Podhoretz Granted Secret Access To Lobby Bush On ‘The Case For Bombing Iran’
Podhoretz Granted Secret Access To Lobby Bush On ‘The Case For Bombing Iran’
Norman Podhoretz, the “patriarch of neoconservatism,” recently published a book entitled “World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism,” staunchly supporting the Iraq war and pushing for war with Iran. In June, Podhoretz published a controversial piece in Commentary magazine titled “The Case for Bombing Iran.”
The Politico reports today that President Bush has been listening to Podhoretz’s radical agenda, recently enlisting Podhoretz to discuss his views on Iran. In a meeting that “was not on the president’s public schedule,” Bush and Karl Rove “sat listening to Norman Podhoretz for roughly 45 minutes at the White House”:
Rove was silent throughout, though he took notes. The president listened diligently, Podhoretz said as he recounted the conversation months later, but he “didn’t tip his hand.”
“I did say to [the president], that people ask: Why are you spending all this time negotiating sanctions? Time is passing. I said, my friend [Robert] Kagan wrote a column which he said you were giving ‘futility its chance.’ And both he and Karl Rove burst out laughing.
“It struck me,” Podhoretz added, “that if they really believed that there was a chance for these negotiations and sanctions to work, they would not have laughed. They would have got their backs up and said, ‘No, no, it’s not futile, there’s a very good chance.’”
President Bush has loyally supported Podhoretz’s agenda in the past. In 2004, he bestowed the Presidential Medal of Freedom — the nation’s highest civilian honor — on Podhoretz, calling him a “fierce intellectual man” with “fine writing and a “great love for our country.”
Today, Podhoretz’s calls for bombing Iran are being echoed in the administration. According to Newsweek, Vice President Cheney considered a plan to allow Israel to conduct missile strikes against Iran “in an effort to draw a military response from Iran, which could in turn spark a U.S. offensive against targets in the Islamic Republic.”
Podhoretz has argued that “if we were to bomb the Iranians as I hope and pray we will…we’ll unleash a wave of anti-Americanism all over the world that will make the anti-Americanism we’ve experienced so far look like a lovefest.” By enlisting Podhoretz’s advice, President Bush is demonstrating that there isn’t any idea too radical for him to consider.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
So how is, in his own words, unleashing “a wave of anti-Americanism” a good thing?
Doesn’t that seem counter-intuitive to fighting a War on Terror? I mean, if you make more enemies around the world, doesn’t that put us all at more risk for some form of counter-attack which would come in the form of terrorism?
Bombing Iran to stop terrorism is akin to bombing McDonalds to stop hamburgers.
September 24th, 2007 at 12:57 pmIt looks as if the democratic process has failed completely. I fear that nothing short of force will stop these madmen from setting the entire world on fire.
September 24th, 2007 at 12:58 pmHas any lead of the free (used to be at least) world launched 3 wars in 8 years? First one justified, but forgotten, second one unjustified and illegal, third one to start world war III.
I don’t think Russia, China and the rest of the world are going to put up with our criminal governments crap very much longer.
Buck Fush
September 24th, 2007 at 1:02 pmthere isn’t any idea too radical for him to consider.
… as long as it lines up with his own radical way of thinking…
please, somebody stop the criminals…
September 24th, 2007 at 1:08 pm.
How can anyone “pray” that we bomb another country? What kind of god do these people worship, anyway? This isn’t just Old Testament, this is early tribal god smiting the enemy in the next valley.
The neocons never learn from experience and are intractable in their ideology.
September 24th, 2007 at 1:08 pmImperialism is a hard act to maintain. It requires the Empire to be the sole terror-state, in this case relying on the threat of nuclear annihilation to increase complicit and subservient behaviors. This go-it-alone unilateral amurkinism also requires that the citizens remain vigiliant and fearful of one another. If we are convinced that all we need to do is focus on fearing our neighbors, running to law enforcement every chance we get to turn someone in for not thinking as we do, then empire can proceed. It’s all the fault of those pesky dissenters, once they are locked up, and their outbursts criminalized (Senate took a big step towards that now didn’t it?) the Empire remains strong.
