Phony War On Terror Demands Casualties -- And Gets Them

Robert Fisk's most recent article concerns Taner Akcam [photo],

the distinguished Turkish scholar at the University of Minnesota who, with immense courage, proved the facts of the Armenian genocide - the deliberate mass murder of up to a million and a half Armenians by the Ottoman Turkish authorities in 1915 - from Turkish documents and archives. His book A Shameful Act was published to great critical acclaim in Britain and the United States.

He is now, needless to say, being threatened with legal action in Turkey under the infamous Law 301 - which makes a crime of insulting "Turkishness"

and in addition his freedom to travel has been compromised, apparently because of false allegations made against him on the Internet.

Akcam was travelling to lecture in Montreal and took the Northwest Airlines flight from Minneapolis on 16 February this year. The Canadian immigration officer, Akcam says, was "courteous" - but promptly detained him at Montreal's Trudeau airport. Even odder, the Canadian immigration officer asked him why he needed to be detained. Akcam tells me he gave the man a brief history of the genocide and of the campaign of hatred against him in the US by Turkish groups "controlled by ... Turkish diplomats" who "spread propaganda stating that I am a member of a terrorist organisation".

All this went on for four hours while the immigration officer took notes and made phone calls to his bosses. Akcam was given a one-week visa and the Canadian officer showed him - at Akcam's insistence - a piece of paper which was the obvious reason for his temporary detention.

"I recognised the page at once," Akcam says. "The photo was a still from a 2005 documentary on the Armenian genocide... The still photo and the text beneath it comprised my biography in the English language edition of Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia which anyone in the world can modify at any time. For the last year ... my Wikipedia biography has been persistently vandalised by anonymous 'contributors' intent on labelling me as a terrorist. The same allegations has been repeatedly scrawled, like gangland graffiti, as 'customer reviews' of my books at Amazon."

This wasn't the first time Akcam's freedom of movement has been restricted, and apparently for the same reason:

Prior to his Canadian visit, two Turkish-American websites had been hinting that Akcam's "terrorist activities" should be of interest to American immigration authorities. And sure enough, Akcam was detained yet again - for another hour - by US Homeland Security officers at Montreal airport before boarding his flight at Montreal for Minnesota two days later.

On this occasion, he says that the American officer - US Homeland Security operates at the Canadian airport - gave him a warning: "Mr Akcam, if you don't retain an attorney and correct this issue, every entry and exit from the country is going to be problematic. We recommend that you do not travel in the meantime and that you try to get this information removed from your customs dossier."

Fisk summarizes the incident:

So let's get this clear. US and Canadian officials now appear to be detaining the innocent on the grounds of hate postings on the internet. And it is the innocent - guilty until proved otherwise, I suppose - who must now pay lawyers to protect them from Homeland Security and the internet. But as Akcam says, there is nothing he can do.

Several bloggers have picked up this story, and one in particular has done a good job filling in some of the missing details. But they have all concentrated on the unreliability of Wikipedia and the general problem of how to tell whether something you find on the net is credible. And none -- not even Fisk himself -- has made the point that seems most obvious to me.

The so-called War on Terror is a fraud, a massive crime against all humanity "justified" by a web of carefully crafted and expensively disseminated lies. And like any web of lies, it cannot sustain itself without ever-increasing fiction. Thus we have phony terror plots leading to spectacularly hyped arrests (which may not even lead to charges, let alone a trial) and entrapment going on all over the place. But that still doesn't generate enough publicity to keep the illusion going under its own power.

Early in the phony war, the phony warriors needed suspects so urgently that they were buying them. But they can't keep doing that, so now they're using any other available pretext to try to meet their quotas.

And we have clearly reached a point where it doesn't even matter anymore whether somebody is a terrorist or not. If his name -- or some similar name -- is on the government's watch-list, that's good enough to justify ruining his trip -- or his life.

And meanwhile -- as if the utter phoniness of the bogus war needed any further emphasis -- an actual terrorist has been set free.

What does all this mean? It goes something like this:

Imagine if France arrested Osama bin Laden, and refused to extradite him to the United States on the grounds he would be tortured. Then imagine they refused to charge him with terrorism, but only with an immigration violation, and released him on bail. Now you'll have some idea of the situation with Luis Posada Carriles, with one exception - the United States does torture its prisoners, while Venezuela does not.

