Posts Tagged ‘Terrorism’
One of seven people arrested over an alleged plot to launch a terrorist attack in Britain has been released without charge, police said Sunday, as detectives continued to question more than a dozen other people over two alleged plots.
The Metropolitan Police said the 30-year-old woman detained in London on Thursday has been freed.
Five men and a woman are still being questioned over allegations of “the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism.”
The suspects include a British Muslim convert who once appeared in a documentary about Islamist extremism and three brothers who were detained by armed police at their home near London’s Olympic Park.
They are among a spate of pre-Olympics arrests and security scares.
The Sunday Telegraph newspaper reported that a terrorist suspect who is subject to limits on his movements under a contentious order known as a Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measure was arrested in May after traveling by train five times to Stratford railway station, beside the Olympic Park.
The man, suspected of ties to Somalia’s al-Shabaab militants and identified in court documents as CF, did not enter the Olympic venue.
Separately, police in central England are questioning seven men arrested after a car stopped by police on a highway for being uninsured was found to contain guns, ammunition and other weapons. Police have not given full details of the haul but say the guns were not automatic and were not loaded.
On Thursday, armed police closed a highway in central England, evacuated dozens of passengers from a bus and sent in bomb disposal units after a passenger reported vapor coming from a bag. The source turned out to be an electronic cigarette, designed to help smokers quit.
Britain’s terrorist threat risk remains at substantial, the middle point on a five-point scale, meaning an attack is a strong possibility. Intelligence officials say there has been an expected increase in chatter among extremist groups ahead of the Olympics, but there are no specific or credible threats to the games.Share on Facebook
No one was able to remember three episodes of “extreme right wing terrorism” that were reported to have taken place in Lubbock because such acts of “extreme right wing terrorism” did not take place. An article appearing in The Huffington Post on Tuesday stated,
“Texas‘ Lubbock County has seen only extreme right-wing terrorism . . .”
The men were accused of luring blacks to their car and shooting them with a short-barreled shotgun.
The grand jury said the three defendants, a white supremacist and two Latino cousins, “discussed their mutual hatred of blacks and how they wanted to start a revolution or race war that would involve killing and eliminating blacks.”
The indictments, returned Tuesday in Lubbock under seal, were announced yesterday by the Justice Department. The federal charges could carry the death penalty, but no decision has been made on whether to seek it.
The grand jury said defendant Roy Ray Martin is a skinhead and member of the white supremacist South Bay Nazi Youth. Also indicted were cousins Ricky Rivera Mungia and Eli Trevino Mungia, friends of Martin.
Nazis are on the “extreme Left.” Thus, the three shootings in Lubbock were in reality “extreme Left Wing terrorism,” if indeed the crimes fit the criteria of “terrorism.”
The concluding Avalanche-Journal comments on the Nazi and his two cousins were,
Roy Ray Martin, Eli Trevino Mungia and Ricky Rivera Mungia each were sentenced to life plus 50 years in prison for the 1994 shooting spree directed at randomly selected black people.
If the three terrorist attacks included a “Neo-Nazi” and his two accomplices shooting black people or any people, the “terrorist” attacks that took place in Lubbock should be classified as “Extreme Left Wing Terrorism.”
It is of interest and concern that the “Extreme Left Wing Terrorism” attacks by PETA on the lab of Dr. John Orem were not even mentioned in the report. This might indicate that the “research” group that produce the report released on Tuesday had results in mind and may not have wanted facts to get in the way?
Nazi Fascism has been referred to as Right Wing for decades. This is a fabrication that has been successfully put forth by Left Wing academics and news media. The promotion of Nazi Fascists as Right Wing has been almost universally accepted as truth and needs to be vigorously challenged.
Fascism and Communism are the two primary forms of Socialism, whether the Left likes it or not.
Fascists pursue government control of the economy, the people, and everything else.
Conservatives support a small government, as our original Constitution mandates, with little power in the Federal government. We Conservatives want most of the power for We the People with what government power that is necessary kept at the local and state levels. Such beliefs, according to the report under discussion, can get mainstream Conservatives classified as advocates of “extreme right wing terrorism”!
