TWG: America, read the congressional record titled “Communist Goals For America“, tell your children and grandchildren you’re sorry, then bend over and kiss your ass goodbye.
1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
If Nukes Are So Useless, Why Are Iran, North Korea, China and Russia Building Them So Fast?
by Peter Huessy
January 29, 2013 at 4:00 am
Senator Hagel, while signing up to the timetable for the elimination of all nuclear weapons, also said in the 2009 Al Jazeera interview, that nuclear weapons can be abolished because they no longer need to play a traditional deterrent role. As part of this strategy, Hagel proposes to “de-alert” our weapons, making them unusable in a crisis. This raises the question of why any adversary would also volunteer to put its nuclear warheads in reserve and significantly delay its own ability to use such weapons, especially when doing so is largely unverifiable.
The “Global Zero” campaign to “zero out” all nuclear weapons is pressuring the US to set an example for the rest of the world to follow, by dramatically cutting its nuclear forces even further to a level not seen since the dawn of the nuclear age 60 years ago.
This cutback is on top of the already considerable 90% reduction — since the height of the Cold War in 1981 — in our deployed strategic nuclear forces, as well as a similarly significant reduction in our reserve stockpile and our tactical nuclear weapons.
In proposing a larger reduction, a logical question has arisen: What is the role, if any, of the nuclear weapons we will keep prior to their elimination? In short, what is the function of nuclear weapons in the post-Cold War era, now seen as the post-9/11 era and its concern about terrorism?
A little history is in order. The essence of the US triad of missiles on land, submarines at sea and bombers ready to fly is that it is virtually impossible to take all of these forces out in one quick, sudden unexpected strike by the bad guys, which would leave us “naked”, i.e., with no nukes left with which to deter or strike back.
The Global Zero forces have long wanted to eliminate the land based missiles — at the height of the Cold War we had 1050 such missiles on land spread over 7 states; we have 450 now over five states.
Global Zero wants to get rid of the land-based Minuteman missiles and rely primarily on our submarines, both to save money and to demonstrate that we are truly dedicated to “going toward” zero weapons.
But we only have two bases or ports for our submarines, one in Washington and one in Georgia. Those subs in port can be destroyed by a cruise missile attack. But those subs at sea, usually four, in their patrol areas, cannot now be found by any adversary so they can survive to fire back at any adversary who might strike the US first.
But our Navy leaders believe anti-submarine warfare technology may in a number of years make it easier to detect and find them. Thus, prudence dictates we continue to make the fleet as quiet and survivable as possible, as well as maintaining the insurance policy of our land-based Minuteman missiles to ensure we can retaliate if attacked. The cost of the Minuteman program annually is roughly $500 million in research, development and acquisition, a bargain at less than $1 out of every $7600 spent by Uncle Sam.
If an anti-submarine warfare breakthrough occurred, our submarines over time could be eliminated while underwater on patrol. Under those circumstances, we would not know what country had taken them out.
This would be a deadly serious crisis, because the US President would be faced with the prospects of the United States losing its nuclear deterrent. This entire dilemma, however, can be avoided simply with the expedient of the US keeping all of our Minuteman missiles in their silos sustained and modernized.
The next strategy proposed by Global Zero involves a degree of sleight of hand. After proposing that 450 submarine-based warheads would remain in our inventory, they propose that the same warheads be “de-alerted”. This would require making technical changes to the submarine missile-launchers. The submarine commander, upon receiving orders from the President to fire such weapons, would not be able to carry out such an order for upwards of seventy two hours or three days.
Since taking the missiles “off alert” is not verifiable, we would be hoping our adversaries did likewise. Instead of President Reagan’s policy of “Trust, but verify”, we would be in a new world of “Trust, don’t verify, and hope”.
Finally, the Global Zero advocates try to hide the weakness of their approach by proposing that if needed in a crisis, the submarines could add an additional 450 warheads to their missiles by returning to port and adding such warheads to their missiles from stockpiles stored nearby. The only problem is that, as experts have explained, such an endeavor would take many months. And the logical question arises, why would the “bad guys” wait around during a crisis for the US to re-arm?
In this context, the Global Zero campaign has now authored a proposal in which nuclear weapons would be eliminated by 2030 — with the US leading the way by eliminating much of its current Nuclear Triad of bombers, submarines and land-based missiles. Some number of weapons would remain throughout the period leading up to the elimination of the rest.
Here things get confusing. What would be the doctrine upon which the current nuclear forces would rely? If not available for use in a crisis, what would their purpose be? And if other nuclear armed nations kept their weapons ready to use, we would enter every crisis potentially unprepared to deter war.
One author of the report, former Senator Chuck Hagel, now nominated to be the new Defense Secretary, asserted in a 2009 Al Jazeera interview that the doctrine of mutual assured destruction or MAD, was no longer relevant although it had been the doctrine of the US and the Soviet Union for much of the Cold War. What then would take its place?
The report itself, primarily authored by the former Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General James Cartwright, has underscored that nuclear deterrence still needs to be maintained, and has proposed that the US keep some 450 warheads for that purpose, with an additional 450 warheads “in reserve” on a reduced force of ten submarines and 20 bombers.
But the Global Zero report also calls for these 450 reserve warheads to be removed from their bombers and submarine-launched ballistic missiles and stored elsewhere, a change which would require many months before they could be brought back from storage and used.
Why any adversary would also volunteer to put its nuclear warheads in reserve and significantly delay its own ability to use such weapons remains unexplained — or what purpose would be served by bringing nuclear weapons to bear in a confrontation already underway for some time or possibly even already resolved?
Further, moving our deployed warheads off alert, so they could not be used for days or months after a crisis occurred, certainly would give incentives to other parties in a conflict to have nuclear weapons at the ready so they could be used to defeat everybody else.
There are adversaries of the US that have, or are urgently attempting to acquire, nuclear weapons; adversaries that include Russia, China and North Korea, with Iran now projected to have sufficient nuclear material for a weapon as early as 2014. Will all of these nuclear powers actually put aside their nuclear weapons, making them unusable in a crisis?
Any crisis could emerge involving any number of the current nine nuclear weapons states. In that light, the primary objective of the United States should be to ensure that no nuclear weapons be used, whether those weapons were to be used against the US and its allies or not. To do that, nuclear deterrence would be required. And such deterrence must be — and appear to be — both credible and stable. The Global Zero strategy is neither.
What then should a credible US nuclear policy look like? At a minimum, it should preserve nuclear stability, the guiding principal of which would be that during a crisis, the US would work to ensure that: (1) No nuclear weapons were used by anyone against anyone else especially while nuclear weapons remain in the arsenal of nations; and (2) That peace is preserved, and any aggression, even conventional, is avoided.