September 24th, 2007 at 1:08 pmBecause of madmen, there’s a good chance we will have bombed Iran by the time Bush and Cheney leave office. It’s as if they know their party is toast and a Dem will be elected POTUS, so they’re going to leave things in as big a mess as they possibly can when they go. Sort of like the Iraqis setting the oil fields on fire as the retreated from Kuwait.
September 24th, 2007 at 1:11 pmBush and Rove laughing at Pod-mans Kagan futility statement.
I’m not sure what to make of that. Bush also did not stop Kim Jong Il from acquiring a nuclear weapon as he promised to do.
September 24th, 2007 at 1:13 pmHas any lead of the free (used to be at least) world launched 3 wars in 8 years? First one justified, but forgotten, second one unjustified and illegal, third one to start world war III.
Comment by Buckie Boy — September 24, 2007 @ 1:02 pm
Nope — not since the Germans and Japanese during WWII have three countries been invaded by the same power in that kind of time span. One could make an argument for Russian dominance of eastern Europe immediately following the German surrender, but those weren’t exactly wars.
September 24th, 2007 at 1:16 pmThese people are bat sh$t crazy and have been wrong about everything they have supposed in the past so why would anyone suppose they are right this time? We should have ousted these evil, criminal thugs, before it got to this.
What is so different in Iran’s idiot than our idiot? Who is killing all the people in the name of profit?
I want my country back and Iwant all 29% morons out of sight.
September 24th, 2007 at 1:18 pmKeep turning those rocks over so we can see the unmitigated snakery going on behind the peoples’ backs!
September 24th, 2007 at 1:19 pm“if we were to bomb the Iranians as I hope and pray we will…
Praying for bombs, death and war???
Exactly what God do you pray to? Kali?
we’ll unleash a wave of anti-Americanism all over the world that will make the anti-Americanism we’ve experienced so far look like a lovefest.â€
Why the f*ck does it sound like these Neocons think this would be a good thing?
They are all f*cking insane.
Meanwhile, Hilary refuses to say if she will withdraw troops from Iraq before the first term is over……
She seems to have flip-flopped ( again ) from her position right after starting to run for president, where she clamed to be for imediate withdrawal.
September 24th, 2007 at 1:21 pmBe careful, our little woodenhead president has a very small but impressionable (like silly putty) mind.
September 24th, 2007 at 1:24 pmPlease consider the fact that Bush is a real hero to his tribe – The Balance of wealth is back to pre-New Deal levels and international investments are better than ever.
September 24th, 2007 at 1:31 pmThe US will be full of gated-communities protected by Black Water and people like those Katrina surviors or middle class workers who have lost their pensions will be left, in not a Third World United States but pretty close to one.
But Bush will have saved the “United States” that matters to his people.
Podhoretz is a Neocon warmonger and senile traitorous old fool as well.
September 24th, 2007 at 1:33 pmYour right,
Bombing Iran to slow or stop their progress toward a nuke weapon is radical. Lets just back away and let them build it! That isn’t radical at all.
September 24th, 2007 at 1:34 pmMeanwhile, Hilary refuses to say if she will withdraw troops from Iraq before the first term is over……She seems to have flip-flopped ( again ) from her position right after starting to run for president, where she clamed to be for imediate withdrawal.
Comment by Wayne — September 24, 2007 @ 1:21 pm
She is worried that if she is too far to the left in the primary she will have her words thrown back at her in the general election. What she will actually DO if elected is anyone’s guess.
I must admit, she is a tough cookie. She has Bill helping her strategize, and he is the most gifted political genius of this era. The 08 is going to be very interesting…..
September 24th, 2007 at 1:36 pmIranian activists oppose military attack on Iran — dissident
4 hours ago
UNITED NATIONS (AFP) — Iranian pro-democracy activists strongly oppose any military attack on their country but want the world to condemn Tehran’s human rights violations, Iranian dissident journalist Akbar Ganji said in a petition seen Monday.
