Monday, May 26, 2014

Why Isn't Dana Rohrabacher in Prison?

If the United States Government were governed by the laws it makes for the rest of us, California Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher would be in prison. More specifically, he would be in open-ended military custody without judicial remedy of any kind.

Rohrabacher was among the 230 Congressmen who recently voted to preservea measure permitting the indefinite detention, without trial, of US citizens accused of providing “material support” to al-Qaeda or other terrorist groups.
That vote, dealing with an amendment to this year’s National Defense Authorization Act sponsored by Washington Democrat Adam Smith, took place on May 22. In a Twitter exchange a few days later, Rohrabacher publicly admitted to acts that make him a fine candidate for arrest and military detention under the NDAA. 

A poseur, not a fighter: Dana (r) with the proto-Taliban.
For decades, Rohrabacher has been a prominent supporter of radical Islamist terrorist organizations allied with the CIA – from elements of the Afghan Mujahadeen in the 1980s to the bizarre Iranian Islamo-Leninist cult called the People’s Mujhadeen (or MEK). 

Any group “that actively opposes Soviets and Nazis and [radical] Islam is good enough for me,” Rohrabacher insisted in a Twitter message after I confronted him about his record. As it happens, Rohrabacher managed to support a group that actually managed to combine all three of those characteristics. 

On July 23, 2001 Rohrabacher was a featured guest speaker at a fundraising dinner in Edgewater, New Jersey for the Albanian-American Civic League, a political front group for the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army, or KLA.  That event took place about fifteen miles from the World Trade Center, where – about six weeks later – thousands of people would be murdered in a terrorist act reportedly carried out by allies of the KLA. 

In the years leading up to the US-led 78-day terror bombing of Serbia in 1999, the CIA cultivated the KLA as an asset, despite the fact that it was recognized as an al-Qaeda-connected terrorist group by the State Department and numerous European intelligence agencies. After the NATO-coordinated bombing campaign forced Serbia to relinquish Kosovo, Washington installed the KLA as the government of the breakaway province. 

The KLA’s ancestry is divided between Stalinists and the Albanian “Skanderbeg” SS division, which rounded up Pristina’s Jewish population before carrying out a campaign of rape and murder of the province’s Serbian population. This pedigree made the KLA something akin to the turducken of terrorism – Communists stuffed into Nazis wrapped in Islamic radicalism. However unpalatable this combination may be to decent and civilized people, Rohrabacher found it to be delectable. 

Defending the terrorist group and his support for it, the Congressman made the remarkable – and entirely unverifiable– claim that “Kosovo sent troops after 9-11 to help [America] fight bin Ladin and [radical] Islam.” This would suggest that in the future the KLA will come into possession of time-travel technology: It wasn’t until 2010 that the government of UN-administered province had its own internal security force, and to date it still doesn’t have an army
Al-Qaeda's American front: KLA volunteers in Yonkers, New York.
When this was pointed out to Rohrabacher, the Congressman blithely replied that if someone could provide him with “a source claiming Kosovo did not send [a] contingent” to Afghanistan, he would “admit that my memory was wrong” – as if the burden were on reasonable people to disprove his unsubstantiated claims.  

More recently, Rohrabacher was one of the most enthusiastic supporters of the Iranian MEK, which began its life in 1965 as part of the Soviet-sponsored international terrorist network. During the late 1970s, the MEK carried out terrorist acts in which U.S. citizens were killed. It also took part in the1979 siege of the U.S. embassy in Tehran, during which 52 U.S. citizens were taken hostage for 444 days. 

In 1981, the MEK – which was part of the coalition that brought Khomeni to power -- was expelled from Iran by the Ayatollah and sought refuge in Iraq, where it allied itself with Saddam Hussein. MEK cadres participated in cross-border raids in support of Saddam’s U.S.-abetted invasion of Iran. 

American victims of the MEK, 1975.
The MEK’s official doctrine, explained Ray Takeyh of the Council on Foreign Relations (hardly an “isolationist” group) in congressional testimony, fuses Islamic “values” with Marxist ideology: “From Lenin they embraced the importance of a vanguard party committed to mass mobilization, and from Third World revolutionaries they took the primacy of guerilla warfare as indispensable agents of political change.”

