PDA

View Full Version : Who Wags Who? Bush or Olmert?


mhgaffney
01-17-2008, 08:37 PM
When I read this fine op-ed by Paul Craig Roberts (below) I couldn't help but think of the knee jerks who frequent this board -- like locust.

Especially the line "Americans have no moral conscience."

Roberts is also correct when he writes that "Americans do NOT understand terror."

I hope everyone will read this -- because Roberts explains in clear language how the world sees America, and the world is right. When Bush stood beside Olmert the whole world knew the truth of the situation -- everyone, that is, except Americans, most of whom have been brainwashed by our corporate owned media.
MHG

January 17, 2008

Bringing Death and Destruction to Muslims

Leader and Vassal

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

After pandering to Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert's right-wing government last week, US president George W. Bush carried the Israeli/neoconservative campaign against Iran to Arab countries. Sounding as authentic as the "Filipino Monkey," Bush told the Arab countries that "Iran is the world's leading state sponsor of terror," and that "Iran's actions threaten the security of nations everywhere."

To no effect. Every country in the world, except America, knows by now that the US is the world's leading state sponsor of terror and that the neoconservative drive for US hegemony over the world threatens the security of nations everywhere. But before we get into this, let's first see what Bush means by "terrorist" and Iran's sponsorship of terrorism.

Bush considers Iran to be the leading state sponsor of terror, because Iran is believed to fund Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Palestinian ghetto. Hezbollah and Hamas are two organizations that exist because of Israeli aggression against Palestine and Lebanon. The two organizations are branded "terrorist" because they resist Israel's theft of Palestine and Israel's designs on southern Lebanon. Both organizations are resistance organizations. They resist Israel's territorial expansion and this makes them "terrorist."

They are terrorists because they don't receive billions in US military aid and cannot put armies in the field with tanks, fighter jets and helicopter gunships, backed up by US spy satellites and Israel's nuclear weapons--although Hezbollah, a small militia, has twice defeated the Israeli army. However, Palestine is so thoroughly under the Israeli heel that Hamas can resist only with suicide bombers and obsolete rockets. It is dishonest to damn the terrorist response but not the policies that provoke the response.

The US is at war in Iraq, because the neoconservatives want to rid Israel of the Muslim governments--Iraq, Iran and Syria--that are not American surrogates and, therefore, are willing to fund Palestinian and Lebanese resistance to Israeli aggression. Israel, protected by the US, has disobeyed UN resolutions for four decades and has been methodically squeezing Palestinians out of Palestine.

Americans do not think of themselves or of Israel as terrorist states, but the evidence is complete and overwhelming. Thanks to the power of the Israel Lobby, Americans only know the Israeli side of the story, which is that evil anti-semite Palestinians will not let blameless Israelis live in peace and persist in their unjustified terror attacks on an innocent Israeli state.

The facts differ remarkably from Israel Lobby propaganda. Israel illegally occupies Palestine. Israel sends bulldozers into Palestinian villages and knocks down Palestinian houses, occasionally killing an American protester in the process, and uproots Palestinian olive groves. Israel cuts Palestinian villages off from water, hospitals, farmlands, employment and schools. Israel builds special roads through Palestine on which only Israelis can travel. Israel establishes checkpoints everywhere to hinder Palestinian movement to hospitals, schools and from one enclave or ghetto to another. Many Palestinians die from the inability to get through checkpoints to medical care. Israel builds illegal settlements on Palestinian lands. Israeli Zionist "settlers" take it upon themselves to evict Palestinians from their villages and towns in order to convert them into Israeli settlements. A huge wall has been built to wall off the stolen Palestinian lands from the remaining isolated ghettos. Israeli soldiers shoot down Palestinian children in the streets. So do Israeli Zionist "settlers."

All of this has been documented so many times by so many organizations that it is pathetic that Americans are so ignorant. For example, Israeli peace groups such as Gush Shalom or Jeff Halper's Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions provide abundant documentation of Israel's theft of Palestine and persecution of Palestinians. Every time the UN passes a resolution condemning Israel for its crimes, the US vetoes it.