If you're not yet sick of the hypocrisy, you can read more about it here.

The War On Terror Looks Like A Fraud Because It Is One!

John Gleeson of the Winnipeg Sun hit the nail pretty close to the head on Friday when he wrote:

War on Terror looks like a Fraud

Contrary to the "patriots" who try to use the deaths of our soldiers in Afghanistan to stifle debate on Canada's involvement in the War on Terror, I would say that as new evidence presents itself, we would indeed be cowards to ignore it simply because we've lost troops in the field and are therefore blindly committed to the mission.

The word in quotes refers to Canadian "patriots" here but he is quite right about taking in new evidence as it presents itself. And the same logic applies, of course, to any country in which the rising number of military deaths is used to stifle debate on public policy.

And new evidence is piling up around us, arguably strong enough to declare the whole War on Terror an undeniable fraud.

A blogger might make the same point more strongly, especially if (for example) said blogger didn't have any advertisers to think of. And this cold blogger has been saying essentially the same thing, in many different ways, for quite a while.

In other words, the evidence that seems to be piling up around us at the moment only supplements evidence that was visible a long time ago. This in no way minimizes John Gleeson's piece, which focuses on black gold, Baghdad Tea:

Virtually ignored by mainstream media, the Americans showed their hand this year with the new Iraqi oil law, now making its way through Iraq's parliament.

Indeed! It's been a big story on some of our favorite blogs, but hardly a word from the mainstream media. In this cold blogger's opinion, it was brave and commendable of John Gleeson to buck that trend...

The law -- which tens of thousands of Iraqis marched peacefully against on Monday when they called for the immediate expulsion of U.S. forces -- would transfer control of one of the largest oil reserves on the planet from Baghdad to Big Oil, delivering "the prize" at last that Vice-President Dick Cheney famously talked about in 1999 when he was CEO of Halliburton.

... and to mention Cheney and Halliburton, the most famous if not the most amply compensated modern American war-profiteers!

"The key point of the law," wrote Mother Jones' Washington correspondent James Ridgeway on March 1, "is that Iraq's immense oil wealth (115 billion barrels of proven reserves, third in the world after Saudi Arabia and Iran) will be under the iron rule of a fuzzy 'Federal Oil and Gas Council' boasting 'a panel of oil experts from inside and outside Iraq.' That is, nothing less than predominantly U.S. Big Oil executives.

"The law represents no less than institutionalized raping and pillaging of Iraq's oil wealth. It represents the death knell of nationalized Iraqi resources, now replaced by production sharing agreements, which translate into savage privatization and monster profit rates of up to 75% for (basically U.S.) Big Oil. Sixty-five of Iraq's roughly 80 oilfields already known will be offered for Big Oil to exploit."

Yes, and even worse, as I understand it: the monster profit rates of 75% will come into effect only after the big oil companies have been sufficiently "compensated" for their capital investment in Iraq. Prior to that point, which will apparently be determined by the oil companies themselves, their share of the profits will be much higher than 75%.

While the U.S. argues that the oil deal will give Iraqis their shot at "freedom and stability," the International Committee of the Red Cross reported this week that millions of Iraqis are in a "disastrous" situation that continues to deteriorate, with "mothers appealing for someone to pick up the bodies littering the street so their children will be spared the horror of looking at them on their way to school."

That's only one indication among many.

Some observers might look to the Luis Posada Carriles case and draw the conclusion that this War is very selective about what sort of Terror it fights.

As for Iraq, to those of us who have been watching closely, it has always been clear that the US invasion was never intended to bring that country "freedom and stability".

And that's why Evelyn Pringle writes:

In November 2002, Stephen Hadley, deputy national security advisor at the time, called Lockheed employee, Bruce Jackson, to a meeting at the White House and told him that the US was definitely going to war in Iraq but there was one small hitch, the administration could not decide what reason to use to justify it.

So Jackson formed the "Committee for the Liberation of Iraq," and its mission statement said it was "formed to promote regional peace, political freedom and international security by replacing the Saddam Hussein regime with a democratic government that respects the rights of the Iraqi people and ceases to threaten the community of nations."

Listen! Do you want to know a secret? If freedom and stability were really on the agenda, the Pentagon would have nixed the use of depleted uranium, and that's just for starters.

