russia’s borders.

There was never a possibility that Russia was going to let that happen, any more than the U.S. national-security establishment would permit North Korea to place military bases and missiles on Mexico’s side of the Rio Grande. In the eyes of those who believe that America’s overgrown military establishment can do no wrong, that makes Russia the aggressor in the crisis.

But let’s face it: These people are ingenious at producing crises and then playing the innocent. The fact is that NATO should have been dissolved at the end of the Cold War. It wasn’t dissolved for one big reason: in order to produce endless crises with Russia so that Americans would feel the need to keep their overgrown, Cold War-era, military establishment in existence.

Moreover, under what authority is America’s overgrown military establishment telling Eastern Europeans that the United States will come to their defense in a war against Russia? I thought that under the U.S. Constitution it is the responsibility of Congress to decide when America goes to war. The U.S. military march through Eastern Europe is just another sign of how the national-security branch of the federal government — the most powerful branch — calls its own shots when it comes to foreign policy.

Moreover, it’s a sign of the times when America’s overgrown military establishment is our country’s good-will ambassador. It used to be that the American private sector served that purpose. Not so anymore. Now, it’s U.S. generals and other military personnel who serve that purpose, as they parade through Eastern Europe showing off their tanks and other military equipment, just like the Soviets did in their May Day parades. Continue reading
 

Obama Told This Admiral Not To Give Out Bibles, His Response Is Glorious

It does me proud to see a Coast Guardsman make his stand for his God and country, not an unlawful fuehrer. You can, too. Stand with him, do not obey unlawful orders. Wouldn't you agree Admiral Lee is putting his career and even maybe his life in harm's way. Would you? Now be honest with yourself, isn't an Admiral Lee someone you'd vote for public office? The answer to yourself will be reflective of your own moral character. If he mysteriously pops up on the CFR Military Roster, we retract our endorsement super pronto. ~~~~

November 29, 2014

 

Obama’s agenda to keep the Bible out of the hands of our Military is in full swing. If there is only one speech you have to see that takes him down, THIS IS IT!!!

The Government is telling soldiers that if a person is in need, or even contemplating suicide to send them to a Chaplain and do nothing else.

But what if the opportunity to save a life is here and now, in the moment?

This Rear Admiral says that no matter what he is told by the Government he will share the Bible when and where it is needed.

This man of true Faith is what we need right now in this country to lead us back to greatness. He took a stand against those who wish that the Bible didn’t exist and not back down from a fight!

You Like?

You'll like this one, too:  

POWERFUL! Coast Guard Admiral Lee Addresses Restrictive Regulations on Religious Liberty - YouTube

How Long Would the US Navy Survive in a Shooting War?

US Navy is a huge force but largely based around aircraft carrier groups that modern weaponry may have made obsolete

Marc Hopf

Military 7 hours ago | 2200 32

 

Carriers today may be sunk from air, land or sea America sees itself as a ruler of the world’s oceans. After all, the country — which spends 10 times more on its military forces than the following nine countries — has by far the biggest naval force. And as since the Vietnam War they have dealt only with militarily inferior opponents, they are extremely self-confident in their belief that they can defeat everything and everyone. It is not surprising that some young Americans even wear T-shirts with the logo: “United States Navy: The Sea is Ours.”

Perhaps we need to meet this pride and arrogance with some understanding in view of the numerical superiority of the U.S. Navy. In total, it currently has 10 operational aircraft carriers (two in reserve), while Russia and China have only one each.

Aircraft carriers are the great pride of the U.S. Navy and are also perfect to underline visually the claim of the ruler of the seas. They are therefore well liked by U.S. presidents as stages for delivering speeches when the time comes to tell the people that this unique nation has once again won a heroic victory.

What thrilling moments these were (at least for Americans) when George W. Bush landed in a fighter jet on the USS Abraham Lincoln (no, not as a pilot) and then, with the words “mission accomplished” and “a job well done,” proclaimed the end of the Iraq war to the people. As we know, the destruction of Iraq was carried out by the Americans under the label of Operation Iraqi Freedom. We may still ask ourselves what it had to do with freedom, but that’s a different story.

