U.S.: DISMAY AT ARREST OF ETHNIC SERBS

Karpinski like some others in this forum is trying to clear her name be rewriting history. She failed and was fired. She was not malicious, just incompetent.

From Red6

"Do you know who else had ambitions to create "Lebensraum" for his people? Serbia planned and deliberately wanted to push people from their homeland to expand their national territory."

Oh the irony. Your hero, izetbegovic, threw his lot in with the SS in WW2. His recruits appalled the German officer corps of the Handzar SS division.

Keep on with the posting though, I could do with a laugh.

Care to explain why Abdic, the most popular muslim politician in Bosnia was allied with the Bosnian Serbs in Bihac?

Runs against your argument somewhat.

The desertions amongst the Bihac population to Abdic ( and hence the Bosnian Serbs ) were so great that your heroic Islamist Govt in Sarajevo were forced to directly fly in Mujahideen into the enclave to bolster Gov't lines.

Trust you to side with the Islamists against the Secular muslims.

But, do keep on posting, you're a hoot.

Still defending Dr Balls, Hoplite? Oh, that's funny. Please explain why is testimony was soooooo good.

From Red6

"You're no different than the German today complaining that they were bombed in WWII"

Why this belitting of the crimes of the NAZIs in WW2?

The entire total of deaths in the Bosnian civil war was 100,000. From all sides, both civilian and military. This was a 4 way civil war.

Muslim against Croat
Croat against Serb
Serb against Muslim
Secular Muslim ( Abdic ) against Islamist( Izebegovic )

Yet you compare the crimes of the Bosnian Serbs with the NAZIs?

I wonder.

Is this belittling the crimes of the NAZIs by accident or design. I say this because your hero, Izetbegovic, was a WW2 war criminal, his "Muslim Youth" ( Young Muslim )movement was based on the Fascistic Muslim Brotherhood and provided the canon fodder for the Handzar Division. Many of his lifelong political colleagues actually donned the SS uniform AND he named his Praetorian Guard , "Handzar", in honour of same said SS Division.

Is that why you whitewash the crimes of the NAZIs?

" Kind of like the Holocaust denier, but as we know, you guys don’t like any correlation to the Nazi’s or WWII."

Oh, the irony AGAIN. It's YOUR hero, Izetbegovic who denied the Holocaust.

He was kind of unusual in that he had VERY close links with the Saudi Arabian Wahhabis ( Holocaust deniers ) AND the Iranian Gov't ( Holocaust deniers too ) .

Your boy.

The Bosnian Serbs biggest ally ( along with Greece ) was the Israelis. So the IDF are Holocaust deniers too?

From getoffmylawn to Red6

"It would probably be best for yourself, and everyone else, if you just stayed away from the BALKANS threads"

That's uncalled for. We all need to laugh at SOMEONE.

["I give up. You win."]

Just out of curiosity Red6, do you always consider people who don't agree with your point of view as "deniers" or rather as people "who are trying to rewrite history?"

That was what I meant...the war was misrepresented one way only, that being that the poor Muslims were the innocent, they were slaughtered by the "evil" Serbs. You were right, times like these makes us wish for people like Vlad Tepes, the true historical version, not the Hollywood concept. While they portray him as a murderer, a cruel and bloody man, the truth is that he was beloved by his people and his involvement in successful crusades against the Ottomans made him so popular with most of his neighbors, church bells would toll from Rhodes to Genoa upon hearing about his successful campaigns against the Ottomans. He was a huge threat to the sultan responsible for the destruction of Constantinople, the true spot of Christian development, a destruction which brought on another misrepresented concept of dark times in Europe which was nothing more than lack of findings of documents, books, art which were actually destroyed by the Muslims during their invasion of Constantinople. But I digress and this brings to mind a comment made by Christopher Walken after the 9/11 attacks and his unsatisfaction with our soft military action against the terrorists, comment in which he said that if this was Russia which suffered this type of attack, the second day Middle East would have been transformed into a parking lot. And I agree with him!

You need to catch up.....this is 100% correct, no discussion. In other words, once the pieces fall together the picture is clear. You either have not accomplished this or you are clearly one of the college Jr.s or Seniors that are going after your Political Science degree and are paid to take on the "forum" crowd. You are clearly out of your league or class and way behind the power curve for this subject. Reference the following........for only one example....