“We categorically reject a military attack on Iran,” the high-profile dissident said in an open letter to UN chief Ban Ki-moon, a copy of which was obtained by AFP.
The prominent dissident, who is currently in the New York area, said talk of a possible attack on Iran over Tehran’s refusal to suspend its uranium enrichment program was making “things extremely difficult for Iranian human rights and pro-democracy activists”.
“No Iranian wants to see what happened to Iraq or Afghanistan repeated in Iran,” said Ganji, who spent five years in prison for articles linking officials to a string of killings of intellectuals in Iran.
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hf6l21RN4Cp6SdhYddAuAkCgu7Dw
September 24th, 2007 at 1:37 pmBombing Iran to slow or stop their progress toward a nuke weapon is radical. Lets just back away and let them build it! That isn’t radical at all.
Comment by Roger_Roger — September 24, 2007 @ 1:34 pm
Again we see the tiny mind at work. Should we continue to negotiate with a sovereign nation, one that has just as much right to self-defense as we do? Or should we attack yet another Muslim country on a pre-emptive basis, thus further alienating the rest of the planet.
Hmmm. That’s a tough one.
September 24th, 2007 at 1:37 pmComment by Roger_Roger — September 24, 2007 @ 1:34 pm
#
How many times did we bomb the Soviet Union? How many times have we bombed Pakistan? What if Iran actually had nukes (5 years from now)? If they attack Israel, Israel has nukes too. So do we. It is not something they can use.
September 24th, 2007 at 1:38 pmHilary Clinton acts like a Lieberman type Democrat, so I have zero faith in her doing anything decent for Americans. She was raised a Republican and still thinks like one too.
September 24th, 2007 at 1:39 pmAfter reading Podhoretz’s book My Negro Problem – And Ours.” you really understand his mission. Israel leaders and rich people are doing what that country has been trying for thousands of years. They can’t attack Iran themselves but it would help if a friend controlled Iraq. Then they would be in place to attack both Iran/Syria/Lebanon. This is what we call using someone else to get your job done. Like the Middle East Leaders the Jewish people knew they had an idiot when Bush stole the election. All parties played to their interested after studying the dummies. Bush wanted to have power to show his Father, Cheney just wanted the money because his power is greed. Greenspan was right it has always been the oil. Now in comes the so called thinkers and educated Jewish leaders who have been waiting for an open door to have someone else wipe out the control of the Middle East. Yes the call is to bomb Iran as Cheney needs oil and Israel control. Next will be Syria and Lebanon then the mission for the Jews will be complete.
One Problem. GOD is watching and it will never happen because Satan is ruling these peoples mines.
September 24th, 2007 at 1:39 pmThat’s why Hezbollah won and didn’t fall to Israel. Yes even the President of Israel is it and he’s now willing to talk to Hamas. This is the price all pay when following Satan. He gives you a taste then it’s gone.
Does anyone think Russia or China will stand idly by as Bush continues these unprovoked attacks? Does it occur to anyone that they might want to use their armies to invade our soveriegn nation? If they do, how would we stop them? With what army?
The neocons have been wrong about so many things, why on earth should we trust them now?
September 24th, 2007 at 1:41 pmDoes anyone think Russia or China will stand idly by as Bush continues these unprovoked attacks? Does it occur to anyone that they might want to use their armies to invade our soveriegn nation? If they do, how would we stop them? With what army?
The neocons have been wrong about so many things, why on earth should we trust them now?
Comment by TheToonGuy — September 24, 2007 @ 1:41 pm
#
China is having a field day with this right now. A good chunk of the funding for Iraq has been borrowed from China. They will eventually want to be paid back.
September 24th, 2007 at 1:42 pmLast evening on “The War” on PBS,a soldier from World War 2 said his joining up wasn’t really an act of patriotism as much as he and his generation realized that Hitler had to be stopped for the good of the world,not just the United States.One wonders when the world is going to come to the same conclusion about Bush.
