How to End the War

Margaret;

The police, the firefighters and the communities they serve govern themselves, of course.

In my personal view there’s no reason to not have larger governmental structures as long as they are run on a consensus basis and their policy decisions are advisory and not coercive.  It’s with the coercive power of the state and its submissive relation to concentrations of wealth that I’m concerned.  Democratic governance is a good idea, we should try it someday.

luminous beauty a libertarian? interesting....

I know you may not believe my affiliations Margaret, but I would like to try and answer you on my own if you will let me.  A very basic tenet of libertarianism is the absence of government (or government sponsored agencies) forcing anything on the people.  This idea of “force” is important: 

The philosophy allows for police and fire fighters as this is considered either a protective, or defensive, use of force…that is, force is being applied to protect the rights of others, punish others who have violated rights, or whose rights are threatened.  The key is that at some point in a robbery or other crime, force has been used to violate someone’s rights.

Libertarians oppose the use of force, period, but defend those who’s lives have been affected by the unlawful use of force because of the tenets above (defensive or protective measures).  Libertarians belive that the only use for government is to protect or preserve these rights.

Luminous and Margaret,
To despise equally Mr’s Soros and Dobson is not to be turned to the dark side, it is to RECOGNIZE it’s motive force in both spectra

Feel alone? Hardly, I am one of a core of activists who are still very pushy at local and state level, but bail out at the national level.

We see right in here the inheritors of the kind of polarization which represents that spirit to see evil in the opposition which corroded the roman republic.

And Lincoln, Margaret, PLEASE. the same Lincoln who held Chief Justice Taney in contempt and ignored their Supreme rulings? The same Lincoln who appointed the richest and sleekest repub BIG TIME lawyers to his cabinet (Seward an Stanton), the same Lincoln whose spending was so corrupt that the word SHODDY was invented to describe it’s results amongst the boys of the union army?

That Lincoln?

My point is that you have taken the case and because of a personal venom about Bush which is indescribable to me, made it the exceptional.

Deceive, sorry...not here. You simply cannot accept that those who were in the streets in 1969 can perceive OTHER

Impeach? Then FDR was fair game for trying to ‘pervert’ the supreme court to 13 justices, or for usurping the Neutrality Patrol. Or Kennedy for an ‘illegal’ blockade (an act of war btw) against a sovereign nation. Or carrying on with what the FBI considered a potential E German spy.

Impeaching Clinton was stupid, impeaching Bush in the midst of GWOT for claiming a BATTLE (which is what Iraq is, not a war, just ONE battle in a lengthy war, not of our choosing), is far past that. It is a demonstration that partisanship know s no bounds, and is far more important to those in opposition than the patience to see critical policies carried out.

“Provide for the Common Defense” is at the top of the document for a REASON.

But as you say this is pointless. I am a Harry Truman Dem in a group of extremeists in here (and you ARE) whose success within my party will mean a generation of large majorities for the republicans. Worse still, people like me driven into the republican party are liable to make them reasonable on the domestic policy side.

Then where will the dems be? 37% 35% 29%?

Oh but so pure in the descent. It will feel good railing, even in the declining relevance to history.

Whigs. Nothing more.

Ignorance in the election?....hardly.
We are the most well informed we have ever been.

That ignorance is posited as a reason is an elitist, “I understand far better than you, the issues, and know best what is good for you.”

How anti-democrat, and anti democratic.

Just check Factcheck.org today, about judges, and how they are beying portrayed. Not exactly Fred Barnes.

And that is the entire point. When the center looks far right to you, something is VERY wrong.

Here this is a good site for you:

http://www.ILIKECHOMSKY.ORG

Well.  Curious is a libertarian? Interesting…

You do know, Curious (if you are curious?), that lewrockwell.com, Ayn Rand and the Austrian League are not the end-all-be-all of libertarianism, don’t you?

Maybe you could go to

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

come back and report on what you’ve learned, if anything.

epanamondas;

Your links are as screwy as your confused moral compass.

Iraq may be just a battle to you in your easychair. It’s hell on wheels to the people in Iraq.  That’s why you are on the dark side.  You turn your back on horrible and unnecessary human suffering to blindly support what are transparently a bunch of bungling liars.  What’s with that?

LM,

No, I meant the funding, not the governance.  The government currently pays for these protections through our taxes.

Epi,

Well, what a surprise!  Another Libertarian, maybe?

No, FDR couldn’t be impeached for lying to Congress, because no one pressed such charges.  However, after 2006, the DNC will certainly pursue such charges as the recently leaked Blair/Bush documents verify that they lied to their respective governments and people about the Iraq situation. 

If I am an elitist, it is only in that I bother to research my data.  Most people don’t.  And, I was on the streets in ‘69.  It just amazes me that those people mostly sold their souls to the devil and became the “greed is good” generation.  After they turned off when Boersky was convicted, they became the “it’s too much work, just tell me what I believe” generation.  That’s you, Epi.  When the msm only reports things that flatter the admin., you know somethings rotten in Denmark.  Sorry you’re too unobservant and subservient to your masters to break your leash.

Allow me to repond to you in exact kind....

Take your premarin

Paul,
You said:
“It was the “realist” policy of Albright/Baker/Scowcroft/Powell/Berger.... that got us the 9/11 mess to begin with by supporting so many Arab dictators out of “stability”.

That you call these people “realists” (as others incorrectly have as well,) is a serious misunderstanding of what “real” is. Powell for one is a neocon and has always been one in his political life. Powell is just a moderate neocon who has had the “benefit” of real war experience in Viet Nam. He does have “some” idea of how wrong this misnamed war called “Iraqi Freedom” is, but his loyalty roots still won out as he sold his soul at the UN. His lying about mobile biolabs was a classic example of a man selling his soul. He will pay for that heavily as any political ambitions he might have had were smashed on the rocks called Iraqi Oildom, (er Freedom.)
Neocon does not = real. Neocon better =Empire and all that negative word stands for.

You also said:
“You Democrats have to get over the idea that some regions need to continue living in despotic tyranny.”

First of all, you are not a Republican in my view. You are a neocon from the attitudes you reveal. Your hegimonist belief that this, or any other country, has the “right” (no, better is obligation) to change the rest of the world through military might is truly insane. I suggest you need help when you think you have the right to take over other countries with killing and devastation (as in Fallouja, for instance.)
Secondly, this quote is pure nonsense. Just typical technique:
1. Make an untrue statement appear as fact by stating it authoritatively.
2. Paste your “fact” on your opponent.
3. Tell your opponent they are obviously wrong for believing your made up “fact.”
4. Tell your opponent how to solve the “made up problem” your opponent “has” with your obviously superior solution.

Sigh...zzzzz

Hi LB and Margaret,

LB,
My thanks to you as well LB, for the “Political Compass” site. I couldn’t remember who recommended it until Margaret mentioned it.

Margaret,
My score was Economic @ -5.13 and Social/Authoritarian @ -5.33. So I’m right about where you are.

Political Compass very engaging !
Economic Left/Right: 1.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.97

Margaret;

Here is some theory on how such a system might work.

http://www.zmag.org/ParEcon/pelac.htm

Practically, social-libertarianism doesn’t rely on systemics, but on the decisions of individuals to live in solidarity with all their relations.  It’s generally seen as an evolutionary process driven by natural human desires for personal freedom and cultural solidarity.

Epi,
You babbled:
“We see right in here the inheritors of the kind of polarization which
represents that spirit to see evil in the opposition which corroded the
roman republic.”

Oh! Wow! This is some serious preaching right out of “Preacher Gobbledigook 101.” Do you teach? Or just starting the class?

And babbled some more:
“My point is that you have taken the case and because of a personal venom about Bush which is indescribable to me, made it the exceptional.”

Whooie Margaret, what a snake you are! Full of personal venom! Stay out of my garden, you sound dangerous.

And you babbled further:
“It is a demonstration that partisanship know s no bounds, and is far more important to those in opposition than the patience to see critical policies carried out.“

Do you realize how far out in left field you sound here?

Go back to my last post to Paul, and read that “great technique” Paul used that I laid out in great burdensome detail. You have just done exactly the same thing here.
Maybe some more knowledgable debate person here can put a name on this odious technique for me. Then I could just reference the name.