In addition to their suitability as impressive orator stages, the aircraft carriers also fulfill, of course, a military purpose. They can be considered as small floating airports, which ship up to 100 fighter jets to the scene of the action. Since they are equipped with the best weapons, radar, and defense systems, until now they have experienced almost no threat, especially since in the past the U.S. Navy parked them preferably off the coasts of defenseless desert states.

But what would it look like if the power of the U.S. Navy met its peer? The title of this article already implies the answer: not so good, and it could be that the patriotic U.S. Navy fans would hide their T-shirts quickly in the closet.

Back in the 70s, Admiral Rickover, the “father of nuclear navy,” had to answer the question before the U.S. Senate: “How long would our aircraft carriers survive in a battle against the Russian Navy?” His response caused disillusionment: “Two or three days before they sink, maybe a week if they stay in the harbor.”

The reason for the greatly reduced lifetime of the aircraft carrier in a battle against the Russians is a deadly danger below the water: modern submarines — especially Russian ones — are so powerful and difficult to locate that they can send large battleships and aircraft carriers to the bottom of the sea in the blink of an eye. The weakness of the U.S. Navy, therefore, is their vulnerability when they compete with an enemy that — using the language of the Americans — dominates the seas below the water surface. Of course, the U.S. military analysts are aware of this weakness, so one wonders why the U.S. Navy still adheres to the doctrine “the bigger the better” and continues to rely on an armada of aircraft carriers and large battleships.

Colonel Douglas McGregor, a decorated combat veteran, author of four books, a PhD and military analyst, gives the answer: “Strategically, it makes no sense, but the construction of large ships, of course, creates a lot of jobs.”

So the threat of Russian submarines, torpedoes and anti-ship missiles is well known by the Americans — a fact which Roger Thompson’s book, Lessons Not Learned: The U.S. Navy’s Status Quo Culture, also points out. A brief excerpt:

As Howard Bloom and Dianne Star Petryk-Bloom advised in 2003, both the Russians and Chinese now have the deadly SS-N-22 Sunburn missile at their disposal. This massive long-range missile, equipped with nuclear or conventional warheads, is extremely difficult to detect or destroy. According to Jane’s Information Group, it is more than capable of destroying any U.S. aircraft carrier. More to the point, Timperlake (a Naval Academy graduate) and Triplett warned that the Sunburn missile is designed to do one thing: kill American aircraft carriers and Aegis-class cruisers.

The SS-N-22 missile skims the surface of the water at two-and-a-half times the speed of sound until just before impact, when it lifts up and then heads straight down into the target’s deck. Its two-hundred-kiloton nuclear warhead has almost twenty times the explosive power of the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima. The U.S. Navy has no defence against this missile system. As retired Admiral Eric McVadon put it: “It’s enough to make the U.S. 7th (Pacific) Fleet sink twice.”

In addition to this concept-related, almost inevitable weakness of large warships, there is another reason for the vulnerability of the U.S. Navy and the U.S. armed forces in general: their arrogance and the associated underestimation of their opponents. Anyone who underestimates his enemy grows imprudent and holds bad cards in the event of a surprise attack. This happened in 2000, when the American aircraft carrier USS Kitty Hawk was caught by the Russians on the wrong foot.

Here are some excerpts from Jon Dougherty’s article, “Russian Navy takes Flyover by Surprise” (World Net Daily):

