ON AFGHANISTAN: A SINISTER WASHINGTON BOONDOGGLE

The Washington Post article ("At War With The Truth") made me cry. The truth is always the first casualty, but not the worst. It's the lives (generally young) and limbs lost, that evokes a deep and unrelenting sadness. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/investigations/afghanistan-papers/afghanistan-war-confidential-documents/

Excerpt:

A confidential trove of government documents obtained by The Washington Post reveals that senior U.S. officials failed to tell the truth about the war in Afghanistan throughout the 18-year campaign, making rosy pronouncements they knew to be false and hiding unmistakable evidence the war had become unwinnable.


This expose did not come as a surprise to most Americans. Certainly not to me --someone with an intimate connection to the place and its bloody past. 

Afghanistan.  Forty years. 40. So many dead. All sides. All ages. Afghan. Soviets. Pakistanis. Americans. So much blood shed. For what? TO WHAT END? 

DEATH, more death. Unrelenting violence.

Maimed children (the lucky ones) begging on the streets with huge smiles on their faces....grateful for life. Widows in their black burkas searching for their loved ones. Smiling Soviet troops waving from their vehicles on their way to their deaths. Mujahedin with their Lee Enfields and AK-47s smiling and nodding their goodbyes as they trudge towards their deaths. Some with roses in their hair and tawiz (amulets) around their necks. Young Marines in a culture brief eager to avenge 9/11.

Haunting smiles. Haunting faces. Everywhere. All sides. EVERYONE was/is impacted. There are no "innocents" here. Except the children. And the young gullible fighters following orders (lawful and unlawful).

Afghanistan. It's like a scab. That keeps getting picked at, never to heal. 

The PTSD. No one was/is immune. Not the Soviets, nor the Americans, nor especially the Afghan people who've borne the brunt of it. Forty years. 

Quote: "Since 2001, more than 775,000 U.S. troops have deployed to Afghanistan, many repeatedly. Of those, 2,300 died there and 20,589 were wounded in action, according to Defense Department figures." 

How do George Bush, Dick Cheney, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleeza Rice, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Susan Rice et al live with themselves with so much blood on their hands? NONE of them with a sibling or child in these unending wars.

How do you confess/admit to the American people (to the grief stricken mothers) that these post 9/11 American casualties were in vain? That, all along, it was a boondoggle, concocted in Washington, for such nefarious reasons that any rapid, and clear, revelations of what transpired, and continues to transpire, might just shock the American public at large to rise up from their long slumber to challenge the embedded tyranny of what has lately been labeled "the Deep State." 

The American Revolution was fought over stamp taxes. Today, we the American people are not under a foreign yoke. But we are under the boot of an insidious "class" of individuals (forget the party labels) whose self interest can be classified as "treasonous." Furthermore, these traitors have all sorts of convoluted foreign "connections" due to a fatal flaw in our political system, which allows foreign money to flow into the coffers of our political class.

Back to the Afghan quagmire. Afghanistan was NEVER "winnable." Whatever that means. Hell, a military logistician at the rank of corporal, taking a quick look at Afghanistan's topography and location alone, would've rendered a "no go" verdict on any long term military commitment. 

The reason for invading Afghanistan --albeit under the draconian medieval Taliban-- were flimsy at best. 9/11 wasn't an Afghan attack. The mullahs in Kabul had NOTHING to gain from such an act of war against the globe's Super Power. 

Their distrusted Arab guest, Osama bin Laden --who was hoisted upon them by their external paymasters, the Saudis and the Pakistanis-- approved the Pakistani Khalid Sheikh Muhammad's scheme to strike America. Bin Laden hightailed it out of Afghanistan by the end of 2001 to Pakistan. Along with Zawahiri, he ended up in the bosom of the Pakistan Army for "safekeeping" at the behest of the Saudis. 

So many what ifs of history... one in particular stands out: What if Bush junior instead of publicly shaming Mullah Omar had behind the scenes quietly reached out to him through intermediaries? To work out some sort of an exchange, wherein Mullah Omar handed over his guest for tangible benefits without any fingerprints or evidence of such a transaction that would threaten his position and have him lose public face/honor. Perhaps the Bush administration never really sought OBL after all given the Bush family's close Saudi ties.

