“The Stop Arming Terrorists Act”

“Under U.S. law it is illegal for any American to provide money or assistance to al-Qaeda, ISIS or other terrorist groups. If you or I gave money, weapons or support to al-Qaeda or ISIS, we would be thrown in jail. Yet the U.S. government has been violating this law for years, quietly supporting allies and partners of al-Qaeda, ISIL, Jabhat Fateh al Sham and other terrorist groups with money, weapons, and intelligence support, in their fight to overthrow the Syrian government.[i]

“The CIA has also been funneling weapons and money through Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar and others who provide direct and indirect support to groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda. This support has allowed al-Qaeda and their fellow terrorist organizations to establish strongholds throughout Syria, including in Aleppo.  

“A recent New York Times article confirmed that ‘rebel groups’ supported by the U.S. ‘have entered into battlefield alliances with the affiliate of al-Qaeda in Syria, formerly known as al Nusra.’ This alliance has rendered the phrase ‘moderate rebels’ meaningless. Reports confirm that ‘every armed anti-Assad organization unit in those provinces [of Idlib and Aleppo] is engaged in a military structure controlled by [al-Qaeda’s] Nusra militants.’

“A recent Wall Street Journal article reported that many rebel groups are ‘doubling down on their alliance’ with al Nusra. Some rebel groups are renewing their alliance, while others, like Nour al-Din al-Zinki, a former CIA-backed group and one of the largest factions in Aleppo are joining for the first time. “The Syria Conquest Front—formerly known as the al-Qaeda-linked Nusra Front—is deeply intermingled with armed opposition groups of all stripes across Syria’s battlefields.” 

“The CIA has long been supporting a group called Fursan al Haqq, providing them with salaries, weapons and support, including surface to air missiles.  This group is cooperating with and fighting alongside an al-Qaeda affiliated group trying to overthrow the Syrian government. The Levant Front is another so-called moderate umbrella group of Syrian opposition fighters. Over the past year, the United States has been working with Turkey to give this group intelligence support and other forms of military assistance. This group has joined forces with al-Qaeda’s offshoot group in Syria."  Excerpt from the bill



Tulsi Gabbard – Bless her.  For the record SST supports this bill in the House of Representatives.  Those who disagree with me on this should feel free to express their opinions here.  Will the bill pass the House?  That is unlikely considering the bipartisan strength of the Borgist war party in the Congress.  pl


This entry was posted in As The Borg Turns, Borg Wars, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

49 Responses to “The Stop Arming Terrorists Act”

  1. Outrage Beyon says:

    It’s a great bill and reminiscent of the Boland Amenment. Those with reasonably long memories will recall how that law did nothing to prevent Reagan from committing treason by sending arms to the Ayatollah Khomeini, in order to fund his terrorist war in Nicaragua.
    (In fact, the Syria proxy war bears a striking similarity to the Nicaragua “contra” war. Barry & Hillary did Reagan one better by knocking off Ghadafi and then stealing his weapons to send to Syria, rather than buying them from Libya.)
    With all that said, I think this bill has zero chance of passing. Or if passed, zero chance of being enforced. If passed, the President will issue a signing statement saying that he can feel free to ignore it. The Israel lobby and their captured clique of Congressional warmongers will most likely defeat the bill.
    Because after all, their terrorists are all “brave freedom fighters” and they want to keep on using them as proxy forces for regime change.

  2. I support this bill wholeheartedly. The logic is impeccable. Just the bill’s name speaks volumes. Not only does the bill call on the U.S. to stop arming and supporting terrorists, it also calls for “Making it illegal for the U.S. government to provide assistance covered in the bill to any nation that has given or continues to give such assistance to terrorists.” This would turn our Mid-East policy completely upside down or, more properly, right side up.
    I took this from Tulsi’s website:
    “The legislation is cosponsored by Reps. Peter Welch (D-VT-AL), Barbara Lee (D-CA-13), Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA-48), and Thomas Massie (R-KT-04), and supported by the Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) and the U.S. Peace Council.”
    That’s a pretty interesting mixture of progressive democrats and libertarian republicans. Rohrabacher, like Gabbard, is also an avid surfer. The surfboards that he and his wife used on their honeymoon hang in his House of Representatives office. Some say he’s crazy as a loon. I agree with a lot, but not all, of his political stands. I’ve meet him a few times and admire him. He’s a good man. I hope this is the beginning of a new coalition in Congress, one that assist Trump in keeping the Borg at bay.