Here's John Gleeson again:

Four years after the invasion, it's becoming pretty clear that Iraq has been "pacified" solely for the purpose of economic aggression. Humanitarian considerations are moot. The awful plight of Iraq's one million Christians, who have no place in the new Iraq, underscores this ugly truth.

Quite so. It's not only the Iraqi Christians, although they may strike a responsive chord in the mind of the North American reader. The humanitarian crisis is upon all of Iraq -- indeed all of the Middle East -- not just the Christians. And humanitarian considerations are indeed moot.

So, by the way, is all talk of American withdrawal in the near- or medium- or long-term future.

Afghanistan, meanwhile, has given the U.S. a strategic military beachhead in Central Asia (which "American primacy" advocates called for in the '90s) and it was quietly reported in November that plans are being accelerated for a $3.3-billion natural gas pipeline "to help Afghanistan become an energy bridge in the region."

So perhaps it wasn't so loony after all to wonder if Afghanistan wasn't about the gas pipeline all along, rather than the shadowy figure of Osama bin Laden, who has never been seriously threatened, let alone captured, and who isn't even listed as a 9/11 suspect by the FBI.

With many Americans (including academics and former top U.S. government officials) now questioning even the physical facts of 9/11 and seriously disputing the "militant Islam" spin, with the media more brain-dead than it's been in our lifetimes, now is not the time for jingoism and blind faith in the likes of Cheney, George W. Bush and Robert Gates.

Quite true. And it's nice Mr. Gleeson to notice. If only more American journalists would do the same.

Our young men are worth more than that -- aren't they, Mr. Harper?

Well of course they are. They're worth at least that, and Steven Harper knows it. But his allegiance to his pseudo-conservative enablers may be stronger than the ties that arise from the worth of humanity, unfortunately.

On the other hand, what a column!

You don't often see such sentiments expressed so bluntly in mainstream North American media. Granted it's Canadian media, but it's certainly not a crunchy-granola bleeding-heart left-wing paper.

More to the point, John Gleeson is absolutely right. It's refreshing to see so much truth in any newspaper, let alone the Sun.

I've been saying ever since I started blogging that the war on terror is bogus, and that this conclusion can be reached in all manner of ways. John Gleeson mentions 9/11, the oil law in Iraq and the pipeline through Afghanistan. But here's another way to see the same thing:

The Pentagon has sent out memos saying their main priority is now to win the war on terror by October of 2008 -- just in time for the next presidential election. Not just the war in Iraq, mind you. The word has gone out: wrap up the entire Global War on Terror.

This was a war that was supposed to last for generations. And it's not as if we've shown any signs of "winning". To be blunt about it, we haven't even shown any sign of understanding what "winning" means, let alone what it takes to "win".

If this is a war that can be started and stopped at the pleasure of the President, or the Pentagon, just in time for an election -- or even if the people running it see it that way -- then it's clearly a cynical ploy, not worthy of financial sacrifice, let alone the sacrifice of young men and women. Not to speak of the destruction of foreign countries and innocent victims numbering in the millions.

If this were a real war, there would be no way to know when it would end. Or how.

And as we noted yesterday, our so-called most important European allies in the so-called war on so-called terror seem to understand at least some of this, and they now refuse to call it what our so-called president insists on calling it.

They're not calling it "Grand Theft Oil", as this nearly frozen blogger might sometimes do, but then again we don't have to worry about offending any sponsors here.

All sarcasm aside, it's slightly encouraging to see the "War on Terror" being rejected by such an important ally, even if they're only rejecting the phrase and not the war. Maybe speaking the truth is going to become slightly less unfashionable, at least for a little while.

And if that's the case, it could be that John Gleeson is not only absolutely right but also slightly ahead of the curve ... even if the curve has taken its sweet time getting here.

Think It Can't Happen Here? Think Again! It's Already Happening!!

Bella Maryanovsky, a legal resident of the United States, has been arrested and is being held without charge in a Florida prison.

What did she do? She walked into an immigration office to renew her green card papers.

Her prognosis? Her attorney has been given no indication of whether (or when) (or with what) she may be charged, or whether (or when) she might be granted a bond hearing.

So, what's the deal?

It appears she was arrested under a new immigration program called “Operation Return to Sender.”