A pair of Russian warplanes that made at least three high-speed passes over a U.S. aircraft carrier stationed in the Sea of Japan in October constituted a much more serious threat than the Pentagon has admitted and were easily in a position to destroy the ship if the planes had had hostile intentions, say Navy personnel.
According to reports, a Russian air force Su-24 “Fencer” accompanied by a Su-27 “Flanker” made unopposed passes over the USS Kitty Hawk on Oct. 9, as the carrier was being refueled.
Russian fighters and reconnaissance planes made a second attempt to get close to the carrier on Nov. 9 — a repeat performance for which the Pentagon, as well as eyewitnesses aboard ship, said the carrier was prepared. But it was the first incident in October that caused alarm.
Pentagon spokesman Kenneth Bacon said during a regularly scheduled press briefing Nov. 30 that the Russian fighters were detected on radar well in advance of their high-speed passes. Naval officers aboard ship who spoke of the incident on the condition of anonymity agreed.
However, at the time the carrier’s combat information center alerted the ship’s commander, Capt. Allen G. Myers, that the Russian fighters were inbound, none of the carrier’s fighters were airborne. The ship carries 85 aircraft, according to Navy figures, and has a crew of over 5,500. 
Witnesses said Myers immediately ordered the launch of alert fighters, but the ship’s scheduled fighter squadron was on “Alert-30” status — a minimum launch time of 30 minutes where pilots are “in the ready room” but are not sitting in cockpits waiting to be launched.
Bacon told reporters only that there “may have been a slight delay” in getting the interceptors in the air, explaining that because the Kitty Hawk was taking on fuel, it was not sailing fast enough to launch its aircraft.
One naval officer onboard the ship said, “40 minutes after the CO [commanding officer] called away the alerts,” the Russian planes “made a 500-knot, 200-foot pass directly over the tower” of the carrier.
Before the Kitty Hawk could get a single plane airborne, the Russian fighters made two more passes. Worse, witnesses said, the first plane off the deck was an EA-6B Prowler — a plane used primarily for electronic jamming of an enemy’s radar and air defenses, not a fighter capable of intercepting another warplane.
The EA-6B “ended up in a one-versus-one with a Flanker just in front of the ship,” one witness said. “The Flanker was all over his a.... He was screaming for help when finally an F/A-18 Hornet from our sister squadron got off the deck and made the intercept. It was too late.”
Naval personnel noted that “the entire crew watched overhead as the Russians made a mockery of our feeble attempt of intercepting them.”
The Clinton administration downplayed the incident .... The BBC, however, said that it was evident by the photographs taken by the Russian jets that there was “panic aboard” when the planes made their over-flights.

Our American readers will now perhaps argue that this humiliating incident happened 15 years ago and such a thing is no longer possible nowadays. But most readers of Russia Insider remember the events of April 2014 when the ultra-modern destroyer USS Donald Cook was paralyzed by a single SU-24.

For those readers who unfortunately missed the story, here it is: At the beginning of April last year the Americans sent the USS Donald Cook into the Black Sea, with the permission of Turkey, to protest against the Russian annexation of Crimea and to demonstrate their military strength. The destroyer was equipped with the most advanced Aegis Combat System, a naval weapons systems which ensures the detection, tracking and destruction of multiple targets at the same time. In addition, the USS Donald Cook is equipped with four large radars, whose power is comparable to that of several stations. For protection, it carries more than 50 anti-aircraft missiles of various types.

According to the “Montreux Convention,” non-Black Sea state warships are permitted to stay in the Black Sea for no longer than 21 days. The Americans, of course, ignored this rule, and Russia responded by sending an SU-24. The Sukhoi was unarmed but equipped with the latest electronic warfare device, called Khibiny.

When the SU-24 approached the destroyer, all radar and control systems, information transfers, etc., of the USS Donald Cook were suddenly paralyzed by Khibiny. In other words, the seemingly superior Aegis system was completely off — like when you turn off your TV with the remote control.

Subsequently, the Sukhoi simulated 12 missile attacks at low altitude on the virtually blind and deaf USS Donald Cook, and we can imagine that the two SU-24 aircraft pilots had a lot of fun. 

Unfortunately, at this time there was neither John McCain nor NATO Commander Phillip Breedlove on board the ship — they would certainly have received some long-lasting impressions from this demonstration.

After this incident, the USS Donald Cook chose to immediately and at full speed move towards a port in Romania, where 27 shocked crew members asked for dismissal from the service.

This story shows us that Americans still overestimate the capabilities of their armed forces and do not realize (or do not want to admit) that Russia’s military technology is in many areas superior and has an advantage that cannot be offset quickly.

