#ieds

Every year, Lynn Hastings, the UN Humanitarian and Resident Coordinator in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, issues a press release before the school year discussing how Israel and Jewish settlers have been awful to Palestinian children.

This year, as far as I can tell for the first time, the press release also mentions a couple of ways that Palestinian terror groups are endangering Palestinian children..

Physical barriers placed by Palestinians in refugee camps, some rigged with explosive materials, are threatening the safety of children and making it harder for them to reach their classrooms.  And reports continue of children being enrolled in “summer camps” by armed groups, increasing their risk of being exposed to violence or military content.   

I've mentioned that the IEDs that Palestinian terror groups have been placing on the roads of camps in order to blow up Israeli vehicles are a danger to ordinary Palestinians, but this is the first time I have seen any NGO mention the danger, even if it downplays the danger.

Similarly, even though these "summer camps" have been run by terror groups for decades, this is the first time I have seen the UN say anything negative about them. The sentence is comical: "increasing their risk of being exposed?" That is the entire purpose of the camps, and there are lots of videos and photos showing the children with real or mock weapons!

Hastings fails to mention that most of the "children" killed by Israel this year were either child soldiers recruited by terror groups or were actively engaged in attacks. 

Perhaps the UN felt forced to mention Palestinian responsibility towards the children's welfare because it has had to admit that it couldn't open up schools in the Lebanese Ein el-Hilweh camp because of terror groups that have taken over the schools.

THE GOP DOUBLES DOWN

TCinLA

I thought waking up this morning to see a photo of Trump at his hatealong last night in Waco with him standing in front of photos of the January 6 insurrection while the “song” “Justice for All” he recorded with the “J6 Prison Choir,” the insurrectionists he claims are patriotic Americans who participated in a “righteous protest” - essentially watching him remove the mask and admit he did in fact incite the insurrection and saying “Yeah, I did it - what are you going to do about it?” - was as strange as things were going to get this final Sunday in March, 2023.

I thought having a confessed statutory rapist and draft dodger - one-hit wonder Ted Nugent - calling Volodomyr Zelenskyy a “homosexual weirdo” was a about as crass a new low for the MAGAts as things were going to get.

I thought having Marjorie Traitor Goon publicly creating an alternative reality by calling the J6 defendants political prisoners who are being “badly treated” in a facility where they have access to computers and the internet, exercise and health services - all completely unavailable to the average inmate of the DC Jail - was a completely laughable denial of reality.

I was wrong.

Yesterday, the three blind mice - Gym Jordan and his co-conspirators masquerading as chairmen of three House committees - responded to District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s reply to their first letter sent this past week by doubling down in a second letter on their intention to intervene in the New York City investigation ahead of possible criminal charges against Trump, revealing they plan to to consider whether Congress should take legislative action on three separate issues “to protect former and/or current Presidents from politically motivated prosecutions by state and local officials.” In other words, to find a way to make such a prosecution of Donald Trump impossible.

Trump admits his complicity in the January 6 insurrection and leaders of the Republican Party take steps to insulate him from accountability before they even know what specific charges he will be indicted on.

The Republicans declare war on reality and the rule of law. THAT is as strange as things got on this final weekend of March, 2023.

Bragg responded to the letter after it became public last night, writing, “We evaluate cases in our jurisdiction based on the facts, the law, and the evidence. It is not appropriate for Congress to interfere with pending local investigations. This unprecedented inquiry by federal elected officials into an ongoing matter serves only to hinder, disrupt and undermine the legitimate work of our dedicated prosecutors. As always, we will continue to follow the facts and be guided by the rule of law in everything we do.”

A spokesperson for Oversight Committee Democrats has stated, “Chairman Jordan, Comer, and Steil believe former President Trump is above the law. This outrageous position is further evidence of former President Trump and MAGA extremists’ hold on Congressional Republicans.”

The MAGA Republican Party has now officially declared war on the rule of law.

Here are the high points from the Letter:

“Notably, your reply letter did not dispute the central allegations at issue—that you, under political pressure from left-wing activists and former prosecutors in your office, are reportedly planning to use an alleged federal campaign finance violation, previously declined by federal prosecutors, as a vehicle to extend the statute of limitations on an otherwise misdemeanor offense and indict for the first time in history a former President of the United States.”

No, you morons, it wasn’t “previously declined” by federal prosecutors. The Trump-appointed Attorney General Bill Barr, citing the so-called “Nixon rule” that a sitting president cannot be indicted and prosecuted, ORDERED the DOJ attorneys to drop the case.

“Contrary to the central argument set forth in your letter, this matter does not simply involve local or state interests. Rather, the potential criminal indictment of a former President of the United States by an elected local prosecutor of the opposing political party (and who will face the prospect of re-election) implicates substantial federal interests, particularly in a jurisdiction where trial-level judges also are popularly elected. If state or local prosecutors are able to engage in politically motivated prosecutions of Presidents of the United States (former or current) for personal acts, this could have a profound impact on how Presidents choose to exercise their powers while in office. For example, a President could choose to avoid taking action he believes to be in the national interest because it would negatively impact New York City for fear that he would be subject to a retaliatory prosecution in New York City.”

This is wholly and completely specious, but what Republican argument about anything isn’t?

“Likewise, because the federal government has a compelling interest in protecting the physical safety of former or current Presidents, any decision to prosecute a former or current President raises difficult questions concerning how to vindicate that interest in the context of a state or local criminal justice system. For these reasons and others, we believe that we now must consider whether Congress should take legislative action to protect former and/or current Presidents from politically motivated prosecutions by state and local officials, and if so, how those protections should be structured.”

