A funny thing happened while following the money trail of the neoconservatives who have hijacked U.S. foreign policy. The path led to a network of financial and intellectual resources that also is dedicated to neoracism. The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation has been the economic fount for the neoconservative notions of global affairs now ascendant in the Bush administration. According… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (56)Page 1 of 1 pagesVery good article. Thank you.
I have a question when it comes to financing our country’s move toward theo-fascism. I know you can find tons of information on the Moon organization’s connections, financing and in general working with the conservative movement and the leadership of the Republican party. He has spent BILLIONS propping up and maneuvering right wing thought over the last couple decades, in particular. This is the same “Rev.” Moon who claims he’s the Messiah and plans on eventually controlling our country and the world. The cash comes from overseas and the origins are never revealed in any detail, because his group has never been made to fall under FARA, as I believe the should.
FARA
http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/fara/
The Washington Times, for instance, has NEVER made a profit, losing tens of millions yearly. Moon’s organization literally works with the republican party to drive us toward a more theocratic government…Don’t believe me? Read this, and pay close attention to what it says about David Caprara, who Bush just named to head VISTA. Everything I have read says that members of Moon’s organization have one goal, put the group/Moon in charge of the world.
http://www.au.org/churchstate/cs6013.htm
Posted by Arnold Ziffle on Jun 8, 2003 at 1:34 PM con’d
I am just hitting some high spots here...and NO ONE talks about it. Not even the so-called ‘liberals’ who say they see the right, as it has evolved, as a destructive element in today’s society, not a PEEP. Even if you buy that Moon that his ‘church’ is a religion and you don’t see him as a dangerous megalomaniac, why are the republicans/conservatives working with a group like this? With these goals? For a party which is record setting in the hypocrisy department, this is the Grandest Hypocrisy of Them All.
In fact, this story is an epic and everybody acts like it isn’t there.
I know Moon has snagged a democrat or two into his web over the years. But the conservatives have given the Moon organization a place at the table of influence in our country. Moon was a VIP guest at the Reagan-Bush inaugural. Bush 41 has traveled the world giving speeches honoring Moon. Bush 41 called Moon, “the man with the vision.” Moon dislikes democracy as much as he does communism, he says the only way is for the world to follow him and his group under a theocracy...he has called America ‘Satan’s harvest”....some ‘vision’ wouldn’t you say?
Does anyone think that without the Washington Times being there to nurture these extremists over the decades, that the election of 2000 would have been close enough to steal? Think back over the years. For instance, guess which paper was the first to print the lie about AF1 being trashed? It goes on and on.
NO MOON NO BUSH. It is as simple as that....Moon predicted presidents would have to go through him to become president, and in Bush’s case that is a FACT. (Moon created, printed and distributed 30 millions voter ‘scorecards’ for Poppy during the ‘88 election, didn’t cost Poppy or the repubs a cent.)
Posted by Arnold Ziffle on Jun 8, 2003 at 1:35 PM Can you tell me why, knowing that the Moon organization has bankrolled the conservative movement to the tune of BILLIONS, ...that is BILLIONS with a B, why is it NEVER discussed, even by the left? Their hundreds of sources of information which document this activity. The number one manipulator of our political system declares he is the Messiah in 40 newspapers across the country, he is in bed with the Bushes and the republican party and NOT A PEEP. You know what I mean, yes, the information is there but THE PUBLIC doesn’t know beans about it. Ask anyone on the street if they remember Moon and they will tell you he is gone away or that only a few ‘nuts’ still follow him. Ask them.
Lt. Gen. Daniel O. Graham was asked by Moon to help influence the Reagan administration’s decision on Star Wars. According to Graham, people in the administration didn’t support SDI in 1982. Moon not only used his paper, he paid 200 grand to make a propaganda film supporting SDI. Even had Charlatan Heston in it and, you guessed it, Ronnie likes movies so the country pissed away a hundred billion or so. Even if you believe Start Wars is the right policy, do you think those decisions should be made by Generals, who have been advisors to the president, in consultation with “Rev.” Moon? Where Moon is given the power to tip the balance in our system? He isn’t a citizen. Maybe I should repeat this, an advisor to the president went to “Rev.” Moon to influence the decision on Star Wars. As Moon put it in a 1991 speech, “Father gave his support and Reagan announced it.” (Moon claims he and his wife are the “True Parents” of all mankind, here to fulfill the job Jesus didn’t get done. Thus the “father’ reference, he was speaking of himself.)
