1. US Security from Michael_Novakhov (88 sites): “International Security” – Google News: Russia open to disarmament dialogue with US – Outlook India

Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Russia open to disarmament dialogue with US  Outlook India

Russia open to disarmament dialogue with US. Geneva, Aug 10 The Russian Ambassador to UN, Gennady Gatilov, said that Moscow believes that regardless of …

“International Security” – Google News

1. US Security from Michael_Novakhov (88 sites)


Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    27
    Shares
  • 27
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

1. US Security from Michael_Novakhov (88 sites): Eurasia Review: Give Guantanamo Back To Cuba – OpEd

Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

By Jacob G. Hornberger*

The U.S. Empire, which controls
much of the world through hundreds of military bases in foreign
countries, through foreign regimes run by domestic U.S. puppets, and
through foreign dependency on U.S. foreign aid, got its start in 1898
during the Spanish American War. It was that war that enabled the Empire
to acquire its imperialist domain in Cuba known as Guantanamo Bay,
which is now the Empire’s premier international indefinite-detention
prison, torture center, and kangaroo judicial system.

The late 1800s were a time of worldwide empires. Great Britain,
France, Spain, and others were empires, possessing and oftentimes
brutally controlling people in faraway colonies. Although the U.S.
Constitution had called into existence a limited-government republic, by
the time the latter part of the 19th century had arrived, many
Americans had been swept up in the pro-empire fervor, owing largely to
the Progressive movement, which was also influencing America toward
embracing the worldwide move toward socialism and interventionism. The
Progressive idea was that in order for the United States to become a
great nation, it needed to become an empire, just like other empires.

In 1898, Cuba and other possessions of the Spanish Empire were
fighting for their freedom and independence. Since this was a time in
which U.S. officials were still following the Constitution’s
declaration-of-war requirement, President William McKinley sought and
secured a declaration of war against Spain, with the ostensible aim of
helping the Spanish colonies win their freedom and independence.

It was a lie and a double cross of those who were fighting for their
freedom and independence. In fact, the real aim was to replace the
Spanish Empire by defeating it and taking possession and control over
its colonies, with the aim of making America great by converting it into
an empire.

Upon winning the war, the U.S. took control of Cuba, the Philippines,
Guam, and Puerto Rico. The Filipinos kept fighting, this time against
the world’s newest empire, the United States. For a good account of that
war and what it did to American values, see “ America’s Other Original Sin ” by Andrew J. Bacevich, which appeared this week in the American Conservative.

The Cubans, on the other hand, surrendered to U.S. power. As part of
its victory, the new U.S. Empire forced Cuban officials to entire into a
lease that granted the empire a perpetual lease of the 45-square-mile
property known as Guantanamo Bay.

The lease provided for payment of $2,000 per year in gold coin. After
President Franklin Roosevelt nationalized gold in the United States, in
1934 U.S. officials forced Cubans to accept a modification of the lease
that enabled the Empire to pay Cuba $4,000 in U.S. paper money, an
amount that, needless to say, has significantly decreased in value over
the decades owing to the Empire’s inflationary financial policies.

The Cubans don’t cash the checks the Empire sends them because their position is that the lease isn’t valid anyway.

From a legal standpoint, the Cubans are right. Since the lease
agreements for Gitmo were made under conditions of force, fraud, and
duress, they have been null and void from their inception. Moreover,
since the leases provide for no fixed expiration date, that also makes
them null and void under the law.

Of course though, the law is irrelevant. All that matters is force.
Since the U.S. Empire is much more powerful than the Spanish Empire was,
there is absolutely nothing the Cubans can do to regain their property.

Beyond the illegality of the U.S. Empire’s control of Gitmo,
Americans need to ask a critically important question: What business
does the U.S. government have owning and operating an imperialist
military outpost in a foreign country? America was founded as a
limited-government republic, not an empire.

Moreover, the Progressives have been proven wrong in the assertion
that the way to national greatness lies in empire. It’s the exact
opposite. An empire weakens, corrupts, and ultimately destroys a nation,
not only through the out-of-control spending and debt required to
sustain it but also through the moral degradation that comes with
forcibly controlling and brutalizing people in faraway lands.