So, as long as a single Russian fighter jet can turn off a complete U.S. warship with the latest warning and fire control systems by just pushing a button, the answer to the question “How long would the U.S. Navy survive?” today is the same as in the old Cold War days. Source

Why is the US military making fake social media accounts?

Swaying public opinion 
 

 
More videos like this
 

An insidious practice

The US military has been given software which can create fake online social media personas.

These accounts are used to “create false consensus in online conversations, crowd out unwelcome opinions and other commentaries or reports that do not correspond with its own objective”.

They may not be controlling the internet directly, but such covert manipulation of online conversations is just as destructive, and worlds more deceitful.

 

Broward Cty Sheriff Deputies "assist" US Fed Troops in Training for Incarcerating US Citizens

Other states and their local police sure to follow...

Troops Training To Intern Citizens In Fort Lauderdale

Posted by Edmondo Burr

Video: Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Shot last week, shows military and law enforcement practicing  internment during martial-law style training.

Eu Times reports: The clip shows armed troops arresting role players on the street before a column of prisoners are marched towards a mock internment facility. Black Hawk choppers are also seen whizzing between buildings.

The exercise was accompanied by very little media coverage.
A Sun-Sentinel report said that Broward County police would be “assisting members of the U.S. Special Operations Forces who are undergoing urban warfare training.”

The drill, which was held in locations the military refused to disclose beforehand, began on March 17 and ended on Friday. 200 military personnel from all four branches, Air Force, Army, Marines and Navy, took part in the exercise.

“The goal is to prepare participants in realistic, unfamiliar training conditions before they deploy for combat overseas,” states the report. Residents were advised “not to be alarmed by the Black Hawk helicopters in the sky.”

Broward County also saw similar drills back in March 2014, when Navy SEALS practicing storming a university building from a helicopter.

Concerns continue to circulate that such drills are designed for dual purpose and are part of a plan to acclimate Americans to accept martial law in a time of national emergency.

As we have exhaustively documented, the fact that preparations are being made to use the military during domestic unrest is manifestly provable.

Jade Helm, an upcoming military drill that will involve nine states, caused controversy after Texas and Utah were labeled “hostile” territory in documents related to the exercise.

Israelis Killed more Palestinians Last Year than in any Year since 1967

Why do the American people allow and even condone and fund  the slaughter of those who mean us no harm? It is shameful for us to elect those that are tolerant of such human cruelties. This is not American in any form of the past and cannot be America's future.

Sunday, March 29, 2015

A Palestinian man carries an injured girl
into the Shifa hospital following Israeli
strikes in Gaza City (AP Photo)

The year 2014 was a dangerous one to be a Palestinian. More Palestinians were killed by Israel than in any year since the occupation of Palestinian territories began in 1967.

According to a report (pdf) by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs in 2,314 Palestinians were killed last year and an estimated 17,125 were injured in fighting with Israeli forces. That compares to 87 Israelis killed in the hostilities. Israeli injuries totaled an estimated 2,629.

Most of the deaths came in the fighting in Gaza between July 7 and August 26. During those hostilities, 2,220 Palestinians were killed, 1,492 of them civilians, 551 of whom were children. This included 142 Palestinian families who saw three or more family members killed because of attacks on their residences. These attacks on residential buildings accounted for 742 deaths.

During the Gaza fighting, 71 Israelis were killed, 66 of them soldiers.

Deaths were also up among West Bank and East Jerusalem Palestinians. There were 58 Palestinians killed by Israeli forces last year, as opposed to 28 in 2013 and eight the year before. Sixteen Israelis were killed as a result of conflict in this region in 2014, compared to four the previous year and none in 2012. Most of the 6,028 injuries were caused by rubber-coated metal bullets or tear gas inhalation.