Merlin;

I think epi’s problem is he’s caught in the middle and just doesn’t know where to turn.  In his heart he knows Bush & co., whether they are EMRB’s (evil-minded rat-bastards) or just a gang of clueless idiots, are quickly leading our country toward utter rack and ruin.  His rational mind, though a little bit panicky (hence the preachiness), is quite naturally seeking to find reasons to tell him that things really aren’t that bad.  It’s a sane response in its way.  For a while.

David,
Thanks for the link.  Provocative line of reasoning… basically that we should allow the Republicans to ‘abuse’ the language of democracy, since it is hand in hand with all the worst of capitalism anyway - so that the Republicans are allowing it to show its true face, allowing then for real change to maybe occur.
Not sure if I agree with it, but I appreciate the different way of thinking.

The link again:
http://www.cprobes.com/archives/2005/05/why_we_should_p.html

David,
I read the article at CPROBES you twice recommended. This is one of the more confusing reviews I have read in a while. Its like he originally wrote a long article and then cut it in half and presented the chopped up version.

His thoughts are such I want to ask what he was smoking when he wrote it. I wrote a point by point refutation but decided it was a waste of time to post it. I really think his “true point” is utterly without merit and the direction of his thought and proposed solution a total loss. To proceed as he proposes leads to more disaster (for others). I’m sure that if it was his “ox that was being gored” he would be thinking differently. Apathy cures nothing.

There really is a good conversation going on here. I read all of page 1 and i want to reply to Curious if they are still listening.
Curious,
You need to abandon your emotional, sound-byte driven reactions to Margaret’s answer. Your question “Are the [Iraqi] people suffering more [after the invasion], economic stability, safety, etc…” sounds as though you’re amazed that the answer is “yes.” It doesn’t sound like you’re asking because you genuinely want to know the answer, although I may be wrong on this.
Your short answer is that with over 100,000 dead civilians, with many many more critically injured and facing lifelong poverty, the US-led occupation army has caused far more civilian deaths in two years than Saddam ever caused in the same amount of time. The country is also economically crippled, with very little rebuilding having been done so far by imperialist invadors, Halliburton, Bechtel & Co. The provisional occupation government banned newspapers that opposed the occupation.
Besides unpleasant details like these, I would also answer that “overthrowing Saddam” was not worth it (assuming you’re working from the vantage point of the Iraqi people, and not American imperialism) because the bigger picture shows us that Iraq is about to become a colony of the United States, pure and simple.
You seem to think that the war was partly a valiant humanitarian effort because, after all, we freed the Iraqis from Saddam Hussein!
Show me one third world country where a US invasion and occupation brought about a society with more freedom and equality.
We need to start making predictions based on history, not on wishful thinking. The world in its majority is doing just that: it opposes this adventure because it has a keener and more accurate sense of the ugly reality of American power than most Americans do, patriotic or not.
What do we do? Organize, organize, organize and build a more militant anti-imperialist movement that will force people to think of these questions and eventually force the US to re-think its agenda for world control. The people of the world are growing impatient.

Oh by the way, see a scathing criticism of Naomi Klein’s fence-riding on www.counterpunch.org. WHAT, more hair-wringing debates? WHat’s America coming to, people are actually passionately discussing and evaluating dissident views! Impossible. There is hope yet.

The article is called:
Ain’t But One Way Out
Naomi Klein’s “Courage”
By MICHAEL NEUMANN

Alessandro’s conclusion that the debate between Naomi Klein and Michael Neumann indicates America is “passionately discussing and evaluating dissident views” is an odd one. Michael Neumann and Naomi Klein are both Canadians.

LB, really? Man, where have I been….

BTW, in case you were “curious”:
Economic Left/Right: 1.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.74

Margaret,
thanks for comments.  You go, girl.  and mostly, thanks to Naomi Klein for speaking truth to power.  How to annoy a liberal:  stop thinking, keep talking (for bumper sticker).

Here are your “insurgents”...fresh this AM…

http://www.revivingislam.com/
“How are we going 2 kill these filthy kafirs if we cnt even do anything?”

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/focusoniraq/2005/May/f focusoniraq_May76.xml&section=focusoniraq

“One of the lions of the martyrdom-seeking brigade carried out a heroic operation against a police post on Abu Nawas street Tuesday, hitting several of the guardians of the Jews and Crusaders,”

Sounds just like Sam Adams to me! Naaahhhh...more like .. Franklin, right?

I’m not turning anywhere, BTW. This issue trumps considerations about unions, or anything else.

But when clearly objectively identified CENTRISTS find a label as ‘dark sided’ fake democrats...the labeler needs a real good look at the mirror.

If it’s too gobbelgook for you Margaret..maybe this is more clear for you… you are the Gracchi, Saturninus, no different in degree form what you despise, armored only with the thin effete defense that you do research...and your arrogant self assurance that others do not.

You are objectively in error. You are an extremist.

David Duke thinks he’s right too. He has his sources. He does his research. So does Noam Chomsky ... and there’s not a whit of difference between them. Both self eliminate, and self identify.

Maybe it’s me, but I still don’t see your links.

Curious: LB, really? Man, where have I been….

Expanding your mind, I hope.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I’m -7 on both scales.  Yes, I’m radical and idealistic, but I’m not naive.  I’m aware we live in a pragmatic world.  I’m perfectly willing to listen to and seek to empathize with other people’s POV’s, but it only works if they are willing to make the same commitment.  Copacetic?

‘So, where have you been, my blue-eyed son
B. Dylan

Epi,

Unfortunately, everytime I go to Favorites to get the links, ITT drops off what I’ve already put in.  So, to start with, here’s the link showing that Bush and Blair blatantly lied.  Lying to Congress is an impeachable offense:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-523-1592904-523,00.html

I will come back with another but, as I have a business to run, I’m not going to spend all day on someone who will only summarily dismiss any evidence that doesn’t agree with their mindset, you.

Sorry the reply was later than you’d like but, being the boss, I get into the office when I get in.  Here’s another link to show what a piece of crap liar George W. Bush is:

http://www.sundayherald.com/27735

Well, that’s enough for now.  You may wish to dismiss the empirical evidence I amass, such as talking to people before the election and noting the demographic breakdown of the vote, but it’s not worth it to me to do all the research to attempt to convince you of my findings.  You would just make some other lame refutation, so whatever.  It is sad, however, that your responses are generally base and juvenile in tone.

epaminondas:

<objectively identified CENTRISTS find a label as ‘dark sided’ fake democrats...the labeler needs a real good look at the mirror"</i>

I’m lookin’ pretty good for my age.  And when I look inside I feel even better.  how’s your concience?  Can you find it?  How big a pile of corpses will it take for you to feel secure?

You are objectively not CENTRIST (no need to shout).  You haven’t displayed much evidence of thoughtful moderation. (David Duke the same as Noam Chomsky?  George Soros no different than Rev. Dobson?  Get real, quit spouting horsecrap.) More like a fence-sitting middle-of-the-roader playing CYA.

Perfect how others make the point for me

LB, it was political compass which identified me as objectively in the middle.

My conscience is fine. After debating Gulf arabs on the meaning of morality and right and wrong for 4 years I am very comfitted, and confident in my position.

No doubt however, you are so extreme that in 12/8/41 you’d have been part of the 11% that wanted to negotiate with the Japanese, after all, it was the evil USA which cornered them with rapacious economic sanctions rendering a choice between being a third rate nation or war. We are in a world war not of our choosing. That’s it. Ignoreing this will cause more deaths...namely my kids, and soon to be their kids. After all they are crusaders and zionists. Sorry you are so head in the sand. Somehow I think my attitude is no fence sitting.

Want to see someone about the pile of corpses..try Sayid Qutb, and the Dean at King Abdul Aziz University.

BTW Duke and Chomsky are not very different… one is an avowed racist and the other writes book dedications for Holocaust Deniers.

Margaret ... a url in ‘favorites’ remains there unless purposefully erased. They don’t get dropped. You claimed they were in your favorites yesterday, I believe. I run a business in cardiovascular research and don’t have much time, but usu can find what’s needed in about 30 seconds.. put your phrase in quotes and use google or clusty. Sounds like a dodge to me. As far as quality of sources..who knows?

“Forces And Resources For A New Century, was written in September 2000 by the neo-conservative think-tank Project for the New American Century (PNAC)” is a well known paper, and indicates as do ALL military plans potential courses which are benficial to the USA. As I stated, before, in 1941 we pulled the war plan out of a drawer which was closed in 1925, nearly a generation b4 the war. Does this mean that coolidge was planning on conquering Japan and the South Pacific? Or when it was updated to Rainbow Orange under FDR does it mean that he meant to expand the ‘american empire’?