Following the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the Bush administration rebuffed an offer from Tehran to exchange al-Qaeda suspects in Iranian captivity for MEK operatives in “liberated” Iraq. Since that time, MEK agents have been used to carry out terrorist attacks in Iran, and the group’s sensationalistic claims about the Iranian nuclear program have been retailed by Washington’s propaganda apparatus

Until September 2012, the MEK was inscribed on the State Department’s official roster of international terrorist organizations. Prior to that time, under federal statutes, it was considered a felony to provide “material assistance” of any kind to the organization – which can include agitating for the State Department to repeal the group’s designation as a terrorist organization. 

(Click to enlarge.)
Rohrabacher’s defense of the MEK reads like a variation on WWII-era Popular Front propaganda. Insisting that the MEK has “changed,” he points out that “Iran’s Mullahs target [the] MEK [for] death,” which illustrates one occupational hazard of being part of a murderous Islamo-Leninist cult. 

Those who don’t leap to the defense of the MEK “side with [the] Mullahs,” declares Rohrabacher in a rhetorical flourish worthy of a petulant High School sophomore. Not surprisingly, Rohrabacher is willing to take the side of terrorists as long they direct their violence at people who oppose Washington’s imperial foreign policy.

During an April 17, 2007 hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Human Rights, European legislators and human rights activists offered testimony condemning the Bush administration’s practice of “extraordinary rendition. This is the extra-judicial kidnapping of suspected terrorists, who were imprisoned and tortured within the CIA’s global archipelago of “black sites.” 

Rohrabacher’s view was that anybody seized and interrogated by the CIA should be considered subject to summary execution without due process – a position that anticipated the Obama Regime’s “targeted killing” program.
Rohrabacher’s arrogance and hostility prompted heckling from a handful of protesters in the audience. This, in turn, provoked a bilious eruption from the fetid depths of whatever substitutes for Rohrabacher’s soul: “I hope it’s your family members that die when terrorists strike.” 

When I challenged Rohrabacher about that comment, his first reaction was to whine that he is the victim of a “lie the left uses because it doesn’t want to honestly debate the points I actually make.” He then admitted to wishing death on people who opposed Washington’s global system of abduction and torture, which he considers appropriate punishment for such improper thinking.

 “That they feel [the] impact of what they advocate [would] not [be] bad,” the Congressman told me. The violence Rohrabacher wishes on his political opponents would actually be the lethal blowback from policies that he has advocated. 

To Rohrabacher, defending the rule of law and due process as applied to suspected terrorists is akin to treason – as is refusing to support actual terrorist groups when they are retained as assets of the U.S. government.

When talk radio bulimics fall prey to ideological double-think of this kind, the results are disagreeable but not particularly harmful. Owing to Rohrabacher’s position, however, his delusions have played a significant role in visiting destruction and death on hundreds of thousands of people in distant countries, and he expects those who have survived his eccentric brand of humanitarianism to be abjectly grateful for the attention lavished on them by Washington.

During a 2011 visit to Iraq, Rohrabacher – his Chickenhawk plumage on full display – insisted that Iraqis area indebted to the United States forthe invasion and occupation that left their country a shattered ruin. Noting that the U.S. is mired in an ever-deepening economic downturn – brought on, in large measure, by decades of militarism and imperial meddling abroad – the Congressman demanded that “some consideration be given to repaying the United States some of the mega-dollars we have spent here…. We could certainly use some people to care about our situation as we have cared about theirs.”

Taken literally, Rohrabacher’s suggestion would require that some large, wealthy foreign power – such as China, perhaps – invade and occupy the United States after imposing a murderous-decade-long economic embargo to soften us up. That’s the same kind of “caring” Washington inflicted on the Iraqis, who understandably weren’t interested in paying for that supposed privilege. 

In fairness to Rohrabacher, the demand he made of the Iraqis displayed a certain consistency between his abhorrent public policy views and the squalid conduct of his private affairs.

In August 2012, Rohrabacher moved out of a luxurious Costa Mesa rental home, stiffing the landlord out of a week’s rent. After moving in, the Congressman had changed the locks and prevented the owner, Robert Polyniak, from carrying out agreed-upon annual inspections. When the landlord’s girlfriend, Darlene Whitsell, finally gained access to the abandoned home, she found that it had been well and thoroughly trashed.