  3. Annem says:

    As a newcomer to this blog, I would like to ask a simple question: What does BORG mean?

  4. JMGavin says:

    She is telling the truth, but The Narrative is louder.

  5. asx says:

    God bless Tulsi. As a follow up we immediately need these as well.
    Stop Arming Saudis Act.
    Stop Arming Qatar Act.
    Stop Pretending Turkey is Reliable NATO ally Act.
    Stop Funding Pakistani committment to Terror Act.
    Stop Letting Middle East tails wag the dog Act.
    And if Trump truly believes in a non-interventionist America First policy, who better can he have for his SoS than Tulsi?
    Let’s rid our Cargo Cultish devotion to funding moderate jihadis and lay the ghosts of Brezinski and Charlie Wilson to rest. We’re long past the point where the blowback inflicts more damage to us than what these rats can do to others.

  6. jonst says:

    I support the bill too! I doubt it has a chance to pass. And I hope that Tulsi has few skeletons in her past. Because….she has made some enemies.
    And pardon the off topic comment here…but I am amazed that the Obama Admin has, implicitly, confirmed the authenticity of the Wikileaks Clinton Data Dump. After all, if the Russians fabricated the documents, there would be no need to hack into the servers. This will prove interesting down the road I think. As the documents get studied in more depth.
    This should not be read as me believing the reports of the Russian. I don’t. But await first source material to review. But in any event, the Obama Admin has gone a long way to confirmation of their authenticity. And if that is a correct assumption on my part, this should raise questions about going back and reviewing the killing of the DNC worker on the streets of Washington. http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2016/08/11/wikileaks-founder-yeah-it-was-pretty-much-a-hit-on-that-dnc-staffer-who-have-been-my-source-for-dnc-emails-n2203815

  7. Emad says:

    Ms. Gabbard believes the USG has violated the law governing material support to foreign terrorist organizations (18 USC 2339). But that’s not true. The USG has not violated this law. There’s an exception (J) in 18 USC 2339:
    No person may be prosecuted under this section in connection with the term “personnel,” “training,” or “expert advice or assistance” if the provision of that material support or resources to a foreign terrorist organization was approved by the Secretary of State with the concurrence of the Attorney General. The Secretary of State may not approve the provision of any material support that may be used to carry out terrorist activity (as defined in section 212(a)(3)(B)(iii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act).
    Basically, so long as SOS approves the support and the AG nods in agreement, the USG is free to give foreign terrorist organizations any material support it deems appropriate. The language at the end (no support to a foreign terrorist organization if it’s to be used to carry terrorist activity) may not have been intended as such, but it’s morphed into a bad joke, because any barely competent government lawyer can argue that a rebellion, insurrection or insurgency a la that waged by jihadists in Syria falls outside the strict definition of terrorist activity in 212(a)(3)(B)(iii). Problem solved.
    Ms. Gabbard can try to close this loophole. But you know as well as I do that neither she nor anyone else for that matter can do that. At least not now. Setting aside the fact that governments fight tooth and nail to keep whatever broad authority they already have; covert and clandestine ops types at the DOD and CIA, plus a coterie of large (e.g. Dyncorp, Mantech and SAIC) and small (your friendly neighborhood VOSB) will lobby against removing loophole J so hard even BLM would find it patriotic to oppose its removal.

  8. mike allen says:

    Interesting that the two ‘R’ co-sponsors are Libertarians. How will the rest of the party vote?

  9. turcopolier says:

    I said that it is unlikely to pass. pl

  10. turcopolier says:

    “Borg” is my shorthand for what Obama calls the foreign policy establishment in the government, academia, the military, media etc. This Borglike conglomerate operates on the basis of a massive group think consensus that is globalist, neo-liberal and R2P driven. The Borg has, of course larger policy implications than the IO business that I railed against in cited post. The Ziocons find it to be a useful tool, most of the time.
    there is a search button on SST. pl

  11. F-35 says:

    Tulsi is the bravest soul in Washington, but hers is a lonely fight. Nurturing and supporting “good terrorists” is one of the main pillars of US foreign policy. It won’t be surrendered.