Clark placed career ahead of nation in Kosovo

GEORGE JATRAS
Tucson Citizen

The Dan Christman and Chuck Larson guest column published on Jan. 8 - "Gen. Clark's stand vs. Milosevic praiseworthy" - was remarkable as much for what it didn't say as for the distortions in what it did say.
In praising Clark's testimony against former Yugoslav dictator Slobodan Milosevic before the International Tribunal at The Hague, the authors failed to mention that Milosevic was not permitted to question Clark on what the general had written in his book, "Waging Modern War."

Also, the U.S. government demanded and received the right to edit videotapes and transcripts of the sessions before they were made public. Following his secret testimony at The Hague, Clark, in answer to an inquiry about what should happen to Saddam Hussein, hypocritically stated that it was important that Hussein's trial not be behind closed doors, so that the whole world could see justice done.

While the article had high praise in general terms for Clark's leadership of NATO forces in the Balkans, a critical look at his performance tells a different story.

In "Waging Modern War" Clark writes about his fury upon learning that Russian peacekeepers had entered the airport at Pristina, Kosovo, before British or American forces.

In an Aug. 3, 1999, article, "The guy who almost started World War III," The Guardian (UK) wrote: "No sooner are we told by Britain's top generals that the Russians played a crucial role in ending the West's war against Yugoslavia than we learn that if NATO's supreme commander, the American Gen. Wesley Clark, had had his way, British paratroopers would have stormed Pristina airport, threatening to unleash the most frightening crisis with Moscow since the end of the Cold War. 'I'm not going to start the third world war for you', Gen. Mike Jackson, commander of the international K-For peacekeeping force, is reported to have told Gen. Clark when he refused to accept an order to send assault troops to prevent Russian troops from taking over the airfield of Kosovo's provincial capital."

Gen. Clark's buddy in Kosovo was Hashim Thaci, the leader of the Kosovo Liberation Army which, according to the July 30, 2002, Belfast News Letter (N. Ireland), is engaged in sex slavery, prostitution, murder, kidnapping and drugs.

The Daily Telegraph reported on Feb. 19, 2002, that "European drug squad officers say Albanian and Kosovo Albanian dealers are ruthlessly trying to seize control of the European heroin market ..." This is the same Hashim "The Snake" Thaci with whom Clark was photographed in a triumphal handshake after NATO forces occupied Kosovo.

As for his ability as a military leader, Gen. Clark failed on two counts: the Kosovo air campaign and his plan for a ground campaign. While the questionable effectiveness of the air campaign is not solely his responsibility, his coverup of the results ("Kosovo Cover Up," Newsweek, May 15, 2000) are testimony to his dedication to power and career.

As for a ground war, which Gen. Clark admits that he favored, he insists that he could have conducted a successful ground war in Kosovo by sending supporting Apache helicopters through the mountain passes between Albania and Kosovo, a plan which was described to me by an Apache pilot as "hare-brained" and "suicidal."

There is no doubt that a ground war with the might of 19 NATO nations behind it eventually would have succeeded, but at what cost and why? To feed Gen. Clark's ego and ambition.

Before accepting the judgment of Adm. Larson and Lt. Gen. Christman, one should also consider the comments of two retired four-star generals, Gen.Tommy Franks, who led the campaign to capture Baghdad, and Gen. Hugh Shelton, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

An article in the Jan. 12 New Yorker quoted statements they made shortly after Clark announced his candidacy. When asked if Clark would make a good president, Franks' short reply was, "Absolutely not." When asked the same question, Shelton replied that "... the reason he came out of [his NATO command in] Europe had to do with integrity and character issues ... Wes won't get my vote."

Such comments by retired four-star generals about another four-star are almost unprecedented. They should not be taken lightly.

If Gen. Clark had had his way in Kosovo, we might have gone to war with Russia, or at least resurrected vestiges of the Cold War, and we certainly would have had hundreds if not thousands of casualties in an ill-conceived ground war.

Clark's obsession with career and power is what we saw too often in senior leaders during the Vietnam War and hoped never to see again in those with positions of responsibility for the lives of our GIs and the security of our nation.