Read this if you have been caught in the word games which claim The Washington Times is ‘independent’ of Moon. It tells some of the story about who tipped the balance on Star Wars and talks about the editors who quit because Moon was molding the paper. (he recently said he intends for the Washington Times to teach the country about God. Moon said God, personally, declared him to be the messiah.)
From Frontline:
http://www.mediachannel.org/originals/moontranscript.shtml
Posted by Arnold Ziffle on Jun 8, 2003 at 1:36 PM I’ve got news for you folks on the left, you can spitter and sputter all you want, but until the country deals with this, all the rest is useless.
Oh, did I mention Moon has financed the North Koreans? He gave them ten’s of millions to keep that communist country afloat and he bought them submarines. See the Defense Intel Agency(DIA) docs at the end of this article:
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2000/101100a.htmlI have to go, there is so much more here. Why won’t the country recognize who is driving the bus? When will the conservative leadership go on FOX and bow to their Savior?
Moon is known to dress members up to look like historical figures, like Reagan, and have them bow fully prostrate before him. I guess it is his way of ‘visualizing’ the future he wants.
Bush 41 called him the ‘man with the vision’...I don’t think the American public would share that vision and if they knew it was happening, I don’t think they would appreciate it.I will leave you with some links and couple short quotes from the 1978 congressional investigation of Moon:
Quoting finding #3Among the goals of the Moon Organization is the establishment of a worldwide government in which the separation of church and state would be abolished and then would be governed by Moon and his followers.
The findings may be found here: http://www.rickross.com/reference/unif/Unif11.html
more from the report:
http://www.freedomofmind.com/resource center/groups/m/moonies/fraserport.htm
Alan Tate Wood, a former UC member who had been president of the FLF, described to the subcommittee some of Moon’s political ambitions and activities. He said that Moon, through the UC and its numerous front organizations, wanted to acquire enough influence in America to be able to “dictate policy on major issues, to influence legislation, and move into electoral politics."(228) In the United States, the political goals of the UC and those of the KCIA “overlap so thoroughly as to display no difference at all.”
Posted by Arnold Ziffle on Jun 8, 2003 at 1:36 PM Do your own searches see what you find. Here are some additional links:
Former member Steve Hassan?s Moon page, see list of hundreds of Moon front groups: http://www.freedomofmind.com/resourcecenter/groups/ m/moonies
Robert Parry, crack investigative journalist and long time Moon watcher has an excellent series on Moon. http://www.consortiumnews.com/ archive/moon.html
Rick Ross?s Moon page with many articles no longer available from the original sources on the net. http://www.rickross.com/groups/moonie.html
Craig Maxim former member whose was raised in the cult. His mother is still a member. Craig’s site has plenty of info and is still adding. To get a good insight into Moon read Craig’s experiences. Excellent. http://www.xmoonies.com/
Moon moves on the United Nations http://www.globalpolicy.org/ngos/ analysis/1101moon.htm
This is a site from a man who is still in the “church” and is fighting anonymously from within. http://wiserose.hp.infoseek.co.jp/exposed/exposed.htm
Moon Primer http://www.geocities.com/nomoonies/ chronicles/a_moon_primer.html
Posted by Arnold Ziffle on Jun 8, 2003 at 1:37 PM You missed the Manhatten Institute. These are the people that want vouchers so that public schools will end up with less money and only the poor blacks.
---
http://www.mediatransparency.org/ search_results/info_on_any_recipient.php?recipientID=198
Posted by jmi on Jun 9, 2003 at 2:41 AM oops, this:
Lt. Gen. Daniel O. Graham was asked by Moon to help influence the Reagan administration’s decision on Star Wars.should read:
Lt. Gen. Daniel O. Graham asked Moon to help influence the Reagan administration’s decision on Star Wars.
---Did you read this? Why isn’t this worth 5 minutes on TV?
http://www.mediachannel.org/originals/moontranscript.shtml
Narrator: By 1984, despite his paper’s growing influence, James Whelan was unhappy.Whelan: “When we started the paper there was never any question that it would in any fashion project the views or the agenda of Sun Myung Moon or the Unification Church ó all to the contrary. We said, ‘Look, we are going to put a high wall in place. It is going to be a sturdy wall. And it will divide us from you.’”
Narrator: But Whelan’s wall of editorial independence was often breached.
Whelan: “Moon himself gave direct instructions to the editors...Who in fact calls the shots? Ultimately Moon calls the shots....
Whelan (at press conference): “The Washington Times has become a Moonie newspaper.”
Narrator: Whelan resigned. Times spokesmen said the dispute was really over money. Whelan was later replaced by former Newsweek editor Arnaud de Borchgrave, seen here in a Moon-sponsored film.