In that light, how do any of the Global Zero proposals make sense, especially in de-alerting those warheads that remain in our inventory while eliminating our ICBMs
Most problematic about the Global Zero strategy us that it relies upon verification measures — not yet identified — to preserve the peace in a non-nuclear world with many rogue states that have a strong propensity to cheat. In these circumstances, would war of any nature be less likely or more likely? Let’s look at four key issues.
1. Assuming the US, and its allies would not completely trust a commitment by Iran, North Korea, China, Pakistan and others to get rid of their nuclear weapons, wouldn’t it require extremely intrusive inspections — including those made without notice — to adequately verify such an eradication, as even the proponents of such an agenda admit?
What happens, however, even if we reach such a hypothetical condition of zero nuclear weapons? Would the Global Zero proponents also tell us that with nuclear weapons no longer available, war between countries — including terrorist-sponsoring states and their terror allies — would go away? As General Brent Scowcroft, former National Security Council Adviser to President Bush, has asked: What part of the pre-nuclear era of World War I and World War II are folks hoping we go back to?
As conventional war would still be possible between nations — and without nuclear deterrence, possibly even more likely — wouldn’t the benefit of getting nuclear weapons first, on the sly, be of enormous strategic advantage to a country seeking to commit aggression against another? Would verification be so foolproof that we could be certain such a surprise would not happen?
If North Korea were to invade South Korea solely with conventional forces — even unsuccessfully — would not South Korea be sorely tempted to secure nuclear weapons to ensure that such an attack would never happen again? Or what about a conflict between India and China, or Pakistan and India, or Iran and Turkey? Would nuclear weapons stay out of the geostrategic equation for long?
A nuclear-free world would also therefore be a world where very quickly there would be a rush to rearm, as the likely outcome, or attempted prevention, of any perceived potential conflict. The world would soon be awash in aspiring nuclear powers with the attendant instability this situation would entail with few “rules of the road” in operation.
2. Some advocates of nuclear zero also assert that nuclear weapons currently serve no usefully military purpose, in that they cannot be used for any militarily useful goal, and thus can safely be eliminated.
A recent essay by Ward Wilson, cited as further evidence that nuclear weapons have never been useful and thus can now safely be abolished, asserts that the Japanese surrendered at the end of World War II not because of the US use of nuclear weapons, but because the Soviet Union entered the war in early August 1945.
General Larry Welch, the former US Air Force Chief of Staff and Commander of the Strategic Command at the height of the Cold War, and one of the key authors of the initial US effort to reduce nuclear weapons to lower but more stable numbers, found such a proposition “at odds with the facts, even at odds with the information presented in Wilson’s article.”
“The Japanese emperor,” Welch wrote me, “was the only authority in Japan to overrule the military and declare an end to the war. The use of nuclear weapons against Japan gave him the necessary leverage to surrender and to make it stick. … The idea that the Soviets’ entry into the war did the trick is not supported by any understanding of the facts at the time.” He added, “The Russians had no significant capability facing Japan, and no naval capability. Their forces were concentrated in the European theater.”
Welch also noted that, “The overwhelming evidence was that a US and allied invasion of Japan would have cost America 500,000 to 1,000,000 military casualties and 1-2 million subsequent Japanese casualties. After the war, we discovered very large caches of war material being readied to fight just such an invasion.”
Wilson’s claim that nuclear weapons had no role in the peace maintained throughout the Cold War – is “devoid of supportable rationales” said Welch.
“The very fact,” Welch wrote, “that there was no armed conflict between two superpowers armed to the teeth, facing each other across an artificial border, is de facto evidence that nuclear weapons served a military purpose unparalleled in human history —-they played a major role in avoiding war for an extended period between two heavily armed adversaries, an accomplishment, let me emphasize again, largely unparalleled in human history.”
The “whole point of deterrence was never to use these weapons” he continued. “The idea that the use of such weapons was wholly irrational and would not accomplish one’s war aims was precisely the point of deterrence; the use of such weapons was so horrible to contemplate, their use by our adversaries was deterred.”
3. The next issue is whether nuclear weapons serve no further purpose. “If nuclear weapons are so useless as he asserts,” Welch continued, “why are rogue states and others seeking to acquire them?”
If nuclear weapons really serve no purpose, then it makes sense for the US unilaterally to take the lead and be the first to disarm: have the US get rid of its nuclear weapons unilaterally, before any of our adversaries do as well?
If, however, as even global zero advocates concede, nuclear deterrence remains essential, then the argument should be about what is needed for both strategic deterrence and for maintaining strategic stability.
In that regard, reference to the one treaty now in force that calls for the eventual elimination of nuclear weapons would be useful. The whole purpose of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty [NPT] was to reduce those nations with nuclear weapons, to stop proliferation and eventually reduce and then eliminate nuclear weapons.
The NPT, signed in 1968 and entering into force in 1970, also called for general disarmament of conventional forces as part and parcel of any such nuclear disarmament. The US nuclear umbrella was widely seen during the Cold War as keeping the peace in Central Europe, preventing a superior Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact conventional capability from being used on the continent. The US was hardly ready to give up its nuclear deterrent in Europe and leave in place a vastly superior Soviet conventional capability facing NATO across the Fulda Gap. Even today, leaders of countries from Germany, Taiwan, Korea and Japan, for example, credit the US nuclear umbrella for forestalling major proliferation pressures among US allies.
Nuclear weapons, then, have served a major purpose: stopping the very proliferation which the Global Zero campaign claims is one of its chief concerns. But with the removal of the US deterrent umbrella, including the remaining tactical nuclear weapons the US has in Europe,, proliferation will only be encouraged.
Proponents of Global Zero probably have to make up their minds: do or do not nuclear weapons give whoever possesses them a decided advantage in strategic affairs? If they do give such an advantage, pursuing Global Zero could actually be an unfortunate prelude to Global Proliferation, as nations seek to match or overtake smaller and smaller US nuclear forces. Global Zero could also lead to a world where just a handful of such weapons could obliterate other powers shortly after Global Zero had been reached. Again, a rush to rearm would result.
4. A key part of the Global Zero agenda is to “de-alert” the weapons of the United States, and implicitly those of Russia as well. This has sometimes been described as taking our warheads off of their missiles or removing them from bombers, then storing them separately from the platforms from which they would be launched, or delaying the time by which warheads on their respective missiles could be launched.