Col. George Jatras, USAF (Ret.), of Camp Hill, Pa., flew 230 F-4 combat missions in Vietnam, served for seven years with various NATO designated units, was the senior Air Force attaché to the Soviet Union ('79-'81) and the senior Air Force advisor to the Naval War College, where he also served as an instructor in the Strategy Department.

http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/index.p...304b5_guestwes

Good post.

seems to run in the family......so,is he or she your sibling? Hmmmmmmmmm,

Tom: Red6 says; ["The comparisons of Serbia to Nazi Germany are 100% spot on, although no doubt Germany was far worse in magnitude."]

Notice any contradictions?- or is it just me?

you are the one that started the personal attacks and disinformation distribution. I'm not writing this to you, as there is a 100% chance that you won't read these and certainly won't make any intelligent remarks pro but, mostly negative as you are in a state of denial or paid to be a ....well, you know, the big "Pro"....:) but, it's just these few articles and comments that still keep me sort of "hung up" you might say. :)) I write these not for you, but, fortunately you keep responding in order to allow the rest of us to sound off with the truth. So, keep up the good work, this is good exercise and publicity. lolol...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/europe/caspian100598.htm

Go ahead for Balkan oil pipeline
Albania, Bulgaria and Macedonia have given the go ahead for the construction of a $1.2bn oil pipeline that will pass through the Balkan peninsula.
The project aims to allow alternative ports for the shipping of Russian and Caspian oil, that normally goes through the Bosphorus straits.
It aims to transport 750,000 daily barrels of oil.
The pipeline will be built by the US-registered Albanian Macedonian Bulgarian Oil Corporation (AMBO).
The pipeline will run for nearly 900 kilometres from the Bulgarian port of Burgas, over the Black Sea to the Albanian city of Vlore on the Adriatic coast, crossing Macedonia.
Delayed project
The project was first conceived in 1994 but has suffered delays due to uncertainties about whether there was sufficient demand.
By signing the agreement on Tuesday, the prime ministers of Bulgaria, Albania and Macedonia have overcome the problem.
"This is one of the most important infrastructure projects for regional, EU, and Euro-Atlantic integration for the western Balkans," said Albanian Prime Minister Fatos Nano.
According to AMBO president Edward Ferguson, work on the pipeline will begin in 2005 and it is expected to be ready in three or four years.
He added that the company had already raised about $900m from the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) - a US development agency - the Eximbank and Credit Suisse First Boston, among others.
The project has also the support of the European Union.
Analysts have said that oil companies like ChevronTexaco, Exxon Mobil and British Petroleum would be happy to find alternative routes to the Bosphorus and Dardanelles Straits.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4130271.stm
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/business/4130271.stm

Published: 2004/12/28 16:19:23 GMT

© BBC MMVI

Pipeline Diplomacy
The Clinton Administration's
Fight for Baku-Ceyhan
http://www.wws.princeton.edu/cases/papers/pipeline.pdf

Macedonia Albania seal accord on AMBO oil pipeline project
31/10/2006
OHRID, Macedonia -- Officials from Macedonia and Albania signed an agreement Monday (October 30th) on the exit points of the AMBO oil pipeline. The one in Macedonia will be near the village of Lakaica, while the entry point in Albania will be near the village of Stebleve, in the municipality of Elbasan. Macedonia selected Deve Bair locality as an entrance oil pipeline point, while the Bulgarian exit point is expected to be determined shortly. The 917-km long pipeline is to carry Caspian oil from Burgas, Bulgaria to Valona, Albania. (Vecer - 31/10/06; MIA, Makfax - 30/10/06)

http://www.setimes.com/cocoon/setimes/xhtml/en_GB/newsbriefs/setimes/newsbriefs/2006/10/31/nb-10

Terror war and oil expand US sphere of influence
GIs build bases on Russia's energy-rich flank
By Scott Peterson | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

MOSCOW – As the Roman Empire spread two millenniums ago, maps had to be redrawn to reflect new realities. In similar fashion, the expansion of the British Empire kept cartographers at their drawing boards, reshaping territories from Southern Africa to India to Hong Kong.
Now, as the United States wages its war on terrorism in Afghan-istan – and deploys troops for the first time in the energy-rich regions of Central Asia and the Caucasus – the borders of a new American empire appear to be forming. ( See map.)

Firmly in the Russian and later Soviet sphere of influence since Napoleon's day, these strategic regions, along with their Middle Eastern ramparts to the south, are now home to 60,000 American troops.