The U.N. report criticized both sides in the conflict for their failure to adequately distinguish between civilians and combatants. It urged the Israelis to refrain from launching attacks that endanger non-combatants when deaths and injuries to civilians “would be excessive in relation to the military advantage anticipated.” The report urged Palestinian armed groups to “refrain from the indiscriminate firing of rockets and other projectiles at Israel and not endanger civilians by using their neighborhoods to launch attacks and shield combatants.

Although the Israeli Military Advocate General announced criminal investigations into 19 “exceptional incidents,” the authors of the report, based on previous experiences, were not optimistic about the issue of accountability. For example, following the Gaza War of 2008-2009, in which Israeli forces killed an estimated 759 Palestinian civilians, “only three soldiers were convicted, with the longest sentence involving the theft of a credit card.” 

There is no evidence that Palestinian authorities have ever investigated possible human rights violations by Palestinian armed groups.

In a separate report, Amnesty International accused Palestinian armed groups of committing war crimes “by repeatedly launching indiscriminate rockets and mortars towards civilian areas in Israel.” 
A previous report accused the Israelis of committing war crimes.

-David Wallechinsky, Steve Straehley

To Learn More:

Fragmented Lives (United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs occupied Palestinian territory) (pdf)

U.S. Only Country of 47 to Vote against Investigating Possible Human Rights Violations during Israeli Occupation of Gaza (by Noel Brinkerhoff, AllGov)

US military officers resort to lying and deception at all levels, finds damning official report

• Shock 52-page report finds dishonesty at all levels in the U.S. Army 
• Warns officers have become 'ethically numb' and urges quick action 
• Says leaders 'espouse lofty values' but slog 'through mire of dishonesty' 
• Finds personnel expect requested information to be 'questionable' 
• But notes staff are 'happy to go along with the illusion all is well'  

By Flora Drury For Mailonline

Published: 08:55 EST, 20 February 2015

A damning official report claims dishonesty within the U.S. military is so endemic that everyone assumes they are being lied to at all times.

The shock report calls on officials to 'urgently confront the corrupting influence of dishonesty' within the army, warning officers have become 'ethically numb'.

The situation has become so bad, the executive summary concludes it has 'allowed leaders to espouse lofty professional values while slogging through the mire of dishonesty and deceit'. 

Dishonesty: The report claims dishonesty is endemic in the army on all levels, discovering personnel expect to not be told the truth at certain points, and accusing officers of becoming 'ethically numb' (Stock picture)

The report's executive summary also claims 'much of the deception and dishonesty... is actually encouraged and sanctioned by the military institution'.

Report authors Leonard Wong and Stephen J. Gerras say it is often justified one of three ways: 'mission accomplishment', 'supporting the troops' or that the task or reporting requirement is unreasonable or 'dumb'.

They go onto note lying and 'adjusting the truth' is so common, military personnel who order a report do not trust its content.

The report authors, who interviewed staff at all levels in the army in order to compile the 53-page document, state: 'It appears that a peculiar situation where those requesting the information, and those supplying it know that the information is questionable.'

However, they add, personnel are 'happy to go along with the illusion all is well'.  

Concerns: Former U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel sent a memo to military leaders before he stepped down from his post asking to deal with 'unethical or morally questionable behaviour'

The report, created for the Strategic Studies Institute and U.S. Army War College Press, say comes just a week after departing Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel's final words of advice to senior military staff were to sort out 'unethical behaviour'.

According to CNN, Hagel wrote: 'The vast majority of our senior leaders are men and women who have earned the special trust and confidence afforded them by the American people.

'However, when senior leaders forfeit this trust through unprofessional, unethical or morally questionable behavior, their actions have an enormously negative effect on the profession.' 

via dailymail

General Petraeus Accused of Founding ISIS/ISIL

1st posted by CV 11.16.14

Could Petraeus be carrying out orders from above? We think so. 

Is your "support" for our troops with the belief they're acting in America's national defense? Really? Or, are they and former foreign friends being sent to die for an enemy embedded within our gates. Something you may want to ponder. While doing so, your thrust for their safety - and our own -  demand they return home.