Deborchgrave: “When I was in Europe recently, I was delighted to hear the Washington Times quoted every hour on the hour on the Voice of America and on the BBC ó two worldwide radio networks that happen to reach hundreds of millions of people.”
Narrator: De Borchgrave has consistently denied taking orders from Moon. But the man who ran the editorial pages under de Borchgrave tells a different story ó William Cheshire.
Chesire: “I protested to de Borchgrave. I went up to his office when I saw this happening, I told him this was unethical, improper, unprofessional, and it ought to stop. Also, it was dumb.”
Narrator: Cheshire and four others resigned after de Borchgrave ordered an aboutface on an editorial critical of the South Korean government.
Chesire: “I said, ‘Arnaud, we have a problem.’ He said, ‘What’s the problem?’ I said. ‘The problem is you’ve conferred with the owners of this newspaper, come back downstairs and demanded a reversal of editorial policy on their say so.”
Posted by Arnold Ziffle on Jun 9, 2003 at 2:15 PM I can not say that I am surprised that the Neocons are in bed with racists. Since Nixon forged the Republican alliance with the south, a strong current of white supremacy has infused the Republican party as it once infused the Democratic party.
I am endlessly fascinated with Moon and his link to Republicans and Neoconservatives. I remember when Moonies were one of the feared cults stealing the minds and souls of the Christain Right.
Posted by Frank Darbe on Jun 9, 2003 at 3:02 PM Darbe POP QUIZ
Q: Who leads the democratic party in the senate?A: Why its Robert Byrd (W va) former leader of the klan. Who’s racist now?
Posted by Brad on Jun 9, 2003 at 4:59 PM Gish Brad, I almost thought you were gonna have an original thought. Silly me, will you next point at Bill Clinton’s zipper and giggle?
Does that make it all better and OK? An 85 year old man says something he shouldn’t have and that makes you helping Moon and the neo-racists OK. When did conservatives decide that a sense of proportion was meaningless? About the time they decided being a jerk was diplomacy?Does it make you giggly with pride when you can repeat Savage verbaitum?
Would you like me to make your next few posts? We all know what you think and WHY you think it, now if you could figure it out,
“You can judge the character of a man by the company he keeps.” GW Bush
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/55a/018.html
Bush and his wife, Barbara, have spoken at several events sponsored by the Women’s Federation for World Peace, which is run by Moon’s wife, Hak Ja Han Moon. More than 50,000 people paid to see the Bushes at a single event at the Tokyo Dome last year. Tickets cost between $105 and $196 each.---
http://www.freedomofmind.com/stevehassan/presskit/articles/fisher.htm“All these people should know better,” said Cynthia Lilley, founder of Mothers Opposed to Moon, a group of parents whose children have been recruited into the Unification Church. “My daughter would tell me over and over how in their recruiting films, they would show Moon with Bush to impress young people. They use the films of Moon and Bush and other celebrities to reassure parents that it’s okay that their children are on the streets selling flowers 18 hours a day.”
---
http://www.au.org/churchstate/cs6013.htm
While a number of Republican-aligned private organizations have promoted President George W. Bushís religion funding scheme, only Moon won an official relationship with the Republican leadership to rally grassroots forces on behalf of the “faith-based” summit. This enhanced status enabled him to do grassroots political organizing ñ and religious recruitment ñ with the apparent blessing of Bush and his GOP allies in Congress.“Whenever the conservatives identify an issue as important to their agenda, Moon creates an Astroturf organization to create the appearance of grassroots support for these initiatives,” Clarkson said.
Posted by Arnold Ziffle on Jun 9, 2003 at 6:52 PM An 85 year old man says something he shouldn’t
that should read...man “did” something
Posted by Arnold Ziffle on Jun 9, 2003 at 7:03 PM This is all scary as hell. We’re living in 2003, not 1403, 1603 or 1803....
Racism should be the antithesis of this country, not the underlying foundation.
And it isn’t just racism. It’s sexism, agism, and on and on. Except for Moon, to get ahead, you have to be male, white, wealthy, and a fundamentalist Christian (or maybe Jew).
Scary as hell.
Posted by Diane on Jun 9, 2003 at 8:06 PM Just because a person is against affirmative action doesn’t mean they are rascist.The label of rascist has been used to many times to stifle debate by those that are afraid of the facts.I hope the day will come when people could debate subjects dealing with race in a honest manner.This is he only way progress can be made.
Posted by Rod on Jun 9, 2003 at 11:26 PM And we are told that Arab and Muslim monies are channelled into Terrorist funding and operations.