  12. elaine says:

    Tulsi Gabbard also recently participated in the veterans protective ring on Sioux land
    during the on going protest over the proposed oil pipeline. She’s a very interesting person.

  13. crf says:

    From Star Trek. They are alien cyborgs (hence the name: borg) with a hive mind who either assimilate other cultures into their way, or destroy them.

  14. Lemur says:

    Gabbard is a good sort, and right wing when it counts too. I hope she eventually gets a job in the Trump administration.

  15. robt willmann says:

    The bill that Tulsi Gabbard introduced is H.R.6504. The text of the bill is not yet available on the Congressional website; she just filed it on 8 December, two days ago–
    It has been referred to the House Intelligence and Foreign Affairs committees.
    Here is the extended, typed version of her introductory remarks on the House floor in the Congressional Record–
    And her press release on the bill is here–
    It is interesting that on her website, she often spells her state — Hawai’i.

  16. Eric Newhill says:

    Tulsi Gabbard is going to be the first female President of the USA and I look forward to that day.
    Excellent Bill and should be a no brainer to have it go all the way to Law.

  17. GF says:

    I contacted my Freedom Caucus representative – Paul Gosar Dist. 4 AZ. – to add his name to the co-sponsor list and back the bill.

  18. Ghostship says:

    You left out the full phrase “Washington Borg” aka Washington Establishment, Washington Elite, etc.

  19. BraveNewWorld says:

    I am a true fan of Tulsi. This bill is full of great intent. But I am sorry to say it is just shadows and dust. The US already has the “Leahy amendment” and politicians just ignore it with impunity along with all the rest of the laws.
    The political class has to start being held legally responsible for their actions when they break the law. There is exactly 0 support for that on either side of the isle and in the current climate would be abused by both sides if it existed. I don’t know how the US gets back to the rule of law for the rich and powerful but if you think of any thing let the rest of us know as your not alone in the erosion of accountability.

  20. Terry says:

    While the bill may not pass there is a real benefit to having this before Congress to raising public awareness and legitimize public dissent for regime change. In an earlier speech she mentioned “Great Turtle Island”. This may be a first for the House floor.

  21. Allen Thomson says:

    Speaking of possibly good Members, anyone have an opinion about Will Hurd, aka My Congressman? A newbie that just won reelection, mostly has voted the Republican line but shows some interesting signs of independence. Also ex-CIA with an obvious interest in and some knowledge of national security matters.

  22. J says:

    Sadly I have to agree with you regarding the little chance of the legislation passing the war-party Borg in the Congress. Just like the little chance of the CIA being re-tooled to being HUMINT COLLECTION ONLY.
    Did you see where an Iraqi woman [Saleh v. Bush] has filed in U.S. Courts (California) saying that former Pres Bush 2 and his administration personas broke the law when they planned and waged the Iraq war. The Iraqi woman Saleh alleges that Bush administration leaders committed the crime of aggression when they planned and executed the Iraq war, a war crime that was called the “supreme international crime” at the Nuremberg trials in 1946.

  23. different clue says:

    Skeletons in the closet only have the power-to-destroy which we the bystander-beholders of those skeletons choose to give them. Those “skeletons” she may “have” in her closet will have no effect when exposed if we pre-decide to pre-forgive her her skeletons. And so is the blackmailer deprived of his/her power-to-blackmail.
    In today’s digital world we should also beware of being taken in by the planted skeleton. Who is to say that busy reverse-cat-burglars are not even now at this very moment sneaking life-size full-scale models of skeletons INto Tulsi’s closet? Is it real? Or is it Memorex? Is it real? Or is it a full-scale 3-D digital printashop model? And as to computers, I suspect any really good hacker can sneak into the target’s computer and leave some Super Triple-X Child Pornography on it for Law Enforcement to “find” at some politically strategic later date.

  24. different clue says:

    Eric Newhill,
    It should also force all its opponents to either vote against it or abstain or “call in sick” so that everyone can see who they are by name.
    Hopefully the bill will be forced to that stage in the process where Names get Named.