“Second, the Committees’ inquiry has an obvious legitimate legislative purpose and is “a subject on which legislation could be had.” To begin with, as discussed above, Congress has a specific and manifestly important interest in preventing politically motivated prosecutions of current and former Presidents by elected state and local prosecutors, particularly those tried before elected state and local trial-level judges. Therefore, the Committee on the Judiciary, as a part of its broad authority to develop criminal justice legislation, must now consider whether to draft legislation that would, if enacted, insulate current and former presidents from such improper state and local prosecutions. These legislative reforms may include, for example, broadening the existing statutory right of removal of certain criminal cases from state court to federal court.”

Here is the argument to use the federal government to protect Trump.

“Moreover, as discussed above, your prosecutorial decision to indict a former President may cause a potential confrontation between federal and local law-enforcement authorities. Federal law requires the United States Secret Service to protect a former President.8 Therefore, your unprecedented prosecutorial decision raises the potential for conflict between the federal law-enforcement officials required to protect the former President and local law-enforcement officials required to enforce your indictment and exercise control of him throughout his presence in the local criminal justice system. Such a novel and potentially fraught collision of federal and local law-enforcement officials with the safety of a former President at stake is certainly a matter of interest for the Committees. The Committees’ oversight is necessary to inform potential legislation that would address or remedy any potential conflicts between federal and local authorities.”

You mendacious morons! It has already been established that state and local law enforcement would COOPERATE with the Secret Service, which would coordinate Trump surrendering after indictment. There is no possibility whatsoever of any “shoot out” happening.

This is the most audacious assault on the rule of law by the Republicans. They are ALL, each and every one of them, traitors to their oath to protect and defend the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, because ALL THEM ARE THE DOMESTIC ENEMY.

Marine Veteran Micah Herndon Crawls Across Finish Line at Boston Marathon – A Matter of Honor for Fallen Friends

The Marine Corps Times reported that Micah Herndon, 31, deployed to Marjah, Afghanistan in 2010 with the 1st Battalion, 3rd Marines (aka “Lava Dogs”). Monday’s Boston Marathon revealed that Micah was going to honor his fallen friends no matter what. When he began to experience severe leg cramps, he fell to the ground and crawled across the finish line.

Micah is no stranger to difficulties.…

 Click the buttons below to access the full episode on iTunes(Apple users), or Soundcloud(Android users). Be sure to like, share, subscribe, and download the episodes. Thank you.

GRP 104- This episode is co-hosted by the creator of The Veterans Project U.S. Army Veteran Tim Kolczak. Our guest for today is British Army combat veteran Geraint Jones. Gez served multiple tours of duty in Afghanistan and Iraq. We took a dive into what it was like serving during the height of the Iraq war in Basra where the British military was primarily operating. Basra at the time was like the wild west and Gez shares stories of his time patrolling into some of these areas as well as the complexity of dealing with very tight rules of engagement as a British warfighter.

 He shares some hilarious and tragic stories of life in Basra. We touched on several topics to include tourniquet use, politics in war, dealing with extreme heat while conducting operations, and searching for roadside bombs. This is a good one.

 0:00-Intro

 11:48-British Army Infantry

 24:28-Basra, Iraq

 43:07-Rules of engagement

 54:30-Operating in Iraqi heat

 1:00:38- “Orders Are Orders” checking for roadside bombs in Iraq  

 1:13:50-Tourniquet use

 1:20:42-Don’t mix politics and war

 You can keep up with Tim Kolczak at:

www.thevetsproject.com

www.instagram.com/theveteransproject

  Geraint Jones is on Instagram at:

www.instagram.com/grjbooks

  Follow my co-host and my pages on social media. Links below.

 Global Recon:

www.Globalrecon.net

 https://www.instagram.com/igrecon

 https://www.instagram.com/blackopsmatter

  www.twitter.com/igrecon

 https://www.facebook.com/GlobalReconPodcast/

  HP Lefler:

https://www.instagram.com/4runner.freyja

  Chantel Taylor:

https://www.instagram.com/mission_critical

  https://www.instagram.com/altern8rv

 Music provided by Caspian:

Depends on if you’re asking “how often do people run over mines left over from previous wars” or “how often do people blow up from a hidden explosive.” The first question, I have no idea; I imagine it depends on the area (certain locations are more likely to have old minefields) and what kind of mine was used.Nowadays our biggest concern in the Middle East isn’t landmines, it’s IEDs -- improvised explosive devices. Homemade bombs, if you will. These can be anything from an empty soda can to a dead animal carcass, so it’s almost impossible to really prevent them. When we had IED training we honestly were told that literally anything could be an IED and we just have to be really vigilant and report anything that looks suspicious, which as I said could mean reporting litter on the side of the road that wasn’t there yesterday, or a dirt pile that looks larger than the rest. That sounds a little extreme until you realize that even local trash collectors are at high risk of being severely injured or killed due to IEDs.How often a vehicle hits an IED depends on a lot of factors, namely the location, the enemy activity in the area, how close you are to enemy territory, how well built the IED was, how cleverly hidden the IED was, and whether it was put in a spot that a soldier would be likely to walk or drive over. Our routes are supposed to be monitored and scouted ahead of time for trouble, but any new route should be presumed trapped. We’ve actually developed specially armored vehicles who exist for the sole purpose of scouting out IEDs. USA Today says we’ve had 3,000 deaths due to IEDs and 33,000 wounded, which is significant when you consider that the US death toll’s currently around 7k and the wounded around 50k. So all things considered, I’d say it’s pretty likely.

-Kingsley