All Palestinian Groups taking up cudgels against an oppressive Zionist regime which has ILLEGALLY OCCUPIED Palestinian country for more then 50 years and which continues to provide NAZI-style retributary justice to all Arabs; must suffer elimination so that the might of Israel can rule from the Middle East - which does not belong to tghem. Moses himself did not lesad this scurge of society to the promised land nor did Solomon’s Nation and Territories find favour among the arabs. Hence the regimes and so-called civilisations were destroyed and much better cultivated on basis of EQUALITY, JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS; on the concept of a HUMANE, LIVEABLE, TOLERANT SOCIETY.
ISLAM,has far too many so-called experts who look from the outside inward and find things not to their liking. Hence, there must be some measure of demagogury to attract attacks and genocidal behaviour in a world led by NEOCONS; ZIONISTS AND WHITE SUPREMACISTS.
Posted by Noah Dean on Jun 10, 2003 at 2:19 PM I think it fairly reasonable to suspect that a large part of the alliance is driven by a centuries old fixation of racial supremacy and ethnic/religious fanaticism. America has dealt with the in the past and from time to time it has, like a dormant, disease, displays its symptoms at times of crisis. No doubt that certain power hungry political groups have siezed on this vulnerabily to catapult themselves to power on the rising tide of racism, fomenting it for their purposes, wealth and power.
We should remember prior history and not repeat these mistakes. We have to learn the lesson of racism and fanaticism, combined with runaway corporatism leads to fascism, genocide, and the destruction of the Republic from coalitions determined to defeat it. If Americans capitulate and refuse to confront it directly internally, other countries will be forced, just like we were in WWII to decisively defeat it. We must not fail to stop the rising tide of fascism. We must to fail to see its signs before the disease takes over our country.
Posted by Rafiq on Jun 10, 2003 at 2:38 PM The usual Zionist-Nazi collaboration rears its ugly head yet again… WAKE UP AMERICA! GW Bush = Mass Murderer, Guilty for “Operation 9-11’, AKA “America’s Reichstag Fire”, brought to you by the religious fanatics at “Engineered Apocalypse Incorporated.”
Posted by Thoriffixxx on Jun 10, 2003 at 3:49 PM Here’s why affirmative action is bad, its done wrong. Its a lot easier to be white than black, but its also a lot easier to be richer than poorer. When determining whether someone should get the “benefit of the doubt” in college admissions or whatever, socioeconomic status should be looked at, not just race.
Posted by Brad on Jun 10, 2003 at 3:55 PM To those who say that Israel has been illegally occupying their land, ARE YOU CRAZY? The land was essentially given to the Jews by Britiain after world war 2. It was Britain’s land to give, and there were numerous attempts at reaching an agreement on how to divide the land, the Arabs rejected everyone, they just tried to crush Israel, and they couldn’t win the wars.
Oh yeah, to everyone that thinks someone who is against affirmative action is a racist, then they must naturally believe those against Israel hate Jewish people.
Posted by Brad on Jun 10, 2003 at 4:00 PM Zionism is the ultimate form of affirmative action.
Posted by Thoriffixxx on Jun 10, 2003 at 4:21 PM very interesting story.unfortuneatly most americans are not interested in thinking about their society and what makes it tick.
Posted by wallace nixon on Jun 12, 2003 at 9:55 AM Sorry Brad but its true the Israelis under International law are illegally occupying Palestinian land but you would not know that due to the manipulated US media. The picture put across by the majority of the Western media is that of Israel trying to defend itself against ‘islamic extremists’ when in actual fact they are employing a policy of ethnically cleansing the Palestinian people.
The Israelis bulldoze the Palestinians homes or cut off their villages with road blocks to pave the way for their fanatical zionist settlers with the blessing of Ariel Sharon. The Palestinian people are humiliated, treated as sub-human and slaughtered daily by the US sponsored Israeli Defence(Occupation) Force. This may help you understand why the ‘Arabs’ struggled to defeat an army trained and equipped by the US. Its a classic case of the abused becoming the abuser.
Posted by Maz on Jun 15, 2003 at 5:49 PM Maz, Israel IS illegaly occupying some land. However, I was responding to the poster that said the Israelis were illegally occupying Israel for the last 50 yrs (israel “started” in 1948).
I’m going to say something that’s gonna piss a lot of you off, but I have to say it. Israel should declare all-out war on Hamas. They should carry out the Bush doctrine and rid the world of those terrorists. They should kill Arafat. Once those two things happen, ture peace may be achieved.
