When I stuffed my backpack to board "The Audacity of Hope", the US boat to Gaza, I received a call from a puzzled friend, who advised me: "You know they kill Americans, don't you?" When I served as Intelligence Operations Officer of the American 4th US Armored Division in Goeppingen I intercepted an emergency call from the USS Liberty, which was being strafed by our Israeli "Allies", until most of their crew had been killed. General Sherrer, the commander of our division had only one comment: "With 'friends' like these, we have no need of enemies"! But I digress - Ray McGovern, who boarded The Audacity of Hope, was cautioned by friends, not to board that ship. He was also cautioned by a source with access to very senior staffers at the National Security Council that NOT ONLY does the White House plan to do absolutely nothing to protect the Americans on board from Israeli attack or illegal boarding, but that White House officials "would be happy if something happened to us". They are, I am reliably told,"perfectly willing to have the cold corpses of activists shown on American TV." Bedrock American virtues like honesty and honor seem in very short supply these days, having been sacrificed on the altar of fear and overweening concern for "security". Most Americans are used to watching their tax dollars enable the worst kinds of brutality abroad!
In Official Washington, there is one fact about the Afghan War that nearly everyone "knows": In February 1989, after the Soviet Army left Afghanistan, the United States walked away from the war-torn country, creating a vacuum that led to the rise of the Taliban and its readiness to host al-Qaeda's anti-American terrorists. It is a point made by senior administration officials, including incoming Ambassador Ryan Crocker, and departing Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who once summed up the conventional wisdom by saying: "We will not repeat the mistakes of 1989, when we abandoned the country only to see it descend into civil war and into Taliban hands." Robert Gates was there at the time, as President George H.W. Bush's deputy national security adviser, so he should know. If there is any remaining doubt about this key historical "lesson" regarding Afghanistan, you simply need to watch the Tom Hanks's movie, "Charlie Wilson's War," in which you see Hanks as Rep. Wilson pleading for additional aid for Afghanistan and being rebuffed by feckless members of a congressional committee. The only problem with this "history" is that it isn't true: There was NO immediate cutoff of funds for the Afghan mujahedeen in 1989. Indeed, hundreds of millions of dollars in covert CIA funding continued to flow to the rebels for several years, as the US "government" sought a clear-cut victory over communist leader Najibullah, who was holed up in Kabul. If you don't believe me, read George Criles's 2003 book, Charlie Wilson's War, upon which the Hanks movie was based. In it, Crile describes how Wilson kept the funding spigot open for the Afghan rebels after the Soviet departure, despite a growing US awareness that the mujahedeen were brutal, reactionary and corrupt, a reality that Washington chose to ignore when theses Islamic warlords were being hailed as anti-Soviet "freedom fighters" in the 1980's.
The House refused to vote President Obama the authority for US military operations against Libya on Friday, but stopped short of cutting off funds for the mission, a mixed message reminiscent of congressional unease on Vietnam and more wars. In a repudiation of the "commander in chief", the House voted overwhelmingly against a resolution that would have favored letting the mission continue for one year, while barring US ground forces, a resolution the president said would be welcome. The vote was 295-123, with 70 Democrats abandoning Obama one day after Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton had made a last-minute plea in a Capitol Hill meeting, but shortly after that vote, the House turned back a Republican-led effort to cut off money for military hostilities in the Libyan war. The vote was 238-180. The funding measure would have barred drone attacks and airstrikes, but allowed the United States to continue actions in support of NATO. While the first vote on White House authority has no immediate effect on American involvement in the NATO-led mission, it was an embarrassment to a sitting president, and certain to have reverberations in Tripoli and NATO capitals. The vote marked the first time since 1999 that either House has voted against a president's authority to carry out a military operation. The last time was to limit President Bill Clinton's authority to use ground forces in Kosovo. Republican leaders pushed for Friday's constitutional showdown between the executive and legislative branches, with rank-and-file House members saying the president broke the law by failing to seek congressional approval for the 3-months-old war!