This has the purpose of not allowing nuclear weapons to be used for up to 72 hours after they have been de-alerted, and months for submarine-based weapons stored ashore. The first action cannot be verified and the latter takes so much time as to have no impact on a crisis or conflict already erupted. Thus, re-alerting and reconstituting our submarine force, for instance, would be a task taking not just days but in some instances months.
The first thing wrong with such a proposal is that it is, in large part, not verifiable. The second thing wrong is that the adversary’s weapons could surreptitiously be “re-alerted.” In a crisis, there would be the very same rush to rearm, which the very instability that the Global Zero push for no nuclear weapons is supposed to prevent.
Global Zero’s recommendations would therefore produce the likelihood that nuclear weapons would be used against us and our allies. We would not cheat, but the other side well could.
The most worrisome part of the Global Zero agenda is its proposal to dismantle unilaterally most of our current stabilizing nuclear deterrent. Cartwright and Hagel both propose to eliminate our 450 land based missiles and most of our bombers capable of carrying nuclear weapons, and then rely almost entirely on our submarines.
This may sound attractive but it is not. Our submarines are in two ports, in Georgia and Washington. A certain number (four) of these 12 Trident boats are, on an ongoing basis at sea, patrolling within their pre-assigned boxes. Some boats remain in port, while others transit from port to patrol area. They are considered highly survivable out at sea as an assured second-strike retaliatory capability. The submarines place no pressure on a President in a crisis to cross the threshold and use nuclear weapons.
According to the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Jonathan Greenert, the highest ranking Naval Officer in the US, the quest by our adversaries to develop an underwater, or anti-submarine warfare [ASW] capability, is high on the list of his most worrisome possible future developments.
If acquired, this would put at risk our submarines out at sea, where they could be destroyed by underwater torpedoes — with the US totally blind as to which nation might have carried out such an attack. Over time, our fleet could be targeted or eliminated, and with it our entire nuclear deterrent capability.
Today, while our submarines remain safe as they patrol at sea, we still maintain 450 Minuteman missiles in silos in the ground spread over hundreds of thousands of square miles in five states as a key insurance policy. To take out the Minuteman silos would require the “bad guys” to launch two warheads at each silo, which would require a massive attack. But even if all of our missiles in their silos did not survive–highly unlikely–our submarines at sea could retaliate. Thus any adversary would face the daunting task of simultaneously taking out our submarines in port and at sea as well as our land based missiles. Given the different flight times required to take out each element of our Triad, we would have sufficient warning of an attack and be able to strike back but only with all three Triad legs in place and sustained.
The presence today of 450 Minuteman missile silos spread over five states thus makes a pre-emptive attack on the US non-credible. Minuteman is thus a critically important strategic insurance policy, as is each element of our Triad. In a crisis, the bad guys know they cannot eliminate our ability to strike back , if necessary, with nuclear weapons. This maintains the strategic balance where no side is tempted to go first with nuclear weapons. That is what deterrence has to entail.
If the advocates of Global Zero really believed that relying primarily on our submarines made sense, they would not have admitted, as they did, that beyond 2040 an ASW or anti-submarine warfare breakthrough could occur that would put our entire underwater deterrent in fatal jeopardy.
Given the proposal to eliminate the Triad now, what would be the insurance policy upon which the US would rely to keep our needed deterrent if an ASW breakthrough occurred before 2040? The proponents of eliminating our Triad are either betting that our adversaries will not achieve any ASW breakthrough before then, or they are assuming that a lot of nuclear-armed lions will be getting along well with a lot of de-nuclearized lambs.
To claim the US deterrent is safe — except for a technological breakthrough — is less than prudent. Obviously a technological breakthrough, of which the US might not be aware, would alter the strategic balance, dramatically shifting the “correlation of forces” toward a nation which believed that eliminating the US nuclear arsenal would be to its advantage militarily and politically.
The proposal to eliminate the Triad brings with it — as with other proposals by the people of Global Zero — not peace, but a heightened geostrategic instability. Such a posture as Global Zero advocates would only encourage nuclear powers to seek to eliminate the US nuclear capability, while brandishing their own nuclear weapons to secure their own objectives. The use of nuclear weapons and planned aggression by an adversary may indeed become even more likely, and increase the likelihood that nuclear weapons might be used by someone other than the US in a crisis.
Global Zero would actually create the incentive for nations to bring nuclear weapons secretly back into their inventory; such weapons would once again become the “coin of the realm,” sought by rogue state bullies as the ultimate weapon with which to secure their often totalitarian goals.
Tyrants and nations would rush to impose their will, and with it the loss of our liberty previously guaranteed by a nuclear deterrent, now removed.
Hat tip Mantenga for the forward. Thank You, Mantenga.
In addition to the M1 tank fleets, F16 Fighter Squadrons, High Powered Weapons, military training and BILLION$ the obama regime is redistributing to their islamic terrorist pals, we have even MORE money being shuffled out while our own people are suffering. Our Veterans have lost benefits, our air traffic control towers shut down, our schools shut down and thousands of dangerous illegal alien criminals being released from prisons, along with a plethora of budgetary cuts in other critical areas.
obama’s Dept of Foreign affairs have announced that they have awarded the Palestinian terrorists another $500 MILLION
$200MILLION from this years budget will be handed over as direct aid to the Palestinian terrorists.
The money has been released to coincide with Obama’s visit to the Middle East.
As if that wasn’t enough he also gave $200 MILLION to Jordan.
(Keep an eye on Jordan. The obama regime will topple them next in order to continue installing their islamic caliphate they so desperately need. )
Of course, obama’s propaganda whores wouldn’t think of disclosing this TREASON to the American people. We have to get the news from other Nations. Thank God there are bloggers out here to share this information.
Clearly, America’s laws against TREASON have been eliminated.
The entire world is either laughing at us or crying for us.
I am so ashamed to be an American today. This Nation is full of idiots, created by the so-called “educators” we’ve allowed to raise our youth into nothing more than glassy eyed sheeple, advocating for their own serfdom and for the death of this once great Nation. And the common core scheme will lock this down to perpetuity, with nary a whimper from “caring parents”.
The “educators” continue to churn these idiots out by the millions into our society. One does not need a tempest prognosticator to see where we’re headed.
If you haven’t already, say your goodbye’s to America as you know it. We will soon see the bloodiest, most violent war this world has ever seen. God help us all. We’re finished.
And we deserve nothing more.
Shame on us.
Will President order drone strike on White House?
Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
March 21, 2013
President Barack Obama is now the global head of Al-Qaeda – bankrolling, arming and equipping terrorists around the world in order to achieve his administration’s geopolitical objectives – while simultaneously invoking the threat of terrorists domestically to destroy the bill of rights.