Meanwhile our troops spent almost TWO DECADES on a wild goose chase. On missions that had little tactical utility in the long run because of a nonexistent strategy. Sure there were efforts at "strategy" but, due to the inevitable mission creep, the effort to hunt down OBL continued to morph until the end result (today) is something absurd: nation building along the lines of a "western democracy."

The fanatically xenophobic Taliban (even by traditionally xenophobic Afghan standards) weren't our enemy. Not "Taliban Central." At that juncture --prior to our sending troops to overthrow the Taliban-- not even the CIA's former ally, Jallaluddin Haqqani, had any ill intent towards our homeland. While there was no love lost for the American 'infidel,' they didn't care for meddling foreigners, even the so-called Muslim brothers. Our boots on the ground (conventional vice surgical strike) was the game changer. It was akin to entering the worst hornet's nest imaginable. Setting aside our natural inclination to dislike such seemingly medieval entities, the reality was/is (to the best of my current knowledge) that the Taliban had no global aspirations. None. They just wanted to be left alone to oversee their "lovely" Emirate. 

George Bush had another agenda. Iraq was the actual prize. Afghanistan was supposed to be the entry point to Iraq and, more specifically, Saddam Hussein, who was in Bush's cross hairs for reasons one can speculate over. 

Which inevitably brings us to the events of 9/11. After all, to this very day, having our troops in harm's way in Afghanistan is in order to prevent another 9/11. So goes the stale mantra of our "policymakers."  

Who was behind 9/11? 
The profile of the 19 hijackers (Arabs) and the mastermind/leadership (Pakistani -KSM and Saudi, OBL) has zero Afghans. True OBL was plotting in Afghanistan under the very noses of his hosts, the Taliban. But Mullah Omar was betrayed by OBL and the Paks.

Yet, Washington gave the Saudis and the Paks a free pass. Worse, the Pakistan Army (PAIC or Pakistan Army Industrial Complex) were given billions in essence to host bin Laden and his merry band of terrorists. 

Reading the findings, the interviews, I weep for those heroic volunteers in our military who've died or been maimed in our endless wars "on terror." RIP.

President Donald Trump was elected precisely because he was an outsider who promised to bring our troops home. One can hope that the endless wars can be brought to an end and the proper focus can prevail on limiting/controlling ACCESS to our HOMELAND via visas and the border. 

REMEMBERING VERNIE D. LIEBL ON THE 75th ANNIVERSARY OF D-DAY

Clockwise from top: Vernie in front on horse to the right ; Vernie left holding cat with brother George; Vernie sitting to the right fishing; Vernie bottom left sitting, sister Pearl is third from left and sister Francis is on the far right with friends.

Top: Vernie between horses on ranch, 1938; Middle: Vernie far right; elder brother Ray in center with wife Beulah Sadie in front of him; front right of Vernie is eldest sister Pearl; in front of her is Ray Jr, Vernie's nephew (Ray and Sadie's son). Far left is Annabelle (Annie), his sister in 1941. Bottom: Vernie far right, with sister and brother Ray, 1941.

Upper left: Vernie as a baby with his siblings in the arms of a neighbor; his mother Neva is far left. Vernie as a baby April/May 1921. Liebl brothers, eldest Ray (left), Vernie (middle) and George (right); in front of his dad is Ray Jr. A future US Marine.  Vernie with sister Francis and brother George.


Vernie Liebl's 357th Infantry Regiment of the 90th Infantry Division landed on D-Day on Utah Beach. Vernie was wounded on July 11th  when the 90th Division cleared the Foret de Mont-Castre (Hill 122) during fierce German resistance. The 90th Division suffered 5000 killed, wounded or captured.  Vernie was hospitalized in England and returned to the Front on July 31st. He was killed during the battle to liberate Hayange on 10 September 1944.

Vernie was buried in the Lorraine American Cemetery, Saint Avold, Lorraine, France (Plot C Row 24 Grave 30). His parents --Josef and Neva Liebl-- placed a marker near their burial plot in Beaver Creek Cemetery, Twisp, Washington State in his honor:

May God continue to bless/rest Vernie's soul, and the souls of all those killed by forces of evil during a conflict in which the righteous ultimately triumphed after much bloodshed. 