“Massive black stains and muck covered the carpet throughout the home,” recounted the Orange County Weekly. “Sticky grime encased damaged, rusted appliances…. Walls inexplicably contained odd holes, nail polish, and some smelly substance that may have been feces…. A second-floor suite used by Dana’s wife, Rhonda, as her bedroom contained a huge, mysterious, lubricant-like stain – something you might expect on the floor of a Hollywood sex club – that had seeped through thick carpet and padding to tarnish a hardwood floor.” 
An example of what greeted Dana's landlord.
Repairing the damage cost nearly $26,000. Polyniak deducted Rohrabacher’s $6,700 security deposit and sent him a bill for the remainder. A year later, the Congressman – who had already stiffed Polyniak out of a portion of the last month’s rent – filed a lawsuit against the landlord, demanding $21,000 for not refunding his full security deposit. 

Rohrabacher’s occupancy of Polyniak’s property was a microcosm of the US occupation of Iraq – and in both cases he seems to think that the occupier is entitled to compensation from the victim. 

The political class consists largely of people unfit for civilized company, and among his reprehensible peers Rohrabacher has distinguished himself. Assuming that prison cells should exist, Dana Rohrabacher richly deserves to occupy one, not only for abetting terrorism and mass murder but also in the interests of public hygiene.

If you can, please donate to help keep Pro Libertate on-line. Thank you, and God bless! 

Dum spiro, pugno!


Anonymous said...

notice anything wrong with the
"R-CA" "D-NY" convention?

Chris Mallory said...

If China, Russia, or Outer Bumfreakistan invaded the US (to effect regime change, defend civil rights, insure a supply of maple syrup) Dana and his buddies would in all probability end up as collaborators and Quislings. Their type always does.

(Yes, I know that no other nation on the Earth has the naval capacity to land any troops on CONUS.)

Gil said...

Um yeah being an enemy combatant is totally different from being a criminal. You don't switch sides then expect a fair trial in wartime. Get real!

William N. Grigg said...

The U.S. government hasn't declared war since December 1941, so we're not in "wartime" in constitutional or legal terms.

Terrorist organizations that are not appendages of political governments are non-state actors that should be treated as criminal syndicates. An individual who adheres to a terrorist group is part of a criminal conspiracy and should be prosecuted through the criminal justice system.

The 2012 NDAA expands the concept of "enemy combatant" to include people who -- unlike Dana Rohrabacher -- have done nothing to offer material support for terrorist organizations of any kind.

Gil said...

Yeah right, there's no hardcore definition as to how the U.S. Government can declare a war:

On the other hand, there's no differentiation between an active soldier who carries a gun and grenades versus a soldier who is in the background in supplies.

Furthermore terrorists have the least protection whatsoever as they subscribe to no nation, have no uniform or open symbol of identification, hide as civilians, etc.

It sounds as though you want the U.S. army to be forever walking on eggshells while terrorists can do as they please until the U.S. loses or better the U.S. Government disintegrates and the supposed golden era of Libertarianism arises.

William N. Grigg said...

There IS a "hardcore definition" of how the US Government can declare war, and that definition isn't altered by the persistent refusal of the government to follow it, any more than wedding vows are altered by the infidelity of an adulterous spouse.

You assume that a "terrorist" is anyone thus described by the Regime in Washington. That's a transliteration of the approach used by Lenin and the Cheka, which puts you in interesting company.

When US military personnel participate in aggressive and unjustified wars (such as those in Iraq and Afghanistan), they really shouldn't be surprised to encounter partisan resistance, which is emphatically not the same thing as terrorism. The solution to that predicament is to avoid aggressive wars.

How are indiscriminate drone attacks on a supposedly allied country like Pakistan anything other than state terrorism? Under the principles you apply, it would be morally defensible for Pakistani authorities to kidnap, torture, or execute anybody in the supply chain involved in manufacturing Predator or Reaper drones.

William N. Grigg said...

You haven't addressed the gravamen of my argument above -- namely, that the same ruling elite that wants to imprison or execute anybody accused supporting terrorists has been involved for decades in the cultivation of terrorism -- and continues to do so today.

Shouldn't Dana Rohrabacher (among others) be subject to indefinite detention or a drone strike?

Chris Mallory said...

"Furthermore terrorists have the least protection whatsoever as they subscribe to no nation, have no uniform or open symbol of identification, hide as civilians, etc."

So, the Iraqis fighting to expel an invader from their nation were terrorists?
How about the French Resistance or the Eastern European Partisans? Terrorists or not? They hid as civilians. They did not wear uniforms.
If the Chinese invaded the US at the behest of our government, would you be a terrorist if you kill a few Chinese privates who are guarding a checkpoint?
The current definition of "terrorist" is "Anyone the United States government does not like."

Lemuel Gulliver said...

