Thursday • October 9 • 2025
Vol.XVII • No.XLI
Manchester, N.H.
One thing I have learned over these past 17 years here at GraniteGrok is that there is a descending value placed on professionals being held responsible.
Certainly, we get to hold politicians to account every 2, 4, or 6 years, depending on the office and that office’s length of term.
As an example (sidenote), I am VEHEMENTLY against the growing trend of legislating the changing of NH County offices from 2 to 4 years. Face it, you’re just not that special. I might reconsider IF a bill was passed and signed that allowed we Citizens to recall any such politician at any time for any cause, political or otherwise, at a time of our choosing BEFORE the next election.
Politicians hate to be held accountable for their votes – both Parties. Especially the NH State Senate, where it always seems that for important votes, only a voice vote is called.
Much better in the NH House, but even then, too many “Representatives” refuse to muster up the courage to be on the record by casting a vote. We’ve chronicled those “walks” and “unexcused absences” many, many times.
Journalists are not fans of being held accountable for what they write or say, either. With their puffed-up chests hiding behind that hackneyed phrase “Comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable.” Poseurs, IMHO, as many have become nothing more than mouthpieces for the Left. (Think I’m kidding? Why, then, do their political donations to politicians, PACs, and Parties rarely end up with the corresponding Right-leaning entities?)
Trust me, they have not liked it once, finding out that when they have berated me or one of my writers, their names and organizations show up on Google results pages.
They then say that Journalism no longer has to be “objective.” That both sides of an issue do not have to be shown; that does not make you news-people – that’s an activist.
And now we see it with lawyers. Specifically, government prosecutors that refuse to hew to the Law and do their job. In their case, by way of some Gordian Knot reasoning containing a mishegoss mashup of Social Justice, Anti-Racism, Critical Race Theory, and various and sundry other Progressive malapropisms, all of which serve as excuses as to NOT doing their job – holding those alleged perps accountable for their alleged crimes against property or people.
They have decided not to be accountable to the Law AND complain when others attempt to hold them accountable by way of throwing the Race Card, the Class card, the extremist card, or whatever other XXXX Card they can think of. To make themselves victims instead of Society’s Legal enforcers (in which they were either appointed or RAN to be elected to do such).
Georgia Prosecutors File Challenge to Block Law That Holds Prosecutors Accountable.
You know, just like my “No Means NO!” bill that would have forced appointed (i.e., Town Administrators, School Superintendents, Selectmen, and School Boards from transferring monies into zeroed General Ledger accounts (by both Budget Committee and vote of town residents) because of loopholes in the NH Depart. of Revenue and Administration). FORCE them to have to Follow the Law. Of COURSE, they did (especially the “Soros-funded” prosecutors who were specially selected for their willingness to use “prosecutorial discretion” not as a tool for individual cases with specific situations but as a blanket for ALL crimes of a certain type. Because Society has so oppressed these now “victims,” it is outrageous to hold them responsible for crimes that Society forced them to commit…
…or some other form of Stupidness. It’s the Left’s continued shove push to remove Society’s definition of Personal Responsibility to a “group one.” Which, as we can all reason out, means no one is responsible for anything – and can then make the Stalinist “Show me the man, I’ll find you the crime’ come true far beyond their wildest expectations. Reformatted, emphasis mine:
Back in May, we reported about a new law in Georgia that seeks to hold prosecutors who don’t do their jobs accountable. The General Assembly passed the bill essentially along party lines — the one Democrat who voted in favor of it has since moved over to the GOP — and Gov. Brian Kemp signed it into law at a ceremony in Savannah, Ga.
“I am not going to stand idly by as rogue or incompetent prosecutors refuse to uphold the law,” Kemp said at the time. “Today we are sending a message that we will not forfeit public safety for prosecutors to let criminals off the hook.”
The law, which requires district attorneys to look at every case for probable cause and prevents the blanket dismissal of cases, took effect on July 1. The law also set up a commission that has the power to discipline or remove prosecutors who don’t prosecutes crimes thoroughly and fairly.