The monument to the 90th US Infantry Division at Utah Beach, Manche, Normandy, France

Monument erected to honor Vernie and his fellow soldiers who died liberating Hayange, September 10, 1944:

357th Infantry Regiment 11 Soldiers Plaque

<< Back to Hayange

View larger image

Details:

Affixed to the street-facing front of a three-storey, duplex residential building situated at No. 29 Rue du General de Gaulle (D952) on the north side of the road.  The rail line runs directly behind the house.   Plaque Bronze plaque commemorating 11 soldiers of the 357th Infantry Regiment, 90th Infantry Division.  It is situated directly above a smaller plaque that marks the site of the interred ashes of Lieutenant Colonel Edward Smith Hamilton, the "Liberator of Hayange."  

Monument Text:

A la memoire des soldats du 357eme d'infanterie 

90eme division de l'armee americaine tombes pour la 

liberation du Hayange le 10 septembre 1944 morts aux service

de leur patrie et pour la liberte de l'humanite 

Nous n'oublierons pas

Company A

Albert Lemmon

Alphonse T. Ludwig

Willian L. Minton

Donald Miller

Lawrence A. Peters

Richard Fern

Gabriel J. Poletts

Bernard A. White

Company C

Vernie D. Liebl

Rex L. Sprouse

Company D

Stanley A. Wozniczka

In honor of those soldiers of the 357th Infantry 90th Division US-Army

who in the liberation of Hayange on 10 September 1944 died in 

the service of their country and the freedom of mankind  

We shall not forget

ON ACADEMIA-PART TWO: WHEN GENDER FLUIDITY (AKA TRANS MOVEMENT) TRUMPS STEM STUDIES

You know the system is broken when a College Administrator, in this case a Dean of Student Affairs, in a rather pompous tone and condescending manner, refers to your "adult" child as "your student" this, and "your student" that, but never as "your son." In his self importance driven legalese, he shows zero compassion but loads of self righteousness even as he adopts a deceptive conciliatory tone.

That is when you know: They've got him in their malevolent clutches. And, the battle to save your child from the cult is over before it has even begun. Yet, unbeknownst to them, they have messed with the wrong Tiger Mom aka me.

Yup, I realize this must all sound like riddles. But please bear with me...allow me to speak my peace. Believe me, I've earned this right. As, I'm now painfully aware, as many other parents have learned the hard painful way that the LGBTQRSTUVWXYZ ad nauseum movement in just another weapon in the rather large arsenal of those dark forces of evil. The same forces that condemn women, such as myself, who place motherhood and raising moral children above all else. Yes, sometimes even above our own husbands, especially when there are medical challenges to be overcome.

These are the same forces who hate this amazing country, who hate males (except the self hating ones desperate to "fit in" and therefore self criticize/condemn their own biology), who hate light, love darkness, and pursue a bizarre path of pretzelish complexity, even though the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) principle will do just fine

We've all been ambushed. Some of us have actually been in combat zones and know it only takes one ambush for 'lights out.'

In recent years, however, Dr. Josephson has testified against the trend of treating children with gender dysphoria (the persistent condition of identifying with the gender opposite one's birth sex) with treatments affirming a transgender identity. Drugs that block puberty or cross-sex hormones can endanger a child's long-term psychological health, he argued.

https://pjmedia.com/video/rep-nadler-refers-to-trans-critical-woman-as-he-while-slamming-her-testimony/

https://pjmedia.com/trending/child-psychology-prof-effectively-fired-for-opposing-transgenderism-fights-back/

THE GAELS

ON BEING 'CONTROVERSIAL': MY 'BARACK OBAMA-MUSLIM APOSTATE?' OPED AND THE AFTERMATH

My first op-ed (Barack Obama- Muslim Apostate?) ended my chances of an academic career.

https://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2008/0519/p09s02-coop.html

I kid you not.
Why?

Because I wrote an oped that went viral globally and endured abuse and threats from various quarters. But that wasn't the real reason I suspect. The reason: How dare I depict our soon-to-be first Black American President in a poor light! I must be a racist, Islamophobe, homophobe, elitist, capitalist, zionist, populist, misogynist, ad nauseum. In short, persona non grata in the eyes of academics who adored Obama for some reason.