What is interesting is the Wikipedia article on Rohrbacher, containing his voting record. An amazing catalog of inconsistency. Yes-No-Yes-No-Yes-No on very similar issues. Perhaps his governing dictum is "Expediency"? Or perhaps, "Mental Confusion"?Likewise interesting is that the electorate of various districts he has run in have seen fit to return him to office every 2 years since 1988, usually with over 60% of the vote.

He seems (in public at least) affable, personable, and good-looking, which is all it takes in America to get elected. Reminds me of many years ago, when the mayor of Hoboken, NJ was returned to office while serving time in jail.

Truly, we get the government we deserve. The ingrained stupidity of the American boobeoisie is something only a brilliant mathematical genius, who deals in concepts of infinity, could understand.

On a positive note, in the 3/6/2014 vote to condemn Russia for its "invasion" of Crimea, (402 in favor, 7 against,) Rohrbacher abstained, saying:

"Starting with our own American Revolution, groups of people have declared themselves, rightfully, to be under a different government or a government of their choosing. People forget that’s what our Declaration of Independence is all about." He also said, "The sanctions are an abomination of hypocrisy."

So, Mr. Grigg, he may be a total slimeball, like almost every other denizen of our Gubmint, but sometimes he says or does the right thing. How much better can one realistically expect of one of the psychopaths of limited intellect, unlimited arrogance, and nonexistent morals, lording it over us up on Capitol Hill?


PS: On Afganistan, he said: "If the Taliban is going to be defeated, it's got to be by the Afghan people themselves, not by sending more U.S. troops... The centralized system of government foisted upon the Afghan people is not going to hold after we leave... Karzai’s regime is corrupt and non-representative of Afghanistan’s tribal culture. This failed strategy is not worth one more drop of American blood. Under the current strategy, our military presence alienates more Afghans that it pacifies. So if you’re going to pull the plug, then we need to get the hell out now.”

Seems like this man sometimes has a flash or two of lucid insight. Maybe that's why his constituents keep voting for him? - LG

Lemuel Gulliver said...

Mr. Grigg -- On the other hand, after re-reading your essay, if the intent is to expose the hypocrisy of the American Government, well, that is as plain for all the world to see as a wart on a supermodel's nose. After this last business in the Ukraine, and all the foul gas emitted by Kerry and Obama on the subject, the entire world stands astonished at the immense brass balls on these arrogant dickheads. Only the Greek Chorus of the governmental whores of Europe, who count on the US to finance their post-political retirements, and the servile lapdog media, brown-noses one and all, have pretended to agree with the breathtaking hypocrisy of Washington. The doublespeak and lies of the Ukraine episode, the crowning achievement in human pursuit of hypocrisy, are so blatant, so obvious, and so immense, it makes Dana Rohrabacher look like a choirboy by comparison.

- LG

Gil said...

Wow, the anti-Americanism is so thick you can cut it with a knife. Of course the U.S. gets to define what a terrorist is to them not what Al Qaeda thinks should be a terrorist to the U.S.

On the other hand, you attack the U.S. and then argue your reasons are sound therefore you don't have to deal with retaliation? Puh-lease! Had the War of Independence failed then George Washington would be remembered as one of the last people to be hung, drawn and quartered.

William N. Grigg said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
William N. Grigg said...

If you were an American worthy of the title, you would recognize that hating those who presume to rule us, and abominating the crimes they commit, is hardly the same thing as wishing ill on our country.

A terrorist is anybody who employs violence or the threat thereof against innocent people in order to achieve political ends. That definition is uniform and depends on actions, not identity.

Neither al-Qaeda nor the US government has the privilege of defining that term. The US government, by its actions, has established itself as a terrorist organization that is several orders of magnitude deadlier than its occasional subcontractor, al-Qaeda.

Given your attitude toward dissent and partisan warfare, it's reasonable to believe that during the War for Independence you would have been among those demanding that Washington be "hung, drawn, and quartered."

Lemuel Gulliver said...

Mr. Grigg,

Hear, hear.

Opposing the crimes of the oligarchs and their armed psychopathic enforcers, who presume to be entitled to rule America, is NOT opposing the long-suffering Americans who are ruled by them, or denigrating the aspirations of the public for America to be a shining city on a hill. Americans are a fine people.

In the same way, opposing the war crimes of the Zionist entity at the Eastern end of the Mediterranean, is NOT being hateful towards Jews, just because the psychopathic political rulers of the Zionist entity have defined their country as a Jewish state. Jews are also a fine people.