September 24th, 2007 at 1:46 pmHilary Clinton acts like a Lieberman type Democrat, so I have zero faith in her doing anything decent for Americans. She was raised a Republican and still thinks like one too.
Comment by Jay Randal — September 24, 2007 @ 1:39 pm
Hmmm….dunno if most Republicans would agree with you there. It is true that the two parties seem to be going toward some strange convergence on many issues, particularly foreign policy. 2008 has been billed as a “change election” – it is like the first time since 1928 that neither a sitting President or Vice Pres isn’t running. I can’t that a Clinton is a change agent, but Hillary looks totally inevitable for the Democratic nomination. If she wins, I wonder if the folks who comment here would see that as a win or no…?
September 24th, 2007 at 1:48 pmOne wonders when the world is going to come to the same conclusion about Bush.
Comment by Vanthomas — September 24, 2007 @ 1:46 pm
Don’t you think that thought is ringing in the ears of many of the insurgents trying to get us out of their country in Iraq and out of the ME?
September 24th, 2007 at 1:49 pmIf she wins, I wonder if the folks who comment here would see that as a win or no…?
Comment by Keltoi — September 24, 2007 @ 1:48 pm
#
No. The worst thing the dems could do for their party would be to nominate Hillary. Anyone else is a better choice. Imagine if the repubs nominated Hannity/Coulter. Same thing.
September 24th, 2007 at 1:51 pmWhat extreme attempts at undoing the evils America has commited in the Middle East have we tried? Have we even TRIED to make up for what we did to Iran? Or are we simply going to bomb them for rising up against us after we violated their country?
So it works like this…
1) We violate them in a way that we ourselves would not tolerate
2) They have a revolution and throw us out
3) We refuse to appologize or anything
4) We bomb them for not letting us get away with violating them…
Or lets take a school yard bully…
1) He violates other kids
2) The other kids rise up against him (which pisses him off)
3) The bully refuses to do anything to make up for his behavior
4) The bully comes back twice as mean and beats up kids again…
What is so freaking hard to understand about the Golden Rule?
We have not even TRIED it… I mean if we tried it and Iran was all “We hate America” still that is one thing… but to even SUGGEST trying to make up with these people all we get is a LAUGH?
September 24th, 2007 at 1:53 pmKeltoi > I see no change if Hillary is elected president in 2008. She will keep 50,000 to 100,000 troops in Iraq and might attack Iran, if Bush does not do it first. She refuses to promote “single-payer” healthcare, that Michael Moore advocates, and loves Wall Street too.
September 24th, 2007 at 1:55 pm#30…very true.Though the “Insurgents” aren’t the entire world now are they?
September 24th, 2007 at 1:56 pmDoes anyone think Russia or China will stand idly by as Bush continues these unprovoked attacks? Does it occur to anyone that they might want to use their armies to invade our soveriegn nation? If they do, how would we stop them? With what army?
Comment by TheToonGuy — September 24, 2007 @ 1:41 pm
While Russia and China could play all kinds of Hell with us in the Eastern Hemisphere, the possibility of an actual invasion of the US is not really plausible. Neither nation has a blue water navy anywhere in the same league as ours, or Japan’s for that matter. China is afraid to attack Taiwan which is right off their coast. As far as their nukes go, M.A.D. is still the strategy. It is China’s economic strength that is most to fear, and Russia’s too for that matter.
September 24th, 2007 at 1:57 pmWhy do these people want to start WWIII? What do they think they will gain from it? Oh, right….more war, more profits for their friends. They don’t care if they destroy the world as long as they get their profits. These people are insane and need to be stopped NOW!
Please write Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and tell them to pass a law forbidding Bush from bombing Iran without their express permission. Do it before it is too late.
Think about why the Bush Administration moved five nuclear warheads across the country “by accident” to the base that is the staging area for flights to the middle east.
