Hard To Understand

I was listening to Rusty Humphries on Monday night. He was talking about the alleged terrorist Mohamed Osman Mohamud. He was trying to personalize what might have happened. He first started talking about being in Washington for the holidays. It was cold so they were talking about going to the Christmas Tree lighting at Pioneer Square in Portland. The weather evidently warmed up and they stayed in Washington. He said if something would have happened at Pioneer Square, he and his family could have been there and been hurt. Latter in the show, after calling Mohamud a “punk ass kid” a dozen or so times, he was saying he was supposed to have been at Pioneer Square that day. He went from talking about going to Pioneer Square because of cold weather to supposed to have been there. Do people re-write events to make things seem like they could have been much worse?

During the show Humphries kept berating Mohamed. He kept saying that he was so important that he was named twice. I must assume that Humphries thinks that Mohamed and Mohamud are the same name. As I stated in “Terrorist Or Propaganda?” below, I don't think Mohamud is innocent but more questions of the FBI need to be asked and answered.

I don't know what good it does for people like Humphries to call names and try to belittle the alleged bomber. It doesn't help get us any closer to the truth and it makes Humprhies less than credible in anything else he says. I guess it could give Humphries a feeling of superiority. I usually only hear or read this type of name calling from Liberals when they don't have any facts to back up their arguments but even then they don't do it so many times during their rant. Don't get me wrong, I'm not perfect. I've probably called people names in the past but I try to base by discussions on facts provided and informed opinion.

During the show, Humphries opined that Mohamud should be put in jail for life after he is convicted. He didn't think he should be put to death because he had not killed anybody. It's Humphries opinon that Pfc. Bradley Manning, the person who allegedly leaked classified documents to Wikileaks, should be put to death because the leaks have caused deaths. What is interesting is that there have not been any alleged, let alone proven, deaths related to the leaks.

Terrorist Or Propaganda?

Mohamed Osman Mohamud was arrested in Portland. He had just dialed a cell phone that he allegedly believed would kill or maim hundreds of innocent people. This story doesn't pass the smell test. Mohamud likely had no contact with anyone other than FBI agents. There could be one other person he was in contact with if you believe the FBI's story of an unindicted associate overseas? With the FBI's record of deceit, I for one don't believe their story. FBI agents provided the plan, the van and the supposed explosives. The FBI also used illegal explosives in the presence of Mohamud. Mohamud dialed the cell phone twice so he is by no means innocent but I doubt he would have done any of this had he not been approached by the FBI in the first place.

It is worrisome that the public is not asking more questions about the FBI's role in this incident. I believe that the FBI is out of control in it's effort to find terrorists. They're not finding many so they've resorted to creating them. I wonder how far citizens will let this country proceed towards a police state before they call for a halt? I just hope we ask our government to rein them in before it is to late to stop them.

Where Is Justice?

David Olofson is in jail for thirty months because he happened to own a firearm that was defective and would sometimes fire more then one round for each pull of the trigger. This made it an unregistered machine gun to the ATF. A government agency that had to use several types of ammunition to duplicate the problem. The job of any law enforcement agency should be to find truth and justice, not to rack up convictions. The defense firearms expert was not allowed to physically inspect or test the rifle. This article is not specifically about Mr. Olofson, it's about the abuse and selective application of the laws of the country.

An Congressional ethics committee document indicates that Representative Charles Rangel owed The IRS $16,775 as of 1990, but he has paid some of the back taxes. It's important to understand that Representative Rangel was the Chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means committee which writes the nations tax laws. Mr. Rangel was convicted of 12 ethics violations. Many of these violations would be considered crimes for we lowly serfs and we would be charged with crimes. One of the violations was “Violating Ethics in Government Act and House Rule26: Mr. Rangel submitted incomplete and inaccurate financial disclosure statements, and failt to report or erroneously reported items he was required to disclose under the Ethics in Government Act from 1998 through 2008. In particular, Mr. Rangel amended certain financial disclosure statements only after a House committee began investigating his reporting of income from his Dominican villa.” How many of us would still be free if we filed a fraudulent government document?

In late 2003, former national security adviser to President Clinton, Samuel Berger, stashed highly classified documents under a trailer in downtown Washington in order to evade detection by the National Archives personnel. He then removed and destroyed them. Many, if not all, of the documents were originals so there is no way to know the extent of Mr. Berger's crime. What was Mr. Berger's punishment? He agreed to pay a $10,00 fine and accept a three-year suspension of his national security clearance. Would you or I get such lenient punishment for mishandling, actually out right stealing, classified data?

The CIA learned that in 1996, John Deutch, former director, had mishandled classified materials by keeping them on several unsecured home and office computers. These internet connected computers were also used by Mr. Deutch's children. The CIA didn't report this security breach to the Justice Department until March 1998. Congress was not notified until June of 1998. In April of 1999, the DOJ found that Mr. Deutch's actions, while sloppy, where not criminal. His security clearance was revoked in July of 1999, 3 months after his friends in high places let him off the hook. I'm sure we would get such treatment. Mr. Deutch's case was reopened shortly after Wen Ho Lee, who didn't have friends in high places, was railroaded through the system by Energy Secretary Bill Richardson and others. Mr. Deutch was eventually convicted of mishandling classified information. President Clinton later pardoned him but not Wen Ho Lee.

With such massive willful abuse of authority it's easy to understand why such a large percentage of people distrust the government. What is not so easy to understand is why that percentage is not 100? I guess the families of the corrupt are forced to agree with them.