Posted by Brad on Jun 15, 2003 at 7:46 PM Brad
I read in another strand that you said the death penalty doesn’t work. How is this consistent with your message above?
P.S. Not interested in attacking your entire value system here, would genuinely like to know the answer.
Posted by Michael on Jun 16, 2003 at 5:08 AM Bush has a doctrine named after him. What is it, Grab All You Can With Both Hands And Fuck The Other Guy? See: Enron, plus the fact he will benefit financially from his administration’s decisions through his father’s investments with Carlyle Group, which is currently being investigated by the FBI about 911.
Nothing to see here folks.
Posted by jan on Jun 16, 2003 at 5:22 AM Wrong again Bro, its not ‘some land’ its the Palestinians land. You seem to have a real Pro Bush attitude that suggests might is right and that lethal and overwhelming force is the way to solve problems. When will you realise that Bush and his cowboys have taken you for a ride with their doctrine in order to further their own greedy interests. I know its been well used but fighting fire with fire will only breed more terrorists.
Do you honestly believe that the two main campaigns that the US have fought in since September 11th 2001 have really made the world a safer place?
Israel HAVE declared all out war on Hamas and regularly assasinates its members(and any civilians that happen to be around at the time, i think you call it ‘colateral damage’) with US donated gunships. If Yasser Arafat was murdered by Israel their would probably be a catastrophe in the Middle East. Maybe if the Israelis stopped forcing Palestinians from their land, removed illegal settlements and treated them as humans rather than animals then peace may have a chance.
Posted by Maz on Jun 16, 2003 at 12:34 PM Michael, you ask a good question. I was refering to the death penalty as a domestic policy issue, not a foreign policy issue. People like Hussein and Osama can be killed, but killers in the US often prefer the death penalty, and I feel a life of hard labor would be a better punishment. I feel that peace would be much easier achieved if there Arafat was gone, whether he be killed or shipped of somewhere, it doesn’t matter, but we have to get him out of there.
Jan, the Bush doctrine comes from the 2002 State of the Union. Bush stated that all terrorist and terrorist supporting nations are enemies and we (non-terrorist supporters) must fight them. Since the Palestinian prime minister has yet to condemn Hamas, they are supporting terrorism.
Posted by Brad on Jun 16, 2003 at 8:16 PM Brad,
So if Saddam or Osama were American would you give them hard labour instead of death?
Posted by Michael on Jun 17, 2003 at 12:46 PM Brad:
While we’re talking non-terrorist-supporting states, on March 16 1988 Saddam Hussein gassed in the neighbourhood of 5,000 Kurds in Halabja by way of revenge for their support of Iran during the war.
According to a 1994 Senate report, private American suppliers, licensed by the U.S. Department of Commerce, exported quantities of the following biological and chemical materials to Iraq from 1985 through 1989. Among the biological materials were:• Bacillus Anthracis, cause of anthrax.
• Clostridium Botulinum, a source of botulinum toxin.
• Histoplasma Capsulatam, cause of a disease attacking lungs, brain, spinal cord, and heart.
• Brucella Melitensis, a bacteria that can damage major organs.
• Clostridium Perfringens, a highly toxic bacteria causing systemic illness.
• Clostridium tetani, a highly toxigenic substance.If this is not supporting terrorism then what is it?
Posted by jan on Jun 17, 2003 at 1:33 PM First of all, Michael your question doesn’t make any sense in one way. Saddam was dictator of another country, and we went to war with him because he didn’t run his country properly. If Osama was American (like Timothy McVeigh) I would have him live a hard life of labor in Alaska or something. The only problem with that is Osama would probably killed in a week by another inmate.
Jan, look at the dates of your reports, 1988. Bush Jr was not president then. He is now, he will no longer allow mistakes like that to happen again. He is trying to stamp out terrorism. People like Sadam Hussein will not be tolerated or supported anymore.
Posted by Brad on Jun 17, 2003 at 3:01 PM I cannot believe that it took so many people so much time to realize this. But it isn’t just White alienated, impotents that are the welfare mammies of places like the Bradley Foundation… You fail to mention people like Larry Elder, Armstrong Williams, and Walter Williams… Clarence Thomas…
Blacks are not all up in arms because “been there, done that” and as history should have shown us all America as a whole will suffer the consequences of it’s wrong doings… and as always, African-
Americans, will continue to survive in spite of… not because of…Why should we care what they say, I would be more concerned with the neocon imps who run around like red-faced robots espousing what they are told....
They are themselves the willing victims of their own stupidity.