Some of these soldiers are building what appear to be long-term bases at remote Central Asian outposts, raising critical questions about America's future role.
One aim is the containment of Islamic extremism, a goal shared by Russia on its vulnerable southern flank. Looking to challenge OPEC leader Saudi Arabia in the oil markets, Russia is also worried about protecting its growing economic interests in Central Asia and the Caucasus, which are crisscrossed by oil and gas pipelines – and potentially lucrative new routes.

But the new nearness of America is triggering heated debate in Moscow, where President Vladimir Putin, by permitting US deployments, is being widely blamed for "losing" Central Asia and succumbing to a new American imperialism.
Others say that Mr. Putin – recognizing that 70 percent of Russia's state budget comes from oil and natural gas exports – has simply traded in cold-war baggage for a new, clear-eyed pragmatism amid Russia's harsh economic realities.

Already 3,000 Americans are based in Uzbekistan, and are believed to run both overt and covert operations in Afghanistan from there. Commanders are setting up new facilities in Kyrgyzstan for a combat air wing and humanitarian missions, with 3,000 more troops.
A deal has been struck with Tajikistan – where Russia has 10,000 of its own troops guarding the Afghan border. Americans have held secret military meetings with Armenia – a key Russian ally – and talks with Kazakhstan. Up to 200 American advisers will soon be helping Georgia control its unruly Pankisi Gorge, where terrorists are suspected to be hiding.

While the US may have grand imperial designs – some experts even go so far as to speak of US troops "guarding" Caspian energy resources in case Iraqi oil supplies are disrupted by any American attempt to change the regime in Baghdad – others emphasize common US-Russian economic interests.
"Don't think like a 'cold warrior,' " says Pat Davis Szymczak, the American publisher of the bi-monthly, Moscow-based magazine Oil and Gas Eurasia, who points out that the bulk of Central Asian energy resources reach the market through Russian pipelines.

"Are we going to send a bunch of Marines to stand around an oil well with guns? So they've protected that oil – big deal. Are they going to take it away in armored vehicles?" Ms. Szymczak asks. "The only way to get it from Uzbekistan to cars in New York is by being friends with the Russians."
While the presence of American forces and the overthrow of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan are causing fresh thinking about how to tap Caspian riches, the context of cold war rivalries – played up by regional leaders often eager to wiggle free of Russia's influence – still dominates discourse.

During a recent tour of the region, state Duma speaker Gennady Seleznyov, warned that "Russia will not endorse the emergence of permanent US military bases in Central Asia."
"The Russians have every reason to be worried" about US intentions in their "soft underbelly," says Thomas Stauffer, an energy strategist and former Harvard professor in Washington. "The only geopolitical logic I can see [to long-term US moves]," Stauffer adds, "is that we want to get a certain amount of space on the checkerboard, with which we can negotiate with the Russians."

Such considerations haven't escaped notice in Washington, where US Secretary of State Colin Powell last December said that Kazakhstan's oil was becoming of "critical importance."
And "Caspian reserves could be critical to future global energy supply," notes an analysis earlier this month by the respected, London-based Jane's Foreign Report. "This is in line with the doctrine of 'full-spectrum dominance' that now seems to govern American foreign policy and is manifesting itself in the Caucasus and Central Asia," the report said.

Escaping the template of Cold War rivalry is proving difficult, even though US-Russian economic interests often coincide. "The Russian security establishment still contains a high proportion of dinosaurs," says Anatol Lieven, a regional analyst at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington.

Many in the US see Russia through old prisms, despite Moscow's demonstrated commitment to helping the US wage war in Afghanistan and elsewhere. "You have people who are still saying Russian policy in the 'near abroad' [the former Soviet states] is a key threat to American interests," Lieven says.

That some in Washington want to keep US troops in Central Asia beyond the Afghanistan campaign "accentuates the fact that the war on terrorism is horribly complicated, and risks being lost by being overloaded with other agendas," Lieven adds. "One problem is that some in the Pentagon are gung-ho for world domination. And then you have [others] who say: 'Hang on a second, we are not prepared for that.' "
Moscow's former domains stretch from Uzbekistan to Ukraine, and have often bristled under Russia's strong-arm tactics to re-exert control. The US arrival may be forcing changes.
"The fact that Russia has acquiesced to US troops in Central Asia and indeed Georgia, shows that Russia itself is prepared to play a much more open and even-handed role in the region," says Julian Lee, a senior analyst at the Center for Global Energy Studies in London. "But we're seeing Russian interest in business channels, rather than political and military ones. It's the sensible way forward."
Some observers say that Putin's KGB background makes him as wary as anyone of American moves – but also realistic about the imperative of a pro-West future.