Since it has now been established that those merely suspected of engaging in terrorism are subject to targeted drone strikes, under the terms of his own prosecution of the war on terror, Obama must immediately order a drone strike on the White House.
The administration has sent nearly half a billion dollars ($365 million plus another $60 million) and is now using US Special Forces to train militants in Syria who have pledged allegiance to Al-Qaeda and who continue to carry out grisly beheadings, terrorist bombings targeting innocent civilians and chemical weapons attacks against women and children.
These same militants, backed not only by the US but by every major NATO power, have repeatedly voiced their hatred for and intention to destroy America, as they ransack Christian churches, burn US flags, chant anti-American slogans and sing the praises of Osama Bin Laden while glorifying the 9/11 attacks.
As the New York Times reported, these very same terrorists killed U.S. troops in Iraq and yet western backing for the insurgency against Bashar Al-Assad has enabled violent extremists to seize power in Syria.
As multiple reports now confirm, Jabhat al-Nusra, the main Al-Qaeda group in Syria, is now commanding rebels and is engaged in “the heaviest frontline fighting” in Syria. As the London Guardian reported, rebels in Syria are admittedly being led by Al-Qaeda terrorists, who meet with them “every day” and train them how to make bombs. The top 29 Syrian opposition groups have all sworn allegiance to Jabhat al-Nusra. Sheik Moaz al Khatib, head of the Syrian National Coalition of Revolutionary and Opposition Forces, has also publicly affirmed his support for the terrorist group.
In addition, while Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority,” and “reverent of individual liberty” have been characterized as terrorists by their own government, US citizens who openly take up arms to join with terrorists in Libya and Syria are allowed to fly around the world with total impunity.
In supporting Al-Qaeda terrorists in Syria as part of the effort to impose regime change, the Obama administration is following the same disastrous policy it pursued in Libya, backing the Al-Qaeda-affiliated Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, which also killed U.S. troops in Iraq, to overthrow Gaddafi.
That led to a country ruled by thugs who have rounded up, tortured and executed thousands of black Libyans. It also led to the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi, which was carried out by some of the very same LIFG terrorists the United States had backed just a year previously.
After the overthrow of Gaddafi, NATO powers aided in airlifting LIFG militants into Syria to continue the fight to impose Sharia law across the region.
Given all this, it’s abundantly clear that the Obama administration has easily outstripped other targets of drone strikes in its zeal to support terrorism around the world.
American citizen Anwar Al-Awlaki was killed by a drone strike simply for producing propaganda videos and communicating with accused terrorists. His 16-year-old son was similarly slaughtered for merely sharing his father’s surname. Other American citizens like John Walker Lindh were imprisoned and tortured in Guantanamo Bay for fighting with the Taliban.
And yet, as Afghan President Hamid Karzai made clear last week, the Obama administration is now colluding with the Taliban while the group carries out suicide bombings in the “service of America.”
By backing terrorists in Afghanistan, Libya and now Syria, Barack Obama has carved out a role as the global head of Al-Qaeda. Wherever on the map his administration wants to dominate geopolitically, Al-Qaeda terrorists flood in to to the dirty work – and it’s all paid for with your tax dollars.
By ordering a drone strike on the White House, Obama would be targeting the primary source now responsible for most of the world’s global terrorism – his own administration.
March 20, 2013 By Ryan Mauro
White House Partners with Muslim Brotherhood Front
The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), a group with Muslim Brotherhood origins and an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror-financing trial, recently toured the White House and met with multiple officials. According to the group, Paul Monteiro, Associate Director of the Office of Public Engagement, “cited ISNA as his primary means of outreach to the American Muslim community.”
The Obama administration’s close relationship with ISNA is about more than photo ops and press releases. It is about policy formulation. The input of ISNA is so treasured that the officials coached the organization on how to engage the White House.
Gunmen Kills 7 in Cancun Bar as Thousands Enjoy Spring Break; Throats Being Cut At “Secure” Border; Sheriff Babeu Weighs in on I.C.E. Releasing Detainees
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FORMER BORDER PATROL OFFICERS
Visit our website: http://www.nafbpo.org
The National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers (NAFBPO) extracts and condenses the material that follows from Mexican, Central and South American and U.S. on-line media sources on a daily basis. You are free to disseminate this information, but we request that you do so in its entirety, as written, and credit NAFBPO (nafbpo.org) as being the provider.
Please click here to read NAFBPO’s
The M3 Report seeks to provide information which its readers find useful and interesting. With that in mind, please consider leaving Comments at the end of each post. Readers can also e-mail us at:
A. Ferguson, Editor
Gunmen Kills 7 in Cancun Bar as Thousands of Students Enjoy Spring Break
Spring Break in Mexico: How Dangerous Is It?
Police probe Cancun taxi drivers’ link to drugs
Texans put aside fears of violence, flock back to Mexico for spring break
Is Drug War Violence Scaring Away Mexico’s Spring Break Tourists?
Throats Being Cut At “Secure” Border
Sheriff Babeu Weighs in on I.C.E. Releasing Detainees
“…a couple of the illegal immigrants released were charged with murder, while others are sex offenders.”
Border Patrol to Shift Focus from Arizona to Texas to Stop Mexican Gangs
‘They are facing a danger’: Sheriff says Arizonans not safe after detainee release
The Perfect Amnesty Storm
Confluence of actions by Obama administration may prompt flood of illegal immigrants, experts say
“…groups of illegal aliens…as large as three-hundred (300) have been spotted by Border Patrol agents in the Tucson Sector”
U.S.-Mexico Border: Hotspot for Drug-Resistant TB
Case from Mexico reminds MDs should be on lookout for measles in travelers
U.S. Border Patrol Weekly Blotter, Blaine Sector February 28 – March 13, 2013
Immigration Reform Could Cost Social Security Billions
DHS’s Progress and Challenges in Securing U.S. Borders
Fast And Furious Negotiations See Disagreements
The Fundamentals of Immigration Reform
To begin fixing America’s broken system, we must be guided by both our highest values and our economic needs.
Amnesty Summit Organizer – Mexicans Own US Southwest (Aztlan)
Whistle Blowers Say Obama Releasing Violent Illegal Aliens
Release of immigrant detainees has set back immigration-reform effort in House
Feds recapture 4 immigrants released during sequester terror dump
Border patrol agents face pay cuts, furloughs following sequester
Was Mexican border firefight killing 40 real?