This is NOT good news: Barack Obama's plan for a "limited" withdrawal of our troops, most of whom will remain in Afghanistan, many of them fighting, for several years to come. In his speech Wednesday night, the president announced he will "reduce" the US fighting force in Afghanistan by 10,000 at the end of this year, and a total of 33,000 by September 2012. After that, "our troops will be coming home at a steady pace, as Afghan security forces move into the lead. Our mission will then transition from combat to support. By 2014, this process will "allegedly" be complete. At no time did he mention that 68,000 service personnel will remain in Afghanistan after September 2012. In addition, according to the Congressional Research Office, 18,919 "private security contractors" working for the Defense Department will also be serving in Afghanistan, performing duties seemingly indistinguishable from those done by American military personnel. In other words, after the "pullout" more than 86,000 personnel will be will remain engaged in fighting, or the vague support duties cited by the president. They will add to the human and economic toll of a war that has killed 1,632 American troops, and has wounded 11,191. The financial cost is now more than $426 billion. With the Iraq war added, the figure is now $1.2 trillion. Though he began the war from a position of weakness, it has been pretty much ignored by cable news and much of the rest of the "mainstream media" the American people have a somewhat different view: Around the country, local papers and television stations, as well as NPR have told the story of its human costs in interviews with survivors of dead servicemen and servicewomen, and with stories about the wounded survivors. When I served as Advisory Team Leader in Trung Lap, Vietnam, and had to stand up to a little tiny US general, I pointed out a huge pile of lifeless American soldiers, just recently brought in after one company's mission. The "little general" assured me that he would make certain that they would soon be picked up by our graves-registration people, and not to worry about their fate!
While the so-called Western elite gathered in picturesque St. Moritz to analyze our pressing world crises, the "outsiders" met in the bleak steppes of Central Asia. Last week's (SCO) - 10th Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in the Kazakh capital Astana highlighted how the REAL rivals to empire, led by Russia and China, who are also "rivals", are trying to fashion an alternative to US hegemony. The SCO is the only major international organization that has neither the US nor any close US ally among its members, and its influence is growing across Eurasia. Leaders of member states Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan were joined by leaders from observers: Iran, Pakistan, India, Afghanistan and Mongolia. Belarus and Sri Lanka have been admitted as dialogue partners, and prior to his arrival in Astana to attend the summit, Chinese President Hu Jintao visited the Ukraine. With a Chinese rhetorical flourish, the "Astana Declaration" stressed the goal of combating the "three forces" of "terrorism, extremism, and separatism". The summit called for a neutral Afghanistan, without US bases, supported by Afghan President Hamid Karzai, even as the US is actively discussing a post-2014 strategic partnership agreement with him. The prospect of permanent US military bases in Afghanistan lies at the core of current US-Pakistan tensions. To top it off, India has indicated its aversion to a "New Cold War", to allay tensions appearing in the region. Russia and China fear that the US plan to establish permanent bases in Afghanistan lies at the core of current US-Pakistan tensions, and India has indicated its aversion to "new cold war" tensions appearing in the region, while Russia and China fear that US plan is to establish permanent bases in Afghanistan, while India has indicated its aversion to "new cold war" tensions appearing in the region. China is clearly the power behind the SCO, offering the region much more economically than Russia, but the common will of all is to keep the US at bay. The high-flown words about peace, regional security and cooperation were for the press and Obama. Behind closed doors, the attending leaders discussed their growing concerns about how the Arab Spring might impact the region, particularly Central Asia's most populous state and harshest dictatorship - Uzbekistan. Another topic at the SCO meeting was how to move toward a new world currency, one NOT established by world bankers at secret Bilderberg meetings, but openly by the major world resource and population centers. A healthy supranational currency is needed, and a return to some form of gold standard would be one of the options.
House Republicans will again challenge President Obama om Libya, offering two resolutions that seek to limit the scope of the mission for a vote as soon as Thursday, The New York Times' Charlie reports. One proposal would demand that Obama halt American bombing of Libya by both drones and piloted aircraft, while allowing the US to to support the NATO mission in other ways, like search and rescue and reconnaissance. The other resolution would only forbid ground troops in the country, but otherwise authorize the mission. The latter is modeled on a proposal offered by Senators John Kerry and John McCain. Both will be discussed by the House Republican Conference Wednesday. The no-more-bombing resolution appears to be aimed at the Obama administration's controversial argument that the military's activities in Libya do not constitute 'hostilities', and so are not bound by the War Powers Resolution, according to Senator Savage. That law requires presidents to seek approval from Congress for hostilities no less than 60 days after they begin. In the case of Libya, that deadline was May 20. House speaker John Boehner said: "we have no desire to damage the NATO alliance," but he does not buy the White House's argument that that we're not engaged in "hostilities" in Libya. According to top lawyers at the Pentagon and Justice Departments, neither do they!