After all, look at the stain of immorality that the U.S. national
security establishment — i.e., the Pentagon and the CIA — has brought to
our nation because of Guantanamo Bay. How can a nation whose government
establishes an indefinite detention prison, a torture center, and a
kangaroo judicial system in an overseas imperialist outpost, with the
express intention to avoid the Constitution and the Supreme Court, be
considered a great nation? That’s the sort of thing that totalitarian
nations, not great ones, do.

It’s time to dismantle the U.S. Empire and restore our founding
principle of a limited-government republic to the United States. A great
place to start would be by giving Guantanamo Bay back to Cuba, followed
by a termination of all foreign aid, a closure of all foreign military
bases, and an end to regime-change operations around the world.

*About the author: Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. Originally published by the Future of Freedom Foundation.

Source: This article was published by the MISES Institute

Eurasia Review

1. US Security from Michael_Novakhov (88 sites)


Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    27
    Shares
  • 27
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

1. US Security from Michael_Novakhov (88 sites): Eurasia Review: Brexit, Boris The Narcissist Clown And ‘Career Psychopath’ Dominic Cummings – OpEd

Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

It’s now two weeks since 92,153 members of the Conservative Party
voted for Boris Johnson to be the new Party leader — and Britain’s new
Prime Minister. 

Johnson, in case you’ve just landed on earth from outer space, is an
Etonian who pretends to play the buffoon (although behind it lurks a
vile temper), and who, for eight dreadful years, was London’s Mayor,
when he showed little or no interest in the actual requirements of the
job, indulged in countless expensive vanity projects, and pandered shamefully to foreign investors with money. 

Johnson’s elevation to the leadership of the UK was greeted by his former editor at the Daily Telegraph, Max Hastings, with the most extraordinary put-down of his unsuitability to be PM in an article for the Guardian entitled, ‘I was Boris Johnson’s boss: he is utterly unfit to be prime minister.’

“[W]hile he is a brilliant entertainer”, Hastings wrote, “he is unfit
for national office, because it seems he cares for no interest save his
own fame and gratification.” He also observed that “[a]lmost the only
people who think Johnson a nice guy are those who do not know him”, and
added that Johnson “would not recognise truth, whether about his private
or political life, if confronted by it in an identity parade.”

Instead, Hastings nails Johnson, “[l]ike many showy personalities”,
as being “of weak character”, explaining how he is a coward — or, to my
mind, more particularly, a narcissist — with “a willingness to tell any
audience whatever he thinks most likely to please, heedless of the
inevitability of its contradiction an hour later.”

In 21st century Britain, we have made a habit of electing — or having
foisted on us — spectacularly bad Tory Prime Ministers. The first was
David Cameron, who, propped up by the Liberal Democrats, embarked on a
cynical austerity programme, using the global economic crash of 2008 as
an excuse, that has cruelly and pointlessly savaged the living standards
of millions of British people. 

In 2015, however, in an act of startling cowardice and hubris, he
promised a referendum on the UK’s membership of the EU to pacify the
Eurosceptic wing of his own party, and also to try and stop the rise of
the reptilian Nigel Farage and UKIP, failing to remember that one of the
few pieces of advice that was Margaret Thatcher’s legacy was to sit on
the box containing the Eurosceptics and to never, ever let them out.
Tory Leavers presumably think that Thatcher was anti-EU, but in fact she
was a huge supporter of our membership of the EU and the single market,
and all her bluster and apparent antagonism towards the EU was designed
to do exactly what it did — to secure more favourable deals for the
UK. 

After Cameron’s hubris led to the EU referendum result, Theresa May
was foisted on us — in part because even the Tory Party was appalled
that Boris Johnson was so unprincipled that he had led the Leave
campaign without even believing in it, thinking only that the Leave
campaign would lose, but that having led it would be good for his
long-term ambition to be Prime Minister. 

Throughout her three years as the country’s leader, May tried to
fulfil the only requirement of the job after the referendum — to
negotiate the UK’s departure from the EU via some sort of deal that
didn’t completely destroy the British economy. 

However, this was an impossible task, because the only viable deal
that isn’t suicidal involves not leaving the EU at all. 60 percent of
our trade is with the EU, on a frictionless basis that is unlikely to
survive any kind of departure, as business-busting tariffs will make
British goods and services less attractive to EU countries than those
from other member states, and we are tied to the rest of the EU by a web
of laws and treaties that are far too complex to be wished away by
fantasies about our illusory “sovereignty”, and a desire for some sort
of bizarre isolation from the rest of the world.