It sounds like Society is attempting to defend itself. After all, they found against my “No Means No” that would have allowed regular citizens to hold those officials to be accountable (btw, it was defeated after these same folks decided to fight back. Like these bozos:
Naturally, Democrat district attorneys leaped from their fainting couches in the highest of dudgeon over the new law, calling it “excessive and unnecessary” and even “racist” for suggesting that prosecutors should actually prosecute or face discipline. Now, a group of district attorneys has filed a challenge to the law, asking a judge to block it on the grounds that it undermines their ability to choose which cases to prosecute.
Well, when you act like children by only doing what you want vs. what you are SUPPOSED to do, why are you surprised when adults step in and correct you? When crimes are not equally gone after, the people hurt are the actual victims, not the criminals recast as criminals. And Society as a whole is harmed. But like children, there is always self-justification for their need to be independent from oversight by ANYONE (am fighting that ongoing battle with the Granddaughter right now).
…Spearheading the effort is DeKalb County District Attorney Sherry “I Can’t Prosecute Domestic Terrorists” Boston, who has twice recused her office from prosecuting Antifa thugs who have targeted the future site of a public safety training center for the City of Atlanta. In typical Democrat fashion, Boston framed the case in the most dramatic terms, pointing out to the AP that it’s “bigger than Georgia.”
“We are talking about prosecutorial discretion and prosecutorial independence, both of which have been solidly under assault the last few years,” Boston said.
Have you noticed that when Democrats don’t like something, that means that the opposite of that thing is “under assault”?
Democrats and their [in]actions are always portrayed as victims. Always. I’ll end with this:
…“All Georgians deserve to be safe, and all crime victims deserve justice,” Carr also tweeted. “Like everyone else, DAs who choose to violate their oaths of office are not immune from accountability, and we will vigorously defend this law in court.”
It’s astonishing the lengths that prosecutors — including one Republican — will go to get out of doing their jobs.
Accountability – another centuries-old, time-honored American trait that is under attack everywhere. Glad to see that someone had the stones to defend it.
HT | Instapundit
The post To Be Held Accountable appeared first on Granite Grok.
In international politics, where nations often grapple with the constant specter of terrorism, Israel has chosen a direct and yet controversial path of targeted killings – as a strategy to combat terrorism. In doing so, it has emerged as a resolute defender of its citizens.
This tenacity that has given rise to such a strategic response has drawn both ire and admiration.
A recent example is the drone strike that killed three Palestinian gunmen who had just opened fire at a checkpoint in the northern West Bank. Now let us picture this scene: the north West Bank, a checkpoint shrouded in tension. Three Palestinian gunmen unleash a hail of bullets, their intent clear – to inflict carnage and sow fear among innocent civilians.
When confronted with the relentless menace of terrorism, hesitation is not a luxury afforded to nations that cherish the lives of their citizens. Unlike indiscriminate bombings or protracted military campaigns, targeted killings are surgical, precise, and calculated. It’s akin to a skilled surgeon removing a malignant tumor, leaving the healthy tissue untouched.
But in the realm of geopolitics, Israel often finds itself accused of wielding a blunt instrument when, in fact, its actions reflect the precision of a scalpel.
Often scrutinized and criticized, these actions find their bedrock in principle as old as humanity itself – self-defense. We say to those who would cast aspersions and question the morality of such activities: put yourselves in Israel’s shoes.
In a region where every sunrise brings the uncertainty of survival, hesitation is not a luxury. Imagine, for a moment, that your home is under perpetual threat, your loved one’s lives hanging in the balance each passing day.
Would you not demand resolute action to protect your family, community, and nation? This, therefore, is the very crucible in which Israel exists.
The arguments favoring targeted killings are not merely theoretical justifications but are rooted in the elemental right to self-defense. When terrorists, undeterred by borders or boundaries, hatch their nefarious schemes, Israel takes action. It is a preemptive strike, a calculated response to thwart impending doom. In the moral ledger, the balance is unequivocal. When confronted with the stark choice of allowing terrorist attacks to unfold or taking decisive action to stop them, Israel chooses life over death.
The words of the great philosopher Aristotle resonate here: “Courage is the first of human qualities because it is the quality that guarantees the others.” Targeted killings, born of necessity, embody this courage, this unwavering commitment to safeguarding innocent lives.