There are other such plans from the other side of the aisle as well. Such as those for Post-Capitalism. All should be encouraged. Planning, if you run a business should be recognized as good.

Instead you have moved from the conclusion that evil bushitler was intent from when...Saddam went for his daddy or maybe from the day he had an oil well?? or was born?, on conquering Iraq ..without any cause to finding facts which can be jammed into that thesis.

The Times UK link.. which is certainly usu a good source, yields >> page cannot be found

cya… goin to client lab

As usual, you read things through your bias.  I said, that when I go to favorites and then cut/copy them to go into the slot here at ITT, it only allows one entry at a time.  Once you have entered the url and go back to get another favorite, it is gone from the ITT “Post Your Comments” when you return.

Yes, to plan is good.  But not when you plan murder.  That is not good.  Get the difference?
There is another leaked paper that the webmaster at oldamericancentury is working on for me that details how Rumsfeld and Cheney plan to set America up as the one-world power, even attacking Europe if they don’t agree with us.  That is not good.  I am not a neocon like you, so I don’t see the good in becoming the Anti-Christ. 

I have seen precious little documentation for your views.  But that’s okay, because I’m not interested in taking on “let’s bomb the world if they don’t agree with us and be our slaves” mentality anyway.  You are a joke.  Thanks for giving us all a good chuckle at your inane theories.

May 01, 2005

Blair hit by new leak of secret war plan
Michael Smith





A SECRET document from the heart of government reveals today that Tony Blair privately committed Britain to war with Iraq and then set out to lure Saddam Hussein into providing the legal justification.

The Downing Street minutes, headed “Secret and strictly personal — UK eyes only”, detail one of the most important meetings ahead of the invasion.

It was chaired by the prime minister and attended by his inner circle. The document reveals Blair backed “regime change” by force from the outset, despite warnings from Lord Goldsmith, the attorney-general, that such action could be illegal.

The minutes, published by The Sunday Times today, begins with the warning: “This record is extremely sensitive. No further copies should be made. The paper should be shown only to those with a genuine need to know.” It records a meeting in July 2002, attended by military and intelligence chiefs, at which Blair discussed military options having already committed himself to supporting President George Bush’s plans for ousting Saddam.

“If the political context were right, people would support regime change,” said Blair. He added that the key issues were “whether the military plan worked and whether we had the political strategy to give the military plan space to work”.

The political strategy proved to be arguing Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD) posed such a threat that military action had to be taken. However, at the July meeting Jack Straw, the foreign secretary, said the case for war was “thin” as “Saddam was not threatening his neighbours and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran”.

Straw suggested they should “work up” an ultimatum about weapons inspectors that would “help with the legal justification”. Blair is recorded as saying that “it would make a big difference politically and legally if Saddam refused to allow in the UN inspectors”.

A separate secret briefing for the meeting said Britain and America had to “create” conditions to justify a war.

The papers, the second sensitive leak close to the election, appear to be an attempt by disaffected Whitehall insiders to attack Blair’s integrity. They are likely to fuel claims he misled the country on Iraq.

One reason for the secrecy is that the minutes record discussion of US plans for invasion; another is that at the time Blair had given no indication that plans were so advanced.

He had not revealed to MPs or the public that in April 2002 he had told Bush “the UK would support US military action to bring about regime change”, as recorded in the Foreign Office briefing paper. Both before and after the July meeting Blair insisted in public no decision had been made.

The July meeting was later mentioned by Lord Butler in his report on the use of intelligence on WMD as a “key stage” in the road to war; but its details have never been revealed until now.

continued…

The July meeting was later mentioned by Lord Butler in his report on the use of intelligence on WMD as a “key stage” in the road to war; but its details have never been revealed until now.

The minutes show Goldsmith warned Blair eight months before war started on March 19, 2003 that finding legal justification would be “difficult”. The attorney-general only ruled unambiguously war was lawful a few days before the war started after Admiral Sir Michael Boyce, chief of the defence staff, demanded unequivocal written confirmation.

Boyce was never shown Goldsmith’s more equivocal advice to Blair of March 7, 2003, and says today ministers failed to give him protection from prosecution at the International Criminal Court. “I have always been troubled by the ICC,” he says, adding that if British servicemen are put on trial, ministers should be “brought into the frame as well”. Asked if that should include Blair and Goldsmith, he tells The Observer: “Too bloody right.”

Sir Menzies Campbell, Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman, said the leaked minute showed Blair had “agreed to an illegal regime change with the Bush administration. It set out to create the justification for going to war. It was to be war by any means.”

Downing Street claimed the document contained “nothing new”.


http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/justify/2004/0803theyknew.htm

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/iraq_when_was_the_die_cast.php

Just a “few” reports to confirm my statements.  Thanks, by the way, because now I know how to put multiple links in without losing the prior “pastes”.

Margaret,

I can’t wait to read how epaminondas dismisses the ‘smoking gun’.

We’re in a war not of our choosing, my ever-lovin’ butt.  We sure did everything we possibly could to bring it about, though.

If he’s been arguing with Arabs with the same kind of honesty, openness and respect he’s shown here, Oo-boy, are we in trouble.

Prados is a good writer and does an adequte job of schmearing opinion around as fact… he needs to stick to his board game, which I have heard is great. He just never got over hating Colby. This is evident from his claim that the admininstration was “informed” that the aluminum tubes were
categorically not for development of UF6. In fact this is a very extreme position and absolutely not fact.

From a paper which disparages the admin position we see this: “The CIA has concluded that these tubes were specifically manufactured for use in gas centrifuges to enrich uranium. Many in the expert community both inside and outside government, however, do not agree with this conclusion.” and “Determining the truth against this background is difficult. I first learned of this case a year and a half ago when I was asked for information about past Iraqi procurements. My reaction at the time was that the disagreement reflected the typical in-fighting between US experts that often afflicts the intelligence community.”
http://www.isis-online.org/publications/iraq/al_tubes.html

This is from a left of center science group. Far from being a smoking gun of any kind, even those who disagree with admin conclusions, agree that at worst conclusions should have been hard to reach.

David Sirota - Center for American Progress? That David Sirota? The David Sirota who wrote in the Nation that the democratic party must move to the far left and abandon the center ? That David Sirota? What would be your reaction if I referred you to a Charles Krauthammner article, or a William Kristol set of ‘facts’. The same sirota who advertises for the out and out socialist Bernie Sanders (just endorsed I believe by Dean?). But before you even form the thought that I am smearing the man and not dealing with what he says, allow me to warn you that is what my arab friends call a typical zionist tactic. I am a zionist, in case you wonder, btw. No matter.

First - you insist on calling Iraq a war. My position is that it is no more a war than the american invasion of the Phillipines, 1944, was a war, and no more illegal. This war was begun with the slaughter of 3000 americans. My position is that the correct strategy for fighting this war is to destroy the status quo ante bellum which came about from 1918 onwards in the middle east (and Bernard Lewis in the most recent Foreign Affairs among other scholars agrees, btw). Part of that status quo is our responsibility, but only part.

cont>>>>>>>

You seem to feel that if western leaders correctly identified this strategy and then employed tactics to make sure this strategy is carried out this is a crime (as decided by who or what?). Colin Powell has freely stated, and very early on, that WMD was the only item around which multiple departments could ‘coalesce’. Thus, the entire matter is a committee decision for the sake of govt agreement. So what?

Hello, we are in a war. We have been since 2001.

Even if I were to stipulate for the sake of argument that each of these presentation url’s represent fact it means that what Blair is
supposed to have done is nothing different from Lincoln planning and then successfully manipulating Jefferson into the attack in Charleston Harbor (Shelby Foote), Wilson cornering the Germans into unrestricted submarine warfare (Edmund MOrris and Jim Powell), and FDR (Conrad Black, as I have earlier referred). Maybe Amazon has “Search inside the Book”. In none of these cases was there an illegal act committed. BTW, Illegal according to who, or what, anyway? The same Kofi who finds nothing wrong in Darfur? The same Kofi who finds a school bus full of Israeli kids shredded by ball bearings cannot be called terrorism? Illegal by a security council whose codified version of a static world, as Dean Acheson argued, actually prevents change by making any change not voted (in a DICTATORSHIP?)illegal since violence is involved?