Posted by Denise on Jun 17, 2003 at 3:03 PM I wish I could tell you those were mistakes Brad, but what we had there was FOUR YEARS of govt.-approved shipment of toxins to a dictator at a time when he was known to be terrorizing his own people on an almost daily basis.
Granted, Bush jr was not in the White House. His father was, and
those business transactions continued for a year after 5,000 people died in a single day.
Posted by jan on Jun 17, 2003 at 3:50 PM Jan, I don’t understand your point. We screwed up by supporting this guy. We now fought two wars to get rid of him. Our government has decided it will no longer support people like Sadam. Do you have a problem with that?
Posted by Brad on Jun 17, 2003 at 5:12 PM brad,
we didn’t go to war in Iraq because of “terrorism”, we did it for profit, both times. Secondly, we also made a mistake by training Bin Laden i.e. Bush senior did. Now maybe “he” should pay for HIS “mistake”? No HE gets to profit from it.
Posted by hates american nazis on Jun 18, 2003 at 12:08 AM Brad, perhaps you might understand my point if you help me answer these questions:
1. If, as you claim, the US has stopped supporting terrorist states, why the continued sponsorship of Pakistan, a military dictatorship with nuclear capabilities with close links to 911 which has massacred and tortured its people for the last 56 years?
2. Why the continued sponsorship of Saudi Arabia, major financial backer of the Taliban and a royal dictatorship which chops off heads and hands according to religious “law” and deprives women of their freedom, their vote, and their value as anything but a vessel for sons?
3. Why, after the first Gulf incursion, did GHWB encourage the Iraqis to “rise up” against Saddam and then permit Saddam to use his gunships to slaughter those who did?
4. Why was Saddam left in power the first time? Do you mean to suggest that the army larger than the rest of the worlds’ combined was not capable of removing him?
5. Why did GHWB restore Kuwaits’ dictator to power?
6.Why does the US continue to give $3 billion dollars to Egypt annually, despite the fact U.S. officials have consistently accused Egypt of violating human rights?
7. Why the contined support for Turkmenistan, despite its appalling human rights record?
Posted by jan on Jun 18, 2003 at 3:17 AM “Hates” what do you mean Bush profits from the war? Certainly not financially. It did make his approval ratings go up because it was a popular war. You say we profited both times, how? We never took any oil.
Jan you make a good point in that we’re still supporting some states that don’t deserve that support. But does the actions of those countries make what Sadam was doing okay? We cannot justify bad behavior with other bad behavior which is what you’re doing. You say that since we support Saudi Arabia, we shouldn’t fight Iraq, that’s terrible.
Posted by Brad on Jun 18, 2003 at 1:42 PM “You say that since we support Saudi Arabia, we shouldn’t fight Iraq, that’s terrible.”
Brad, could you possibly remind me when I said that?
“But does the actions of those countries make what Sadam was doing okay?”
I gave a list of nations with govts that terrorize their citizens. It has nothing to do with the case for or against Saddam (but if you were to press me for an answer I would say I’m against the genocidal maniac). My point there was that the actions of those countries make those countries what GW would call terrorist states, terrorist states that Washington still supports. Whatever happened to being with terrorists or being against terrorists?
Posted by jan on Jun 18, 2003 at 3:10 PM Jan, I agree completely that we should stick more to the Bush Doctrine. I don’t know what we’re arguing about. I thought you were saying the war with Iraq was wrong because we support other bad guys. Well, I guess we’re on the same page.
Posted by Brad on Jun 18, 2003 at 4:27 PM I don’t mean to be rude, but has it occurred to anyone else here that ‘Brad’, shit-spouter extrodinaire, is simply a plant on this discussion board, employed to keep you distracted and wasting valuable energies which could otherwise be used constructively.
When I was a kid and was being harrassed or annoyed by my brother, I’d complain to my parents to try and get him to stop. I was met with the response: “If you ignore him, he’ll stop doing it”.
Seems like a fair point, now.
Posted by chris on Jun 19, 2003 at 8:11 AM Sorry folks,
just doing a test run on our new model. Hope you like it: B.R.A.D. (Born Republican Authoritarian Drone) Special features include:
1. An immense capability for ignoring all the hideous crimes B.R.A.D.’s country has inflicted upon the rest of the globe!
2. Hundreds of excuses for that southernfried shitforbrains currently running B.R.A.D.’s country into a trillion-dollar defecit for which his greatgrandchildren will be POOR POOR POOR!
3. Newly enhanced “freedom chip”. Tap this baby’s phones, place unmarked cars across from his house, tear up the Bill of Rights, and if you hear one word of complaint from him we’ll give YOU your money back!