September 24th, 2007 at 2:01 pmCan anyone give me a really good reason why we all continue to sit behind our keyboards and think that will change things to our liking?
September 24th, 2007 at 2:02 pmComment by civil behavior
Just look at how the dem party has shifted further left on the war. Consider Dem presidential contenders only showed up for Yearly Kos, not to the DLC convention.
September 24th, 2007 at 2:08 pmThis is grass roots community activism.
Just look at one of the threads earlier today, that Free Republic got to picnic at the White House.
Both sides court the online community.
I’d say that’s a pretty good reason for this.
And people getting involved in politics, even just caring more about what their government does is a great thing!
UNITED NATIONS (AFP) — Iranian pro-democracy activists strongly oppose any military attack on their country but want the world to condemn Tehran’s human rights violations, Iranian dissident journalist Akbar Ganji said in a petition seen Monday.
“We categorically reject a military attack on Iran,†the high-profile dissident said in an open letter to UN chief Ban Ki-moon, a copy of which was obtained by AFP.
The prominent dissident, who is currently in the New York area, said talk of a possible attack on Iran over Tehran’s refusal to suspend its uranium enrichment program was making “things extremely difficult for Iranian human rights and pro-democracy activistsâ€.
IT’S MAKING THINGS EXTREMELY DIFFICULT FOR AMERICAN HUMAN RIGHTS AND PRO-DEMOCRACY ACTIVISTS HERE AT HOME, TOO!!
September 24th, 2007 at 2:15 pmhe and his generation realized that Hitler had to be stopped for the good of the world,not just the United States. One wonders when the world is going to come to the same conclusion about Bush.
Comment by Vanthomas — September 24, 2007 @ 1:46 pm
that’s what i was wondering too…
looking forward to part 2 tonight…
September 24th, 2007 at 2:21 pm.
The Bush years- “Compassionate Fascism”.
September 24th, 2007 at 2:31 pmRoger_Rhetoric sez:
My right what, RR?
This is the point where I usually bombard you with evidence that Iran is unable to enrich enough weapons-grade fissile material to make even one nuclear weapon, but I’ve presented you with this information numerous times before, and it just seems to roll off your pointed little head.
So, this time, the burden of proof is on you. Present evidence that Iran is actively trying to produce weapons-grade fissile material, and will do so within just a few years, as you fearmongerers attest.
Until then, kindly STFU.
September 24th, 2007 at 2:31 pmComment by ron — September 24, 2007 @ 2:35 pm
I read his very well-written autobiography last summer, and was highly impressed with his erudition and reasonableness. Thinking he’s an interesting writer, it is a quite shocking letdown to see this book even in print; it should have stayed as a thought in his head. Perhaps I was taken in by what may actually have been an act, a cleverly designed portrayal of a critically minded man with an intellectual journey but, in actuality, the same ideologue he was when he helped flack for Stalinist Russia. Maybe, and maybe not. What is certain is that this particular book is nothing more than a hysterical diatribe with little basis in fact, if any. I’ll give it two stars to be charitable, since I pity this guy.
See, ron? I can cut-n-paste customer reviews of books too.
Dolt.
September 24th, 2007 at 2:41 pmPodhoretz = Zionist psychopath. I was forced to read his BS in college poli-sci. Propaganda disguised as scholarship would be a very generous assessment.
Hey Ron! – How’s your terrorist kissin’ buddies doin?
September 24th, 2007 at 2:47 pmThe third visit to New York by the bombastic Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is producing predictable howls of protest. But largely lost in the build-up of the Ahmadinejad-Bush confrontation are the striking – and disturbing – similarities between the two men and their respective followers.
For the details, see:
September 24th, 2007 at 2:54 pm“Ahmadinejad and Bush: Parallels and Second Comings.”
Bush “listening diligently” hah, more like diligently fondling
September 24th, 2007 at 3:14 pmhis war hard on.