In fact, it is a kindness and a blessing to the nation to criticize the crimes of the few who presume to speak and act for the many. Until the public knows what crimes are being committed in their name, they will be baffled at the hatred directed against their country in the rest of the world.

Only those selfless souls who care and want to realize the vision of a Great Society will speak out against those actions which trample that vision in the mud and smear its face with dung. Those who do NOT care will go silently about their own business.

So, Bravo! Thank you for preaching your vision to the world of the ignorant and misled masses. Live long and prosper.
- LG

Gil said...

The way you look at terr-, er, freedom fighters is the way a moderate Muslim would look at extremist Muslim groups. Moderate Muslims (it is hoped) frown upon the actions of extremists but nonetheless feel the world would be better off if the whole world is Muslim.

Likewise I'm sure you'd be happy if terr-, er, freedom fighters were consistently good at holding back U.S. troops to the point they are just stuck in a plain quagmire. But I'm sure you'd feel good if also freedom fighters could start taking the U.S. commanders of fighting the war against freedom fighters out.

Suppose this Dana Rohrabacher was killed because freedom fighters rigged his car to up to explode upon him starting the ignition? You'd feel a sense justice done? He quite clearly a dictator who gets to ruin peoples' lives on a whim so one less jerk in the world? Suppose the freedom fighter get so successful that they destabilise the U.S. Federal Government to the point where the Union dissipates into fifty separate nation-states? That sounds what Libertarians have been long hoping for. Sure Libertarians were hoping for a peaceful transition but hey a step towards freedom was achieved anyway?

Anonymous said...

Epic smack down!

Anonymous said...

So then who is making the decision on what a "terrorist" is? What exactly is a "terrorist" anyway? If it is someone engaging in violence against innocents for intimidation purposes, then how is Obama not a terrorist?

Will this terrorist list be as exhaustively researched as the drone strike Obama used on a 16 year old us citizen?

William N. Grigg said...

The way you look at terr-, er, freedom fighters is the way a moderate Muslim would look at extremist Muslim groups. Moderate Muslims (it is hoped) frown upon the actions of extremists but nonetheless feel the world would be better off if the whole world is Muslim.

The world is in no danger of falling under the reign of the Crescent. The Global Caliphate is a mirage that inspires the deluded, a chimera that troubles the sleep of the ill-informed, and a profitable theme for opportunists like Glenn Beck.

Likewise I'm sure you'd be happy if terr-, er, freedom fighters were consistently good at holding back U.S. troops to the point they are just stuck in a plain quagmire.

Actually, I would be ecstatic if we were to extricate U.S. military personnel from foreign engagements in which they shouldn't have been involved in the first place.

Since you're obviously of the opinion that Islam poses an existential threat to us, answer this question: Are you at all troubled by the fact that Americans killed and died in Iraq to install a Shariah-compliant constitution on what had been a largely secular society?

Suppose this Dana Rohrabacher was killed because freedom fighters rigged his car to up to explode upon him starting the ignition? You'd feel a sense justice done?

Given Congressman Rohrabacher's lengthy history of promoting Islamic terrorism, if he were to be killed by Islamic terrorists this would be a case of a man literally being hoist by his own petard.

Suppose the freedom fighter get so successful that they destabilise the U.S. Federal Government to the point where the Union dissipates into fifty separate nation-states?

What quantum-separated dimension in the multiverse do you inhabit in which Muslims (I would assume you're referring to them) have sufficient influence to bring about that condition?

Here's something you should consider:

If the nearly all-powerful forces of the incipient Global Caliphate are as powerful as you perceive them to be, wouldn't it be wiser for the unitary state to break up, in order to avoid handing the enemy a monolithic target that can be conquered with a single strike?

Many people believe Barack Obama to be a covert Muslim usurper seeking to conquer the United States from within. That task would be made much more difficult if power were decentralized. Fifty robust constitutional republics -- or even a half-dozen regional governments in a loose confederation -- would be much more difficult to assimilate into an American Caliphate.

Lemuel Gulliver said...

I was sure this topic was wrung dry already, but Gil seems to think not.

Mr. Grigg, I'm with you.

Gil, you are seriously deluded by the propaganda of those who want to control your mind and the minds of 310 million citizens of this country.