According to Michael Chertoff in a June 2006 press release, “Operation Return to Sender is another example of a new and tough interior enforcement strategy that seeks to catch and deport criminal aliens, increase worksite enforcement, and crack down hard on the criminal infrastructure that perpetuates illegal immigration.”

“The fugitives captured in this operation,” claimed Chertoff, “threatened public safety in hundreds of neighborhoods and communities around the country. This department has no tolerance for their criminal behavior.”

However, Maryanovsky, according to her family and friends, has long been an upstanding member of society. She is currently employed placing engineers in jobs nationwide with salaries ranging from $75,000 to $250,000.

Is her case unusual? Not at all, apparently. According to her attorney, the arresting officer told him:

“We got orders to arrest everybody.”

That officer, Keith Bradley, refused to confirm or deny anything about the case [...] saying “I still have a mortgage and bills to pay.”

Surely she can get out on bail, no? Not exactly. Her chance of getting a hearing soon looks slim.

[I]f the detainee is not held near an immigration court there is no mechanism by which they can be brought before an immigration judge to challenge their detention. The individual must simply wait until the right official in the right department of ICE decides it is time to bring them to court. Immigration courts do not have sheriffs who can bring detainees in, so judges will not entertain an attorney’s request for a bond hearing unless the detainee is accessible. Thus, an individual put into detention falls into a sort of black hole.

How is she doing? Not very well.

Maryanovsky takes medication for heart arrhythmia and high blood pressure. She confided to her family and friends that prison personnel mockingly refused to give her medication, telling her, “When you have a heart attack, then we’ll help you.”
...
One friend [...] said that she has visited Maryanovsky twice, and her ankles and extremities are swelling. “[She] can go into heart failure,” [the friend said]. According to family members, her blood pressure hit 220/110, and the family obtained a doctor’s letter to present to immigration authorities, but she was still apparently not being given her medication.

This is part of the war on terror, right? Not so fast!

Ray Del Papa of the South Florida Peace and Justice Network – a coalition that includes representatives from such groups as the Quakers, Pax Christi, Buddhist Peace Fellowship, Jewish Arab Defense Association, Haiti Solidarity, and many others – [...] sees an incongruity in the arrest and detention of such persons as Maryanovsky [...] while known terrorists, such as Luis Posada Carriles, Orlando Bosch, and Virgilio Paz Romero, are allowed to remain free in the U.S., despite their criminal records.

What can we do about this?

First, read the article I've been quoting, from RAW STORY.

Then make as much noise as you can. But do it safely, please!

Bush On Horns Of Dilemma

Aside from the usual trouble between the USA and Venezuela, or maybe because of it, the Luis Posada Carriles issue is making big waves which seem to be rocking every boat. Or at least that's the Venezuelan side of the story.

The Americans say it was all just a little mistake which the Venezuelans could rectify quite easily if they really wanted to.

Does any of this sound familiar?

US officials may face Caracas ban

Venezuela is threatening to refuse entry to US officials in response to the decision to bar Venezuela's top judge from entering the United States.

US immigration officials cancelled Supreme Court President Omar Mora's US entry permit last week.

The US cited an "error" on the visa, described by Venezuelan Vice-President Jose Vicente Rangel as a "slight to Venezuela's dignity".
...
Mr Mora last week insisted the cancellation of his visa was linked to calls by Venezuela for the US to extradite Luis Posada Carriles, wanted by Caracas for the bombing of a Cuban plane in 1976.

Mr Posada Carriles is currently in US custody facing immigration charges, after the US refused a Venezuelan extradition request it described as "flawed".

Thousands of Venezuelans marched through Caracas last week in support of the government's call to extradite Mr Posada Carriles.

You see, there's really no problem here that can't be fixed ... The visa had an "error" and the extradition request was "flawed" and the Venezuelans will never get their hands on Luis Posada Carriles because he's the Bush family's favorite terrorist. There. Now, wasn't that simple?

Oops! I wasn't supposed to mention that, was I? I don't think I was supposed to mention any of this because it shows so clearly that the so-called "War On Terror" is nothing but a sham.

Oops! I wasn't supposed to mention that, either, was I? Well Ex-Cuuuuuse Me! It's hard work keeping track of all the things I'm not supposed to mention, ok? So Give me a Break!

Sorry about that, folks. I don't mean to be more snarky than usual... I guess sometimes it just comes out that way. Oh well.