NATO has said its planes struck "a key Gaddafi regime command and control node" west of Tripoli. A BBC correspondent visiting the site in the western area of Sorman says the building has been pulverized. On Sunday, NATO said one of its missiles struck a residential area in Tripoli. A BBC correspondent taken by the Libyan government to see a compound in the western area of Sorman says the building has been pulverized. On Sunday, NATO said one of the missiles struck a residential area in Tripoli, and admitted that one of its missiles, due to weapons failure, may have led to civilian casualties. BBC Middle East editor Jeremy Bowen was taken to see the remains of the country estate of Khweildy al-Hamidi, a member of the Libyan Revolutionary Command Center, the inner circle of government. Libyan officials told him that eight rockets slammed into the palace at about 0400 or 0500 on Monday morning. There are shell holes and craters in the houses in the compound, our correspondent says, after what was a "very comprehensive attack". NATO has confirmed it carried out operations in the area of Sorman, which lies halfway between Tripoli and Zawiya to the west. Mr. Hamadi has been part of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi's inner circle since the 1969 coup that brought the Libyan leader to power.
According to Lebanese sources, more than 10 Hezbollah members, including high-ranking operatives, were arrested in the past few days for collaborating with Israel. Mohammad Atwi from the Nabatieyeh district in southern Lebanon, who was responsible for organizing security within the party, and coordinating activities with with Iran and Syria, is one of the high ranking Hezbollah officials recently arrested. A cleric is also reported to be among the suspected Israeli spies. (It's over, Israel!) The Lebanese resistance movement says it discovered the spy cell three months ago, after very crucial information about the movement was passed to Israel. The Lebanese resistance movement says the detainees are being interrogated, adding that some have confessed to spying for Mossad, while others deny these charges. Hezbollah says it discovered the spy cell six months ago, after very crucial information about the movement was passed to Israel. Several prominent Lebanese figures, including members of the army, politics and business, have been arrested over the last two years on charges of spying for Israel. Tel Aviv has launched an intelligence war against Hezbollah, following its defeat during the 33-day war against the Lebanese resistance movement in 2oo6!
According to a survey conducted by Bloomberg, nearly 70 percent of Americans are becoming more, and more, and more dissatisfied with Obama, and are not certain about voting for him in the 2012 presidential election!! The June 17-20 poll shows that only 30% of the potential participants are confident about voting for him in 2012, while 36% say that the US is moving in the wrong direction. Among the likely independent voters, 23% expressed their support for the "president", while another 36% say they DEFINITELY would not support his re-election. This is while 60% said that the US was moving in the wrong direction. Among the likely independent voters, 23% expressed their support (there's one born every minute), while another 36% said that they DEFINITELY would not support Obama, come what may! This is while the United States' actually unemployment rate as of May 2011 stood at 9.1%, a figure which is almost twice the rate it was before the onset of Obama's recession in 2007!
Atlanta: An internal investigation by the owner of the rig which exploded in the Gulf of Mexico last year blames oil giant BP for the disaster. The Transocean report released Wednesday says the April 20, 2010 Deepwater Horizon explosion and resulting oil spill was the result of a succession of well design, construction, and temporary abandonment decisions that compromised the integrity of the well and compounded the risk of failure. The Swiss firm says many of the decisions were made by well owner BP in the two weeks before the incident. Transocean said its evidence indicates that BP failed to properly assess, manage and communicate risk. BP's internal report on the disaster blamed a cascade of failures by multiple companies. Government investigations also have spread around the blame.