The Palestinian Agricultural Relief Committees' film, "The Iron Wall," reveals the enormity of Israel's crimes against Palestine.

President Jimmy Carter, Israel's friend, tried to bring peace to the Middle East but was frustrated by Israel. Carter was demonized by the Israel Lobby for calling, truthfully, the situation that Israel has created "apartheid."

Historians, including Israel's finest, such as Ilan Pappe, have documented "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine," the title of Pappe's book published in 2006.

Israelis, such as Uri Avnery, a former member of Israel's Knesset, are stronger critics of Israel's policies toward Palestine than can be found in America. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz is more outspoken in its criticism of Israeli policies than any newspaper would dare to be in North America or Europe.

But it is all to no avail in brainwashed America where Israelis wear white hats and Arabs wear black hats.

The ignorance of Americans commits US foreign policy to the service of Israel. As Uri Avnery wrote in CounterPunch (January 14, 2008), a visitor from another planet, attending the recent press conference in Jerusalem, would conclude that Olmert is the leader of the superpower and that Bush is his vassal.

Americans don't know what terror is. To know terror, you have to be a Palestinian, an Iraqi, or an Afghan.

Layla Anwar, an Iraqi Internet blogger, describes what terror is like. Terror is families attending a wedding being blown to pieces by an American missile or bomb and the survivors being blown to pieces at the funeral of the newlyweds. Terror is troops breaking down your door in the middle of the night, putting guns to your heads, and carrying off brothers, sons, and husbands with bags over their heads and returning to rape the unprotected women. Terror is being waterboarded in one of America's torture dungeons. Terror is "when you run from hospital ward to hospital ward, from prison to prison, from militia to militia looking for your loved one only to recognize them from their teeth fillings in some morgue."

For people targeted by American hegemony, terror is realizing that Americans have no moral conscience. Terror is the lack of medicines from American embargoes that led to the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children. When asked by Lesley Stahl if the American policy was worth the children's deaths, Madeleine Albright, President Bill Clinton's secretary of state, said "we think the price is worth it."

In the feeble minds of the White House Moron and his immoral supporters, the massive deaths for which America is responsible, including those inflicted by Israel, have nothing to do with Muslim enmity toward America. Instead, Muslims hate us for our "freedom and democracy," the real threat to which comes from Bush's police state measures and stolen elections.

There is dispute over the number of Iraqis killed or murdered by Bush's illegal invasion, a war crime under the Nuremberg standard, but everyone agrees the number is very large. Many deaths result from American bombing of civilian populations as the Israelis did in Lebanon and do in Gaza. There is nothing new about these bombings. President Clinton bombed civilians in Serbia in order to dictate policy to Serbia. But when Americans and Israelis bomb other peoples, it is not terror. It is only terror when the US or Israel is attacked in retaliation.

The Israeli assault from the air on Beirut apartment houses is not terror. But when a Palestinian puts on a suicide belt and blows himself up in an Israeli cafe, that's terror. When Clinton bombs a Serbian passenger train, that's not terror, but when a buried explosive takes out an American tank somewhere in Iraq, that's terror.

Aggressors always have excuses for their aggression. Hitler was an expert at this. So are the US and Israel.

Unfortunately for the world, there's little chance for change in America or Israel. The presidential candidates (Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich) who would bring change in Washington, without which there will be no change in Israel, are not in the running for their party's nomination. As John J. Mearsheimer noted on January 12 , the candidates in the running are as much under the thumb of the Israel Lobby as Bush. The candidates are Bush clones as strongly committed as Bush to hegemony, war, Israel and executive power.

The possible exception is Obama. If he is an exception, that makes him a threat to the powers that be, and, as we might have witnessed in the NH primary, the Republican- supplied, Republican-programmed Diebold electronic voting machines can easily be rigged to deny him the Democratic nomination. Hillary will not resist Israel's wishes, and her husband's presidency bombed at will his demonized victims.