 

Thursday, November 6th, 2014 | Posted by Veterans Today

Western special services might be behind ISIS terrorists – Intel veteran

From Russia Today

The leaders of Islamic terrorists could be under the direct influence of NATO and Western powers using their movements to threaten Russia’s territorial integrity, says a former general of Russian military intelligence service.

“There are some grounds to suspect that American and British special services could support the Islamic extremists in order to target the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation,” Lieutenant-General Nikolai Pushkaryov, formerly of the Central Intelligence Directorate of the Russian General Staff said in an interview with the RIA-Novosti news agency. “The top of these movements can be under the influence of NATO agents,” he added.

The general also commented on the statement by the head of the Chechen Republic, Ramzan Kadyrov, who promised to destroy any Islamic terrorist who voiced threats against Russia.

Kadyrov also told reporters that Chechen special services intended to hunt down and kill Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi – the head of the Islamic State group (also known as ISIL and ISIS), adding that this man had been recruited to work for the US by General David Petraeus, the former director of the CIA, and former commander of coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Back then, Kadyrov claimed the Islamic State “was acting on orders from the West and Europe.”

Pushkaryov said in his interview that he took Kadyrov’s words very seriously and believed that the head of the Chechen Republic could bring his plans to fruition. “I have a great respect towards Ramzan Kadyrov. If he and his men want to find this man, they would be capable of doing it,” he stated.

The head of Russia’s Federal Security Service, Aleksandr Bortnikov named the Islamic State as a primary threat at the meeting of the heads of special services of the CIS states on Wednesday.

Bortnikov said that IS terrorists receive combat training and experience in Iraq and Syria and then return to their home countries, including the CIS nations, as instructors, recruiters and experts in the terrorist underground. 

He added that the Taliban and other radical groups in Afghanistan and Pakistan were ready to adopt these methods and this carried additional threats to the CIS countries.

Russia has acknowledged the threat that comes from the Islamic State and promised to support countries and groups fighting against the organization. In September US Secretary of State John Kerry said that in his view Russia must join the international fight against the IS terrorists.

 The head of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s Department for New Challenges and Threats, Ilya Rogachev, said that the country “did not expect any invitations and was not going to buy entry tickets,” into the US-led anti-IS coalition.

See our General Petraeus files:

Charleston Voice: Petraeus Affair: Shirtless FBI Pic Appears to Be ...

Nov 21, 2012 ... Petraeus Affair: Shirtless FBI Pic Appears to Be Playful - ABC News.

Charleston Voice: General Petraeus may have been officially ...

Sep 9, 2013 ... Another special forces veteran, retired Colonel James Coffman, worked with Steele and reported directly to General David Petraeus, who had ...

Charleston Voice: Cover-up at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

Nov 11, 2012 ... “What I do know is that an integral part of that firewall involved having information on Petraeus that would potentially damage his career, legacy ...

Charleston Voice: CIA-Sponsored Trolls Monitor Internet & Interact ...

Nov 29, 2012 ... Petraeus is seeking to better the CIA's ability to create online identities for undercover spies. Currently, each internet user has a digital footprint ...

Traitors Within the Gates: CFR's Military Membership Roster

Oct 6, 2014 ... GEN David Petraeus - Director CIA (Aug. 2011) Resigned 11/9/12 Admitted Adulterer present Commander of U.S. and Coalition forces in ...

Charleston Voice: Could Theft of $500M Fuel in Afghanistan be ...

Sep 11, 2012 ... Could Theft of $500M Fuel in Afghanistan be another Thread to be Unraveled on Petraeus' Watch? Posted by Charleston Voice ...

Charleston Voice: Mossad Chief Secretly Met With Top U.S. Officials ...

Feb 1, 2012 ... Feinstein then indicated that she had met Mossad chief Pardo earlier in the week in Washington, with Petraeus adding that he too met Pardo ...

Charleston Voice: U.S. Escalates Drone War in Yemen

Mar 31, 2012 ... About two weeks after the strike, U.S. General David Petraeus, now the director of the CIA, met with Yemen's then-dictator, Ali Abdullah Saleh.