Available in red, white and blue.
Posted by Mattell on Jun 19, 2003 at 10:44 AM Let’s re-visit the Israel thing, shall we? First of all, how was it Britain’s land to “give away” in the first place? Oh right - I forgot, in a lovely foreshadowing of current events, the Crown stomped all over the world up until about 60 years ago, seizing by force whatever they wanted. Sorry, my mistake - my bad.
Also, there’s bad to go around on both sides of the Israeli/Palestinian fiasco. Neither side helps its own cause by falling into the same sick, terribly destructive tit-for-tat slaughter. Personally, I think Hamas AND Arafat need to be eliminated on a permanent basis. Sharon should’ve taken that snake out when they had the chance.
And what about Sharon? I’ve been pleasantly surprised at some of his concesssions as of late, but this is a guy with plenty of blood on his own hands. He was actually forced to leave office years ago due to his bloodthirsty ways.
Finally, “the race card.” Yup, all of us whiteys are racist pigs, that must also explain why Sammy “Corky” Sosa got so much heat for cheating in baseball. Gimme a break, affirmitive action in many cases is blatant reverse-discrimination, and doesn’t do a damn thing to address the real and complex social issues facing people of all races. If racism is wrong - and I’m saying it is - than it’s wrong ALL the time, not just part of it.
Posted by Gary on Jun 19, 2003 at 2:15 PM Wake up, robots! It’s a FACT that Israel SUPPORTED AND FUNDED Hamas as a rival to the Palestinian Authority… just try to prove that false. What better enemy than one you create yourself? Everytime the PA makes peace overtures, then Hamas blows something up, and then Israel bombs Palestinian Authority policemen. I smell a Zionist Rat..... By the way, if Bush lied about Iraq (and he did), then what else did he lie about? HINT : its initials are “9-11”. Again, no better enemy than one you create and control yourself.
Posted by Thoriffixxx on Jun 20, 2003 at 1:11 PM Brad,
One doesn’t have to subscribe to every conspiracy theory to notice that re: 911, there are some enormous questions left unanswered.
For instance:
1. Contact with Flight 11 was lost at 8:13am. When something like this happens, controllers are trained to assume the worst. Both FAA and NORAD claim NORAD was not notified until 8:40. Why a gap of 27 minutes?
2. The FAA is responsible for policing No Fly Zones like the ones over DC and NY. Why was this not enforced on 911?
3. On 13/11, Sen. Carl Levin asked Gen. Myers whether the Defence Dept. was contacted by the FBI or the FAA after the 1st two planes (before the Pentagon was hit), and Myers said “I don’t know the answer to that question.” Why did the topranking military man on American soil not know whether his own dept. was contacted by FBI or FAA TWO DAYS after the attacks?
3. In an interview with AFRTS, Myers claimed that when he was waiting for a hearing with Sen. Cleland, he saw Flight 11 on TV, and claimed he thought it was “a small airplane or something like that. So we walked in and did the office call with Sen. Cleland.”
Why, after seeing a national monument struck by a passenger jet, did the topranking officer in the US go ahead with a scheduled meeting?
4. NORAD ordered jets scrambled at 9:27. At 9:35, 3 F-16s took off from Langley, 130 miles from Washington.
a)Why a gap of 8 minutes?
b)Why not from Andrews, ten miles from Washington?
5. Before Flight 77 turned around it flew off course in a north-west-south loop over W. Virginia before returning briefly to its course. For the traffic controllers, this is the equivalent of seeing a cardriver doing 120mph down the I-60 with his eyes closed. Why was this ignored?
6. The NORAD centcom on Cheyenne Mountain is responsible for “monitoring, processing, and interpreting missile, space or air events which could have operational impacts on our forces and our capabilities, or could be potential threats to N. America or US and allied forces overseas.” So why not on 911?
Posted by jan on Jun 21, 2003 at 10:08 AM The truth is almost every single monster that America, and the World, has had to deal with for the last thirty years has been created, and supported, mostly by a small group of Republican Conservatives with a certain mindset. That is their forteí. They make the monsters, tell us the World is a dangerous place, and then steal billions from the American taxpayers to fight their own creations. I have railed against their policies since the early 80s. It is oblivious to anyone who can read that these people know full well what they are doing and that they personally make millions and billions of dollars from the death and suffering of Human Beings. In addition they donít give one good damn about the lives of our soldiers, or anyone else for that matter, as long as they and their buddies get into Power and make money.