You say you have seen precious little documentation, but yet you who snobbishly denigrated the ‘average’ american voter as ignorant, apparently did not even try to see what it is that Sayid Qutb had to say in “Signposts” about the west and specifically america and jewish people, or perform your self vaunted ‘research’. Nor I bet did you see what the significance of Ibn Tamiyya’s rulings were in today’s world. Or what the significance of the Kharjarites are and what they mean for us today. Or what it is Abdullah Azzam was teaching at Abdul Aziz U. Or what Mawdudi preached. Or what Shaykh Qaradawi says today, or what he was doing on the Board of the new mosque in Boston.

LB you worry about my effect on the arabs… the effect is the other way around. It is THEY who convinced me beginning on 9/13 /2001 what the stakes are. It is their beliefs, freely and openly and unabashedly expressed that demonstrate the racist, semi-fascist plutocratic theocracy of ignorance is the outcome if we do not act with complete resolve. It is the arabs who thoroughly
radicalized me to the point of writing and seeing published columns detailing this.

I have in earlier comments mentioned some significant things freely expressed, which represent staggering racism and hatred based in true myth, culminating in the beliefs of many that we represent satan. Is that you simply wish to ignore this reality or you are waiting for an inundation of urls proving this. I can provide it. Do you wish it? For starters, just take a stroll around here:
http://www.memri.org...just for starters. They provide verbatim transcripts and translations of arabic, farsi and other speeches, articles columns and recorded TV.

You return again and again to the damnation of Bush and Blair seemingly in ignorance of the world around. You live in the blissful ignorance that in the end our ‘crime’ will be to create a democracy where there was mass murder and mass graves to the tune of 350,000 at a minimum..and our impetus was to create a mass of democracies because they historically never go to war with each other
(the 1812 return grudge match excepted) thus improving our security.

But that’s okay to fail and to have you help at failure as long as Bush and Blair get branded.

You would do well to pick up Michael Beschloss’s history, “The Conquerors”, and read Conrad Back on the great FDR . There is nothing new here today,
and nothing out of the ordinary in the conduct of a war. This war.

OBFUSCATION.

That’s how, Luminous Beauty.

hysterical and unfortunately typical

I answer your url’s in detail, and not only can you not refute mine, or my position, you don’t even have a one liner.

Far from obfuscation, it is refutation of your basic position. You are playing the wrong game.

And you still have not done a minute’s research on Qutb, or any other source which might shiver your gestalt, hmmm?

Head in the sand.

This is a waste of time. At least the arabs are actually starting to wonder (along with the Guardian, Asia Times, and many others) if the USA was right, and a change is coming.

Around the grounds ladies....

epi,
You stated:

“You are playing the wrong game.”

So you admit it. This is all a game to you, and you are playing the “right” one, while “we” are playing the wrong one. They kill 3000, we are justified to kill a hundred thousand and counting. You may be highly educated and a business man etc., etc., but you still need real help psychologically to deal with your basic hate and prejudices.
Your anger and self righteousness underlies your desire to promote violence. And you have a thousand obfuscations, er URLs, to justify it.

Merlin you can’t have this both ways

1) The ‘game’ I am referring to is the bushitler ‘game’ of others
2) What prejudice? You think I am? BRING IT ON… where, how?
PREJUDICE=<<<an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge>>

That describes those who have YET to look at a single source I have provided.

3) I was condemned by Margaret for not providing documentation, and when it is provided it is called obfuscation..my fault for actually trying to provide objective evidence in an emotional<>hanging party.

Now, we don’t even have to be repubs to be considered evil...and what they say may be true..repubs think dems are stupid and dems think repubs are evil.

The Japanese killed less than 3000...we then killed millions ..were we justified oh great and know all gentle issue oriented 90’s man who can easily identify prejudice in others, but is totally lacking in history?

epaminondas:

If I’d had my majority in ‘41, I probably would already have died fighting Franco in Spain, thank you.

It’s an absolute falsehood that Chomsky writes book intros for Holocaust deniers.  You should really check some of these “facts” you cull from righty propaganda and slander factories.  Absolutely none of them are reliable for anything but a steady stream of BS.

Coolidge was planning to conquer Japan.  How did you find out?  So was Warren Gamaliel Harding (the 2nd Worst President Ever).  You don’t think those plans actually sat around the War Department gathering dust, do you?
Ah, yes.  The Yellow Peril.  Wasn’t racism fun, back then? 

As I make it, you’re slightly more conservative than Adolph Hitler, and slighty less libertarian than Milton Friedman.  Relatively middle-of the-road (company of yellow stripes and dead armadillos), yeah.  A Centrist you’re not.  A partisan you’ve become, young Skywalker.  Welcome to your new housemates, Dave the Snake and Rev. Jim.  Bet you wish you were bunking with Noam and George now? 

It’s not like you really have to educate us on the loud and ubiquitous rationalitions, prevarications of meaning, and ornately decorated horsecrap of the Emperor and His Enablers.  It’s everywhere. Except in the actual facts.

As far as I can understand between your oft-repeated baseless slanders of everyone to the left of Joe Lieberman, and ravings about how morality history and law don’t matter in the face of raw violence, you are saying that some Arab guys told you that some other Arab guys really hate us, and really, really want to kill us all.  Duh!  And they wrap their rationalizations for their hatred in religious trappings.  Double Duh!  They called us bad names!  Du-du-duh!  So we should really, really, really hate them back.  And really, really, really, really kill all those Arabs and other Muslims who hate us, or happen to be standing next to Muslims who hate us, or dare to resist us killing their brothers, fathers, sisters, mothers, aunts, uncles, cousins, or anybody who gets in our way, or fails to renounce any kind of anti-American or anti-Zionist beliefs, or fails to denounce anyone secretly harbouring forbidden beliefs..........freedom on the march.

No man.  4000 yrs of Western History and you haven’t learned a gadblamed thing.

epi

“… and our impetus was to create a mass of democracies because they historically never go to war with each other.”

Is democracy created by force? coersion?
will the new democracy allow for smokers? Asians?Gays?
WASPs?
should we make up a “watch list” for everyone who is not

“with us” ?

prejudice is easily recognized

Have you seen the picture of Rumsfeldt and Saddam shaking
hands??

I think it was right after Bush I gave Osama a cool $2 mill

Convience is a bitch

epaminondas, as I have said to Margaret on several occasions, it is true that history will define this issue...in the matter that it has defined all of the issues you have laid forth.  Ignoring historical reference is to ignore the truth of history. 

I believe that history will define this war as a postive turning point...obviously most of those here on this site belive otherwise.  A shame, but unavoidable.  C’est la vie.

Pure facts:
Noam Chomsky wrote the dedication for Roger Faurisson’s last denial book. Faurisson is a well known denier, who has made many appearances at Shaykh Zayed’s annual racist hate fest in Qatar, why don’t YOU check it out. Chomsky is a defender of Faurisson, and has been for a long time.

Alan Dershowitz caught him ICE COLD LIVE at a debate denying his defending the denier, and lying over the dedication.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky#The_Faurisson_affair
http://www.anti-rev.org/textes/VidalNaquet81b/
http://www-tech.mit.edu/V122/N25/col25dersh.25c.html

Now if you go on, that makes you a denier as well.Congrats. How’s <<your>> conscience cozying up to such a person?

Ignorance is the basis for your beliefs in this, as in many other things.

RB..what are you talking about and WHERE IS YOUR DOCUMENTATION…
<< I think it was right after Bush I gave Osama a cool $2 mill >>
Acording to Stephen Coll (Ghost wars) and Mr. Wilson’s War, both of which are utterly unsparing of the USA, our aid went to the Pakistanis who refused to help unless they got the Cash, and later to Massoud. Most of the Pak help went to Gulbudin Hekmatyar.

Doesn’t ANYONE know any facts????

Democracy IS historically created by force. Here. Freedom was brought by the Armies of the Potomac and Tennesee to half of this nation, and the largest mobilization in the history of the planet brought it at the point of the gun to Germany and Japan, and saved it across eastern europe by remaining vigilant. These actions have been compelled by others.

LB you don’t have a clue what I’m saying bout arabs and remain in Chomksy denial land. You allow evil to spread by such a fantasy life. Go read Signposts. They only confirm the importance of this work.

What do you people read?

Your visceral hatred and prejudice for those who believe ‘other’ has lobotmized reason.

Curious..it’s not so much that they disagree, that’s fine. It is the emotional intolerance, the arrogance and ignorance all rolled into one which make it galactically stupid.