First Mexican extradited to US under Mexico’s new leader to face drug smuggling charges
“Beyond Walls and Cages”: Liberating the Immigration Debate
CBP in St. Croix Apprehend 18 Undocumented Migrants
Agents save occupants from house fire
Supreme Court looks at AZ as injured men, explosives found in desert
Oregon death becomes federal drug case for five
El Paso murder case could put ICE on trial
In Arizona, border security in spotlight amid immigration-reform efforts, sequester cuts
Judge approves settlement in lawsuit involving illegal immigrants
Poached Fish – Missouri Emerges as Caviar Smuggling Center
Two Vancouver men charged in Mexico-to-Washington drug ring
U.S. Border Patrol Agents Seize Thousands of Pirated DVD/CDs
CBP Rescues Lost Couple Suffering from Dehydration
There MAY BE VERY graphic photographs that accompany some articles in the body of this report. It is not our intention to sensationalize. We include these photos in order to give to you, the American public, a clearer understanding of the seriousness of the situation in Mexico and Central America.
**Asterisk denotes death involving a police officer or a member of the military serving in that capacity. Some items may be from notirex.com, lapoliciaca.com or historiasdelnarco.com. Some incidents of violence may not be included here due to the large number of death reports.
A representative of the law has assured a U.S.-based newspaper that the clashes in the recent past is a result of a power struggle within the gulf Cartel (CDG), leaving at least 3 dozen dead. The factions are loyal to leader Mario Pelón Ramírez against groups of Miguel El Gringo Villarreal. The violence crossed the Texas border, and Villareal is behind a team of kidnappers operating in southern Texas. The Gulf Cartel is linked to several executions in the Rio Grande Valley.
MEXICO CITY, DISTRITO FEDERAL
A group of criminals torched a business named La Cabana bar with petrol bombs, resulting in a fire which destroyed the 2 story structure. Three persons were wounded.
NEZAHUALCÓYOTL, STATE OF MÉXICO
The bodies of 3 young men executed with bullets to the head, were found Monday morning. None have been identified.
A joint operation of municipal officers and Mexican army seized a narcolaboratory near here. Two men were arrested, one driving a pick up with radio equipment. The location of the lab was the result of an anonymous tip to police.
The Mexican army seized a clandestine narcolaboratory making crystal meth. Chemicals and equipment were seized.
ROSARITO, BAJA CALIFORNIA
A man was leaving his home at about 9:50am Sunday when he was approached by a young person who shot him twice in the head.
HUEJUQUILLA EL ALTO, JALISCO
A family of four was killed here on Sunday. It included a man of 27, woman 26, a 7 year old child, and a 1 year old. After, the gunmen burned the bodies along with 2 homes and 2 trucks. The fire fighting was hindered by a scarcity of water in this town on the border of Zacatecas.
Peña Nieto’s Challenge: Criminal Cartels and Rule of Law in Mexico
A Mexico Border Shootout Reveals Effort to Cover Up Violence
Mexico City launches smartphone app to geolocate nearest cop
Mexico Govt Announces Guadalajara Gang Truce
In Mexico, tweeting about the drug war to fill the void of traditional media
Sacred cows no more
Enrique Peña Nieto’s proposal to reform television and telecoms shows he is serious about shaking up the economy
Four Members of Family Murdered in Western Mexico
(included a ONE YR old baby)
Press violence in Mexico increases
Death toll in Mexico fireworks blast rises to 17
Mexican soldiers kill 3 gunmen, 2 gunwomen
Mob rule in Mexico as crowd lynches alleged child kidnapper who had to be rescued by federal police
Mexico investigates alleged school bullying death
Brutal attack in Mexico ends life of expat from Seattle
Mexican police seize 9 tons of marijuana, weapons
The Urgency of Wirikuta in Mexico
“The definitive cancellation of mining and agro-industrial contracts in the sacred territory of the Wirrárika is urgent due to the serious ecological, social and spiritual effects that are affecting the indigenous and communal [mestizo] farmers of the region.”
Passengers on Mexican domestic flights have tripled since 1989
(Point being, they’re poor no more.)
Monarch butterfly numbers drop ominously in Mexico
Mexico expands pension access to 2.5 million elderly
Fugitive Peninsula couple captured in Mexico
Mexico’s Coming Gas Crisis
Exiled journalist sued once again for her investigations of corruption at Mexico’s oil company
Mexico – Aztec Tiger On The Rise?
The Story of 2 Dead Costa Rica Cops, the Drug Cartels and America’s Insatiable Appetite for Drugs
America’s Drug Appetite Helps Make Honduras One of the Most Dangerous Places on the Globe
U.S. Citizen and Canadian arrested for selling marijuana brownies at farmers’ market
‘Rising Extortion’ Signals Trouble For El Salvador’s Gang Truce
Police Death Squads Contribute to Honduras’ High Homicide Rate
Costa Rican Police Rescues Trafficked Minors
Colombian Navy Seizes over Half a Ton of Cocaine
Money laundering suspects (19) detained by U.S. Federal Authorities
Bolivia Struggles Against Rising Tide of Crime
Colombian Army Destroys Huge FARC Drug Lab, Seizes 4 Tons of Cocaine
Peru landslide kills gold miners
President Fernández is the First to Meet the New Pope
Anthrax outbreak, Laprida, Province of Buenos Aires
This new outbreak is the 4th to have occurred in less than a month in
this district, in this instance in La Florentina, in the Partido of
Laprida, Buenos Aires Province. The epidemiologic characteristics are
similar, of “sudden death of the animals with blood extravasation from
natural openings.” The affected herd consists of 400 cattle with 4
deaths to date. A metatarsal bone was submitted for analysis and
Bacillus anthracis was cultured and identified.
The herd has no history of previous vaccination or of outbreaks of
anthrax. The animals are on natural grazing with access to water from
Las Sierras de la Ventana. Link below in Spanish.
More must be done to arrest Caribbean drug trade says US
Caribbean’s first gold refinery expected to earn billions
St Lucia police arrest Dominica nationals in major drug bust
Young woman’s death sparks fears of a killer TB strain on our doorstep
(In a recent M3 Report, I included an item on a Nepalese man caught coming into the US
that had this strain of TB.)
-end of report-
The Michael Cutler Hour
Friday 7 pm Eastern
Archived shows here:
USA Talk Radio
The call-in number for a live show is 310-982-4145
We are seeking to increase our subscriptions in an effort to educate more people to the realities of the border insecurity and how illegal aliens negatively affect our nation. Please encourage others to subscribe.
“We have room for but one flag, the American flag…and we have room for but
one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”
~Theodore Roosevelt 1919
TWG: Take a good, hard look at what muslim jihad and hijra is doing to Britain…… and to America. Try not to cry.