Let us not tiptoe around the undeniable truth: targeted killings are a razor-sharp sword in Israel’s unyielding fight against terrorism. Consider for a moment the irrefutable evidence before us. When key figures within terrorist organizations are removed, the result is nothing short of remarkable.
Now, let’s entertain an alternative scenario: a world where targeted killings are shelved in favor of passivity.
Picture Israel sitting idly by, waiting for tragedy to strike before taking action. It is a nightmarish vision where terrorists roam freely, plotting their next assault, knowing that retribution will not come knocking at their door. Thus, targeted killings embody precision and resolve.
Unlike other counter-terrorism strategies, targeted killings do not merely skim the surface; they plunge straight into the heart of terror networks. The consequence of such actions is not just punishment; it is deterrence. It dissuades potential terrorists, forcing them to reconsider their evil intentions.
Targeted killings are the surgical strike, the calculated response that weakens the very infrastructure of terror.
Let’s not beat around the bush or dive into groundless speculation; let’s face the harsh reality that targeted killings have unquestionably saved lives and simultaneously kept the specter of terrorism in check. The proof is right there for everyone to see.
Those convenient critiques seem to materialize with the swiftness of a desert sandstorm. Critics of targeted killings, with their lofty judgments and holier-than-thou proclamations, often conveniently ignore the genuine, very menacing threat that Israel grapples with daily.
Indeed, let us not shy away from the topic of civilian casualties. They exist, and they are undeniably tragic.
But here’s the harsh truth that some are reluctant to acknowledge: when terrorists purposefully use civilians as shields, who bears the true culpability? Is Israel striving to protect its citizens from impending doom, or are those who heartlessly manipulate innocent lives as pawns in their deadly game?
The answer is clear, like a beacon shining through the darkest night.
Yet, a twisted double standard prevails in the echo chambers of international discourse, where self-righteousness often drowns out reason. Israel’s right to defend itself is not just questioned; it is often called into question and scrutinized with an enthusiasm that borders on obsession.
Meanwhile, terrorists, the architects of violence and chaos, are granted sympathy. The real-world dangers that Israel confronts daily, the lurking specter of terrorism that shadows every step its citizens take, often go unnoticed. The weight of responsibility, the relentless burden of safeguarding lives, is borne by Israel alone. Israel’s struggle is not one of choice but of necessity.
Within this crucible of ceaseless turmoil, targeted killings assume the mantle of a reluctant necessity. When the halls of diplomacy echo with empty promises and the specter of terror continues to haunt Israel’s doorstep, what other recourse remains?
What would those who condemn targeted killings propose as an alternative when diplomacy falters, and terror persists? To sit idly by and hope for a change of heart among those who have sworn to destroy?
The effectiveness of targeted killings in the crucible of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not a matter of conjecture but a glaring reality. They have disrupted terrorist networks, rendering them ineffective and decimating their leadership. They have thwarted attacks, preventing bloodshed and anguish.
The alternative – a world where terror reigns unchecked and innocent lives are sacrificed on the altar of diplomacy’s failures – is a vision too bleak to contemplate.
The path we have traversed is one marked by fervent conviction – a conviction that, while controversial, targeted killings have proven to be an indomitable strategy for Israel in the ceaseless struggle against terrorism.
The ethical concerns that cast a shadow over this tactic must be weighed against the imperative of self-defense – a moral imperative as old as time. When lives hang in the balance, the luxury of inaction withers away like a fleeting mirage.
In a world where the alternatives are stark – where passivity often results in tragedy, and diplomacy frequently stumbles in the face of violence – targeted killings offer a lifeline of hope. They are not born of cruelty but of necessity.
In the crucible of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, targeted killings have been both a sword and a shield – a means of defending against impending doom and a testament to unwavering commitment. So, let us not forget the world in which Israel lives – a world marred by threats and peril. Targeted killings are not a symbol of malevolence; they are a symbol of unwavering resolve. In a world riddled with violence, that resolve is, and will always be, Israel’s guiding light.
The post Examining the Efficacy and Controversies Surrounding Israel’s Strategic Approach appeared first on Granite Grok.
One common denominator that explains why previously successful societies implode is their descent into fantasies. A collective denial prevents even discussion of existential threats and their solutions.
Something like that is happening in the United States. Eight million illegal immigrants have entered the United States by the deliberate erasure of the southern border.