There is no space here to list them - it would take pages upon pages - but almost every terrorist action of the past 70 years has been staged and/or assisted in its execution by governmental entities. It goes back even further. Such things as the sinking of the Lusitania, and the deaths of its 1200+ passengers, which drew America into WWI, was staged by the US and British governments. The latest was the plot by the Turkish government to rain missiles on a Turkish shrine inside Syria, and blame it on Syria, to justify Turkey attacking Syria. I could go on and on for hours listing these false flag operations.

Ordinary people like you, me, and 99% of the people who read this blog, want only to live our lives in peace, to have the comforts of home, to raise our families, and to be left alone to love those whom we find to be worthy of our respect and affection.

But there is a segment of the population suffering from a mental illness called psychopathy, in which they have no emotions, feel no empathy for the suffering of others - none - and whose only satisfaction comes from exercising power over others. These people are also usually exceptionally intelligent, and are experts at mimicking real emotions in order to better control others.

These are the people who ALWAYS rise to the top, and control organizations of all types, and get normal other people to do their bidding and to kill each other in pursuit of the agenda of the psychopaths. Some of them are Islamic mullahs, and some of them are US politicians. Also corporate CEOs, cardinals of the Church, oligarchs, bankers, and almost anything else you can name.

You, Gil, are just another victim of these crazies.

Realize this before you become a DEAD victim of the psychopaths, and give up your programmed hatreds of other people who are just like you, unlike the emotionless psychopaths who control us all. Only this insight and understanding can liberate you from this nonsense which you spew forth involuntarily, and with painful emotions, like a meal of rotten shellfish.

Good luck in your further researches.

- Lemuel

Lemuel Gulliver said...

PS: Gil, are you an Israeli? I am guessing this from your grammar. If you get to read this question, and if you are, I can give you a list of the false flag operations of your government, including against its own people. Did you know Menachem Begin, your very own Prime Minister, duly elected by the people of Israel, murdered 243 Jews aboard the vessel Patria when he was head of the Haganah? And also 14 Jews among the 96 victims of the King David Hotel bombing? And that Zionist Jews, many of whom later became the leaders of Israel, conspired with the Nazis, beginning in 1933, to persecute the Jews of Germany? (Google "The Transfer Agreement.") All for the greater good of Israel, of course. I'm sure when they elected Begin, and some of the authors of the Transfer Agreement, the Jews of Israel had no idea about any of it. Let me know if my guess is correct?

Best wishes,

Mr. Grigg,
I am making an educated guess here, but I believe from things I have heard that the "unpublished earthshattering revelations" of Edward Snowden, which we keep hearing are soon to be released, concern the truth about who planned 9-11. You know my views on that. I have heard also that the bombshell is being held in reserve until closer to the election, so that the Republican Party will be utterly demoralized and demolished thereby. I hope it does in fact get released, and no last-minute behind-the-scenes deal gets cut, as the truth will put an end to this ridiculous "War On Terror" and "Homeland Security" state we suffer under, and which Gil seems to subscribe to. One wonders though, how much money might be paid out by the authors of 9-11, or how many MORE murders they might be prepared to commit, to keep the truth suppressed. Time will tell.

- Lemuel

Anonymous said...

50 state governments would be a dramatic improvement over one evil empire

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. Grigg,
Insightful post as always, and may I commend you for freeing me from the clutches of the tyrannical cesspool known as modern media. I'm curious if Mr. Rohrabacher will be prosecuted under the NDAA since it's clear that he supported "terrorist" organizations, but I'm thinking not because according to the gubmint terrorism is only acceptable when it's against the "bad guy."
It's clear that your are in the clutches of the delusional septic tank called Fox News. Free yourself man because the gubmint counts on this crap to keep sheeple like you dumb and unquestioning. There are a couple of quotes that you might want to mull over.
"If liberty means anything at all it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear."
-George Orwell
The other quote is something that my grandmother attributed to Mr. Orwell, so I may be paraphrasing.
"If people give up liberty for security they do not deserve to have liberty." Something like that anyway. Think on it because if we don't stand up for ourselves against governmental tyranny than no one will.

Anonymous said...

While I tend to agree that Dana and his ilk are quite foul, I must call BS on the only photo evidence of his neglect of the rental property he occupied.

That photo is of the side of a range that has been pulled out from the wall. A stove/oven combo. What is depicted is the typical mess that runs down the side of the range from normal cooking activities. This mess is rarely cleaned up, even between tenants, due to the difficulty of removing the range in order to get access.

I have quite some experience in this area, having owned both a cleaning business and an appliance repair business. Trash a politician all you want, but every person reading this blog comment will find the same situation should he get up right now and pull his stove out.