Those on the Right support Liberty, free enterprise, and personal responsibility. Fascists, including Nazis, oppose each of these.
It will take a lot of Conservative courage to challenge the public perception that Nazis and other Fascists are promoters of Liberty, self-sufficiency, and economic freedom.
Examples of both World War II era and current Nazi Socialist activities include isolating and targeting Jews because of their economic prosperity, confiscating guns, attacking Judeo-Christian religious beliefs and banning public prayer, placing Elites in charge over the people, and advocating the elimination of the disabled.
The following is a good start in the understanding of Fascism:
Share on Facebook
Those who put a high value on words may recoil at the title of Jonah Goldberg’s new book, “Liberal Fascism.” As a result, they may refuse to read it, which will be their loss — and a major loss.
Those who value substance over words, however, will find in this book a wealth of challenging insights, backed up by thorough research and brilliant analysis.
This is the sort of book that challenges the fundamental assumptions of its time — and which, for that reason, is likely to be shunned rather than criticized.
Because the word “fascist” is often thrown around loosely these days, as a general term of abuse, it is good that “Liberal Fascism” begins by discussing the real Fascism, introduced into Italy after the First World War by Benito Mussolini.
The Fascists were completely against individualism in general and especially against individualism in a free market economy. Their agenda included minimum wage laws, government restrictions on profit-making, progressive taxation of capital, and “rigidly secular” schools.
Unlike the Communists, the Fascists did not seek government ownership of the means of production. They just wanted the government to call the shots as to how businesses would be run.
They were for “industrial policy,” long before liberals coined that phrase in the United States.
Indeed, the whole Fascist economic agenda bears a remarkable resemblance to what liberals would later advocate.
Moreover, during the 1920s “progressives” in the United States and Britain recognized the kinship of their ideas with those of Mussolini, who was widely lionized by the left.
Famed British novelist and prominent Fabian socialist H.G. Wells called for “Liberal Fascism,” saying “the world is sick of parliamentary politics.”
Another literary giant and Fabian socialist, George Bernard Shaw, also expressed his admiration for Mussolini — as well as for Hitler and Stalin, because they “did things,” instead of just talk. In Germany, the Nazis followed in the wake of the Italian Fascists, adding racism in general and anti-semitism in particular, neither of which was part of Fascism in Italy or in Franco’s Spain.
Even the Nazi variant of Fascism found favor on the left when it was only a movement seeking power in the 1920s.
W.E.B. DuBois was so taken with the Nazi movement that he put swastikas on the cover of a magazine he edited, despite complaints from Jewish readers.
Even after Hitler achieved dictatorial power in Germany in 1933, DuBois declared that the Nazi dictatorship was “absolutely necessary in order to get the state in order.”
As late as 1937 he said in a speech in Harlem that “there is today, in some respects, more democracy in Germany than there has been in years past.”
In short, during the 1920s and the early 1930s, Fascism was not only looked on favorably by the left but recognized as having kindred ideas, agendas and assumptions.
Only after Hitler and Mussolini disgraced themselves, mainly by their brutal military aggressions in the 1930s, did the left distance themselves from these international pariahs.
Fascism, initially recognized as a kindred ideology of the left, has since come down to us defined as being on “the right” — indeed, as representing the farthest right, supposedly further extensions of conservatism.
If by conservatism you mean belief in free markets, limited government, and traditional morality, including religious influences, then these are all things that the Fascists opposed just as much as the left does today.
The left may say that they are not racists or anti-semites, like Hitler, but neither was Mussolini or Franco. Hitler, incidentally, got some of his racist ideology from the writings of American “progressives” in the eugenics movement.
Jonah Goldberg’s “Liberal Fascism” is too rich a book to be summarized in a newspaper column. Get a copy and start re-thinking the received notions about who is on “the left” and who is on “the right.” It is a book for people who want to think, rather than repeat rhetoric.
Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Change