There is no essential difference between the candidates or between the candidates and George W. Bush. Alabama Governor George Wallace, a surprisingly successful third party candidate for the presidency, said as long ago as 1968, "There's not a dime's worth of difference between the Democrat and Republican Parties." Today, four decades later, there's not a penny's worth of difference, not an ounce of difference. Both parties have revealed themselves to be warmonger police state parties. The US Constitution has few friends in the capital city.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com

mhgaffney
01-17-2008, 08:44 PM
Let us hope Roberts is correct about Obama. He remains to some extent unknown -- perhaps the only unknown quantity in this almost totally controlled electoral campaign season.

W*GS
01-17-2008, 08:47 PM
PCR keeps proving that he's a flake.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
01-17-2008, 08:58 PM
Good article. :thumbsup:

Once again, PCR nails it.

W*GS or some other AIPAC shill ought to be along anytime now to denounce him as an "anti-Semite." :D

Bronco Bob
01-17-2008, 09:23 PM
Let us hope Roberts is correct about Obama. He remains to some extent unknown -- perhaps the only unknown quantity in this almost totally controlled electoral campaign season.

Obama? You have got to be kidding. I noticed how you completely
ignored the allegations of Obama's supporters rigging the Iowa caucus,
and the culinary union backing Obama in Nevada and having caucuses
at the Casinos. Yeah, right, go to a caucus where you work and
vote against the candidate your union endorses. So how long you
are working there after that.

W*GS
01-17-2008, 09:30 PM
I don't need to claim PCR is anti-Semitic. He does so himself:

The uniformity of the US media has become much more complete since the days of the cold war. During the 1990s, the US government permitted an unconscionable concentration of print and broadcast media that terminated the independence of the media. Today the US media is owned by 5 giant companies in which pro-Zionist Jews have disproportionate influence. In <a href="http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14566.htm"> "What we know and don’t know about 9/11"</a>

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
01-17-2008, 10:16 PM
Sheesh!

Is W*GS really still trying to make that same old, lame "anti-Zionism = anti-Semitism" dog hunt?

W*GS is a constant reminder of that old adage that the definition of insanity is repeating the same pathological behaviors over and over again and expecting different results.

epicSocialism4tw
01-17-2008, 10:22 PM
Well, we know what wags Gaffer.

Psychosis and paranoid racism.

mhgaffney
01-18-2008, 12:33 AM
Well, we know what wags Gaffer.

Psychosis and paranoid racism.

OK smart guy. Here are some angry facts for you to chew on:

For the last 25 years I have been calling for a peace settlement in Palestine -- that gives both sides a measure a justice. How does that make me a psychotic or a paranoid racist?

It hasn't happened because the US and Israel have blocked every chance for peace -- without exception -- over this same time period.

In fact, I have a long history as a peace activist. When I was a college student I demonstrated against the Viet Nam War --

during which we, the good old US of A, slaughtered 2 million people -- most of them innocent farmers who didn't even know what the word "communist" meant.

Not to mention 58,000 US soldiers.

Not to mention another 100,000 vets who later committed suicide.

Not to mention the thousands of square miles of tropical rain forest we destroyed via bombing and with chemical poisons - agent orange. BTW, much of that land has never recovered, to this day.

It was truly an insane war -- and afterward no one here in America questioned why we were there.

And so history has repeated. Those who fail to learn from the past are doomed to repeat it. Past is prologue.

This is why we are in Iraq today -- which I also strongly opposed -- Did you?

No, of course not!

How could you -- with that huge vacant space between your ears?

Spider
01-18-2008, 12:36 AM
P.C.R. he seems to go to extremes aka Dram queen to get his point acrossed .....

mhgaffney
01-18-2008, 12:55 AM
Nah, PCR is just a damn fine writer. And he talks truth -- point blank.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
01-18-2008, 01:30 AM
Nah, PCR is just a damn fine writer. And he talks truth -- point blank.