Any item which rather than spur investigation seems to be irritating, creates a hyper allergic response which becomes a personal attack rather than a discussion of facts based on many sources.

Presentation of other facts becomes obfuscation.

Orwellian gulag

The Chomsky thing is iconic of the problem.

Epi,

You are a total waste of time and energy.  Good-bye. 

Curious,

Time will prove you wrong.  This war and Administration is the turning point for the demise of the USA as we have known it.

You’re not a waste, as you are a much better debater with at least an occasional valid point.  Best to you.

An unknowing refutaton of Ms Klein’s thesis…
by an Iraqi blogger..written today

http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/

“People inside and outside Iraq keep wondering why little progress is being made construction wise; why Iraqi cities still get poor power supplies? Why there is a deficiency in clean water in many places? Why sewer systems are incomplete? And a thousand questions like these are heard everyday.
I myself had similar questions but following the progress in one particular project gave me a better understanding of the situation and made me see some facts that I wasn’t aware of.”

Read it if you are fair minded and want to know more about reality from an iraqi

asininondas;

Perhaps you could read Chomsky’s own words and find me a quote that shows Chomsky is a holocaust denier.  Relying on the readings of partisans is not very strong.  Guilt by association is less than weak.  It is an injustice.

http://www.chomsky.info/letters/1989----.htm

You are easily led by lies, because slander and self-justification is your principle object.  Not truth or Justice or anything noble.

Epi

You replied:
“1) The ‘game’ I am referring to is the bushitler ‘game’ of others”

To say someone is in the wrong game is to explain your own frame of mind. You do believe this “war” thing is a game to be won by the party with the most might, and you can hardly wait to justify your “righteous game.” We on the left (I speak for those I know) do not consider this a “game” as you do. Killing and maiming others is no game to us, nor is the destruction of others property and their lives. This is very serious and real to us. That you tag us as “game players” only shows that you would like to drag us down to your game playing position in the justification of death and destruction.
And of course you continue to prove my point about your game when you scream in caps at me to “BRING IT ON.” You want to play an angry game with all of us here. Your posts just reek of it.

Regarding your point 2:
Here is Mirriam-Webster’s first definition of Prejudice:
1 : injury or damage resulting from some judgment or action of another in disregard of one’s rights;

This fits your neocon agenda of pre-emptive killing.

Regarding your point 3:
I don’t speak for Margaret (I don’t know her well enough to do that and would need her permission do specifically do so.) My use of the word “obfuscation” was satirical. Personally I do think that is really what you do here with all this verbiage. All a lot of smoke to hide and justify your angry vendetta against being “wronged.” I have “been there and done that”, chasing people like you through the haze of smoke and mirrors that you people call facts and issues. When I got to the bottom line there was the real emotional reason behind the farce. I learned that it is an utter waste of time blowing away the smoke when the real reason is so apparent.
Bottom line:
You an angry man with a war mongering agenda who is trying to hide your real self with smoke and mirrors.

You noted:
“...oh great and know all gentle issue oriented 90’s man who can
easily identify prejudice in others...”
Thanks for the compliment. One note. I’m not a man of the 90’s I was born in 1935. Other than that you are right on!

LB I never said CHomsky is a denier, I stated he wrote book dedications for holocaust deniers, which is a fact and which you claimed was “totally false”. He both did this, and defends Faurission, and has for ages. Make whatever you will of it, those are the facts. Whatever could possess someone to do such things is beyond my understanding, but surely he feels it was an item of guilt, for he tried to lie about it and was caught, live.

Merlin...a 90’s guy is a state of mind, not an age.
Angry?..I am angry with the racist myths that have brought the state of the world to this point. We may take a part of this blame, but the vast majority lies elsewhere, and remains, untouched, and in here quite unacknowleged. But that anger does not affect the objective reality of what IS. No more than being aggravated at a root canal changes what must be done.

As for games...keep the psycho-babble out of it.

My agenda is to increase the security of this nation for three grown children (I was born in 1949) one of whom gets married in Sept. As a dem I am compelled to admit that the policies of the 90’s did not do this, and in fact by passing the buck later in time has increased the deaths.

Was John Brown, an angry man? Was he wrong? Was FDR an angry man on 12/8? Was he wrong? Was WSC an angry man through the 30’s? Was he wrong?

Yet many said about him, just what you have said here about me (no other comparison is intended or accurate)..angry, warmonger, yadda yadda.

There’s no smoke and mirrors.

These obfuscations you mention are the facts/ bones on which the muscle of opinion must be built. I have seen here the dismissal of a discussion of such facts by personal attack and name calling, I have seen no disputation of what is real based on honest discussion.

Even you, dismiss me by arrogantly saying in effect… “I know you and your kind”.

In fact you have no idea who I am, or what I have done or contributed. None. You have no idea of my politics domestically. You have no idea of anything except this singular issue, but you claim you know who I am.

Amazing, actually

Epi,
You corrected:
“a 90’s guy is a state of mind, not an age.”

I know that. I was telling you I am a man of the 60s and 70s. You folks on the right just have no insight in reading between the lines. Its a common failing. Beyond the end of your nose everything is blurry.

You opined:
“We may take a part of this blame, but the vast majority lies elsewhere, and remains, untouched, and in here quite unacknowledged.

This is more evidence of you not seeing what is beyond the end of your nose. This whole thing is a chicken and egg situation. Who poked who’s eye out first. You memorize history, admittedly going back through all the instances of war and mistreatment, trying to seek an answer that is just beyond the end of your proverbial nose. Nobody’s right! Trying to proportion out blame is worse than shortsighted, as it allows for the justification to strike back and continue the slaughter. You avoid the search for peace and promote war instead.

As to “the blame lying untouched,” I readily acknowledge that there is no excuse to create a 911 even though I understand the rational for it. “Blowback” has existed for eons even if the word itself hasn’t. Both the perpetrator’s of 911 and this administration are guilty of mass murder. I don’t think you will find progressives (of my stripe, at least,) saying that we should coddle bin Laden. Criminals of all stripes need to be stopped and brought to a form of justice where they can no longer harm society. And that includes Bush in my opinion.

You continued:
“No more than being aggravated at a root canal changes what must be done.”

This is a bad analogy. Regarding your fear and resolve about your own mouth and its health, that is your decision alone and whatever choice you make is fine. Then you compare this with what you think is right for other people. You are justifying and forcing a decision of a root canal on 100,000+ people without their consent. Very wrong.

Then you quipped:
“As for games...keep the psycho-babble out of it.”

Thanks for the laugh! You know, many years ago I used to say the same thing to people. That was before I realized how confused I was and was scared to death I would find out what a jerk I was. Any attempt to expose me for the fraud I was, was met with these same words. Running from yourself never works. The only cure is to stop and confront yourself in a real psychological way. Good luck. It is a long way out of the pit.

If you are not the person you present here then why are you doing it?

BTW, I enlisted and spent 6 years in the army from 58-64. What branch did you enlist in? Have your children enlisted and do they share your views?

You conclude:
“These obfuscations you mention are the facts/ bones on which the muscle of opinion must be built.”

Again your nearsightedness is shown. Murder is wrong no matter how many facts you marshal in your defense of it. Opinion is not the best arbiter of action. In fact (at least in my opinion,) it is the worst. Compassion, understanding and love are the best determiners of our actions. Not things like greed, hate, revenge, or war. I am a secular Humanist, not a Christian, yet I have a lot of shared belief with that view of gentleness, understanding and compassion. Your judgment/opinion of many eyes for an eye, is a terrible way to live.

I don’t have a clue who you are.  But you have consciously and unconsciously, perhaps revealed a portion of what you are.  Not pretty. 

What was the motive behind that ‘if I defend a denier, i’m a denier’ And then ‘ I never said he was a denier.  If you read Chomsky’s rebuttal, you might have discovered that Chomsky’s letter, defending his freedom of speech not his conclusions, which were not conclusions denying the existence of the holocaust in any case, was not addressed to Faubisson, was used without Chomsky’s permission.  But you knew that.