Why did I write this oped 'Barack Obama-Muslim Apostate? For Al Qaeda the answer, and the implication, is clear'? published in the reputable Christian Science Monitor. The reasons really had little to do with Obama actually.

THE STORY BEHIND THE OP-ED

On December 27th 2007, Benazir Bhutto, the daughter of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, Paksitan's first female Prime Minister (1988-90; 93-96) was assassinated  in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. It was the second attempt by Pakistan's military via gullible proxies. This time they succeeded. The hosts of Osama bin Laden killed the woman who was calling them out, and was America's favorite to regain the premiership via the ballot box. Hiding OBL in Abbotabad  wasn't something the military wanted her, as prime minister, to be privy to; nor the Americans for that matter.

On September 25th, 2007, Benazir Bhutto gave her last public address in America hosted by the Middle East Institute in Washington D.C. At the time I was working as a contractor with the US Marine Corps based out of Quantico. I attended her presentation and admired her courage for speaking truth to power vis-s-vis Pakistan's military apparatus. I was also a bit concerned (about her safety) and thought, notwithstanding her courage, it was a bit naive (or fatalistic) of her to be laying it all out to a Washington audience given what Pakistan's military apparatus is capable of. We were both familiar with it. Her, far more so.

After her presentation, I went up to speak to her. When I introduced myself, she met me like a long lost friend since my late father, a journalist, had been close to her father, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto (a man who was hanged by the military junta under dubious circumstances), from the begining of Bhutto's political career. Notwithstanding her father's obvious flaws (I was no fan of him unlike my father  who was loyal to the end), she was a devoted daughter. Something I could certainly relate to. It was the first, and last, time she hugged me as she left with my business card. After meeting her, I felt like I needed a shower. Although she was just another quintessential career politician with a corrupt past, I felt sorry for her. She seemed to have a death wish.
However, what she said that day was actually the truth spoken eloquently.

Here is her warning speech:

https://www.c-span.org/video/?201169-1/benazir-bhuttos-final-address-washington-dc-2007

The first assassination attempt on Benazir occurred on October 19th, 2007. The day she returned to Pakistan to contest the election. Two bomb attacks on her entourage killed almost 200 and wounded hundreds. She survived having just climbed back inside the armored vehicle. The junta meant business yet, strangely, no major changes were made in her security. On December 27th, 2007, with the help of suicide bombers, and decoys, the military cleverly linked to the tribal belt (the usual fall guys), the mission was accomplished. This time her armored vehicle couldn't save this brave but tragic woman. Benazir outlived her father by three years. She was 54. ZA Bhutto, her father, was 51, when they hanged him in 1979 after a kangaroo court trial. In the interim, both her brothers died violently. Her elder brother purportedly at the instigation of her husband (and possibly Benazir herself). Her father's nemesis, Zia ul Haq was assassinated along with most of the top military brass on August 17, 1988. So Pakistan ain't no picnic. 

Anyhow, something snapped in me. It was time to identify, in some sort of public forum, Pakistan's military's role in the rise of Al Qaeda, and its suspected role in hosting OBL.

BACKGROUND ON THE OPED

People have said Obama and I have similar backgrounds. I disagreed/disagree. Sure we are both --defacto- Muslims born to Muslim fathers. But his father was a dishonorable bigamist, and a violent alcoholic to boot. While my father, married to one woman (my mom) for over forty years, had led an honorable life, was a man of integrity who had never played the 'colonialist' card to get ahead. He was all about merit. Politically, we were never on the same sheet of music (he had drunk deep at the socialist ideological well at university in the 1930s), but the neat thing about my father was that he encouraged independent thought, even if he didn't agree with some of my views. His love had always been unconditional. Enough said.

Obama was the perfect canvas --not that there weren't genuine concerns on how his Presidency would impact relations with the Muslim world, especially since by calling himself a 'Christian' he was, in essence, declaring his 'apostasy'; a death penalty offense according Islamic doctrine (Shariah Law). Should he have any personal baggage, along with the 'apostasy' card, he'd be open up to all sorts of black mail and/or leveraging.