  25. Doug Colwell says:

    It’s interesting you should say that. Yesterday, in conversation with my “SWMBO” I told her the same thing. In her view Clinton’s defeat was a gender issue. As I was telling her my my opinion, that the election was a rejection of the establishment and not of a woman as president, it occurred to me that we might well see Tulsi Gabbard win the post. I’d like to see that. Synchronicity?

  26. Nancy K says:

    With which party will she run? I agree with the bill also.

  27. David Miller says:

    “Borg” is the term Lang came up with to describe the US foreign policy establishment, including elements in government, media, think tanks and so on (taken from the Star Trek techno-hivemind zombie race). He’s written a few pieces on its composition on SST. In an interview with Jeffrey Goldberg, Obama used the term “Blob” to describe the same foreign policy establishment, and this has been widely adopted. I prefer to combine the two and call it “The Blorg.”

  28. robt willmann,
    Hawai’i is the native Hawaiian spelling for the state. the ‘ is a glottal stop that’s common in many Hawaiian words. Hawaii is the only state in the union that has two official languages, English and Hawaiian. Having been born there, my two sons take great pride in saying they are Hawaiian. There is another pidgin dialect on the Islands that is quite prevalent and interesting.

  29. Gordon Wilson says:

    This and the previous post should only clarify the maxim of divide and conquer. The low caliber and frequency snark on the Internet only exacerbates the problem. This bill addresses a symptom, not the disease.

  30. BraveNewWorld says:

    Christna Lin’s take with some focus on what the bill means for South Asia.

  31. Nancy K,
    Tulsi is a progressive Democrat, but holds her own views on such issues as immigration. She is as far from a big business loving Neocon as one can get. I think both parties will change in major ways over the next couple of years. Lord knows what political parties will exist when she’s ready to run for President.

  32. Ghostship says:

    Here are a few other diplomats who should be prosecuted:
    “World diplomats have pleaded for safe passage for Aleppo’s civilians and for respect to be shown to Syria’s disintegrating rebel forces as Bashar al-Assad’s army moves ever closer to victory in the devastated city.”
    A meeting of US, European and Arab foreign ministers as well as Syrian opposition leaders in Paris on Saturday appeared resigned to what the UN called the “last steps” in the fall of Aleppo, seen as the biggest defeat for anti-Assad forces since the conflict broke out in 2011.


  33. Eric Newhill says:

    different clue,
    Exactly. Lack of cooperation with passing this bill will be a monkey on the back of those politicians in the next round of elections as long as the story can get legs.
    By that time R+6 will have rolled up IS and there will have been another terrorist attack or two in this country. Russia is going to look effective and heroic and those that supported the jihadis and thus fought Russia will look like double schmucks.
    Most Americans aren’t aware that we have been assisting head choppers. If they hear that at all they think it’s paranoid conspiracy theory stuff. But that seems to be changing now. Once they accept that foggy bottom really has been in league with Al Qaeda, this bill and the vote on it becomes significant to continued future in politics…..maybe.

  34. Eric Newhill says:

    TTG, Agreed. She will start her run in the same lane that Sanders did, but Gabbard has wider appeal and will extend far into Clinton’s lane as well and will even pick up many Trump supporters (like me :-).

  35. Peter Reichard says:

    The bill has not a snowball’s chance in hell of passing but it will be interesting to see who takes a stand in its favor. Ms. Gabbard is a profile in courage for committing an apparent act of political suicide by resigning in protest as vice chair of the DNC when she saw that the fix was in for Hillary and then throwing her support to Sanders only to be redeemed by the Wikileaks revelations and the election of Trump. Sometimes fate favors the bold and the honest.

  36. Edward Amame says:

    It will be interesting/revealing to see who votes how on this bill. I will be calling my rep to ask her to support it.

  37. b says:

    The bill will not pass but I hope that Tulsi Gabbard will get a bit more play.
    When Sanders was on the verge of loosing the primaries to Clinton I urged that he should immediately announce Tulsi Gabbard for the vice president position.
    I would at least have taken the “female vote” argument away from Clinton and prepared Gabbard for further positions.
    She has some skeleton in closet as she is outspoken supporting nationalist Hindus and somewhat lauded the fascist Indian president Modi. She can also, like any politician, be a turncoat when need be. But her basic instincts seem right to me.