In his latest guest-essay, the English author Paul Weston takes a clear-eyed look at the grim reality of Modern Multicultural Britain. Although his analysis is far from optimistic, he does remind us that everything in the UK is on the verge of counter-revolutionary change. There is no choice — the change has to come.
The Multi-Layered Betrayal of Britain
by Paul Weston
Poor old Britain is in a terrible state. Whilst the recent obscenity of a Labour government is mostly to blame for this, they were not alone in the cultural and racial war which has been waged against the British people over the last half-century. Such has been the all-encompassing assault on who we once were that it is now hard to find any social group which has not been betrayed.
The Wartime Generation: They sacrificed so much, indeed died in their hundreds of thousands in order that our generation could live in freedom. Today they are sidelined and ignored by the Socialist ruling classes, who consider the culture and politics of these aged warriors to be wildly out of tune with modern liberal group-think.
A book was published last year called The Unknown Warriors which collated the stories and concerns of this greatest, yet disregarded people. And it is a heartbreaking read. Over and over again these brave and stoic people mentioned one word — betrayal.
Their principal concerns were the submission of vast swathes of British cities to various foreign entities without due recourse to the democratic process, coupled with the bitter irony of handing over their bloodily defended democracy to an unelected, dictatorial foreign power in Brussels.
One particularly harrowing story was that of the extraordinary bravery shown by a Lancaster bomber rear-gunner, who continued to climb into his turret time and time again even as he saw scores of his friends killed in the most horrific ways imaginable. His bravery has been betrayed though, because he is now reduced to a prisoner within his own house, too frightened to go outside because of the violence and abuse he receives from Socialist-educated children as young as nine.
His despairing voice can be heard through another Royal Air Force veteran, who remarked eloquently of his comrades who had made the ultimate sacrifice for their country: “I mourned them then, but now surviving in a world indifferent to their hopes and dreams, I grieve more for the living.”
The Elderly: Mostly too young to fight in the war, they are nonetheless similarly excluded from modern liberal society. Their views on marriage, homosexuality, morality, Christianity, parenthood, etc. make them the enemy of Socialist ideology. In Africa, the elderly are treated with respect as learned human beings. In Britain the elderly are vilified for simply defying the Socialist Revolution, and as such are considered an embarrassing clutch of old dodderers who can be safely labelled as extremist whilst their views are carefully withheld from the young — who incidentally, and quite literally, frighten the life out of the elderly.
They watch in bemusement and horror as the politicians and the mainstream media force a degraded culture upon their country. They shiver in front of single-bar electric fires, wondering whether they can afford to eat and stay warm. They watch their carefully amassed life-savings eroded as the politicians and bankers artificially manipulate interest-rates and inflation-rates to benefit only themselves. They shake their heads at stories of Iraqis and Somalis living in luxuriously equipped million-pound mansions in which to house their teeming broods, all paid for by the state.
The Young: Who would be young in Britain today? Youngsters have been schooled in liberal/progressive ideology from the moment they set foot in kindergarten. Although filled with a wholly misguided sense of self-esteem, they require remedial classes in reading and writing when they go to university (as some 50% now do) and have no conception of what they do not know.
They view their historic culture as one of imperialism, oppression and racism. They have no notion of respect, civility, dignity, Christianity, duty, honour, integrity or patriotism. Propagandised all their lives in the Socialist ideologies of moral and cultural relativism and multiculturalism, they are blissfully unaware that everything they believe in can only lead to the loss of everything they presently take for granted.
When they leave university they take with them debts in the tens of thousands of pounds and compete for jobs that pay salaries that can never enable them to buy the immigration-driven grotesquely-priced houses that were once affordable to their parents. They turn to drink and drugs in the moral and spiritual vacuum built for them by the Socialist Left, and stagger around the streets of British cities and towns in a booze-fuelled orgy of tattooed promiscuity and violence that shocks and horrifies the rest of the civilised world.
They do not understand that their own world is rapidly changing. The last fifty years saw a peaceful and relentless rise in prosperity, but that is now over. Where once there were ten workers to every retiree the ratio will soon be only two-to-one. Their future is therefore bankrupt. There will be no pensions when they are old. They may well have to work until they drop, and already there is talk of raising the retirement age to seventy. They are the lost generation, and these poor, deluded, Socialist-brainwashed children do not even know it.
The Newborn: What sort of country will they inherit? In 2050 a person born today will be only 39 years old, but he will find himself nearing a racial minority status in his own homeland. In 1950 whites made up 25% of the global population. Today they number only 9%, and by 2050 a mere 5%. This might not otherwise have mattered greatly, but Britain makes up only 1% of the habitable land mass and 1% of the world population, and we have opened our doors to the demographically explosive Third World.
The history of man is war, and wars are always fought along tribal and religious lines. The mass importation of Muslim tribes and Muslim religion into Britain can only guarantee future violence. Whether it can be contained in intra-country civil conflict is yet to be known, but it is likely that what will start out as a carbon copy of the recent Yugoslav conflict must only and logically lead to World War III.
The Christians: Although the majority of the British identify themselves as Christian, our Socialist ruling class have no time for such an outdated and oppressive ideology. As Tony Blair so memorably stated: “We don’t do God” — a view shared by the unelected Socialist dictators within the European Union who refuse to recognise the influence of Christianity in the cultural formation of Europe.
Christians are persecuted and vilified in Britain, be they nurses who wish to wear a cross to work, hotel owners who would rather not let homosexuals practice sodomy on their freshly laundered linen, or people who fail to recognise the immersion of a figure of Jesus Christ in a vat of urine is an edgy expression of “conceptually challenging” art. In addition, the blasphemy laws were repealed by the last Labour government because they specifically related to Christianity and were therefore deemed “discriminatory.”
Alexander Solzhenitsyn stated that “To destroy a people, you must first sever their roots.” This is exactly why Christianity is under attack in Britain. Just as Communist countries feared a moral alternative to the godless and immoral religion of Socialism, so our home-grown Socialist rulers follow suit.
Religious Education in schools which previously centred on Christianity is now devoted to Multi-Religious Studies. Conspiracy theorists are not exaggerating in the least when they suggest that mass immigration and Multiculturalism were not deployed for honourable reasons, but to specifically erode Christian Britain.
A good example of this is the BBC’s attitude towards Islam, which it suggests should be treated more sensitively than Christianity. And whilst Islam is promoted as a female-friendly religion of tolerance and compassion, Christianity is obscenely portrayed as an ideology of racism, imperialism and murder. This is so perverse and abnormal one can only assume that our Socialist rulers have declared all-out war against Christianity — as indeed they have.