I wrote the oped in March of 2008. Sent it out to the NY Times, Christian Science Monitor (CSM), Washington Post, etc etc. No bites. In late April, CSM's wonderful op ed editor expressed possible interest but I had to understandably tweak it. NY Times and Washington Post turned it down. Imagine my surprise to read Edward Luttwak's "President Apostate?" in the New York Times on May 12!  It sounded incredibly similar to my theme to the extent that when CSM published my oped "Barack Obama-Muslim Apostate?" on May 19th, I received emails angrily accusing me of plagiarism (I still have the submission emails --including the one I sent to NY Times).

The title took me aback. The editor of Christian Science Monitor chose it. Authors of opeds generally don't select the title. Thought it was a wee bit incendiary but then noted the NYT title. My preference ("Obama in Osama's Eyes: A Jihadi's Dream Candidate") was perhaps just as incendiary in the eyes of Obama's supporters (I wasn't one given his background and associations).

CONTENTS OF THE OPED
https://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2008/0519/p09s02-coop.html

More on the contents later.

ON BECOMING A 'RECOVERING' ACADEMIC

Some, in hindsight, suggested that perhaps writing this op ed piece was a bad career move. Others --including a tenured professor friend of mine-- had mentioned that I shouldn't write anything 'controversial' as I searched for an academic position soon after completing my Phd in May of 2007. 'Stay below the radar...until you get tenure,' was the well meaning advice. But: WTH. Whatever happened to the pursuit of academic scholarship devoid of agendas (overt at least, the sub-conscious is another matter)?

Irrespective of the fact that the social sciences in America today have 'quotas' based on background, gender, ethnicity etc etc vice merit, I --as a female political scientist with a South Asian/Pushtun background-- should have had a fighting chance. I'd written a dissertation on a 'hot' topic (gender politics in the Muslim world), with the appropriate background (over 18 years living in the Muslim world), language skills etc etc. However, I would find out in my search for a tenured track position that I was persona non grata, especially amongst the feminists in academia.

Undeterred, I continued to apply for academic positions in political science departments commensurate with my academic training and expertise, specifically jobs that sought expertise in South Asia or the Middle East. Meanwhile to bolster my credentials, I wrote scholarly articles. As luck would have it, the article whittling process of scholarly journals is generally rigorous and involves blind peer review so merit still can level the playing field. Prestigious journals like Terrorism and Political Violence is one such example under the excellent stewardship of Dr David Rapoport. My article "Haram or Halal? Islamists' Use of Suicide Attacks as 'Jihad'" passed muster and was published by them as one of my first scholarly publications, for which I remain deeply grateful. Despite numerous scholarly articles and a book based on my dissertation (The Politics of State Intervention: Gender Politics in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Iran), I couldn't gain any traction in academia and, eventually, decided there was no point in any further scholarly articles, nor in applying for an academic position.

And, given the tragicomic state of affairs in academia today (social sciences), wherein often the lunatics seem to running the asylum thanks to a seemingly terrified stance of college administrations vis-a-vis ludicrous and vicious demands of a nasty vocal minority on campus these days, it may appear that there is indeed a silver lining.

See article:
https://www.chronicle.com/article/Academic-Job-Hunts-From-Hell-/236635


PS: Due to a hectic schedule will return to explore the contents of said oped upon my return with an edit.

SYRIAN MADNESS: FALSE FLAGS AND AMERICA'S UNJUST INTERVENTION(S)

What the hell is going on in Washington? 

Sure it is a daily cringe worthy soap opera which tarnishes America's global image. Being a laughing stock for exposing all our dirty laundry on an hourly basis via MSM, online, individual tweets etc. is one thing; but recent events --sabre rattling against Russia and Syria without careful thought-- suggests nothing has changed since the Bush II era. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Egypt (which the Egyptian people managed to save via a peoples' revolution in 2013) and Syria. All epic disasters, playing right into the hands of our enemies (and they are quite a few, state and non-state, to include so-called "allies"). Bleeding us. Weakening us.

Exactly what Osama Bin Laden sought to do with the 9/11 attack.

Get us to overreact and get American troops mired in a quagmire(s) in the Muslim world in order to leverage for Al Qaeda and their paymasters agendas. Not to mention getting to fight other peoples' fights that we should prudently avoid if the stakes do not involve our specific American interests. 

It is always easy for politicians to send others sons and daughters into harm's way.  All this talk about honoring our military. 