Is Podhorst a walking ghost? What the heck is this guy having any dialogue about anything credible or contemporary at all? He’s got one foot on a banana peel and the other in his coffin, for goodness sakes. The fact that he even gets access to Bush’s ear makes the case for mucho dinery being thrown Bush’s way – called payola back in the day.
September 24th, 2007 at 3:15 pmGet this half-dead skeleton on down the next ramp please.
Podhorst looks like he’s right out of Hilter’s Their Reich. Yowie-ewwwww.
September 24th, 2007 at 3:16 pmAustex: I’m taking bets with you. Where are Bush’s hands??
September 24th, 2007 at 3:17 pmSure does sound like the President of Columbia University and the students “sat in awed silence”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070924/ap_on_re_us/iran_us
LOL, Bryon at least check your sources, before you post irrational junk.
September 24th, 2007 at 3:19 pmVeritas: He is very fond of the codger – the two are close enough for
September 24th, 2007 at 3:29 pmhis hands to be on the old mans johnson.
The complete and utter idealogical hypocrisy of the Islamofascist-Leftist alliance is distressing, but as Horowitz reminds us,
Leftists radicals truly believe the ends justify the means
Comment by ron — September 24, 2007 @ 2:35 pm
Are you being sarcastic of do you actually believe what you just wrote?
If you believe it, it has to be the funniest thing written here so far today. If there is any group that is radically trying to have the ends justify the means, it is your Codpiece-in-Chief and his NeoCon Flying Circus who are BEGGING for WWIII and the End of Days.
That is what keeps me up in a cold sweat at night, and the fact that peo-ple like you (Assuming you are serious) still take the BushCo enema with a firehose.
September 24th, 2007 at 3:46 pm> Podhoretz = Zionist psychopath
September 24th, 2007 at 3:50 pmIt’s not that simple.
All neo-cons, psychopaths or not are fully loyal to the following principle:
America’s main (practically only) purpose is to provide security to the Jewish state, AKA “Israel”. For them this principle is above American Constitution as well as above the interests of American people. There is no difference for that matter between neo-cons associated (today) with Republicans and those staying with Dems. Wulfowitz is no better nor worse than Sen. Lieberman for this matter.
The problem is: all American media is actively pronoting this principle, forcing every political leader to accept it. Do You think M. Romney or H. Clinton will be different. OK, OK, under Clinton neo-cons will be called neo-libs, of course, they won’t be liberals exactly as they are not conservative today. The main thing is: their loyalty belongs to something completely external to their country. They won’t hesitatate to reduce USA to a third world country within 15-20 years if this will serve their cause.
BTW, I think the only presidential candidate to stand against this situation is Ron Paul, which automatically garantees him mass media hostility.
At any rate it’s time for Americans to decide tha American politicians should serve USA first not other entities, and to vote out those who can’t.
Unfortunately as elections of Connecticut senator show American people are not very good in this.
he complete and utter idealogical hypocrisy of the Islamofascist-Leftist alliance is distressing, but as Horowitz reminds us,
Leftists radicals truly believe the ends justify the means
Comment by ron — September 24, 2007 @ 2:35 pm
Why would you listen to Horowitz? he goes around making college speeches but conveniently leaves out Rove and Norquist having meetings with Sami Al-Arian. And as far as your ends equal the means you need look no further than Reed or Scanlon and Abramoff. A rightist radical is no different than a leftist radical. IE Neo-cons.
September 24th, 2007 at 3:53 pmYour right,
Bombing Iran to slow or stop their progress toward a nuke weapon is radical. Lets just back away and let them build it! That isn’t radical at all.
Comment by Roger_Roger — September 24, 2007 @ 1:34 pm
Howzabout actually verifying that Iran is making progress towards a nuke, or even wants to build one?
September 24th, 2007 at 4:44 pmNormPod has the mentality of the Columbine terrorists.
September 24th, 2007 at 4:50 pmPicked on as a child, he harbors a lifetime of resentment and desires violent revenge on any perceived threat. But someone else’s kids will execute his desires. Praying for Iran to be bombed is like a football coach praying for victory, as if God takes sides.