The Bin Laden and the Bush families have a long history of doing business together. But why should that be a surprise to anyone. Prescott Bush, our Presidentís grandfather, was convicted of ìTrading with the Enemyî for his actions before and during WWII. He was a Director of a Bank that helped financed Hitlerís war machine, and helped supply Nazi Germany with everything from Pig Iron to Explosives. http://www.tarpley.net/bush2.htm
Almost every single member, and appointee, of this administration comes from big oil. These people have lusted for an oil a pipeline through Afghanistan for years. So of course
Posted by Dan on Jun 21, 2003 at 3:36 PM 9/11 had to happen so we could go to war in Afghanistan. Along with Pakistan and Saudia Arabia our country created the Taliban. We also created the Islamic Fundamentalist that were used to terrorize Americans into giving up their liberties. John Ashcroft is not the anti-Christ, but he knows where he lives.
Hamid Karzai ìÖ. was a top adviser to the El Segundo, California-based UNOCAL Corporation which was negotiating with the Taliban to construct a Central Asia Gas (CentGas) pipeline from Turkmenistan through western Afghanistan to Pakistan.î http://www.bigmagic.com/pages/blackj/column70a.html
I am sure that the World has always worked this way. But that is no reason to just throw up our hands and say ìI give up.î We must continue to speak out when we see liars http://www.house.gov/appropriations_democrats/caughtonfilm.htm and profiteers
http://www.emjournal.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/march03044.html leading this country down the road of Imperialism and Fascism. Our Fathers and Grandfathers fought these people, and we must do the same. Not with guns, but with the power of knowledge, because just like all cockroaches, what these people fear most is their slimy deeds coming to Light.Dan
Posted by Dan on Jun 21, 2003 at 3:36 PM I want to do a poll of this board because I think it will say a lot about how people on this board view the US governmetn
1. Was George W Bush/the Republican party responsible for 9/11?
2. Was Mohammed Attah an agent working for Bush?
3. Is it possible that people screwed up on 9/11?
4. Was Bill Clinton responsible for the ‘93 bombings?
Posted by Brad on Jun 21, 2003 at 4:08 PM Brad,
By way of answering your questions #1&3;, might I refer you to the 7 of mine above and suggest you do your own digging, that way you can feel sure. It might make for interesting reading and if you answer those to your satisfaction I’ve got hundreds more. Here’s another: Of the 19 suicide hijackers named by the FBI, why were four (Ahmed al-Naimi, Saeed al-Ghamdi, Mohald al-Sherri, Salem al-Hamzi) found to be still alive after 911?
Posted by jan on Jun 22, 2003 at 3:17 AM “Hates” what do you mean Bush profits from the war? Certainly not financially.”
No??? His dad’s Carlyle group didn’t make a KILLING in Iraq, which Jr. will inherit? Yeah, the oil is going to Iraq - through Bechtel, Haliburton, et. al. And Bush won’t get put on the “board of directors” after he leaves office? No payback, like his father got?? Why should he be ANY different than Pops. Never mind that Bush’s cronies in business RIGHT NOW and evil henchmen in Congress in the future will be making zillions from this?Talk about a corrupt oligarchy (even the FCC has been bought) - it doesn’t get any worse than this.
These guys belong in JAIL.
Posted by jacques on Jun 22, 2003 at 5:19 PM On a different topic - if Bush wasn’t responsible for 9/11 then why did he call of the hunt for Bin Laden? It doesn’t have anything to do with the Afghanistan pipeline? Someone who ceases to try to apprehend a criminal for financial gain is DIRECTLY responsible for his deed. Ergo 9/11 fall is Jr’s lap. No surprise he won’t release the 9/11 investigation.
Posted by jacques on Jun 22, 2003 at 5:25 PM There is no evidence of any oil being stolen from Iraq, those companies will pay for it.
“On a different topic - if Bush wasn’t responsible for 9/11 then why did he call of the hunt for Bin Laden? It doesn’t have anything to do with the Afghanistan pipeline?”
Actually it doesn’t. Bin Laden killed 3000 Americans, we want to bring him to justice. It is that simple.
Posted by Brad on Jun 23, 2003 at 2:15 PM Oh Brad, you are so naive. Either that, or a paid propagandist. Either way, you are a dupe, and will never be cool no matter how hard you try. Wake up to reality.
Posted by thoriffixxx on Jun 29, 2003 at 12:59 AM So many of us strive to believe that the last and final Victorian has been allowed to use the White House. Is this the ending gasp of the Empire and Plantation caste & value system to justify war and poverty?
Posted by Bill Harding on Dec 3, 2003 at 1:24 PM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Salim Muwakkil
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1972 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
462 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
426 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2003 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
