#michael yon

MIGRANTS + RELIGIONS + BIG BUSINE$$ = CRISE FRONTALIÈRE (ET AVANT-HIER)

"En plus de l'ONU qui offre des trousses sanitaires et MSF avec ses cliniques (carte ci-haut), d'importants groupes caritatifs religieux sont derrière cette vague (ce tsunami) de migrants illégaux : Catholic Charities/US Conference of Catholic Bishops + Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services + Church World Services + World Relief + HIAS Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society + Episcopal Migration Ministries qui affichent des revenus annuels de plus de US$2 milliards (non imposables, bien sûr). "Ces migrants proviennent d'Amérique du Sud mais aussi du Moyen-Orient (Istanbul et vols vers la Colombie), Chine avec leurs réseaux de passeurs professionnels, Venezuela (Iraniens parfaitement hispanophones) et autres contrées surexploitées par des criminels et autres extrémistes de la droite subversive. "Ces masses surtout masculines (où sont les femmes et les enfants ?) passent aussi par le Canada "la plus vaste frontière au monde."

Michael Yon, le plus expérimenté des correspondants de guerre états-uniens; ex Green Beret durant son entrevue avec Del Bigtree, l'animateur de The Highwire le 1er février 2024 - Borderline Episode 357 "Les organismes de bienfaisance catholiques sont partout au-delà de la frontière au Texas. Certains embauchant des voyous fascistes en uniforme, à la fois de la sécurité privée et des flics corrompus, pour protéger leur opération de traite des êtres humains dans la vallée du Rio Grande.  "HIAS est PARTOUT au Panama, construisant des camps pour envahisseurs avec le soutien de Mayorkas (patron de Homeland Security), ancien membre du conseil d'administration avec Sergey Brin (fondateur de Google), qui sont derrière ce projet avec leur massif pouvoir politique et médiatique. "Rappelez-vous, la lutte contre les tenants du HIAS soutient en fait les Juifs orthodoxes. Le « H » de Hebrew dans HIAS est aléatoire car il ne représente que les sionistes et non pas les Juifs. La lutte contre les « Catholic » Charities soutient les catholiques traditionnels. Et ce sans compter sur l'entreprise privée (ci-bas, les "partenaires corporatifs du HIAS).

"Le marxisme adore les techniques de viol de l'esprit conçues pour vous embrouiller.

Many black Americans are even more appalled at black degenerates because when they themselves succeed, they never get full credit for their accomplishments because people assume they made success because of affirmative action -- which sometimes is true and sometimes not.  

President Obama for that matter definitely succeeded in part due to a form of affirmative action, and he still plays the victim card like a violin.  Everyone can see it, including him.

A friend of mine was a black military officer who was badly wounded in Iraq.  When he recovered after the terrible gunshot wound he returned to combat in yet another war, Afghanistan.  There he did excellent work as a brigade commander -- which I personally witnessed.  Yet at least one journalist openly said that he was given preferential treatment because he is black.  This is wrong.  My friend became a brigade commander because he was a badass Soldier, very tough, super smart, and proud of his Army and country.  Not because he was black.  And now he is completing his PhD. He is a leader of men.

A veteran's discussion of "Thank you for your service."

Major Mark Bieger cradles Farah, a little girl wounded in a malicious car bomb attack on patrolling US forces in Iraq, while local children were gathered around the vehicles. Bieger rushed Farah to the US hospital, but she died in his arms. (Image by Michael Yon, 14 MAY 2005. Source.)

(Blogpost by David P. Ervin, posted 2 FEB 2015 on MEA. Source.)

I was recently talking with a friend about the dialogue surrounding ‘thank you for your service’ in the military and veteran community. When I mentioned that it might not be the best thing to say based on what I’d read and heard, she was perplexed. She wondered how a seemingly harmless phrase like that could take on such negative connotations. After thinking about it for while, I wondered myself. What is wrong with it? Given the pervasiveness of this phrase’s criticism, it’s important to examine what we’re really talking about when we talk about ‘thank you for your service.’

The spectrum of denigration of this saying within the military and veteran community is wide. Some have said it doesn’t go far enough, that society should do more than utter a phrase and offer a free meal on Veterans’ Day to welcome back its warriors. Some say it’s simply sycophantic and has more to do with making people feeling good about themselves than legitimately honoring a veteran’s service. And there’s a chorus of voices that claim such a platitude is a symptom of widespread disengagement, sort of a proxy for any meaningful conversation about war. Still others say there’s simply no need to be thanked for something we volunteered to do.

While there is a degree of validity to much of this criticism, perhaps the interpretations are indicative of something deeper, something that speaks more about the perspective and experiences of post- 9/11 veterans than of the meaning (or the lack of meaning) of the phrase itself.

It’s true that a tiny fragment of American society participated in Iraq and Afghanistan. While we were at war our peers were obtaining higher education or pursuing and building careers, something on which we got a late start because we chose to serve. Life went on normally for an overwhelming majority of US citizens. “America wasn’t at war,” so the saying goes, “America was at the mall.” Sebastian Junger and James Fallows have correctly pointed out that the wars following 9/11 were something that fell on the shoulders of the participants rather than the society in whose name they were fought. Junger discussed a situation in which the public simply doesn’t know what its military does, much less share the moral burden, and Fallows mentioned that the gap between cultures goes further, effectively stymieing realistic, constructive debate about military spending and foreign policy.“Thank you for your service” can, in that light, be seen as something of a hollow gesture coming from across a wide chasm between the experiences of those who fought and those that didn’t.

The character of those experiences themselves can shape the interpretation. Recently, the concept of ‘moral injury’ has garnered some attention. In summary, moral injury is the effects of taking part in an act that goes against basic human tenets of right or wrong, like killing. The ubiquity of civilians on modern, non-linear battlefields coupled with the guerilla tactics we encountered created situations in which innocent civilians were killed even while following the rules of war. Then there’s the feeling that we didn’t do enough or that we didn’t deserve to survive when so many didn’t. In these contexts the acceptance of gratitude seems inappropriate.

War unleashes a complex set of conflicting emotions. As young men and women we were awed by incredible displays of firepower even while knowing the obscenity of its purpose. Sometimes we loved it. Sometimes we hated it. Sometimes we hated that the fact that we loved it. And in the back of our minds, we knew it was something we chose to do. We’re proud of that even if we’re appalled at the sights we saw. That the overall experience can leave a veteran grappling with significant questions is not hard to fathom.