"We are living in the age of a new Rome," notes Andrei Piontkovsky, head of the Center for Strategic Research in Moscow, in an analysis published over the weekend. Dismissing Russia's "boot-licking elite," which he says is "choked with hostility toward the US," Mr. Piontkovsky says that energy reserves and influence at the start of the new century will allow Russia and the US to be "useful partners ... if Russia proves able to overcome its cold war-defeat complex and the United States learns not to trumpet its victories."

Pipelines can be another point of cooperation. The US has long pushed for an oil line from Azerbaijan to Turkey, which deliberately bypasses Russia and Iran. But Russia has a key stake in the year-old, Chevron-led CPC pipeline, which carries Kazakh oil to a Russian Black Sea port.
And though laughed at when first proposed during Taliban rule, plans to build two pipelines, oil and gas, across Afghanistan are now being dusted off. Cutting Russia into any such deal to provide gas to South Asia could make sense, analysts say.

That could help satisfy Russia's bottom line – maximum market share. Russian gas reserves are the largest in the world, but a European Union decision this weekend will break Russia's decades-long monopoly there.

"Putin's a realist, and economics are everything," says Szymczak, of "Oil and Gas Eurasia." The result is a tricky balancing act for Putin, as American influence spreads to Russia's borders. "The reality is that a lot of the money to run this country comes from gas sales," Szymczak says. "Putin needs markets to the east – or the whole thing unravels, and he's got a bigger problem than just a few people thinking: 'Oh goodness, we've got Americans in Uzbekistan!"

http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0319/p01s04-wosc.html

Oil Wars The Balkans as an Example
Original article is at http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2001/11/109891.php Print comments.

by oil war Tuesday, Nov. 20, 2001 at 1:47 PM

An EXCELLENT article about what is going on with oil in Central Asia and the Balkans. I challenge ANYONE to read this and tell me Afghanistan is not about oil. Note the reason he gives for the delay's in Unocol's Afghan pipeline.
Cheney & Bush wherever you look: "...a gang of multinational corporations (including BP, Amoco, Exxon, Unocal, Caterpillar, Halliburton/Brown & Root [Dick Cheney], and Mitsubishi) are using all the military, political, and economic tools at their disposal to destroy and recreate the infrastructure and economy of southeastern Europe in their own image".

Oil Wars: The Balkans
by George Draffan
http://www.endgame.org/

Wars are often blamed on political, ethnic, and religious animosities, but war is more often the inflamation of these conflicts -- and war is usually about resources: land, transport routes, and above all, resources. What's the most valuable resource in the modern world? Oil.

The 1995 Dayton Accords led to a major NATO military operation to "pacificy" Bosnia-Herzegovina. For the multinational corporations working alongside NATO, one of the most important rewards will be the construction of a trans-Balkan pipeline to bring oil from the Caspian Sea region to Europe. William Ramsay, U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Energy, Sanctions And Commodities, claiming that that Caspian oil is "crucial to the world energy balance over the next 25 years," has revealed that "there already exists a kind of outline of a new Silk Road running through the Caucasus and beyond the Caspian. We think oil and gas pipelines, roads, railways and fiber optics can make this 21st century Silk Road a superhighway linking Europe and Central Asia."

The European Union, the U.S. government, and a gang of multinational corporations (including BP, Amoco, Exxon, Unocal, Caterpillar, Halliburton/Brown & Root, and Mitsubishi) are using all the military, political, and economic tools at their disposal to destroy and recreate the infrastructure and economy of southeastern Europe in their own image. The conflicts of interest between government officials and corporate executives are blatant and revealing.

Recent NATO military action in Yugoslavia is part of a long strategic (economic) battle to control the Balkans. The current focus is to secure oil and gas pipeline routes from the oilfields of the Caspian Sea to the consumers of Europe. Multinational oil corporations from the U.S., Britain and other European countries, and Russia are signing multibillion-dollar contracts with Kazakhstan.