Paul,I said that nothing we’ve done in Afganistan or Iraq has made things better,and probably made things worse.Actually,given the amount of depleted uranium that we’ve dumped in those countries,we’ve made those peoples lives worse for generations to come.How many babies born without arms or legs does it take before it’s not worth it?One? One thousand?How many? Give me a number so I know what your price is.....Epidermus,I’ve never heard one person use so many words to say absolutely nothing.You truly are a wonder.LB is right,you are perhaps the most confused person on the face of the earth.We’re talking about the Iraq war and you keep talking about WW2.Wassup wi dat?.....But to tell you the truth,these posts underline one thing,the people arguing against the war deal with facts and truth and struggle with their conscience,while all you armchair warriors out there deal with sound bites,bullet points and fantasy,and have no problem with your conscience.Pretty much say it all,doesn’t it?

LB, As an ACLU member I understand the freedom of speech/march in skokie reasoning, but I regret to inform you that I was in the audience when Dershowitz cored Chomsky, and his/Chosmky’s reaction and his long defense of a hideous idea on ‘that’ basis just doesn’t cut it. His long defense of Faurisson (decades by now?)belies it as well. Frankly based on Chomsky’s actions and writing about this, I simply don’t believe him in his freedom of speech gymnatics. But a good question is, why is this clearly news and a shock to you? Aren’t you someone who regards themselves as well informed? And if this was new information, as it seems, what else lies irrefutable just over the horizon?

However your final revelation about the US ‘desire’ to conquer Japan in 1925 is instructive about what you think.

Since this place saved the lives of many in my family from both religous and political persecution, you’ll have to forgive my not being able to regard it as evil.

Merlin, blowback is a ward chuchill code in this case, don’t you think? And more, it belies the reasons my arab friends shared with me with no problem whatsoever, and which go here unremarked, and form the heart of edgy sunni-ism. That being..there is only one law, >>God’s. Those who create their own laws cannot follow God’s, and make themselves gods in so doing, and are therefore idolators. Idolators and polytheists are not to be tolerated is a polite way to put it. Those muslims who view themselves as moderate will not speak up against this pov. Many here are not only afraid of the FBI but more afraid of the sunni mosques, and those I know thru medical research have looked at me and said...’now you understand, we ran from the madness’. Those are facts. They have nothing to do with us. And unless you are willing to bow to Sharia, there is nothing you can do to affect their attitude. That is the motive force behind those willing to take action against us, and those who finance them and shelter them. Those who think this way have gotten their basis from as little as the 5th caliph after muhammad, and have been aided by the great jurist’s Ibn Tamiyyah fatwas against muslims who fail the sunni tests of real faith. To them these temporary political reasons which you probably accept as the cause for all this, are simply convieniences.

We, as cross worshipping crusaders and jews ( as they say every day, as and you should be able to read in the news) need do nothing to bring about their enmity, and God’s. I am personally as is all my family, to them, the descendants of apes and pigs, literally.

I submit that racist myth is what empowers these actors, and that no reasoning will reach them any more than it reached the slave owners of Yazoo City, probably less. And we all know the result of that.

I simply observe these facts. I bring to you my oservation.

I did not enlist but angrily organized anti vietnam protests, after it became clear what really happened on 8/2/65. The draft missed me by 3 (#128). I would have gone. I have one child away now.

But this is not that time. Nor is this war that war.

Defending myself, my family, our way of life and this nation from the racist killers who wish only for shahada is not murder, nor is it any more an eye for an eye than was our proper war against Japan, or the scouring of Nazis from this planet in the same effort.

If the righteous cannot act in self defense for fear of not being perfect in their actions, how is it that evil can ever be defeated? And make no mistake about what we face.

As someone who didn’t really believe in the power of racism until I experienced it personally in college in the mid 60’s, I found a changed me, and I will not do nothing now. I acted then, I will act now. I see no difference between those who espouse what they do today and the KKK. None.

Epidermus,What?????

Mike if you have no idea why history is not just important but critical, it’s a pretty pathetic statment on our eduational requirements..no doubt you’ll be repeating the history you don’t know..gee who said that?

Even Gush Limpballs sounds more coherent when he talks than that.

Epi,a study of history is essential to understand current events,yet you seem to select only those parts of history that you can use to support your view.You need to consider everything,otherwise your view is incomplete.And your historical perspective is conspiciously lacking in recent events regarding US/Arab relations over the last 50 years or so.You never refer to it.Why is that???

And whats does racism have to do with this disscusion,other than the increase in hate crimes aganst muslims in our wonderful,free ‘United’ States of America?

Very passionate. Exactly appropriate that your core motivation is basically tribal and religious, and your hatred so alchemically reduced and sanctified.  Congratulations! You have mystically transformed yourself into the worst of your enemies and brought forth the worst in all your enemies.  Well forgive me for not wanting to fight in your religious war.  I really haven’t a dog in your metaphysical disputes.

LB,there’s no difference between Islamic fanaticism and Christian fanaticism.NONE!!!

Epi,

You said:
“We, as cross worshipping crusaders and jews...”

OK, thanks for revealing yourself. You are a Religious Crusader justifying your angry crusade with supposedly factual history (no bias in your observation, of course,) and your opinions and justifications based on it. You were angry with LBJ and now you are angry with the Muslims. Not much has changed in 40 years, has it? You are still angry...just at someone else.

And this:
“I submit that racist myth is what empowers these actors, and that no reasoning will reach them...”

And I submit to you, “that no reasoning will reach you either” until you stop having this unrelenting anger.

And more:
“If the righteous cannot act in self defense for fear of not being perfect in their actions, how is it that evil can ever be defeated?”

Wow, folks, a neocon religious wingnut preacher on the “good” side of that great dualism, exposes himself! Here is the reason for the factual smoke and mirrors epi denies using. Justification of his Crusade! Whew!!

As I mentioned in an earlier post, quoting myself, ahem:

“I have “been there and done that”, chasing people like you through the haze of smoke and mirrors that you people call facts and issues. When I got to the bottom line there was the real emotional reason behind the farce. I learned that it is an utter waste of time blowing away the smoke when the real reason is so apparent.”

And a farce it is.

Epi,it blows me away that such a racist hate monger such as yourself could be a member of the ACLU.How do you reconcile such opposing view points?Is it only racism if it’s directed against you?

Hi Mike,
You said:

“LB,there’s no difference between Islamic fanaticism and Christian fanaticism.NONE!!!”

Exactly right. But of course to understand that, would be to have no excuse to have a Crusade. Poor epi could never do that. What would he replace all that anger with? Love? Compassion? Understanding?
How about abject fear of the truth? Unfortunately, that usually comes first. Enough to keep a man dressed in a cape with a cross on it I suspect…

Merlin,crusade,inquisition,witch hunt,Christianity is replete with examples of,well,mans inhumanity to man,and that includes all you women out there,just so I don’t appear sexist.  From where I sit,true and significant change will only occur when we,I.E..humanity,realise that,as individuals,our well being depends on the well being of all of us,and also that the well being of all of us depends on the well being of the individual.It’s something that can’t be legislated,can’t be forced.It requires a FUNDIMENTAL change in our consciousness.It requires a complete abandonment of capitalism,(the only way that capitalism can continue is if we realise interstellar flight).It requires a form of communism,OOOOH,now there’s a bad word.Our only other alternative is a dog eat dog world,survival of the fittest,where the survivor inherits a destroyed world.All I see right now is a bunch of Lemmings running full speed toward the edge of the cliff.I hope that I’m wrong.

Merlin THIS PHRASE....<< “We, as cross worshipping crusaders and jews...”

OK, thanks for revealing yourself. You are a Religious Crusader justifying your angry crusade>>

Is what is used by Sunni Freaks word for word.. in describing christians. Those are THEIR words, not mine, and in your arrogant and foolish ignorance you have made my point.

Would you like the hundred’s of URL’s in which that phrase is so used?

If you cannot even recognize the perjorative, racist, language of religous hatred used by those who wish us so ill every second, used by them every single day, how can you possible know enough to comment on this?

What do you read?

Ignorance.

Mike, the problem is yours not mine. How can a civil rights worker have my views on foreign policy today?  How could someone who housed Bradley campaign workers in the NH primaries have my views today? How could an ACLU member have my views today? How could a Mcgovern worker have my views today?

It’s called knowledge and experience.

How could the breaker of segregation (HST) carry out the great FDR’s plan to use nukes? (Oh but that’s history so you don’t get it, right?) You calim me to be racist? Define my racism. Go for it.

Epimonandas:

Is what is used by Sunni Freaks word for word.. in describing christians. Those are THEIR words, not mine, and in your arrogant and foolish ignorance you have made my point.