The fact that he has the ear of the president, who follows the last person to advise him, is truly frightening.
NormPod is a psychopath.
Why do good people die young and these scum get to go on forever.
September 24th, 2007 at 6:27 pmWhy do good people die young and these scum get to go on forever.
Comment by mike c
Oh they may enjoy their time on this realm, but they certainly wont enjoy the next =) They are fools who dont yet realize the next step.
September 24th, 2007 at 11:57 pm>China is having a field day with this right now.
> A good chunk of the funding for Iraq has been
> borrowed from China.
This is a good point, and one the flaghumping rightards will never touch.
For 2 reasons:
1) They have been completely brainwashed and are so deluded they truly beleive in the myth of american invulnerability.
2) They undersand nothing but brute force. The concept of international power being weilded through economic might is something they are unable to understand. Thus, they loudly decry liberals as “tax and spend” but think nothing of the “borrow money from china and spend that borrowed money to to make unending war” mantra. They beleive it will have no consequences because thier foresight is next to nil. If you quoted Dick Cheney in 94 without telling them who the quote was from, they’d be blindly lashing out at the guy because thats what their leaders have told them to do…
While these guys go around boasting and bragging about our inevitable (at some point) defeat of guerillas in a shattered 3rd world middle eastern country, they ignore china slowly slipping its economic tentacles around around our throat.
I’ve got news for you pack of flaghumping idiots….the united states would be knocked into a total economic collapse if china dumped all the american dollars and other investments they had now. Granted, it would hurt china and the world as well, but our country in particular would be crippled by it. Deny it all you want, anyone with a basic understand of geopolitical economics knows its true… china is now more powerful than us, and we’ve let it happen because our leaders have led us to belive that we can fight the entire world and win…
September 25th, 2007 at 6:52 amChocolate Jesus – “let” it happen…?
Perhaps I’m a rabidly paranoid conspiracy theorist, but I believe they are MAKING it happen. Cynically, coldly and deliberately.
The ultra-rich neo-con elite – men who have no nationality and no loyalty except to their wealth – are making this happen to reduce the entire world to a master/slave economy in which THEY will be the masters and will rule over all of us.
Our very existence will depend on their largesse. They will control the water. They will control the fuel. They will control the food. They will control the medicine. We will be forced to scrabble for our existence – at their pleasure.
We are being duped by these men. We are being used; whipped up into a patriotic froth and then sent to die in our thousands – against the “enemy” they have manufactured for our benefit.
And I despair of the fools who don’t see it, who are too wrapped up in driving their Hummers and watching their plasma TV’s.
September 25th, 2007 at 12:35 pmWhy do these people insist on using the rediculous term “islamofascist”? What in the world does fascism have to do with what these people are all about? Fascism is corporate governance. The term was coined by Benito Mussolini when he named the heads of Italian industry to his cabinet thus allowing them to make policy. Obviously the policy favored business and oppressed the workers as one would expect. We have a fine example of this type of governance right here in the U.S. But I ask again, what does fascism have to do with religious extremism? I suspect that whoever coined this phrase was just looking for a term that would cause a negative kneejerk reaction from intelectually lazy people who don’t have the foggiest clue what fascism actually is, but they know it’s bad.
September 25th, 2007 at 1:04 pmNuclear bombs do not kill people. People kill people. My opinion is that even if Iran had a nuclear device they would never use it except in self defense. Look at how many times the US and Israel have threatened Iran and Iran still hasn’t retaliated. Only a very ignorant country would attack another with nuclear weapons. (Hmmm, we did it but there’s always an exception to the rule.) And then there’s the Depleted Uranium we’re pouring all over Iraq. (OK, that’s two exceptions to the rule.) Then there’s the DU we poured all over Kosovo… (hmm, three exceptions). Evidently WE (US) think Iran is as nuts as we are. OK, lets nuke ‘em! –jws
September 25th, 2007 at 4:37 pm