The Libyan government accused NATO of bombing a residential neighborhood in the capital and killing civilians early Sunday, adding t its charges that the "alliance" is striking nonmilitary targets. At least four people, including two children, were reportedly killed. It was not possible to independently verify the government's account of what happened, and NATO said it was "investigating", though they might have meant: Covering up the incident, to look good for the world's press. Whether they are eventually confirmed or not, the allegations are likely to provide supporters of Moammar Gadhafi's regime a fresh rallying point against the international intervention in Libya's civil war. Shortly after the strikes early Sunday, journalists based in the Libyan capital were rushed by government officials to the destroyed building, which appeared to have been partially under construction. Government spokesman Moussa Ibrahim wasn't able to provide the number of casualties, but said there were no military facilities anywhere near the damaged building. Journalists at the scene were later taken to a hospital, where they were shown at least four people said to have been killed in the strike, including two young children."There was intentional and deliberate targeting of the civilian houses," said deputy foreign minister Khaled Kaim during a visit to the site shortly after reporters arrived. "This is another sign of the brutality of the West." Libya's Health Ministry says 856 civilians have been killed in NATO airstrikes since they began in March, but the figure could not be independently confirmed.
A new NATO terrorist strike has slaughtered an additional 19 civilians, including three children, while the people of Libya flood into the streets in support of Colonel Gaddafi. Among other damage, the NATO terrorists have destroyed the home of nine Libyan civilians, while callously refusing to comment on their murder of Colonel Gaddafi's three grandchildren. In the meantime, NATO was able to target a civilian house in Sorman, a western suburb of Tripoli, and the home of El-Khwedi el-Hamedi, who holds a senior position, dealing with human rights, in the Libyan government. A civilian house is now a "target" by the armed, marauding anti-Gaddafi terrorists, who are now called "civilians". The "highly unpopular" Libyan regime is supported by 90% of all Libyans, but our weak-kneed US media is afraid to comment about the high level of support for the Gaddafi government. Susan Rice is the US Ambassador to the UN, but she was unable to produce any evidence that Gaddafi had been using rape as a weapon. On the contrary, she wants to split Libya apart, so that the oil companies who work there can lower the manufactured product, after taking a healthy profit for their effort.
Adam Hochschild has a unique view of history. Though the story of great wars is normally told through expanding empires, heroes and villains, as well as the battles, he does not ignore the big moments. In his newest book: "To end all wars" he takes readers into the insanity of World War I and the unfathomable and unstoppable march to war, including the narratives of people who fought slavery, colonialism and the insane and apparently unstoppable march to war. In his newest book, "To end all wars", he takes readers on an extraordinary, novelesque journey into the unbelievable insanity of World War I, and the unfathomable idiocy of the upper-crust British military leaders who orchestrated the slaughter of millions of volunteer soldiers, mostly from the working class. He showcases the enormous heroism of those who fought against what they saw as the inevitable disaster of World War I, as well as those caught up in the patriotic war fervor. As always, there were the contradictions, the splits in families between brothers and sisters, father and sons, who took opposite directions in their response to the madness that overtook Europe in the years leading up to and including 1914. My grandfather in Breslau (now Wroclaw, Poland) who fought in Germany's Western Front) was an eyewitness to the folly of war's barbarism, and he tried very hard to keep my father out of the horror of World War II, but failed. When it became my turn to fight in Vietnam, my father told me: Though the German officers were Nazi's, they always demanded to lead the most dangerous missions. If you cannot follow their example, don't return to this household. When I returned from Vietnam, I saluted and told my father: "Mission accomplished - all of my men returned safely to their families. And that is what it means to be an officer."
As we know, the brutal death and destruction which our US and NATO descended on Libya is undeniable evidence that contrary to the peaceful protests by demonstrators in Egypt and other parts of the Arab world, we must ask: Why regime change in Libya? Though oil is undoubtedly a major concern, it does not provide a satisfactory explanation of Obama's attempted rape of that country. Since Gaddafi relented to to the US-UK pressure in 1993, and established "normal" economic and diplomatic relations with Western countries, major US and European oil companies struck lucrative deals with the National Oil Corporation of Libya. Why do imperialist powers also want to overthrow Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, Fidel Castro in Cuba, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, Rafael Correa Delgado of Ecuador, Kim Jong-Il of North Korea, Bashar Al-Assad of Syria, and Evo Morales of Bolivia, or why did they overthrow Mohammad Mossadeq of Iran, Jacobo Arbenz of Guatemala, Kusno Sukarno of Indonesia, Salvador Allende of Chile, Sandanistas in Nicaragua, Jean-Bertrand Aristide in Haiti, and Manuel Zelaya in Honduras? The difference between them and Gaddafi is of course obvious: Gaddafi is guilty of insubordination to the proverbial "godfather" of the world - US imperialism and its allies! Like them, he has committed the cardinal sin of challenging the unbridled reign of global capital, of not following the economic "guidelines" of the captains of global finance, ie: of the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and World Trade Associations, as well as refusing to join US military alliances in the region.