Perhaps since we American rational progressives, and Muslim Patriots and Religious agree on this one point, though otherwise in our beliefs, politics, and reason we differ so radically, it is evidence of the objective validity of this point.  Much more likely than the echo chamber of like-minded opinions and specious reasoning you refer to as facts.  (ah, but then you’re a lawyer and a fact is whatever you can convince a jury is a fact).

Where we differ from the Muslims that you hate so thoroughly and uncritically, is in seeing that fanatical disease ravaging the Muslim religion as well.  Here we are, minus the irrational hatred that motivates you, on this one point, in agreement with you.  More evidence that our view is objective.  Actually the clincher as I see it.

You see, we prize objectivity for what it is.  An ability to remove one self from the tangled confusion that is life for the purpose of examining reality unbiased by our mere human passions and foibles.  To you it is a rhetorical trick, a little linguistic hocus-pocus, to advance your advocacy of your pre-concieved agenda.  Not an attitude that lends itself to any kind of productive dialectic.  You blithely and unconciously betray your bias with every post you write.  Though the readers here have generously tried to correct your errors, to you it is water off a duck’s back.  There is none so blind, as he who will not see.

The beginning of wisdom is the recognition of our fundamental ignorance. Since we have no certain knowledge of the outcomes of our actions, our only guide is the clarity of our intentions.  So you see, to trade my small experience of seeking to heal the wounded human heart for all your lauded skill and accomplishment in inflicting such wounds, would be an immoral act on my part.

A lawyer, eh?  Yesterday he claimed he was a cardiologist.  There goes—oops, it was already gone-- Epi’s credibility. 

Do you notice how increasingly shrill he sounds?
Just like a kid you catch doing something naughty, they scream like crazy and say you did it.

Excuse me but if you can find where I claimed to be a lawyer..quote it. Nor did I claim to be a cardiologist.. I am a cardiovascular researcher, not an MD. If you or someone you know has had a bypass surgery, or any heart surgery in the last 15 years, or taken drugs to help left ventricular function, things I did were probably involved.

One makes a false claim and the other jumps on it. Truly amazing !

LB, you have made a clear statement which stands out:
“Where we differ from the Muslims that you hate so thoroughly and uncritically, is in seeing that fanatical disease ravaging the Muslim religion as well.”—on what basis do you think what is happening is a fanatical disease and not “real” islam? Have you perused memri? What is diplsayed there is what has been said for generations, by leaders, virtually all of them. I donl;t claim to say “this is Islam”, or “that is Islam” but I do know this..that is precisely what is at issue. And you have made the assumption that muslims will agreee to be temperate and as you find it non-fanatical. That is a manifestly gigantic assumption. From the 5th caliph this kind of paroxysm has raged periodically thru history within Islam. That is a fact. One not of my observation but of people such as Bernard Lewis. These ‘periods’ may last hundreds of years. They may go somewhat quiescent but never go away. Certainly not since the Salafi movement. Do you know the meaning of Salafi?

I don’t hate the muslims. I hate those muslims whose racist theology and belief that god grants them the right to slice off heads and go to heaven has lead them to committ such acts, and those muslims who finance, transport, and support them. That is no different from saying I do not hate Christians, but I hate those who acted in the Christian organization, the KKK.

The muslims I converse with tell me about 1/3 support this ideology. That would be about the same who supported the KKK about the turn of the century, if not more. The differenc is that the USA had an organization which allowed it to stamp out such terrorists and murderers, whereas today not only is there no such organized ability for the ‘arab kkk’, many, many preachers teach this hate and racism. And this has nothing to do with military actions which we take that they find politically objectionable. It stems, they say from what is a perfect and immutable document, and the undiluted and exact words of God. Thus our symbols of cultural preponderance come to signify evil. Mcdonalds. Las Vegas. Brittany.

The only way, I posit, that this ideology can be ‘defeated’, is first to avoid being killed, and then to emplace if required, systems which allow their societies free will. The UN Arab Human development project has reported every year that arabs have the least human rights and freedom anywhere and lag behind every single geographic area, in every single technical and education and economic area (except per capita oil production). Their GNP’s together, when oil is stripped out, are about what Finland’s is.

That is why the entire status quo of the middle east has to go.

If these societies in free democracies tell us to take a hike..FINE. Govt’s which dislike us will be as transient as govts who do like us. 

Nor should it be necessary with a little luck, to repeat Iraq. All we have to do is look at Lebanon. The Iranians, I have a feeling will take of things on their own, provided the mullahs don’t slaughter them.

What you seem to miss is that, there IS an objective reality. When the tree falls there is a sound 100% of the time. Fact is not what the jury decided if it diverges from this.

CONT >>>>

The readers here for the most have not ‘generously’ tried to correct my errors, in fact, for the most part, presentation of facts and sources has lead directly to personal attacks.

What I find is intolerance.
I am a racist.
I am an AWM (?) an assumption btw
I am a right wing fanatic (despite the presumably objective test mentioned here - Political Compass which plopped me dead ctr)
I am misquoted into a ‘religious wing nut’

and why?

Because I have done the unthinkable! I am a liberal, Mgovernite, registered Dem, ACLU, vietnam protesting civil rights worker from the 60’s who had hair passed my shoulders, who depsite never voting for a repub in a local or state election must now apparently be expunged and excommunicated because I have identified outside the USA forces indistiguihsable from the KKK which seek our destruction, and low and behold is is GWB who has identified this as well.

That is a major mistake.
But apparently no ‘other’ can be tolerated around here.
Too bad for the party if this is the future.

It may just be those of us who aspire to progressive-libertarian principles are the genuine Centrists.  Bridging the capitalist-libertarians on our right, and the state-socialists in the NW quadrant.  It’s my opinion that all three sectors of public thought are, in the interests of human freedom and dignity, naturally allied against the capitalist- state tendencies towards oligarchy and fascism.  History has in this light has been the story of the rich and powerful playing these three political world views against one another in order to maintain their authority to define status and value.

It is disturbing that epamonondas has chosen to let himself be played in this way, but the libertarian right has always been the weakest link in the chain.  On one hand, they are the most likely to allow constraints to human liberty that they don’t see applying to themselves, and on the other, they are always yearning for the fruits of Mammon, and so liable to enslave themselves to the imperatives of capital.

Right now, they are not particularily touched by the odious stench of repression coming from the troglodyte mono-maniac right.  I can’t imagine many feel much comfort in the influence of the likes of Reverends Dobson and Moon, unless like epi they have a convergence of religious views.  As always their primary concern in life is the security of their investments, so as long as the market-place is relatively stable, they have no call to buck the status quo.  But they are doubtless unsettled by all the environmental uncertainties of the current situation.

Why is that I find this:

<< let himself be played in this way>>

somwhere about 3 sd’s to the left of arrogant condescension. I think, rather, I am somewhere in the front of a wave of exodus of perspicacious individuals who can see the end result before it needs to be experienced.

Nor can I find it a reasonable claim that someone who has stated that in 1925 the responsible planning against potential enemies does in fact mean the US, due to “yellow peril” racism intended all along to conquer Japan is remotely close to the centre of anything but chomskyesque theories of evil capital, and white men. That’s not intended as an insult, btw.

Please explain and give an example ,..really…
<<they are not particularily touched by the odious stench of repression coming from the troglodyte mono-maniac right>> Repression? How? Where? Here?

Epaminondas,

Follow the light.  Leave the dark side (and the ACLU).  Come on over where you can have disagreements and not be personally attacked.  We need some intelligent folks on the conservative side.  I’ve learned about 10 people have all the brains and the rest of us are stupid.  We need you.

In fact, U scare me...tho the numbers of strident, shrill individuals here is certainly few compared to a party, I find myself looking down, and wondering if the footprints I am looking at in front of me are those of David Horowitz.

The path has been trode before

Fascinating thread - partly for the interesting arguments, but mostly for the “debating” style.  Both sides claiming the other is using personal attacks; both claiming the other side has their head in the sand, both claiming to be objective…

Ah, the irony.  Kind of shame though.  Both sides have made some fair points.  Too bad neither side seems to be listening. 

Btw, everyone here sure that there are just two sides to this - us against the terrorists (define your terms for each)?  Seems to me, based on this thread as well as other reading, that the acts of terrorism in America, Bali, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, etc...are a symptom of something else, namely the war between the moderates and radicals in Islam itself.  If true, the West (us?) still needs to be involved, but perhaps we should be pursuing a different goal through different means?