Apparently, the Biden administration sees some unstated advantage in destroying U.S. immigration law and welcoming in would-be new constituents.
Yet, the more the millions arrive, the more President Joe Biden and his Homeland Security director Alejandro Mayorkas flat out lie that “the border is secure.”
They both live in a world of make-believe, passed off to the American people as reality.
And the more the Americans are lied to that the border is secure, the more they poll —currently 77 percent — that it is not.
Biden apparently has reversed course and begun using the former pejorative “Bidenomics” as a term of pride.
He now praises this three-year effort to borrow $6-7 trillion, and spike interest rates threefold to 7% on home mortgages — even as prices on essentials like food and fuel have spiked 25-30% since he entered office.
The more that Biden brags about what he did to the economy, the more people poll — over 60% — dissatisfaction with his alternate reality of “Bidenomics.”
Do we remember the humiliation in August 2021 in Afghanistan?
The more retired Gen. Mark Milley, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and Biden assured that the American military presence was stable, the more swiftly it crumbled and descended into the worst mass flight of an American army since Vietnam.
Consider natural gas and oil. The Biden administration waged war on both by canceling pipelines, drilling on federal lands and entire oil fields.
When the price soared and the 2022 midterms neared, Biden suddenly begged formerly shunned illiberal regimes like Saudi Arabia, Iran and Venezuela to pump all the hated oil they could to lower the price.
A desperate Biden drained much of the strategic petroleum reserve — he has yet to refill it — simply to lower the price of gasoline and thus win voters back to the Democratic Party.
When the midterms passed, Biden resumed his attack on once bad, then good, and now bad again fossil fuels — at least until the 2024 election.
Stranger still is the denial of the current crime wave in our major cities. Predators and thugs have turned once iconic downtowns into either war zones or ghost towns or both.
Smash-and-grab swarming of stores and matter-of-fact shoplifting are destroying commerce in our major cities.
Unsustainable stores either leave or shut down. Communities who vote for politicians who defund the police blame the stores for leaving — but not the criminals whose brazen thefts made it impossible to do business in the inner city.
Now modern-day pirates with impunity storm, sink and rob boats of all kinds in the Oakland marina and estuary.
Leftwing journalists and activists, and even Democratic politicians, who all supported defunding the police, now cannot escape the resulting street violence and unleashed murderous predations.
Everyone knows the culprit is the post-George Floyd effort — with Biden administration complicity — to defund the police, end cash bail, institutionalize catch-and-release of criminals and show more sympathy toward victimizers than victims.
Yet neither state nor local officials nor Biden himself even admits to a crime wave. The more the public is attacked and avoids major downtowns, the more it polls furor over the crime wave.
The more our officials, in gaslighting style, claim such alarm is all in our collective heads, the more they themselves are attacked by the very criminals their policies empowered.
Sometimes the fantasies extend to the trivial. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Penn, for months has dressed like an utter slob while on the Senate floor. As a gesture of approval, Democrats junked the dress code so he could wear his sloppy cut-offs and hoodie.
Americans were to assume his slovenly costume was normal apparel — and they were hypercritical for thinking otherwise.
Recently Rep. Jamaal Bowman, D-NY, pulled a Senate fire alarm to disrupt and delay a vote on continuing the funding of the government. But he got caught on a Capitol surveillance video committing the crime.
Bowman whined that he got confused. He preposterously claimed by pulling the alarm he thought he was opening a door to go vote.
All of that was pure fantasy. The alarm was clearly marked. A sign in front of the door warned not to enter. And the door itself was placarded with cautions that any attempt to open it would set off emergency alarms.
No matter. Bowman assumed by calling his critics “Nazis” and using the race card, he could invent a virtual reality.
Despite our epidemic of fantasy, there remains reality.
And we will soon rediscover it all too soon.
Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness. He is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and the author of “The Second World Wars: How the First Global Conflict Was Fought and Won,” from Basic Books. You can reach him by e-mailing authorvdh@gmail.com.
Victor Davis Hanson | Daily Caller News Service
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline, and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.The post Our Establishment’s Alternate Realities appeared first on Granite Grok.
