What’s good for the goose is good for the gander “a small number of heavily armed people swept trough Haiti” this will be the epithet of the American republic. Its a cliché but cliché's are almost invariably true: what go’s around comes around.

The CIA is rivaled for organizational repulsiveness only by the Nazi’s, in fact the Nazi’s were their progenitors when in “operation paperclip” elements of the SS, the Gestapo and “wild” Bill Donovan's OSS were fused into a single agency incorporating the advanced technology Germany had gained by breaking away from the flock. That technology has since been used to enslave the human race. The good news is their day is coming they will not be able to hide what they have done starting with “9/11”. Ironic that in the end it will come down to their technology against the maxim of the greatest critic of technology in warfare Marshall Ferdinand Foch who said: “The most powerful weapon on earth is the human soul on fire.”

Terrorism perpetrated by the West is at present generally called "protecting national interests" or "serving national security". The most deadly, the most feared, the least scrutinized, the least prosecuted terrorists on Earth in the past two centuries and more has been militarUSt$ of the West, the United States being the grand master of such terrorism, therfore the term terrorUSt$ is most applicable to help differentiate U.S./West $-based terrorism from

Terrorism perpetrated by the West is at present generally called (by Western interest$) "protecting national interests" or "serving national security". The most deadly, the most feared, the least scrutinized, the least prosecuted/indicted terrorists on Earth in the past two centuries and more has been militarUSt$ of the West, the United States being the grand master of such terrorism, therefore the term terrorUSt$ is most applicable to help differentiate U.S./West $-based terrorism from terrorism in general or terrorism directed against terrorUSt$.

Terrorism directed against terrorUSt$ is a militant exercise performed by militant anti-terrorUSt$. Whether they do or would consider themselves so or not, there are billions of non-militant anti-terrorUSt$ on Earth who oppose the ideology (terrorUSt$ imperialism) consciously practiced by only a few millions (predominantly of the West); an ideology fully enjoyed by, at most, a half-dozen or so tens of millions, directly benefiting, at most, a couple of hundred of millions , all at expense of the better welfare of Humanity past, present and future.

The nature of the terrorism practiced by terrorUSt$ is global. It is financial, mental, environmental, political and militarist. It is total.

Only a rare few individuals out of millions of Western anti-terrorUSt$ are supportive of militant anti-terrorUSt$ actions, while fewer still are themselves militant anti-terrorUSt$. Humanity as a whole is not producing significantly more militant terrorUSt$, but existing terrorUSt$ do technologically have both propaganda and lethal advantages over both non-militant and militant anti-terrorUSt$ which affords terrorUSt$ the illusion of holding the upper hand to anti-terrorUSt$ in the long run.

On the American continents, and to some extent in the Pacific, since terrorUSt$ reigned for centuries with impunity, their false sense of righteousness and their unbounded arrogance have misled them on a global campaign for political dominance and resource exploitation. That terrorUSt$ will fail in their global endeavor is an absolute certainty. What is uncertain, however, is whether in their demise terrorUSt$ will act with contrition, or they will finalize their self-centered, myopic existence with acts of "If I can't have it (the world), no one can." ka-boom.

I must admit, my knowledge of Haiti is limited to a visit I made to the country a few months before the earthquake, but I'm very aware of the "types" of people who entered the Republic of Panama in 1994 for political asylum. In a word: Sleazy. They were in the hotels drunk, on drugs with numerous prostitutes going in and out of their rooms.

This may not be a popular view, but what is the United States and Western Europe supposed to do in corrupt countries? It's damned if you do, damned if you don't. Give the government money, and it ends up in the private bank accounts of the leadership, don't give them money, and the little that trickles to the people is gone all together.

If you go to an unbiased group, Transparency International, and look up Haiti, you'll find it is one of the most corrupt countries in the world. If we try to directly clean up their act, we are viewed as "imperialists," and if we don't, we are uncaring.

I'd like to make a comment about the CIA being like the "Nazi's." This is always a point of contention with me when I see that group thrown around to describe the immigration law in Arizona and the U.S. CIA as something similar. The Nazi's rounded-up and killed six million Jews and six million others for a total of twelve million people. This does not include those who were killed in military combat, innocent civilians and those physically and psychologically scarred for life.

I can understand the comment about looking out for the U.S. "interest," and I can agree the U.S. Government does look out for it's interest at the expense of others, especially in several regions of the world. But we, as citizens of this country are the government. If the policies are unfair, we need to change them.

kz5dx: "...But we, as citizens of this country (U.S.) are the government. If the policies are unfair, we need to change them."

The assertion that U.S. citizens are the government is not a rationale with which I agree. It is the rationale which militant anti-terrorUSt$ use to justify the murder of U.S. citizens regardless such U.S. citizens' connection/disconnection to or approval/disapproval of U.S. policies.

The World Trade Center was a hub for many militarUSt$ and corporatUSt$ companies and agencies. Being such a concentrated, relatively vulnerable terrorUSt$ center it was an understandable target for militant anti-terrorUSt$. The WTC and places like it should be equated to shopping centers and sports stadiums filled with U.S. citizens.

yikes! major correction: The WTC and places like it should NOT be equated to shopping centers and sports stadiums filled with U.S. citizens.