He is an outstanding writer and one of the few sane voices left in America.

I have to laugh at the ignoramuses who assume he is a "leftist," when, in fact, he served in the Reagan administration.

That's how far to the right Bush has pushed America, folks!

W*GS
01-18-2008, 08:25 AM
W*GS is a constant reminder of that old adage that the definition of insanity is repeating the same pathological behaviors over and over again and expecting different results.

This from the guy whose position on the left/right scale puts him close to Stalin. Apparently the lessons of the 20th century regarding Communism (100 million dead) have sailed completely over your head.

PCR is a Buchananite flake. Big time.

alkemical
01-18-2008, 08:32 AM
In order to "win" the war on terror via war, we need Colonel Kurtz

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
01-18-2008, 08:45 AM
W*GS just can't seem to get any of the sh*t he's been flinging against the wall lately to stick (hence his descent into complete lunacy with the Stalin references, etc.)

In any event, it's still amusing to watch the contortions he puts himself through in his efforts to save face after all the years he spent on his knees for GeeDubya.

:laugh:

Bronco Bob
01-18-2008, 10:25 AM
This from the guy whose position on the left/right scale puts him close to Stalin. Apparently the lessons of the 20th century regarding Communism (100 million dead) have sailed completely over your head.



Economically, yes. But the part you are missing is the authoritarian/libertarian
scale. It's not the economic leftists that kill people, it's the authoritarians.
Hitler is only moderately to the right, in fact every major Democrat running
for president is to the right of Hitler. So going by your logic, Hitler
was a nice guy who never harmed anyone, and you, being to the
right of Hitler, are a mass murderer.
But both Stalin and Hitler score high on the authoritarian scale.
That's the part you are willfully ignoring. In that regards LABF's
philosophy is no more likely to kill anyone than is your philosophy.
LABF is much more in line with Mahatma Ghandi than he is Stalin.

W*GS
01-18-2008, 10:30 AM
W*GS just can't seem to get any of the sh*t he's been flinging against the wall lately to stick (hence his descent into complete lunacy with the Stalin references, etc.)

Here's the facts (sorted by left/right score):


1 -9.75 Stalin
2 -8.62 L.A. BRONCOS FAN
3 -8.50 Walt Brown Socialist 04
4 -7.12 Urinal_Cake
5 -7.00 Gandhi
6 -6.25 JCMElway
7 -5.25 TailgateNut
8 -4.75 baja fan
9 -4.38 Bronco Bob
10 -4.12 Ralph Nader Reform 04


The only "lunacy" is your attempts to spin yourself out of your far-left-field position.

In any event, it's still amusing to watch the contortions he puts himself through in his efforts to save face after all the years he spent on his knees for GeeDubya.

The Big Lie strikes again.

Find one single (1, just one!) post which you believe qualifies me as Bush's fluffer.

On the other hand, considering that's been your position for both Clinton and Chavez, you're the master at the technique.

W*GS
01-18-2008, 10:35 AM
Economically, yes.

IMNSHO, you can't be that far left and not have an authoritarian bent.

But the part you are missing is the authoritarian/libertarian scale.

I fully realize that - however, I'm using LABF's logic against him. He ignores the authoritarian/libertarian scale when he makes his stupid claims and assertions against me. He still compresses everyone down to the left/right axis, and goes from there, without allowing that when he does so, he puts himself in Stalin's company. He rejects that analysis for himself, but hypocritically applies it to everyone else.

I'm not "willfully ignoring" anything - LABF is, and I'm illustrating that.

Bronco Bob
01-18-2008, 01:06 PM
IMNSHO, you can't be that far left and not have an authoritarian bent.


Yes you can. Mahatma Ghandi, Nelson Mandela, and the Dalai Lama
are pretty far to the left and none of them have a record of mass murder.
All were advocates of liberty and freedom. I can't really think of any
well known libertarians who were advocates of mass murder.