Our future mayor, Mike Soucy, has had a few meet-and-greet events in various parts of the city. I did not attend the Castro’s Backroom one as I don’t smoke, but I was at the first one, well-attended and hosted by Family Pizza in Ward 5.
This is a report on the most recent one yesterday at Chen Yang Li in Ward 2. To give some background, there is a lot of reliable local intel reports that Family Pizza is a routine Friday night watering hole for Attorney Bolton, the city attorney, and my opponent, Alderman Dowd, and their ilk. Please see the many Grok pieces written by his perceived nemesis, Laurie Ortolano, who is being honored this month for doing things that are repugnant to Bolton.
People who are familiar with Laurie Ortolano’s RTK journey and various others are also familiar with MY litigation against the City, which was self-represented and “shepherded,” as Nurse Terese would say, by Laurie. On a sidenote, I encourage anyone without blind faith in their local assessor’s office to visit her amazingly constructed public service self-help site, good-gov.org. But back to the story.
I needed to get some more palm cards from Mike Soucy, and what better venue to accomplish that errand than to attend an event of his in my own zip code? I got there a few minutes early and went inside, also with the intention to meet the owner and say that Lily Tang Williams says hi because they know each other, and I told her I would. Mrs Soucy warmly greeted me while Mike was talking to supporters already seated in a reserved banquet area on the outskirts of the bar. This restaurant has an open-concept architecture, and the football game was on the bar’s big-screen TVs.
Once Mike saw me, he greeted me and quietly mentioned that Attorney Bolton and his ilk, Mr Tabasco, were in the bar. Not wanting to be seen turning my head around like a careless passenger who just heard the driver say the police were following them, I played it cool. There was a potted plant blocking my view as I was told to order my drink from the bar. (Drinks are not a campaign expense, and a mayoral candidate running on a pillar of transparency will point those things out despite it being common sense.)
I contemplated my approach to the not-so-busy bar that had an attentive barkeep. Attorney Bolton and I have only seen each other once in person, and it was in court last May. We did not make eye contact that day, plus his accomplice, Attorney Celia (you’re breaking my heart) Leonard, was standing next to him during the hearing, and I was dressed up for court.
I am otherwise a T-shirt and jeans person. Hoping not to be recognized, I approached the bar from the side, pretending to be interested in the football game, even though I hate football and there was a long series of commercials playing. The bartender prepared my drink, which seemed to take an eternity(perhaps only in my mind the same way a slow modem or a red light would) as Bolton was living rent-free in my head both then and while she went to the register made change from my $20.
When I picked up my change, left a tip, and collected the drink and my pocketbook, I turned 90 degrees to walk back to the banquet area and shifted my gaze in that direction, and I was taken by an unpleasant surprise! Alderman Dowd, my opponent, was seated next to Bolton, either having just entered from outside or returning from the restroom. Knowing darn well that it’s not “all bout me” as it was Mike Soucy’s event, I was able to refrain from taking the situation personally. However, whether or not Bolton recognized me at that point, Dowd was sure to say something. I acted casually and pretended to ignore them.
These two, or three if you count Tabasco, were spying on Mike Soucy, plain and simple. Of course, they will probably point out that Chen Yang Li is a public accommodation and they were paying customers there to watch the football game, but nobody that I know of has ever seen them there before. What a coincidence! Dowd will also point out that this is his constituency, Ward 2, but since when does he give a darn about restaurants that are NOT on Main St? “Where’s Chen Yang Li’s Jersey barrier for outdoor dining?” said nobody.
Mike reformatted the event from a stump speech with following audience questions to more of a wedding reception-styled venue. Attendees enjoyed a complimentary appetizer buffet while he visited each table for some light conversation. Acts 17:26-28 points out that God has already chosen certain times and places if you will.
This impromptu and adaptive situation set up two things for me. One of them was meeting Mr & Mrs Brown of Ward 2. Not only were they fine people to talk to, but they let me place my sign in their yard, and they have an orange cat named Cheddar. I am an unapologetic cat person, and I am building a collage of pictures called “Ward 2 Cats Against Alderman Dowd,” in which Cheddar is among the ones that need to be added.