Nevertheless, calling the whole thing off was never regarded by May
as a viable option, even though the outcome of the referendum was only
advisory, and not legally binding, and, in any case, referendums
involving major constitutional change generally require at least a
two-thirds majority. Fulfilling the “will of people” became an
obsessional mantra for her, but even while she was trying to fulfil her
impossible task, the Tory Leavers became increasingly hysterical, urged
on by our dreadful right-wing media, and by the airtime given to members
of the European Research Group, an anti-EU group of Tories whose chair,
since January 2018, has been the implausible toff Jacob Rees-Mogg, who,
like many other pro-Brexit Tories, is already profiting, via investments, from the damage caused to the pound by Brexit.

And so to the present, with Theresa May gone, and Boris Johnson now
in the top job, having told the Leavers what they wanted to hear, and
now enthusing about his determination to leave the EU on October 31,
regardless of whether or not any kind of deal is in place. As I explained
on the day he was elected by his Party, echoing Max Hasting’s
assessment, above, “Because he has no leadership skills whatsoever, and
constantly says to people what they want to hear, this treacherous
chameleon, having sucked up to the geriatric, Europe-hating lunatic wing
of the Tory Party to get elected by them, is now going to try to secure
Britain’s exit from the EU without a deal, which may destroy his
career, and the Tory Party, but which will also cripple the British
economy at the same time.”

Meet Dominic Cummings, Boris Johnson’s closest advisor and a “career psychopath”

It’s bad enough having a narcissist as Prime Minister, but what’s
just as troubling is that Johnson has chosen, as his chief advisor,
Dominic Cummings, the former campaign director of Vote Leave, who was
famously described
by David Cameron as a “career psychopath”, and it is this relationship
that most particularly seems to vindicate Max Hastings’ suggestion that
Johnson’s premiership “will almost certainly reveal a contempt for
rules, precedent, order and stability.”

A powerful profile of Cummings on the Reaction
website portrays him as an self-declared establishment “outsider”, a
public school-educated Oxford history graduate with a kind of teenage
contempt for the establishment that he is clearly part of (his wife is
the aristocrat Mary Wakefield, the deputy editor of the Spectator).

As the article explains:

Cummings has long made his disdain for Whitehall technocrats,
parliamentary politicians, and the civil service no secret. The system
“keeps out great people”, it “hoards power to a small number of people
who are increasingly crap.” He thinks the Eurosceptic right of the party
are a “narcissist delusional subset.” He sees the Westminster machine
as designed to attract incompetents who are focussed on their status and
desire to get ahead, rather than people who get stuff done.

Cummings has a history of driving what would now be called “populist”
campaigns. From 1999 to 2002, he was the campaign director at Business
for Sterling, where he helped to defeat Gordon Brown’s efforts to get
the UK to join the Euro, and in 2004, he led a successful campaign
against Tony Blair’s proposal for a devolved North-East Regional
Assembly. 

He also, as the Reaction article explains, “worked as
Director of Strategy for Conservative Party leader Iain Duncan Smith,
before eventually quitting and labelling Duncan Smith as ‘incompetent’ –
an insult he grew fond of over the succeeding years for the entire
political class.”

After meeting Michael Gove through the anti-Euro campaign, he ended
up joining him at the Department of Education in the coalition
government led by David Cameron, where, as the Reaction article
explains, “his hatred of private schooling, which he saw as propelling
mediocrities into positions of great power and influence, acted as an
impetus to revolutionise the system.”

At the Department of Education, “[w]hile trying to uproot the private
system that allowed ‘incompetents’, as he would describe [them], to
gain influence beyond their ability,” the Reaction article explains that
“he transformed English schooling … expand[ing] the system of
academies, run by private trusts and foundations”, but leaving behind a
flawed system.” He also drove efforts to make the UK into a
“technopolis” whose primary focus was maths and science, even though
that drive came at the expense of humanities and the arts, despite their
massive contribution to British life. 