I fully realize that - however, I'm using LABF's logic against him. He ignores the authoritarian/libertarian scale when he makes his stupid claims and assertions against me. He still compresses everyone down to the left/right axis, and goes from there, without allowing that when he does so, he puts himself in Stalin's company. He rejects that analysis for himself, but hypocritically applies it to everyone else.

I'm not "willfully ignoring" anything - LABF is, and I'm illustrating that.

All I am saying is where one stands on the authoritarian/libertarian axis plays
a far greater role in whether one is an advocate of mass murder or not
than whether one is an economic leftist or rightest. LABF may have done
so in the past, but it was you that mentioned most recently the 100 million
deaths Stalin played a role in and then tried to equate Stalin being an
economic leftist with economic leftists in general being mass murderers.

baja
01-18-2008, 01:14 PM
Here's the facts (sorted by left/right score):


1 -9.75 Stalin
2 -8.62 L.A. BRONCOS FAN
3 -8.50 Walt Brown Socialist 04
4 -7.12 Urinal_Cake
5 -7.00 Gandhi
6 -6.25 JCMElway
7 -5.25 TailgateNut
8 -4.75 baja fan
9 -4.38 Bronco Bob
10 -4.12 Ralph Nader Reform 04


The only "lunacy" is your attempts to spin yourself out of your far-left-field position.



The Big Lie strikes again.

Find one single (1, just one!) post which you believe qualifies me as Bush's fluffer.

On the other hand, considering that's been your position for both Clinton and Chavez, you're the master at the technique.

Wags you are exposing yourself as one who manipulates information to further your agenda.

W*GS
01-18-2008, 01:39 PM
Wags you are exposing yourself as one who manipulates information to further your agenda.

Snort. It's LABF who ignores information in his ardor to attack me.

W*GS
01-18-2008, 01:41 PM
All I am saying is where one stands on the authoritarian/libertarian axis plays a far greater role in whether one is an advocate of mass murder or not than whether one is an economic leftist or rightest.

Tell the exact same thing to LABF.

He always claims that anyone on the right side of the left/right axis must be a conservative/neo-con/right-winger/Bush supporter. He's entirely wrong.

I know he's full of ****, and you should realize he's full of ****, so please tell him for me that he's full of ****, since he completely ignores everything I say.

Bronco Bob
01-18-2008, 01:51 PM
Tell the exact same thing to LABF.

He always claims that anyone on the right side of the left/right axis must be a conservative/neo-con/right-winger/Bush supporter. He's entirely wrong.

I know he's full of ****, and you should realize he's full of ****, so please tell him for me that he's full of ****, since he completely ignores everything I say.

Hey, I've defended you when he has said BS things about you.
Numerous time I have pointed out to LABF that you two are both
almost exactly equal on the authoritarian/libertarian scale.
And you and I have the same position in regards to the Troofers.
I have posted many articles critical of LABF in regards to his
and Gaffney's Troofer claims.

baja
01-18-2008, 02:28 PM
Snort. It's LABF who ignores information in his ardor to attack me.

well it is true he does do that sometimes, we all do that sometimes but you do it a lot W*GS

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
01-19-2008, 06:07 AM
Economically, yes. But the part you are missing is the authoritarian/libertarian
scale. It's not the economic leftists that kill people, it's the authoritarians.
Hitler is only moderately to the right, in fact every major Democrat running
for president is to the right of Hitler. So going by your logic, Hitler
was a nice guy who never harmed anyone, and you, being to the
right of Hitler, are a mass murderer.
But both Stalin and Hitler score high on the authoritarian scale.
That's the part you are willfully ignoring. In that regards LABF's
philosophy is no more likely to kill anyone than is your philosophy.
LABF is much more in line with Mahatma Ghandi than he is Stalin.

Facts like these have never stood in the way of W*GS' crusade against "evil." ;)