A "conspiracy theory " no longer means an event explained by a conspiracy. Instead, it now means any explanation that is out of step with the government's explanation of what we know has already happened: At this time we know, beyond any reasonable doubt, that Silverstein, the owner of all of the three buildings which had collapsed during that fateful event, wanted to rid all of the buildings which had "miraculously" collapsed, of the lethal asbestos insulation, which could have been an enormous law suit. As truth becomes uncomfortable for our government and its ministry of propaganda, tall tales are invented to obfuscate the real reason for this tragic debacle. Even our government supported Jews were involved, and you were able to see them filming this tragedy from across the wide river, dancing one of their little "victory dances" to prove that all had gone well, and that they were still the masters of America. The purest example of how Americans are shielded from "truth", is the media's response to the large number of "professionals" who find the official explanation of September 11, 2001 "inconsistent" with what they, as "experts" know about physics, chemistry, structural engineering, architecture, fires, structural damage, the piloting of airplanes, the security procedures of the United States, NORAD's capabilities, air traffic control, airport security (including the groping of childrens' genitals for contraband explosives). These so-called "experts", numbering in the thousands, generally know nothing about their "so-called" areas of expertise!
Noam Chomsky: There is no doubt that concentrated private capital, closely linked to the state has substantial resources, but we must not overlook the fact that quite a bit has been achieved through public struggle in the US over the years. In many respects, this remains a free country. Many rights have been won, even in the past, and that provides a legacy from which we can move on. Struggling for freedom and justice has never been easy, but it has achieved progress. At the moment we can't realistically talk about challenging global capital, because the movements that might undertake such a task are too scattered and atomized, and focused on particular issues, but we can try to confront directly what global capital is doing right now, and on the basis of that, move on to further achievements. For the majority of the population, incomes have stagnated, working hours have increased, benefits have declined, and people are angry, hostile, and very upset. Many people distrust all institutions, and it's a period which could move in a very dangerous direction. One may have a long-term goal to confront global capital, but there have to be small steps along the way before you could even think of undertaking that challenge!
There is no doubt about it: The brutal death and destruction wrought on Libya by the relentless US/NATO bombardment, the "professed" claims of "humanitarian concerns" as grounds for intervention, can readily be dismissed as a blatantly specious imperialist ploy in pursuit of "regime change" in that country. There is undeniable evidence that contrary to the spontaneous, unarmed and peaceful protest demonstrations in Egypt, Tunisia and Bahrein, the rebellion in Libya has been nurtured, armed, and orchestrated largely from abroad, in collaboration with expat opposition groups and their local allies at home. Indeed, evidence has shown that plans of "regime change" in Libya has been nurtured, armed, and orchestrated largely from abroad, in collaboration wit expat opposition groups and their loyal allies at home. Indeed, evidence has shown that plans of "regime change" in Libya were drawn long before the insurgency actually started in Benghazi, and that it has all all of the hallmarks of a well-orchestrated civil war. It is very tempting to seek the answer to the question "Why the imperialist powers want to do away with Gaddafi", has to go beyond oil, or the "laughable" humanitarian concerns! Perhaps the question can be answered best in light of the following concerns: Why do these imperialist powers also want to overthrow Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, Fidel Castro of Cuba, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, Refael Correa Delgado of Ecuador, Kim Jong-il of North Korea, Bashar Al-Assad of Syria, and Evo Morales of Bolivia?
NATO has painted itself into a corner in Libya. Its daily acts of terrorism against Libyan civilians, its acts of murder against Libyan children and its flagrant breach of international law make Obama, Cameron and Sarkozy war criminals! Like it or not, there is something called an International Law. The precepts of that law are very simple: The band of murderous countries currently engaging innocent civilians in Libya are signatories to the United Nations Charter, yet they flout that Charter's precepts at every turn: The Libyan Revolution, which is aided financed from abroad is killing Libyan civilians. Unfortunately, NATO has sided with these criminals, including the murderers and thieves among that lot: NATO, by siding with these murderers, has adopted their style and also their side: Having taken sides, NATO has become an accessory to pre-meditated murder. Moreover, NATO has broken its own law. According to UNSC Resolutions 1970 and 1973, NATO has even decided to kill Colonel Gaddafi's grandchildren. If justice is ultimately done, there could easily be a criminal case against Obama, Clinton, Hague, Cameron and Sarkozy.