If you would like to read more from the BBC about the Luis Posada Carriles situation, you can explore these links:

May 17: Cuban 'bomber' arrested in US

An anti-communist militant accused of bombing a Cuban airliner in 1976 has been held in the US.

Cuban exile Luis Posada Carriles is wanted by both Cuba and Venezuela in connection with the attack.
...
Recently declassified documents show Mr Posada Carriles used to work for the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

Bad luck on the timing of the declassification, eh what?

May 18: Profile: Cuban 'plane bomber'

Terror suspect Luis Posada Carriles poses a double headache for the United States: his alleged crimes relate to Cuba and its ally Venezuela, and he is a former CIA employee.

The 77-year-old was detained in Miami by immigration agents after apparently slipping into the US illegally.

But he is wanted abroad for the 1976 bombing of a Cuban airliner, in which 73 died, and for 1997 bomb attacks on hotels in the Cuban capital Havana, which killed one.
...
Before his detention in Miami, Mr Posada Carriles, who was born in Cuba but has Venezuelan citizenship, insisted his "only objective" was to fight for Cuba's "freedom".

Reports suggest he was involved in operations against leftists across Latin America over the decades, from Guatemala to El Salvador.

All over the hemisphere, over the decades, what's the difference? And remember to translate the phrase "operations against leftists" into plain English, will you?

May 19: Cuban bomb suspect charged in US

A Cuban exile wanted for the bombing of an airliner in 1976 has been charged with illegal entry into the US.

Anti-communist militant Luis Posada Carriles was arrested in Miami on Tuesday, weeks after he smuggled himself into the US.

He will be held in custody until an immigration court hearing on 13 June, US immigration officials said.

Venezuela wants him extradited to stand trial over the bombing of a Cuban airliner that killed 73 people in 1976.

Both Cuba and Venezuela have accused the US of protecting Mr Posada Carriles by delaying the extradition process.

The US says it will not deport him to any country that would hand him over to Fidel Castro's regime in Cuba.

Venezuela said on Wednesday it would not hand Mr Posada Carriles over, and Mr Castro said he would be happy to see him tried there.

I'm sure he would!

May 20: US accused of 'terror hypocrisy'

Venezuela has said the US will be guilty of double standards on terrorism if it does not extradite a Cuban exile wanted over the bombing of a plane.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said the man, Luis Posada Carriles, was "a self-confessed terrorist".

But was the confession extracted under torture or the threat of torture? Posada Carriles, with his CIA background, would certainly be capable of torturing himself to obtain a confession, wouldn't he? And then that confession would be worthless, wouldn't it?

May 27: US rejects 'bomber' arrest plea

The US has rejected Venezuela's request for it to arrest a Cuban-born man, Luis Posada Carriles, over a 1976 airline bombing that killed 73 people.

Washington told Caracas, which wants to see him extradited, that there was not enough evidence to back the request.
...
Earlier this week, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said he would consider breaking diplomatic ties with the US if the extradition request was knocked back.

But on Friday, a statement from Venezuela's foreign ministry said Mr Chavez's comments "cannot be considered an ultimatum".

Gotta love that one. "If you don't do this then we'll do that." "Is that an ultimatum?" "No."

May 29: Venezuela rallies over Cuba exile

Tens of thousands of Venezuelans have rallied in the capital Caracas to demand the US extradites a Cuban exile accused of bombing an airliner in 1976.

The march comes a day after the US rejected Venezuela's request for it to arrest Cuban-born Luis Posada Carriles, saying there was not enough evidence.
...
Supporters of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez took to the streets of the capital, blowing whistles and chanting anti-US slogans.
...
"Bush is protecting a terrorist while he is supposedly fighting against terrorism - that's hypocrisy," Pedro Caldera said.

And so president bush finds himself on the horns of a dilemma. It couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

Massive News Dump

At the Memory Blog, the amazing Russ Kick has recently posted a huge News Dump, of which the following story lines form only a small sample:

Bush asked to explain UK war memo that proves he lied US into war

Appeals court lets Cheney keep his corporate energy task force secret

US won't declassify 9/11 documents for German trial

"The new stance reverses repeated assurances from Washington in recent months that the evidence would be forthcoming…. The US decision represents a serious setback for German prosecutors, who are having difficulty finding incriminating evidence against Motassadeq, now being tried a second time after his first conviction for terrorism was overturned on appeal."