The thousands of Iraqi civilians who have been murdered were
not sitting around “wishing us so ill every second”

at least that’s what my Iraqi friends told me

“at least the USA had an organization which allowed it to stamp out such terrorists(KKK)....”

In that case please tell Mathew Hale and Trent Lott.They weren’t listening.
If we had let Strom Thurmond do it his way we wouldn’t have a problem,right?

fortunately there is no such thing as institutionalized racism
for us to point to as repression in these “united ‘ states.

“Blessed is that slave whom his master will find at work when he arrives” Matthew 24:46

You know , the New Testament

Luckily , terrorists are only “ real” Islamics in towels
that way we can keep them off planes

Tomkin...you are right. Only those who profess to be muslim moderates are not blowing anybody up. Right now they are losing. They have been since 1924. It’s a one sided ‘civil/religious’ war. There are many who consider themselves moderate, then when describing how these acts are NOT Islamic add the word...BUT.

RB..just think about this..I asked this before, and in fact I asked this of my Iraqi, Omani, and Saudi friends. I have not yet found a cogent answer...if good cannot respond to evil acts for fear of killing innocents, how can evil ever be repelled?

BTW, you left out Robert Byrd. Let’s be fair all around.

Epamonondas;

My apologies for inflating your status.  My bad.

You think like a lawyer.  More lawyer than scientist. Liberalism really is more than a label and a resume.  Perhaps you are no longer what you once were. 

Not a trial lawyer, though, or you would be presenting yourself with more sensitivity to your audience.

Objectively, one could say, things will get better in Iraq.  What has gone on for 2+yrs. cannot be sustained forever. 

I don’t understand. Why do you think it will happen any quicker or more compassionately if we cease to be critical of the administration’s sincerity and honesty in carrying out the policies they claim to be following?  The very best I can hope for is they might do it just to prove us wrong.  They really have never outwardly shown much interest in our concerns in any case, though.  So I’m not betting on it.

Here you go Tomkin..fresh off the press today and right on your subject

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=569403&contrassID=2&am mp;subContrassID=5&sbSubContrassID=0

“The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a decending sprial, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it. Through violence you may murder the liar, but not the lie, nor establish the truth. In fact, violence merely increases hate. So it goes. Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness:
only light cando that.Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that.” Martin Luther King, Jr

Before I am burned at the stake for my “bleeding heart”
I think a more important point here is that there has to be some credibility .
We cant marginalize brown lives because of our demand for “justice”,even though we do it here daily.
We end up looking like cowboys who aren’t smart enough to really figure it out or just don’t give a shit.
All men are created equal.....?

Tomkin,

I do not come to these blogs and participate under the illusion I’m going to sway the opinion of another.  I only hope to provide a different (conservative) perspective.  Matching wits with the folks here keeps you on your toes and up to date on the issues.  I once believed the progressive blogers enjoyed having someone to debate, but I’m not so sure any more.

On to your subject.  I haven’t seen any evidence there’s a possibility to negotiate with radical Islamists.  If you evidence or ideas, I’d love to hear them.  We saw what the Taliban created in Afghanistan. When we went into Bosnia to prevent the slaughter of Muslims and were rewarded by an attack on the World Trade Center.  Go to some of the obscure websites and see the special brand of justice dished out to their own people.  It makes Abu Grab and Gitmo look like resort spas.  There are always causalities of war that are heart breaking.  However, our military spends millions to develop precision weapons to minimize civilian causalities.  Not these guys, they actively plan to kill civilians…the more the better. 

It is always better to seek compromise.  I just don’t see it happening with radical Islam.

RB,

You are right, but don’t expect this neocon bunch of warmongers who thrive on fear to get it.  All they do is cloud any objection one might make and, no matter how well documented, scream that you are unsubstantiated.  I have yet to read one thing by Epi that is anything more than hate-filled, bloodlusty warmongering.  Don’t expect someone with no heart to understand you.

Ghandi and MLK are the answers to a western conscience RB. They are the right answer for those struggles.

They are not the answers to those who think you should die and your death will be part of their salvation.

Unless I misunderstand you, your answer is that to act you become evil.

That is no answer. Even if they are somewhat relative (in your thought) there is at least an evil and a not-evil. You, in this case have condemned not-evil to extinction, perhaps in the thought of a greater salvation. You may be right in that hope. But to find that out you still allow evil to conquer here.

You assume an awful lot if you think this about ‘brown’. Richard Reid doesn’t appear to be brown. We could just as easily claim the reverse, that those who attack us do so partly because the ‘occidentals have a history which proves them evil’. Also false.

It’s not about either of those things. With the exception of the Saudi superiority complex, Islam is mostly color/race blind (but not tribe-blind). And in this case we are color blind as well. As Mel Brooks says, ‘funny, you don’t look druish’.

Muslims are both Muhammad Qutb, egyptian arab, and Stephen Schwartz - yes that’s right - (author of The Two Faces of Islam). Muslims might be anything ..racially.

It’s just not about brown at all. And to them, it’s not about about white, even when they think us evil.

Dresden looked just as bad as Nagoya, know what I mean, and both not much different from Richmond in 1865?

UScareMe,

It is odd that now, when one can see that the last few pages are dominated by conservatives, you come online with a far more civil tone.  As a liberal, I don’t mind hearing your opinion or your sharing of facts, but I hate the Rush Limgaugh scream into your face approach.

I would agree that I don’t see that happening with radical Islam either.  Unfortunately, on the other side of the coin, I see orthodox Christianity becoming volatile and reckless as well.  Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Was it Issac’s fault that Abraham slept with Haggar and Ishmael should have been his rightful heir?  What we see today is the longest and most stringent case of sibling rivalry in all of history. 

There’s plenty of blame for both sides historically.  The Crusades were a pretty big screwup for Christianity, yet that is the current path we pursue.  Regain the Holy Land.  Except this time, the motive is oil.

After we tacitly helped build the Taliban and train Osama bin Laden, what did we do that pissed him off so much?  Was it installing troops in Saudi Arabia?  Was it that he felt we hadn’t supported him enough against the Soviets? For a certainty, our defense of Israel over the Palestinians hasn’t made us their pal. The thing is, for such a level of hatred, something(s) had to be the impetus.  We are not blameless.

So, how to end this.  Well, as a Christian I don’t believe we ever will.  Gog and Magog and on to Armegeddon.  But leaving that aside, the first thing we must do is relieve ourselves of foreign oil dependency.  That’s been a mantra in the Democratic Party since the 70’s.  Hasn’t come to much, though.

I think our government has been an ass over the last 40 years, just keep putting the future off, don’t worry about developing financially feasible alternatives--just keep that oil money pumping and screw the rest.

Specious claim factually in error

<<After we tacitly helped build the Taliban and train Osama bin Laden, >>

As made clear in both the definitive histories (so far), Ghost Wars by Stephen Coll, and “Charlie Wilson’s War” by George Crile, not only did we not arm or train Osama (who had his own saudi funding the entire time), he was often in combat during the Soviet occupation with those we did, and ended by assassinating one of the major receivers of aid and training, Massoud.

I believe you to be demonstrably wrong on facts. BUt bring out your sources for this claim.

Please explain and give an example ,..really…
<they are not particularily touched by the odious stench of repression coming from the troglodyte mono-maniac right>> Repression? How? Where? Here?

You really don’t know much about street level politics here in the good ol’ Yewessay, do yuh?  You think Ann Coulter is a harmless quack? 

You think you’ve been unfairly pelted with personal insults here? 

In some respects, the KKK may no longer effectively exist, but the odor lingers on, under the rose.

Last time I heard her name it was about a pie.
Seems like no repression on lemon meringue there.

Why would some blond speaking her mind be an impediment to anyone speaking theirs? Is that your claim? Laura Ingraham and Rush Limbaugh et al make Luminous Beauty afraid? Doesn’t look that way here.

<<In some respects, the KKK may no longer effectively exist, but the odor lingers on, under the rose.>>

What specifically does that mean?
We stamped it out but must still suffer as a nation? Do you favor the germans still suffering stigma? The japanese over Nanking? Korea?

I asked for specific examples of repression. I see none. I see and hear Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. I see Barney Frank and I hear Ed Markey just fine.  I see and hear Kwame Nfume and there’s no one on this planet who could intimidate Charlie Rangel. So what specifically are you claiming?

Unless I misunderstand you, your answer is that to act you become evil.

How much greater do you think your misunderstanding could be?

Not a claim.  A metaphor.

In 1979 “the