The other thing was that the Browns and I were talking about the Ward 7 homeless camp that city hall is relocating from next to the Merrimack River to a controversial place somewhere between Bob’s Pizza and the bridge. Anyway, Mike Soucy approached our table, and I told him how timely it was because were were talking about the homeless camp, and I asked if he planned to release a statement. I encourage everyone, Nashua residents or not, to please sign this e-petition related to it.
Mike plans to attend the upcoming Wednesday event to discuss it, followed by a statement.
So, this story is really about spying and how emboldened the ruling class has become. These things don’t happen overnight. They are insidious. And this behavior has been on full display many times. Nashua’s ruling class thinks that we commoners are really stupid; let’s show them that we are not by showing up to vote and voting correctly!
The post Spying and How Emboldened the Ruling Class Has Become appeared first on Granite Grok.
On August 10, 1964, the United States Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin resolution. The resolution gave then-President Lyndon Johnson full authority to engage the North Vietnamese in an all-out war. That war lasted until the United States declared defeat and left Vietnam in April 1975.
The resolution was passed in response to an attack by North Vietnam on two American naval ships, the USS Maddox and the USS Turner Joy. The resolution was passed in direct response to perceived North Vietnamese aggression against American naval vessels.
Only one problem: the reported attack against the two naval ships never happened. In his book, FOG OF WAR, the then-defense Secretary Robert Macnamara admitted that the entire basis for going to war never happened.
Go back to Pearl Harbor. The entire country was shocked by the secret attack of the Japanese against the American Naval fleet stationed at Pearl Harbor. Numerous historians now contend that the Americans knew of the “surprise ” attack but chose to do nothing about it because they knew that only such an attack would motivate the American public to permit entry into the war in Europe and the Pacific.
Go back further to World War I: The Americans wanted no part of a European war. In truth, more Americans favored the Germans than the British but all favored neutrality. Then, the Lusitania was sunk by a German U-boat. America entered the war.
Go forward to 9/11. I, like so many, remember the day and the event as if it were yesterday. I remember falling asleep the nite before on the sofa with the television on the Angels baseball game (I am a California refugee). I woke up to a screaming reporter with a live video showing the first of the Twin Towers on fire. I thought at first it was a movie, but then I realized it was live news. Just as I woke, I saw what most of the country saw-the second plane drove itself right into the second tower.
I, like most, was shocked, shocked in a way that has never happened before or since. I was glued to the news for the next several days and weeks. Reports came in regarding another plane that was trying to fly itself into the Pentagon but which was taken down by the passengers.
In response, the United States invaded Iraq.
Then, we invaded Afghanistan.
Questions began to arise: why are we invading Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9/11? Why did we spend trillions in Afghanistan when no evidence ever surfaced the Taliban had anything to do with 9/11?
Many years ago, a husband and wife team of college professors- Cloward and Picken- came up with a concept that has become the darling of the ruling class in Washington, D.C.
The duo studied “crisis” events and found a pattern: a crisis occurs; people become enraged and fearful and demand Government intervention; the government intervenes, and then a major change in policy occurs to change the “cause ” of the crisis and prevent it from happening again.
Cloward and Picken became rather famous when they published an article setting forth this discovery. They became even more famous darlings of the ruling class. They energetically advocated a simple thought: why should we wait for a crisis to happen?
If we want to cause a change of policy, why don’t we create the crisis that then leads to the change we want?
If a political group wants to change a policy, why not just create the “Crisis” and then allow the people to demand government intervention then the Government can swoop in and institute the policy they wanted anyway, empowered by the fear and anger they created from the crisis they initiated.
To my eye, every time the ruling class wants to institute a policy that only they benefit from, they seem to follow the Cloward and Picken model.
Climate change? No problem. Many times, have you heard the ruling class assert that unless we do as they say regarding carbon, food, cars, water heaters, etc, we will all die? They claim that the earth is dying because of our pollution. No matter what the scientists say to the contrary. The sky is falling, and we are going to die unless we get out of their way as they steal us blind and destroy everything ordinary Americans prize. It’s Cloward and Piven: to institute the policy and controls they want, they invent a crisis; the people out of fear and anger generated by the crisis, demand Government intervention; the Government does intervene and institute the policy they want.
Does this Cloward and Picken model not also apply to IRAQ?
To Afghanistan?
To the Gulf of Tonkin?