Which brings me to the question: Who Gains? 

Certainly not the American people. 

Eisenhower's prescient warning during his farewell address rings true over half a century later: we should avoid foreign misadventures and rein in our military industrial complex. The only war America has fought since WW II that can be argued to have been worth the pursuit was the Gulf War to liberate Kuwait. And, even that is stretching it a bit. 

This is not a pacifist stance by any means. On the contrary, American foreign --defense-- policy should be based on pragmatic realism driven primarily by one question: how does a specific foreign (or domestic) action benefit the interests of these United States?    

On Syria, sober thought would begin with a critical analysis involving the larger, historical, context which constitutes the Syrian crisis and the greater Middle East crises. Irresponsible saber rattling and sound bites can escalate, and the end results could do great harm to these United States and bolster the interests of our enemies.

Foreign intervention(s) that are antithetical to American interests must make our Founding Fathers turn in their respective graves. 

Without going into specifics, just a quick assessment would suggest caution. The Assad regime has nothing to gain by killing a few civilians with so-called chemical agents. It would be a propaganda nightmare for a  beseiged, friendless pariah regime. A public relations nightmare at a time when the Syrian government is winning. Da'ish/ISIS is on the run. 

Given our reaction to the last "chemical" attack --at Khan Shaykhun on 4 April 2017, just a week after the Trump administration announced it no longer sought regime change in Syria-- a replay seems to be a central component of a desperate entity (Da'ish/ISIS): a Da'ish false flag operation that leads the kuffar ('infidels') to do their (and their state paymasters) bidding: ouster of Bashar Assad and his government. Note this attack almost one year later at Douma (7 April 2018) came days after Trump announced on 3 April 2018 that America would pull out US troops from Syria. The pattern is quite clear. And, a preliminary investigation would exonerate the Assad government since these announcements bolster Assad's rule, not threaten it. 

Who is behind this ill advised Washington sabre rattling?  That is another question which needs to be raised. 

It is foreign interests, not American ones, who seek to compel us to use our blood and treasure in order to attain their own interests. These entities do not seem to realize how precipitous this approach is. Those flippant (or blindly optimistic) about Syrian regime change, have not thought through the long term fall out for the entire Levant and beyond. A completely destabilized Syria (not that it is all that stable today thanks to us) would encourage the flood of refugees, the extermination of what's left of the Christian population (protected by the Assad government) of the Middle East, and the proliferation of Islamist terrorists. 

President Trump ran on a platform that advocated getting America out of foreign misadventures that have cost us far too many lives and limbs (not to mention treasure). Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen were/are all "wars" that never rose to a WW II type of threat to our national security. If Trump continues Obama's policies, his base won't stand for it at election time. 

If we really are serious about national security i.e. protecting our homeland from another 9/11, we need to get serious about internal measures starting with our visa system, entry mechanisms, and securing our border ASAP. That would be a prudent realistic endeavor to address our national security challenge as it pertains to the post 9/11 environment. 

Trying to piss off the Russians and China simultaneously is sheer madness. Better yet, get inventive vis-a-vis dealing with these two entities. Making post-communist Russia an enemy vice an ally against the global forces that favor the type of authoritarianism inherent in communism is fools folly. This is the post-Cold War era. Russia is not the Soviet Union. NATO is a stumbling block to better relations with Russia which frankly should have eventually been abolished after the Warsaw Pact was dissolved in 1991. But that is a discussion left for another day.

Kudos to Tucker Carlson for daring to think and ask some pertinent questions on Syria:

SEDITION IN OUR REPUBLIC

THE NUNES MEMO: 

TIP OF THE ICE BERG

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/02/02/nunes-memo-exposes-abuse-power/1088772001/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5346375/Memo-reveals-Fusion-GPS-employed-wife-DOJ-official.html

What has transpired is not a partisan issue as being readily depicted in MSM. Rather, these, and other, events raise serious concerns about the current health of our Republic.  

KEY POINTS:

1) The United States "watchers" (NSA, FBI, CIA etc) have become politicized. 

2) This latest "co-option" attempt didn't begin in 2015 but has been a slow and steady progression which goes as far back to President Bill Clinton's first administration. It accelerated right after 9/11 (Patriot Act) and gained traction during Obama's administration.