Charleston Voice: Enemies Within Our Gates: Jane Harman and ...

Aug 1, 2013 ... It is astounding to find that one of the handful of prospects being floated to become CIA director following the fall of General David Petraeus is a ...

US Taxpayers Pay 25% of Israel's Defense Budget & List of US Politicians Who Hold Dual US/Israeli Citizenship

Keep at my fellow Americans we've got foreigners' bills to pay too!

Part I

A Reminder: U.S. Pays One Quarter of Israel's Defense Budget

Wednesday, March 04, 2015

(graphic: AllGov)

With Capitol Hill abuzz over Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's appearance before Congress this week, there is no time like the present for a refresher on how much the American taxpayers spend on Israel's defense.

If it wasn't for Washington's longtime commitment to bolstering the Israel Defense Forces, Netanyahu and Israeli lawmakers would have a serious shortfall on their hands.

After all, the U.S. funds about 25% of Israel's annual spending on its military, thanks to $3 billion a year in aid.

"Since it was founded in 1948, Israel has become the largest single recipient of U.S foreign assistance — a total of $121 billion, almost all of which has been in the form of military assistance," Brandon Ward wrote at Journalist's Resource, citing a 2014 Congressional Research Service report (U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel [pdf]).

Among the items funded by the United States is Israel's Iron Dome anti-missile system. The 2015 budget allows $175.9 million for the system on top of $234 million in 2014 and $704 million in the years before that, according to the report.

The really big-ticket item is a purchase of 19 F-35 fighter planes financed with a $2.75 billion grant. The planes were supposed to have been delivered this year, but problems with the F-35 program have pushed the delivery date to 2016 or 2017.

-Noel Brinkerhoff, Steve Straehley

To Learn More:

U.S. Foreign Aid To Israel: 2014 Congressional Report (Journalist's Resource)

U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel (by Jeremy M. Sharp, Congressional Research Service) (pdf)

Supreme Court Rulings Open Loopholes for Water Polluters (by Noel Brinkerhoff, AllGov)

When Israelis Kill Gaza Civilians, They do so with Weapons Provided by U.S. (by Noel Brinkerhoff, AllGov)

U.S. Aid to Israel Equals $4.9 Million a Day for 64 Years (by Noel Brinkerhoff and David Wallechinsky, AllGov)

via AllGov

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Political Polygamy is Moral and OK for America

Part II

US Politicians Who Hold Dual US/Israeli Citizenship

August 18, 2014

"If Americans were ever polled on it—and they never are—the majority who now object to increasing aid to Israel would also likely object to quasi-governmental and governmental positions being staffed by people who—by citizenship or sheer strength of identity politics—are primarily occupied with advancing Israeli interests rather than those of the United States. It is obvious that the real reason AIPAC and its economic luminaries such as Fischer never substantiate any of the advertised benefits the U.S.-Israel "special relationship" delivers to America in return for all of the costs is simple—there simply aren't any. As greater numbers of Americans become aware that the entire "special relationship" framework is sustained by nothing more than Israel lobby campaign-finance and propaganda networks, the harder the lobby will have to work… In the very short term, Americans can only fight such undue Israel lobby influence by again—like during the drive to attack Syria—staging a mass action to demand their senators reject Stanley Fischer's nomination," Grant Smith, IRMEP

Past and Present:

1. Attorney General – Michael Mukasey
2. Head of Homeland Security – Michael Chertoff
3. Chairman Pentagon's Defense Policy Board – Richard Perle
4. Deputy Defense Secretary (Former) – Paul Wolfowitz
5. Under Secretary of Defense – Douglas Feith
6. National Security Council Advisor – Elliott Abrams
7. Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff (Former) – "Scooter" Libby
8. White House Deputy Chief of Staff – Joshua Bolten
9. Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs – Marc Grossman
10. Director of Policy Planning at the State Department – Richard Haass
11. U.S. Trade Representative (Cabinet-level Position) – Robert Zoellick
12. Pentagon's Defense Policy Board – James Schlesinger
13. UN Representative (Former) – John Bolton
14. Under Secretary for Arms Control – David Wurmser
15. Pentagon's Defense Policy Board – Eliot Cohen
16. Senior Advisor to the President – Steve Goldsmith
17. Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary – Christopher Gersten
18. Assistant Secretary of State – Lincoln Bloomfield
19. Deputy Assistant to the President – Jay Lefkowitz
20. White House Political Director – Ken Melman
21. National Security Study Group – Edward Luttwak
22. Pentagon's Defense Policy Board – Kenneth Adelman
23. Defense Intelligence Agency Analyst (Former) – Lawrence (Larry) Franklin
24. National Security Council Advisor – Robert Satloff
25. President Export-Import Bank U.S. – Mel Sembler
26. Deputy Assistant Secretary, Administration for Children and Families – Christopher Gersten
27. Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development for Public Affairs – Mark Weinberger
28. White House Speechwriter – David Frum
29. White House Spokesman (Former) – Ari Fleischer
30. Pentagon's Defense Policy Board – Henry Kissinger
31. Deputy Secretary of Commerce – Samuel Bodman
32. Under Secretary of State for Management – Bonnie Cohen
33. Director of Foreign Service Institute – Ruth Davis
34. Federal Reserve Chair – Janet Yellen
35. Federal Reserve Vice-Chair – Stanley Fischer

Current (and past) Members of Senate:

  Representative Gary Ackerman (New York)

  Representative John H. Adler (New Jersey)

  Representative Shelley Berkley (Nevada)

  Representative Howard Berman (California)

  Representative Steve Cohen (Tennessee)

  Representative Susan Davis (California)

  Representative Eliot Engel (New York)

  Representative Bob Filner (California)

  Representative Barney Frank (Former) (Massachusetts)

  Representative Gabrielle Giffords (Arizona)

  Representative Jane Harman (California)

  Representative Paul Hodes (New Hampshire)

  Representative Steve Israel (New York)

  Representative Steve Kagen (Wisconsin)

  Representative Ronald Klein (Florida)

  Representative Sander Levin (Michigan)

  Representative Nita Lowey (New York)

  Representative Jerry Nadler (New York)

  Representative Jared Polis (Colorado)

  Representative Steve Rothman (New Jersey)

  Representative Jan Schakowsky (Illinois)

  Representative Adam Schiff (California)

  Representative Arlen Specter (Pennsylvania)

  Representative Allyson Schwartz (Pennsylvania)

  Representative Brad Sherman (California)

  Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Florida)

  Representative Henry Waxman (California)

  Representative Anthony Weiner (New York)

  Representative John Yarmuth (Kentucky)

House of Representatives:

  Representative Gary Ackerman (New York)

  Representative John H. Adler (New Jersey)

  Representative Shelley Berkley (Nevada)

  Representative Howard Berman (California)

  Representative Steve Cohen (Tennessee)

  Representative Susan Davis (California)

  Representative Eliot Engel (New York)

  Representative Bob Filner (California)

  Representative Barney Frank (Massachusetts)

  Representative Gabrielle Giffords (Arizona)

  Representative Alan Grayson (Florida)

  Representative Jane Harman (California)

  Representative Paul Hodes (New Hampshire)

  Representative Steve Israel (New York)

  Representative Steve Kagen (Wisconsin)

  Representative Ronald Klein (Florida)

  Representative Sander Levin (Michigan)

  Representative Nita Lowey (New York)

  Representative Jerry Nadler (New York)

  Representative Jared Polis (Colorado)

  Representative Steve Rothman (New Jersey)

  Representative Jan Schakowsky (Illinois)

  Representative Adam Schiff (California)

  Representative Allyson Schwartz (Pennsylvania)

  Representative Brad Sherman (California)

  Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Florida)

  Representative Henry Waxman (California)

  Representative Anthony Weiner (New York)

  Representative John Yarmuth (Kentucky)

---

There are no better people to run America than European American people. European peoples should be able to organize and advance their own interests just like every other group.

via american3rdposition