To Pearl Harbor?
It’s scary to me indeed, frightening- the thought that the Folks in Washington DC who run our government would follow Cloward and Picken. It’s frightening and scary because it seems to be at least in part supported by the evidence.
What is happening in ‘Israel” is horrible. It is truly a “crisis.”
People are being murdered in the streets for no good reason by crazed lunatics who are driven by hate and malice. But don’t despair because the ruling class never wastes a good “crisis.” The military-industrial complex makes huge fortunes off of the endless wars we engage in, and guess what- this crisis in Israel looks like it is going to save their day: it looks like the war we lost in Afghanistan and the war we are losing in Ukraine is going to get new life in the middle east.
I hope my thoughts are wrong. Maybe I am having them just because I am tired of all the wars and the killing and the atrocities. It’s a hard pill to swallow to think that world leaders create a “crisis”- a crisis that involves killing thousands of people and destroying whole countries- to advance some policy they think is good and necessary for their own power and control.
But think: the news folks want you to believe that the Israeli intelligence corps- Mossad- and the American intelligence corps were unaware of the presence in Gaza of 5000 to 7500 missiles aimed at Israel. They want us to believe that the Israeli army stationed on the border with Gaza- probably the most dangerous and active war zone border in the world- was asleep and had no sentries out to alert the troops to wake up and fight back. And they want us to believe that this attack by Hamas – a Pearl Harbor type of attack- should be a basis for Israel to go to war with Iran.
If Mossad and the Cia had alerted the Israelis of the attack they knew was coming and if the Israelis had been put on high alert, and if the Israeli forces attacked rather than surrendered, no “crisis” would have occurred, and Cloward and Piven’s strategy would have no legs. We would still hate Iran. But we would not be going to war.
My God- I cannot get it out of my head that Mossad and perhaps our own CIA knew all about the Hamas attack well before it occurred but decided to let it happen, even standing down the defense forces to allow the atrocities so that they would have the Cloward and Picken crisis they needed to do what they wanted to do all along-bomb Iran into the stone age.
One Israelite leader summarized all this very well- He proclaimed, ” This is Israel’s 9/11.”
Did he mean by that statement that this is Israel’s “false flag” designed to enrage the world into supporting Israel’s planned strike on Iran to end Iran’s nuclear program?
Israel and the United States have long stated that they would never let Iran get nuclear missiles. Netanyahu told the United Nation’s full assembly not so many years ago that Israel would use all means necessary-including military attack- to end Iran’s nuclear program. Is it possible that they feel that the time is now and made the decision to allow the attack from Hamas so that they would have their Cloward and Picken crisis that would make you and me and the Israeli public demand that Israel bombs Iran? Netanyahu said in a speech little heralded by the press that after he finishes Hamas and Hezbollah, he is going to take the war to Iran.
All I can say is that the world would be a much better place if Cloward and Piven had never been evil and or born.
The post Is This Attack by Hamas/Hezbollah/Iran a False Flag To Drag Us Into Yet Another War? appeared first on Granite Grok.
The traditional American view of people as Individuals REQUIRES swift justice. Instead, the Progressives see not individual criminals but Society as a whole being an entire group – which deserves to be punished.
…It is easy to tar opponents of gun control as “soft on crime.” It is easy to tar opponents of prohibition as “soft on abuse.” But in a strange sense, both gun control and prohibition grow out of softness. A system with the moral courage to harshly, swiftly, and surely punish violence would have little need of gun control. A system with the moral courage to harshly, swiftly, and surely punish abusers for stealing, trespassing, vandalizing, and defiling would have little need of prohibition.
In both cases, we haphazardly punish millions of innocents because we refuse to decisively punish thousands of clear-cut criminals.
-Bryan Caplan (Abusers Give Vice a Bad Name)
The many, in their eyes, are just as guilty as any of its individuals, so the many WILL be punished for the activities of a very few. There is no Justice in that and CERTAINLY no sense of mercy or propitiation, or forgiveness. Only “future guilt.”
CAplan’s remarks run a bit long, but I liked bits and thought you should take note:
HT | Instapundit
The post If American Society Hadn’t Grown Soft, We Wouldn’t Have This Problem appeared first on Granite Grok.