The Middle Class: When Vaclav Havel assumed the Presidency of Czechoslovakia in 1989, he stated that one of the most important jobs to be undertaken was the rebuilding of the middle class, which had been decimated by the Communists.
The values and morals of the middle classes are the backbone of a democratic Nation State. This is why the Communists set out to eradicate them, and this is exactly why British Socialists have done the same. The “bourgeoisie” have been subjected to vilification for the last fifty years, with the attack against them led — rather ironically — by the middle-class intelligentsia within the BBC and the Educational Authorities,
The middle class is a bulwark against state oppression, and so had to be cleansed. Elitism, independence, Christianity and morality are the enemies of the Socialists. One of the more obvious manifestations of Socialism’s enormous success in this field concerns accents. It is very rare today to find a well spoken Englishman under the age of fifty. Class warfare has won, and the traditional middle classes are out of the loop. If one wishes to work in state media or education, one must adopt an Estuary English accent à la Jamie Oliver. We are all working class now.
The Working Class: The Labour Party was originally formed to protect the interests of the working class, so it is more than a little bizarre that the worst damage wreaked upon the very people who make up their core vote was perpetrated by the Socialists within the Labour Party itself.
Throughout the 1960s and 1970s the Trades Union Movement set out to systematically dismantle the manufacturing and industrial base of Britain. The Union leaders who called for more-or-less permanent industrial action were to a man Communists, all taking their orders from their comrades in Moscow. Although Margaret Thatcher and the Conservative Party foolishly completed what the Socialists had started, it is unarguable that the extinction of Britain’s shipbuilding and automotive industries was instigated by the Socialist traitors within the Labour Party.
But this pales into insignificance when compared to the damage inflicted upon the working class by the last Labour government. Their policy of mass immigration and multiculturalism has primarily affected the working class, who find themselves in direct competition with imported third-worlders for territory, education, housing and jobs.
The champagne-socialists who deliberately set out to transform traditional Britain have the financial means necessary to live as far away as possible from the multicultural hell-holes they have deliberately created, the means to educate their children in schools where English remains the first language, and the means to ensure that neither they nor their children ever fall victim to the endemic crime and violence so prevalent in Socialism’s disgracefully manufactured “diverse” communities.
The white working class are not so fortunate. What the Socialists have done to them amounts to the biggest betrayal in the history of this country.
The Immigrants: It is with great sadness that I compare the young blacks in Britain today with their grandparents. The rap-addicted, dope-smoking, unemployable and violent young blacks we see around us bear little resemblance to the well dressed men and women aboard the MV Empire Windrush, which docked at Tilbury in 1948.
They too have been betrayed. Encouraged to retain their culture rather than assimilate, they have been similarly let down by terrible inner-city schooling that refuses to equip them with the skills necessary to live decent and rewarding lives in a capitalist liberal democracy, because to educate them sufficiently is apparently racist.
This is deliberate, of course. Educated, assimilated immigrants are of little use to the Socialists, as so succinctly explained by education “expert” Professor Chris Mullard CBE, who had the following to say with regard to the non-education of black children:
“Already we have started to rebel, to kick out against our jailers…As more black Britons leave school disgruntled, as more black Britons discard their yoke of humility, the ultimate confrontation will become clearer…Blacks will fight with pressure, leaflets, campaigns, demonstrations, fists and scorching resentment which, when peaceful means fail, will explode into street fighting, urban guerrilla warfare, looting, burning and rioting.”
A great evil has been perpetrated upon coloured immigrants by the Socialists, who view them as mere pawns to be used in their fight against the capitalist and Christian West. Professor Mullard is a Communist who infiltrated the British Educational Authorities, and was subsequently, and unsurprisingly, knighted by the treacherous Labour government.
I have used defined groups of peoples and classes to show how we have been betrayed, but we can add some further minority groups who are absolutely essential in allowing the continuation of a liberal democracy and who were therefore earmarked for Socialist re-education or destruction — the traditional family, fathers, non-feminist housewives and mothers, and the apolitical police, judiciary and civil service.
There are a very small number of people who have not been betrayed. The baby-boomer liberal intelligentsia have done very well out of the slow-motion Socialist revolution that has destroyed Britain, as have the super-rich, the politicians and the bankers, who now look to retain their gargantuan bonuses whilst simultaneously redirecting their debts onto the shoulders of the taxpayer.
But at the top of the pile sits Islam. Imported and appeased by politicians of all parties, Islam is the real winner here and is promoted as the religion of peace when it is clearly no such thing. Polygamy laws are ignored in order that Muslims may demographically destroy us, laws are introduced to curtail any criticism on pain of exhibiting “Islamophobia”, and money is directed toward them in order that they need not work to house their multiple wives and children even as they plan to overthrow us.
The rest of us, however — the war veterans, the elderly, the young, the new-born, the indigenous population, the non-Islamic immigrants, the middle-class, the working-class and the Christians — have been betrayed in our entirety.
At the risk of repeating myself, this is totally unacceptable and totally unsustainable. Liberalism’s useful idiots need to be made aware of the error of their ideology, whilst the hard-core Socialist Left must be made to understand that one day, hopefully in the not too distant future, they will be tried before People’s Courts immediately after the reintroduction of the death penalty for treason.
If Britain is to survive the coming decades as a peaceful democracy, then we need to have a counter-revolution of the mind and a counter-revolutionary political party to effect radical change. No viable party currently exists in Britain, but to end this depressing article on a note of optimism, this matter is actively being addressed by a group of people, amongst whom I am proud to include myself.
Just another of MANY muslim terror training compounds… here in the good old U.S. of A.
TWG: The obama regime is redistributing BILLIONS of American taxpayer dollars, M1A1 tanks, squadrons of F16′s, small arms, rockets and training PROVIDED BY OUR OWN MILITARY TROOPS, to these TERRORISTS.
Apparently, 50% of America is in a coma. This is what USED to be called “Aiding and abetting the enemies of America” Aka — TREASON.
More From Those “Peaceful, Loving” muslims: 1 in 4 Swedish Women Will Be Raped as Sexual Assaults Increase 500%
Sweden has imported huge numbers of Muslim immigrants with catastrophic effect.
Sweden’s population grew from 9 million to 9.5 million in the years 2004-2012, mainly due to immigration from “countries like Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia”. 16 percent of all newborns have mothers born in non-Western countries. Employment rate among immigrants: 54 percent.