The arguments made to "legalize" war, torture, warrantless spying, and other crimes by John Yoo and Jay Bybee and their gang are looking rational, well-reasoned, and impeccably researched in comparison with Obama's latest "legalization" of the Libya War. Here's the key section from Wednesday's report to Congress: "Given the important US interests served by US military operations in Libya, and the limited nature, scope and duration of the anticipated actions, the President had constitutional authority, as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive and pursuant to his foreign affairs powers, to direct such limited military operations abroad. The President is of the view that the current US military operations in Libya are consistent with War Powers Resolution and do not under that law require further congressional authorization, because US military operations are distinct from the kind of 'hostilities' contemplated by Resolution's 60 day termination provision. US forces are playing a constrained and supporting role in a multinational coalition, whose operations are both 'legitimated' by, and limited to the terms of a United Nations Security Council Resolution that authorizes the use of force solely to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under attack or threat of attack and to enforce a no-fly zone and an arms embargo. US operations do not involve sustained fighting or active exchanges of fire with hostile forces, nor do they involve the presence of US ground troops, US casualties or a serious threat thereof, or any significant chance of escalation into a conflict characterized by those factors. I don't know about you, but I almost fell asleep half-way through Obama's boring speech. Looks as though we have to look for another president: Anyone, anyone, anyone?
In a breathless story somehow presented as a groundbreaking revelation, The New York Times recently reported that the Pentagon is using all sorts of media channels to market itself to the nation's children. Though the Times presents this as a brand-new development, it is nothing of the sort. The armed forces have spent the last three decades carefully constructing a child-focused Military-Entertainment Complex, which has long had the Pentagon subsidizing everything from video games to movies, most of which glorify militarism to kids. That said, the Times piece did include one important (if buried) piece of genuine news. It concerns a subtle-yet-insidious shift in martial propaganda - one that opens up the military to charges of rank hypocrisy. You may recall that in recent years the Military-Entertainment Complex has been selling kids on the idea that military service is a gloriously "fun" adventure. In one famous ad, the Marines pretended that being a soldier is the equivalent of being a "Lord of the Rings" hero, who slays fiery monsters. In another series of ads, aired as previews in movie theaters, the Air Force portrayed dangerous front-line missions as exciting video games, telling kids: "It's not science fiction - its what we do every day." Deceptive as these spots were, they at least held out the (unstated) possibility that military service can be dangerous, and that joining the Army doesn't give an enlistee death-defying superpowers!
If the so-called "Evil Germans" had done this during the Second World War, the entire world would have been up in arms: As a matter of fact, THEY WERE in arms, when my mother, grandmother, and I fled from our home in Breslau Germany, (now Wroclaw, Poland) en route to Dresden, the locomotive engineer stopped in the middle of a huge forest, and shut down the boiler of his steam locomotive, so that the "evil American Airforce would be unable to find us. (But I digress:) The Libyan government has rightfully accused NATO of bombing a residential neighbor -hood in the capital and killing civilians early Sunday, adding to its charges that the "alliance" is striking nonmilitary targets. In my case, it was the ancient and beautiful city of Dresden, which both the British and Americans burned to the ground, complete with its inhabitants. History definitely repeat itself: After the end of World War II, David Irving wrote "APOCALYPSE (1945, The Destruction of Dresden") At 10.10 PM on the night of February 13 to 14, 1945, the Royal Air Force Master Bomber broadcast the cryptic order: "Controller to Plate-Rack Force: Come in and bomb glow of red TI's as planned. My mother, Grandmother, and I were condemned to watch the insane destruction of Dresden from a nearby hill. When the Allied Lancaster Bombers flew over our farm house, the vibration was so intense that a 12x18 picture bounced intently against our wall, the glass covering the picture broke, and the shards covered most of the floor. Allegedly, Obama is now fighting a "kinder, gentler war", though it was not possible to independently verify the government's account of what really happened, but NATO is allegedly "investigating". At least four people, including two children, were reportedly killed! May GOD, and Allah have mercy on their souls!