"The oil from this region played a major strategic role during this century's two world wars. Protecting the oilfields of the Caucasus was an Allied priority. During the second world war, oil from the Caucasus was an essential target of Hitler's expansionist policies. Following the 1939 German-Soviet pact, Soviet oil from the Caucasus accounted for a third of Germany's imports. In 1942, Germany repeatedly conducted military campaigns to gain control over the region's natural resources. Towards the end of the 19th century, cut-throat competition had already built up between the oil companies. Russia, fearing loss of control over its petroleum markets, sabotaged an agreement in 1895 between American Standard Oil, the Rothschilds and Nobels. Competition in the region was increasingly fuelled by ethnic conflict, administrative corruption and underdeveloped legal and trade practices. Natural resources have [again] become a major issue in the Caucasus and central Asia in recent years. Specialists reckon that the area might contain the world's third largest oil and natural gas reserves after the Gulf region and Siberia. Oil resources are estimated at 200 billion barrels. The most extensive fields have been located in Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan. Other lesser reserves and oil exploitation sites are to be found in Georgia, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Armenia... The fall of the Soviet empire and its concomitant loss of influence in the region has turned the latter into a grey area where regional powers are pitted against one another, each seeking to ensure that their interests prevail within the new successor republics to the former USSR. These countries are seeking a balance between the interests of the regional power brokers and their own national interests and are hoping that their natural resources will offer them the means of developing their economies, thus generating the stability that is needed within the region. One of the major problems of these landlocked states is oil transport, for which they are dependent on cooperation with their neighbours. This is leading to the formation at regional and international levels of a series of alliances and counter alliances, the aim of which is to allow the countries involved to gain access to or influence over some of the world's most important natural reserves."

do I have to comment.....give me some time to catch my breath...I have to apologize for laughing so hard at such a sad comment, but, the irony of it all just got the best of me. The comparison or the comment, one just cannot comment on, due to the ignorance is.....just sad.

I have to say, in such a short paragraph you covered the entire subject manner way off the chart....thank you.

Tom

"Karpinski like some others in this forum is trying to clear her name be rewriting history. She failed and was fired. She was not malicious, just incompetent."

Sounds like a similar incident in regards to someone failing and fired for incompetancy....does Clark come to mind.....????

Your point about the Russians is proven by the Moscow theater incident, wherein the the Russian operatives simply put a bullet into the head of the unconscious female suicide bombers. After I saw the video of one of the American's beheadings, I recalled some history about Vlad. (I wish I knew as much as you do.) I concluded that his executions were an act of military strategy, not homocidal mania. I believe Vlad was vastly outnumbered by the Ottomans, and the only way to keep them at bay was to for him to show he could top their brutality.

:)) the Serb military made fools of Clarks follies....you should read about how they fooled them.

---

Serb discusses 1999 downing of stealth (story of non-Serb)

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-10-26-serb-stealth_x.htm

Well, this guy is not Serb, but Hungarian
http://www.aire.org/portal/images/articulos/20051027zoltan_Dani.jpg

Today guy is baker...

Red6, well done. You've supplied facts and perspective; things which--save from Hoplite--are not often evident on the Balkans threads. I know with that "6" suffix that you've been hit with much worse than the electronic bombardment of historical revisionism, illogic, fabrications, and personal attacks from our resident Serb nationalists.

The facts of the death & destruction of Serb ethnic cleansing in support of their irredentist goals are well established. It is both factually incorrect and an insult to the United States of America for the Serbs to try and associate what they did in the 90s--in terms of either goals or methods--with what the United States is doing in our current war on terror.

From one military veteran to two others: Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

It's too bad that the three in question....have supplied virtually red herrings, and un-substantiated assertions that are supported by what has been proven to be a well contrived effort to deceive the true American patriots, and not the card board types that obtained their rank on toliet paper. The true Patriots do not adhere to the MSM reports as proven by Peter Brocks, book, "Media Cleasing, Dirty Reporting"....The true American patriot was Major General Smedely Butler, who kept this nation from becoming a facist government.........

http://lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm

from another patriot apparently....

http://www.scuttlebuttsmallchow.com/racket.html

These three shrills, shills, or twrills are a menace and are either paid or very much mislead as to the truth. The true patriots WILL NOT allow this to continue without reporting the truth for every lie they tell to promote the travesty against our constitution. they are traitors and should never have donned the uniform.