Declassified documents: MI6 protected Nazi who killed 100 British agents

Head of Abu Ghraib Prison Speaks Out

US 'backed illegal Iraqi oil deals'

Luis Posada Carriles: The Declassified Record

No Court-Martial for Marine Taped Killing Unarmed Iraqi

NGO report: Egypt conducting torture for the US

Rep. Waxman introduces Restore Open Government Act

Disclosure of Grand Jury Info to Intel Agencies

Is Justice Department trying to put FOIA beyond appeal?

All this and more, here.

I hope you'll bookmark and visit the remarkable Russ Kick's amazing websites, the Memory Blog and the Memory Hole.

The Phony War On Terror

To properly fight the war on terror, it's not enough to identify the terrorists. You also have to decide whether they should be prosecuted or protected.

Confusing? Maybe. But that's the signal being sent by the Bush administration, and the signal is being sent over multiple channels simultaneously.

From the Washington Post: A Protected Friend of Terrorism

By Douglas Farah

Monday, April 25, 2005; Page A19

The Bush administration is touting the rule of law and democracy as priorities in its effort to create stability and defeat terrorism. Yet it remains curiously apathetic about the activities of one of the world's most notorious indicted war criminals, a man who is also an abettor of al Qaeda and Hezbollah. I am speaking of former Liberian president Charles Taylor, who has not only escaped answering for his crimes so far but who may be given an opportunity to repeat them if the United States does not act.

It seems to matter little here that Taylor's efforts to escape justice may well succeed because of U.S. inertia. Indicted on 17 counts of crimes against humanity, Taylor poses a clear and present danger to West Africa and U.S. interests. Yet the State Department continues to respond to congressional inquiries with bland assurances that everything is fine and Taylor is no longer a problem. It's not true.

Unless Taylor is turned over quickly to the U.N.-backed Special Court for Sierra Leone to stand trial, he will never face punishment for the crimes he committed in the region at the cost of tens of thousands of dead and hundreds of thousands of lives destroyed. The mandate of the court, largely funded by the United States, expires at the end of the year. It was established to try those "most responsible" for the atrocities in Sierra Leone. Taylor is at the top of the list.

Taylor's were brutal, vicious crimes. For more than a decade he presided over forces that murdered, raped and mutilated children; they also abducted children to use them as cannon fodder. He created "Small Boys Units" made up of specially trained children who, while high on amphetamines, were used to raze villages and murder civilians. He trained and supplied the Revolutionary United Front in neighboring Sierra Leone, whose signature atrocity was hacking off the arms, legs and ears of civilians, many of them children.

Taylor also hosted diamond buyers from al Qaeda and Hezbollah for several years, allowing the two designated terrorist groups to earn and hide their wealth in an asset that is untraceable and easily convertible to cash.

Is that disgusting? There's much more. Click here if you dare. Meanwhile, mixed reviews for the Washington Post. One thumb up for running this story; the other thumb down for putting it on page 19.

But wait! There's even more. From Robert Parry, at Consortium News, comes a story that is possibly even more disturbing: The Bush Family's Favorite Terrorist

While the Bush administration holds dozens of suspected Muslim terrorists on secret or flimsy evidence, one of the world’s most notorious terrorists slipped into the United States via Mexico and traveled to Florida without setting off any law enforcement alarms.

Though the terrorist’s presence has been an open secret in Miami, neither President George W. Bush nor Florida Gov. Jeb Bush has ordered a manhunt. The U.S. press corps has been largely silent as well.

The reason is that this terrorist, Luis Posada Carriles, was a CIA-trained Cuban whose long personal war against Fidel Castro’s government is viewed sympathetically by the two Bush brothers and their father. When it comes to the Bush family, Posada is the epitome of the old saying that “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.”

The Bush administration – which has imprisoned Jose Padilla and other alleged Muslim “enemy combatants” without trial – has taken a far more lenient approach toward the 77-year-old Posada, who is still wanted in Venezuela for the bombing of a Cubana Airlines plane in 1976 that killed 73 people. Posada also has admitted involvement in a deadly hotel bombing campaign in Cuba in 1997.

There's much more here, too, of course! Click this link to read the rest of it.

And now ... What can I tell you? If you still believe the so-called "war on terror" is legitimate, you need more than words. You need a slap across the head!