Eventually, Cummings alienated so many people that he left the
Department of Education, but he then joined Vote Leave, where he and CEO
Mathew Elliot “are credited with being the masterminds of the campaign
that secured the narrow victory.“ Cummings, notoriously, came up with
the slogan ‘Take back control’, and the infamous NHS bus bearing the
message, “We send the EU £350 million a week, let’s fund our NHS
instead”, suggesting, implausibly, that the Tories, hell-bent on
privatising the NHS, would actually spend money supporting it instead.

And so to his new role, in which he is is “deeply committed to taking
the UK out of the EU, and by virtue of being effectively persuaded into
Number 10 by Boris Johnson, has signed up to the government’s
commitment of leaving 31st October, ‘do or die’, ‘deal or no deal.’”

However, his hatred for the political class — despite the evident
hypocrisy of working for the Prime Minister — extends to the ERG and the
Tory right, who he “cannot stand  – he thinks they are electoral
obstacles, eurosceptic for all the wrong reasons, ‘difficult to work
with’ and ‘self-serving.’”

Cummings is apparently “a genuine eurosceptic”, but “that scepticism
is rooted in a desire to shift the structures of government. He sees the
EU as a vice trapping the UK because those who run the show feel
accountable to the higher powers in Brussels, not to their constituents.
With no EU there are no higher structures for Whitehall to blame for
their inability to change the state of the UK’s global position, and the
state of the lives of those in the regions.”

And to achieve his aims, it seems, he “would happily see the party
set on fire as a necessary casualty in accomplishing his evisceration
and then rebuilding of the entire structures of government.”

The Reaction article concluded however that, “[a]t his core,
Cummings is a fundamentally inconsistent character”; namely, “[a]n
elite anti-elitist, who hates superficial careerists, shacked up with
one of the most ambitious men ever to occupy number 10. He wants to be
an outsider, but can’t claim he is while he holds the reigns of the
highest power in the UK. He clearly wants to mark himself as different
from the SW1 lot, but he has an office inside Number 10 Downing Street.
He wants to make Britain into a maths and science focussed
“‘technopolis’ but is trained as a historian. The real fear is that this
eschewal of norms and casual disdain for those around him could be
hugely dangerous.”

The article added, “or it could produce an extraordinary political
success”, but I don’t see that as a potential outcome. It is still
abundantly clear that a hard Brexit cannot be anything but a disaster,
and with Cummings in such an influential position, Boris Johnson not
only risks alienating the traditional Eurosceptics — those deluded
champions of the UK’s illusory significance like would-be hardman Steve Baker and the fatuous Mark Francois — but is also actively enraging Remainers, or, as we used to call them, the Tory establishment.

As for what happens next, no one knows. MPs, lazy as ever, are on
holiday (“recess”), when they should be back responding to a national
emergency. Options for when they do finally sluggishly get back to work
at the start of September include holding a no-confidence vote on
Johnson’s premiership, leading to a general election before the October
31 Brexit deadline, although Cummings’ greatest contribution to enraging
pro-EU figures like Dominic Grieve has been to suggest
that Johnson was entitled to ignore the result of a confidence vote and
to call a general election that would be held after Britain leaves the
EU, leading to Grieve suggesting that, if that scenario were to proceed,
the Queen might have to sack him, but, as is typical of Brexit-related
constitutional issues, opinion is divided as to whether this is possible. 

What is clear, however, is that the UK’s mission to become a global
laughing stock continues relentlessly, thanks to the Conservative Party
members who, as Max Hastings described it, have “foist[ed] a tasteless
joke upon the British people”, a self-serving clown who, in turn, has
hired an untrustworthy establishment “rebel” to finally drive the UK off
a cliff in an unprecedented act of national suicide.

Eurasia Review

1. US Security from Michael_Novakhov (88 sites)


Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    27
    Shares
  • 27
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

1. US Security from Michael_Novakhov (88 sites): Eurasia Review: US On The Doorstep Of Withdrawal From Afghanistan – OpEd

Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

President Trump recently declared his troops withdrawal from Afghanistan calling it a burden on U.S economy and fighting for the sake of others. To give an end, envoy Zalmai Khalilzad was appointed as U.S representor in the peace talks with Afghan Taliban to result in peace agreement between Afghan government and Taliban.

The Afghan war is the longest war in U.S history that has been going on from the last two decades which is called the US “forever war”. U.S since 2001 has spent more than 51 billion dollars per year in its war and reconstruction projects in Afghanistan, in addition to this more than 2300 American forces have been killed in their war with Afghan Taliban and caused causalities to thousands of them.