  38. robt willmann says:

    The bill out of the conference committee that is to be the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (NDAA) (Senate bill 2943), which Tulsi Gabbard objected to the other day as making it possible to get Manpads into Syria, is still not on the Congressional website so that we can take a look at it.
    In addition to the Manpads issue, some version of the Countering Disinformation and Propaganda Act that was just sitting in the House and Senate without any activity may have been slipped into the NDAA in conference committee; those bills are Senate bill 2692 and House resolution 5181. They want the State Department, along with others, to develop “fact-based narratives” to counter Russian, Chinese, and other propaganda. Of course, a “fact-based narrative” is not necessarily a “true narrative”. Some of the best propaganda contains some facts along with the falsehoods that you want to try to get people to believe.

  39. BraveNewWorld says:

    Tulsi had a sit down with Trump. I expect she took the time to mention the bill. All it would take is for Trump to get on twitter or walk up to a microphone and challenge all the politicians to vote for the bill or explain why they are supporting the terrorists that did 9/11 and this bill would pass with unanimous support.

  40. Tyler says:

    I have an auto alert set on USAJobs for when “Tulsi Gabbard’s Cabana Boy” position opens up. My resume is set.

  41. DSorce says:

    Agreed until she backed Hillary Clinton, perhaps the most warmongering, jihadi-supporting candidate since John McCain. Maybe even more so. I mean, was Donald Trump’s Howard Stern-esque comments from a dozen years ago or his pro-life position disqualifying? Or his lack of experience vs. her very bad experience and record? I’m kind of a one-issue candidate. Namely, no more neocon BS wars and division and destruction. So my decision on whom to support for President occurred in late summer 2015, when Trump said Iraq was a mistake, we are going to stop the stupid wars in the Middle East, and we’re going to start getting along with Russia and other countries. My support for Sanders ended around the same time when he said he would support Syrian “rebels”. Since then I heard for a year and a half of Hilary Clinton promising support for jihadis in Syria, a NFZ over Syria, and direct confrontation with Russia. We were saved from perhaps the most catastrophic fate humankind could ever face and perhaps the end of humankind as we know it. And we were saved by the huge number of average working-class Americans in middle America who don’t who have either the time or the money or the inclination to go to fancy schools and read the monolithic bullshit coming from NYT, WP, et al.
    OT, question for Col. Lang. There’s been a lot of discussion about the CIA trying to subvert Trump and consequently starting a civil war to subjugate middle America. And that’s the CIA’s forte– undermining and subverting. There’s obviously a large number of Washington insiders and politicians who’d be on board a CIA-based coup. Conversely, we see huge support for Trump among the military. His reception at the Army-Navy game yesterday among the cadets and midshipmen and military brass was stunning. My question, could the intelligence apparatus be overhauled and moved under the military and away from the civilian (CIA, DoS, contractors)?

  42. Annem says:

    Thanks, All! A terrific term.

  43. The Porkchop Express says:


  44. Annem says:

    The US media regularly refers to the “moderate” fighting groups that we support and who are engaged in the Aleppo war. No one seems to put names to those fighting groups except those that are not acceptable. Does anyone have an idea of just what groups we claim are moderate, and what “moderate” even means?
    I recall reading about a discussion in which the various Syrian groups that would want a seat at the peace table were asked about their attitudes on various issues from Islamic law to tolerance of minorities and while they tried to equivocate a bit, it seemed that they shared the same ideology as other jihadis except, perhaps, the extreme takfiris. There was a question about the role of Christians, whether they could have a role in government, or whether they were dhimmis, but none were willing to accept the Druze unless they become Muslim.
    It seemed that the only thing that distinguished them from ISIS and Nusra was that none expressed/expressed a desire to attack the West or their Turkish and Saudi backers. It is likely true that none have at this stage the capacity or the motivation for doing so.

  45. gowithit says:

    She’s way to socially liberal for you “Alt News” boy! She’d kick you to the curb fast!

  46. gowithit says:

    If she was with the Nat Amer protest …No Way getting in with the Trump admin. Trump is an investor in the pipeline!

Comments are closed.