Sweden now has the second highest number of rapes in the world, after South Africa, which at 53.2 per 100,000 is six times higher than the United States. Statistics now suggest that 1 out of every 4 Swedish women will be raped.
In 2003, Sweden’s rape statistics were higher than average at 9.24, but in 2005 they shot up to 36.8 and by 2008 were up to 53.2. Now they are almost certainly even higher as Muslim immigrants continue forming a larger percentage of the population.
With Muslims represented in as many as 77 percent of the rape cases and a major increase in rape cases paralleling a major increase in Muslim immigration, the wages of Muslim immigration are proving to be a sexual assault epidemic by a misogynistic ideology.
The statistics are skewed by urban centers where the Islamic colonists cluster. In Stockholm this summer there was an average of 5 rapes a day. Stockholm has gone from a Swedish city to a city that is one-third immigrant and is between a fifth and a quarter Muslim.
Sweden, like the rest of the West, will have to come to terms with the fact that it can either have female equality or Muslim immigration. It cannot have both.
What are muslims taught to believe about rape?
Muhammad Would Never Approve of Rape
It is against Islam to rape Muslim women, but Muhammad actually encouraged the rape of others captured in battle. This hadith provides the context for the Qur’anic verse (4:24):
The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur’anic verse: (Sura 4:24) “And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess.” (Abu Dawud 2150, also Muslim 3433)
Actually, as the hadith indicates, it wasn’t Muhammad, but “Allah the Exalted” who told the men to rape the women in front of their husbands – which is all the more reason not to think of Islam as being the same as other religion.
Note also that the husbands of these unfortunate victims were obviously alive after battle. This is important because it flatly contradicts those apologists who like to argue that the women Muhammad enslaved were widowed and thus unable to fend for themselves. (Even if the apologists were right, what sort of a moral code is it that forces a widow to choose between being raped and starving?)
There are several other episodes in which Muhammad is offered the clear opportunity to disavow raping women – yet he instead offers advice on how to proceed. In one case, his men were reluctant to devalue their new slaves for later resale by getting them pregnant. Muhammad was asked about coitus interruptus in particular:
“O Allah’s Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?” The Prophet said, “Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence.” (Bukhari 34:432)
As indicated, the prophet of Islam did not mind his men raping the women, provided they ejaculated within the bodies of their victims.
As one might imagine, Muhammad’s obvious approval of raping women captured in battle and his own personal participation as recorded in many places is of intense inconvenience to the Muslim apologists of our time. For this reason, some of them attempt to explain away these many episodes and Qur’anic references to sex with captives by pretending that these are cases in which women have fled bad marriages and sought refuge with the Muslims. Some apologists even refer to them as “wives,” even though the Qur’an makes a clear distinction between “those whom thy right hand possesses” and true wives (see Sura 33:50).
Beyond the desperation of the 21st century apologist however, there is absolutely nothing in the historical text that supports this rosy revision of Muslim history. The women of the Banu Mustaliq were sold into slavery following their rape:
“We went out with Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing ‘azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter“ (Sahih Muslim 3371)
In fact, female slaves were traded like any other simple commodity by Muhammad and his bad of devoted followers:
“Then the apostle sent Sa-d b. Zayd al-Ansari, brother of Abdu’l-Ashal with some of the captive women of Banu Qurayza to Najd and he sold them for horses and weapons.” (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham/Hisham 693)
Is it Islamic to sell one’s wife for horses? Clearly these were not wives!
More importantly, by definition a “captured” woman is not one who is fleeing her husband. She is fleeing her captor (ie. the Muslim slave raider). This hadith describes a typical raid, in which the women and children are captured as they are attempting to flee the attacking Muslims:
“…and then we attacked from all sides and reached their watering-place where a battle was fought. Some of the enemies were killed and some were taken prisoners. I saw a group of persons that consisted of women and children [escaping in the distance]. I was afraid lest they should reach the mountain before me, so I shot an arrow between them and the mountain. When they saw the arrow, they stopped. So I brought them, driving them along” (Sahin Muslim 4345)
The Muslim narrator (who happens to be Muhammad’s adopted son) sees the women trying to escape (following the massacre of their men) and cuts off their route by shooting an arrow into their path. These aren’t women trying to seek refuge with the Muslims. They are trying to avoid capture by the Muslims.
The same hadith goes on to recount that Muhammad personally demanded one of the captured women for his own use:
I drove them along until I brought them to Abu Bakr who bestowed that girl upon me as a prize. So we arrived in Medina. I had not yet disrobed her when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) met me in the street and said: “Give me that girl.” (Sahih Muslim 4345)
The prophet of Islam and his companions used war to collect women for personal sexual use and for trading. Unless she was arbitrarily declared as someone’s wife, the woman became a sex slave. In no case was her fate tied to anything that she had personally done, nor was she given a choice about her future.
TWG: You can also review a list of obama’s RELENTLESS efforts to keep our Military members from voting. He’s done nothing but give them both of his middle fingers since he usurped the White House. Why would ANY Military member & Veteran support that beast after what he’s done to them?
In addition to the article posted below, you can view the lengthy list of Military Voter Suppression and Voting Fraud efforts committed by obama and his thugs here: http://twg2a.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/obamas-relentless-attacks-on-our-military-lets-review-military-voting-rights/
As the obama regime redistributes BILLION$ in American Taxpayer funds to their muslim brotherhood and other islamic terrorist groups, they’re sticking it to our Military and Veterans. And let’s not forget the squadrons of F16 fighter jets, the hundreds of M1 Tanks and other weapons and training to their islamic terrorist pals WHO ARE KILLING OUR TROOPS. This regime has demonstrated, IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS, with whom and with WHAT their allegiance lies. Here’s a hint…. it’s NOT with our Military Members, our Veterans, our Children, our Families and the future for America and Her Citizens.
Obama ‘declares war’ on U.S. military
Take a look at alarming slough of presidential actions
America’s men and women in uniform – many of whom have risked their lives in service to their country – are now being stripped of once-guaranteed college benefits as the Obama administration seeks to ensure citizens feel the pain of its loss in the sequester battle.
It’s just the latest move in a series of Obama administration actions that have chipped away at the U.S. military’s size, strength and benefits structure – and drastically changed the face of the most powerful fighting force in the world.
The U.S. Army, Air Force and Marine Corps have now halted their tuition assistance programs after across-the-board federal spending cuts went into effect March 1. The suspension applies to all components, including Reserve and National Guard personnel on active-duty orders. The U.S. Navy is also expected to deliver a similar announcement soon. The cuts do not affect G.I. Bill benefits.