3) Arguments/false concerns over "sources and methods" being revealed by unclassifying this memo by FBI et al ring hollow as exemplified by the contents of said memo.  Nothing and NO ONE has been sacrificed/compromised by the release of what exactly transpired under the guise of "national security." 

4) Redacting the names of those who engaged in seditious behavior and have thus violated their oath to the US Constitution, would have only served to embolden, and ensure, the continuation of a disturbing pattern of sedition which can best be described as a coup d'etat in slow motion against a duly elected President in a Constitutional Republic. The implications of what has been unfolding are truly frightening and not inconsequential for the long term survival of this Republic. 

5) The very institution, the FBI, that is the lead LAW ENFORCEMENT agency has been compromised in that some of its employees have put selfish interest above their oath to serve honorably, and to follow the letter of the law. Not all of course by any measure but they will bear the brunt of the tarnishment. The FACT that NO ONE resigned in protest, or deemed it essential for the survival of this Republic to come forward and put country above self, speaks to how rotten the core has become. And it is a very large core.

6) When the senior "law enforcers" embark on a mission to ensure that the most corrupt and coopted candidate  is elected, you know you've a very serious embedded structural problem in your Federal Government. When the very laws they are authorized to enforce are violated, what recourse do the citizenry have?

7) The entire "Russian collusion" narrative that is fueling the so-called Mueller investigation of President Trump has been like a smelly red herring. As they say: Follow the money.

8) It was never the Russians intervening in our election or surveilling a Presidential candidate's campaign headquarters. IT WAS OUR OWN "WATCHERS." The ones who have the power to spy on each and every one of us (which they certainly do with no compunction under the so-called "Patriot Act") in various ways. And, set the IRS on us when we dare to write about Benghazi on blogs or disclose our sensitive non-attribution briefs provided in a military college  setting to Wired Magazine without permission in order to place a bull's eye on our foreheads, and to silence and intimidate us. 

 9) To reiterate, there was never any "Russian collusion" by the Trump Campaign. But there certainly was a British based one with the Clinton Campaign. The same mandarins in Washington were working with Christopher Steele, a MI-6 operative, and judging from the Steele fiasco and his pathetic "dossier" the question should be asked: Who is Christopher Steele? Any investigation must scrutinize this man to the extent that it leads them to those in the shadows here and abroad. 

10) Congress will need to have the backbone to move towards exposing all to the American People. The people have this right. They also have the right to demand severe accountability and a massive overhaul of our "intelligence" infrastructure which has been compromised to such a degree by certain special interests (oligarhs of various backgrounds) at the expense of the larger good i.e. the people's interests. How we go about this is going to be like walking through an active minefield with snowshoes on. 

I'm terrified of the implications. Have been for some time. You should be too. 

P.S: The fact that the FBI found no wrongdoing when it was accidently uncovered that our former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton used a personal server for all her official State Department email, not to mention the numerous violations of her and her staff vis-a-vis handling (and unauthorized destruction) of CLASSIFIED materiel was one of many clues that Washington has been corrupted and there are one set of laws for the oligarchs and another for the minions. Truth is truly stranger than fiction.

P.P.S: Representative Devin Nunes is a very brave and honorable man. Support for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) is deeply entrenched in Congress. FISA was introduced by Senator Ted Kennedy in 1978, and was signed into law by President Jimmy Carter. However, recent events underscore a need to revisit the constitutionality (and utility) of the secretive (and unaccountable) FISA Court. Critics, like Judge Napolitano, argue that such a secret court is unconstitutional. See his arguments against the FISA Court:



https://www.creators.com/read/judge-napolitano/09/13/is-the-fisa-court-constitutional

NOTE: A German movie, with English sub-titles, called "The Lives of Others," hauntingly encapsulates life in a Police State, namely the German Democratic Republic in this case. There are many current, and former, "Republics" across the globe that are police states such as the Islamic Republic of Iran, Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), People's Republic of China, Socialist Republic of Vietnam, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea etc. Not all "Republics" are created equal and the slow, or rapid, descent into life in a Police State is a real possibility without constant oversight and vigilance with a particular focus on "the watchers" both in the public and the private sectors. The link to this movie:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405094/