The possible peace deal is based on four main pillars, one of which is the foreign troop’s withdrawal from Afghan land which is the core demand of Afghan Taliban in their negotiations with envoy Khalilzad.

The U.S placed its foothold in Afghanistan to eradicate militancy specifically the Taliban on Afghan soil, but on the ground we have witnessed the opposition’s enhancement in terms of military and worsening of security circumstances inside the country which has created certain doubts in Kabul regime and in the world about U.S role in the peace building in Afghanistan.

Today Afghan Taliban are stronger than they were in 2001 due to their support from many sources both regionally and globally in the presence of U.S and NATO forces. Beside this civilian casualties has increased, according to 2018 UNAMA report there were 10993 civilian casualties which includes 3804 deaths and 7189 injured. As compared to 2017 its graph could be 5% increase in overall casualties and 11% increase in deaths.

Moreover, Taliban’s influence has improved in many areas. According to various reports Taliban controls more than 45% of Afghan territory, in contrast President Ashraf Ghani in his interview with Turkish TRT news broadcasted on Tuesday July 16, 2019 declared that out of 400 districts, 22 are under Taliban’s control.

Beside this there is increase in civilian casualties in Afghan and foreign forces raids, therefore it shapes a complexity to U.S win in its war in Afghanistan. Today Americans also accepts that in their presence there is insecurity, corruption, and growing number of extremist groups in Afghanistan.

The Asia Foundation in a survey from 16 ethnic groups in 2016 has revealed that 40% of the Afghan people are bored or pessimistic of the insecurity in Afghanistan, but today this number has increased due to the worse security circumstances, especially the year 2018 and doubtful stance of U.S in Afghanistan peace building.

In addition to this according to the Charles Koch Institute of Arlington Virginia 2018 survey which concludes that 57% of the Americans and 69% of military veterans declared that they are going to support the president Trump decision in the removal of troops from Afghanistan. Beside this two out of three U.S citizens that also includes 73% of military veterans believes they cannot say the U.S war in Afghanistan has been a success.

To add more, YouGov (an international opinion and data company) had a survey on behalf of the Charles Koch Institute of Arlington Virginia prior to the celebration of the 70th anniversary of NATO organization, where key member states of the NATO were asked about the relevance and efficiency of the organization in respect to the military intervention in Afghanistan. Based on the survey 46% of the Germans, 47% of Turkish and 41% of the responders from United Kingdom believed that NATO mission in Afghanistan has failed.

Moreover, about half of the responders from Germany and more than half of them from United kingdom were based on the hypothesis that their country shouldn’t sent their troops to Afghanistan at start. Interestingly, Americans and French were asked with the same question and the consequences were that they do not know the answer for the question.

Meanwhile, the regional states like China, Iran and Pakistan are also on the notion that it’s time for U.S to withdraw from Afghanistan, Russia as a global power is also on the same page with these states therefore it fully supports the Washington effort in the reconciliation process of Afghan Taliban and hosted rounds of dialogues between Afghan political leaders and Taliban leadership recently.

The people inside Afghanistan assumes the foreign troops are in their land for their own sake and proxies which could reversely effect their future because the security conditions are worsening day by day due to contradictory interest of regional and global powers. Afghan government has also claimed several times the support of neighbor and global powers for the insurgency in Afghanistan.

On the national level in Afghanistan some prominent political leaders are also either in opposition to U.S and foreign troop’s presence or calling them responsible for the insecurity in the country. Gulbaddin Hikmatyar, one of the prominent former warlord in a recent visit to Islamabad has appreciated the role of regional states specifically Pakistan in the reconciliation process of Taliban and hoped for the withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan, which is a key for the stability in the country.

With the same token, ex-president Hamid Karzai in a gathering at Kabul on July 18, 2019 has expressed his concerns about the future implications of the peace talks. Karzai said, “We want peace, not external deals on our soil”. In addition, he added that we want to be back to our normal life to have cordial bilateral relations with all the countries, though “we don’t want our country to be used for the interests of others in the pretext of friendship”.

Consequently, the output could be that prevailingly all the major stakeholders in Afghan conflict has reached the consensus that peace with Taliban is a major step for stability in Afghanistan and the region, for which U.S and foreign troops withdrawal is for sure.

*Zabih Ullah, graduate student of International Relations from International Islamic university Islamabad, Pakistan

Eurasia Review

1. US Security from Michael_Novakhov (88 sites)


Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    27
    Shares
  • 27
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Global Security News from Michael_Novakhov (27 sites): 1. Russia from Michael_Novakhov (116 sites): Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty: Death Toll Raised To Five People In Arkhangelsk Military Site Blast

Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Officials have raised the death toll to five people in a mysterious August 8 explosion and fire at a military unit in Russia’s northwestern Arkhangelsk region, as a string of blasts have rocked Russian military sites in recent days.

Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty

1. Russia from Michael_Novakhov (116 sites)

Global Security News from Michael_Novakhov (27 sites)


Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    27
    Shares
  • 27
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Blogs from Michael_Novakhov (21 sites): The FBI News Review: “fbi surveillance” – Google News: Las Vegas Security Guard Linked to White Supremacist Group Arrested for Possession of Bomb Parts – KTLA Los Angeles

Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

August 09, 2019 FBI News Review at 23 Hours “fbi surveillance” – Google News: Las Vegas Security Guard Linked to White Supremacist Group Arrested for Possession of Bomb Parts – KTLA Los Angeles “fbi” – Google News: FBI arrests Las Vegas man who allegedly wanted to shoot Jews, LGBTQ bar patrons – NBCNews.com “fbi” – … Continue reading “Blogs from Michael_Novakhov (21 sites): The FBI News Review: “fbi surveillance” – Google News: Las Vegas Security Guard Linked to White Supremacist Group Arrested for Possession of Bomb Parts – KTLA Los Angeles”

Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    27
    Shares
  • 27
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

“fbi surveillance” – Google News: Las Vegas Security Guard Linked to White Supremacist Group Arrested for Possession of Bomb Parts – KTLA Los Angeles

Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Feedly Logo
August 09, 2019

“fbi surveillance” – Google News: Las Vegas Security Guard Linked to White Supremacist Group Arrested for Possession of Bomb Parts – KTLA Los Angeles
“fbi” – Google News: FBI arrests Las Vegas man who allegedly wanted to shoot Jews, LGBTQ bar patrons – NBCNews.com
“fbi” – Google News: Vegas man accused of plotting to bomb synagogues, LGBTQ bar – CNBC
“fbi” – Google News: FBI investigating bank robbery; suspect at large | News | nwitimes.com – nwitimes.com

“fbi surveillance” – Google News: Las Vegas Security Guard Linked to White Supremacist Group Arrested for Possession of Bomb Parts – KTLA Los Angeles

FBI from Michael_Novakhov (28 sites)
Las Vegas Security Guard Linked to White Supremacist Group Arrested for Possession of Bomb Parts KTLA Los AngelesThe FBI arrested a security guard from Las Vegas on Thursday who agents say possessed bomb-making materials in support of plans to attack synagogues and …
Read More

“fbi” – Google News: FBI arrests Las Vegas man who allegedly wanted to shoot Jews, LGBTQ bar patrons – NBCNews.com

FBI from Michael_Novakhov (28 sites)
FBI arrests Las Vegas man who allegedly wanted to shoot Jews, LGBTQ bar patrons NBCNews.comConor Climo, 23, of Las Vegas, who had an assault-style rifle and bomb-making materials, said he wanted to shoot Jews and an LGBTQ bar patrons, the FBI …
Read More

“fbi” – Google News: Vegas man accused of plotting to bomb synagogues, LGBTQ bar – CNBC

FBI from Michael_Novakhov (28 sites)
Vegas man accused of plotting to bomb synagogues, LGBTQ bar CNBCA 23-year-old Las Vegas man who authorities say worked as a security guard has been arrested and accused of plotting to firebomb a synagogue or a bar …
Read More

“fbi” – Google News: FBI investigating bank robbery; suspect at large | News | nwitimes.com – nwitimes.com

FBI from Michael_Novakhov (28 sites)
FBI investigating bank robbery; suspect at large | News | nwitimes.com nwitimes.comLANSING — The FBI is investigating a bank robbery in Lansing. The suspect fled the scene and is still at large, the FBI said.
Read More
Feeling mobile? Get the Feedly app and read on the go
GooglePlay Store App


Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    27
    Shares
  • 27
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •