Archive for the ‘Zionist Threat’ Category
Somebody’s Son or Daughter is Our Tragedy
Somebody’s Son or Daughter is Our Tragedy
http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2010/09/01/somebodys-son-or-daughter-is-our-tragedy/
Posted By Philip Giraldi On September 1, 2010 @ 11:00 pm
Abraham Lincoln referred to the “terrible arithmetic” of war, meaning that sometimes a general or statesman would have to accept large numbers of casualties in fighting that would bring the conflict to an end and thereby save even more lives. Whether Lincoln’s war really needed to be fought at all is debatable, but most Americans would accept that war has sometimes been necessary throughout history for a nation to survive when confronted by enemies. When a war must be fought, the key objective should be to end it as quickly as possible and with a minimum loss of life. We Americans of the twenty-first century are now experiencing our own “terrible arithmetic,” but an arithmetic that goes on and on without end. Worse, we are engaged in several conflicts that have nothing to do with national survival and did not have to be fought. At least Lincoln hoped that his bloody battles would lead to an end to killing. Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama appear to have had no such expectations and instead have been and are accepting of permanent American engagement in the Middle East and Central Asia. Both have contrived the necessity of fighting a long war against an enemy they can hardly identify and repeatedly have failed to understand.
Americans should realize that they have come 180 degrees from the views of the Founding Fathers about the dangers of a standing army when the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen can call a sinking economy the nation’s greatest security threat because it does not generate enough money to support the Pentagon’s “needs.” America’s political culture, increasingly on a permanent war footing, is fueled by the fact that the status quo is painless for the country’s elites, almost none of whom have children in the military and many of whom actually benefit personally from the military industrial complex that exists symbiotically with the unending conflict. They are immune to the consequences of their bad decisions. But the rest of us, who do not sit on the board of Grumman or Boeing, perhaps are able to see the war in more personal terms as it is our dead children and neighbors who are returned home for burial. As I watched the funeral of a young soldier who went to high school with my daughter last year I had to wonder what his life might have been like if it had not ended in a senseless war fought in a godforsaken corner of the globe. All his hopes and dreams vanished in the time it took to be killed by a bullet fired by a tribesman who was quite possibly fighting to defend his home. Our young American will never marry, never hold his firstborn. Never grow old surrounded by his grandchildren.
“Somebody’s daughter” is a phrase used sometimes in the media to remind the reader that when a woman is on the receiving end of abuse or violence one should personalize the tragedy by remembering that the victim was once a child, full of hope, who was loved and cherished by those around her. That way a horrible event does not become just a statistic or a line in a newspaper and the reader is better able to relate to the loss, identifying personally with the loved ones who remember the daughter they once held in their arms. Nor should one forget that she is also, quite likely, somebody’s wife or mother or sister. “Somebody’s son” or husband or father or grandson should likewise be on our lips every day as we read about the death toll from the never ending wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, apparently soon to be joined by increased American military engagement in Yemen and Somalia.
“Somebody’s daughter” speaks to our better angels, reminding us that everyone’s life is precious and that we should treat every man or woman we meet with respect and caring, just as we would our own children and grandchildren. Those sons and daughters that Washington has sacrificed in a series of wars that have no meaning have names, they are not just numbers in the tally of 5,678 American dead in Afghanistan and Iraq. They are Sergeant Ronald Rodriguez, Sergeant Stephen Deluzio, Corporal Christopher Boyd, Lance Corporal Kevin Oratowski, Specialist Jamal Rhett and Specialist Faith Hinkley, all among the fifty-five Americans killed in Afghanistan during the month of August. They all leave family and loved ones behind to mourn them and a community that should increasingly be pondering why they have died.
Is there anyone in either the Obama Administration or in the lickspittle mainstream media who really believes that more killing in Afghanistan and, increasingly again, in Iraq, will turn out well? Do they actually think that five years from now there will be a stable, non-corrupt, and pluralistic regime in either place that will be thanking Washington for its help? Or in Yemen? Or in Somalia? Do they really think that Rodriguez, Deluzio, Boyd, Oratowski, Rhett, and Hinkley have died for some kind of glorious cause or to defend the United States? They should understand that, on the contrary, all the killing in faraway lands makes Americans less secure. It leaves scars and one of those scars will be a visceral hatred of the United States and all it stands for, anger that will fester for generations. When a US drone blows up a wedding party the survivors will want revenge. This is called “blowback,” a desire for retribution that breeds terrorism. If President Obama is truly interested in ending the scourge of terror he would issue orders immediately to begin America’s departure from east of Suez. Leaving other nations to their own devices is immeasurably better than the United States as regional hegemon and policeman. There is no way to bring the dead back, but remembering that each one of those who has died is somebody’s daughter or son will perhaps help Americans come around to the view that there has been enough of preemptive war, targeted killings, and predator drones. Most of all, there has been too much bloodshed and hatred. We Americans are not safer, we are much poorer, and we have become much more callous and uncaring as a people. And our sons and daughters are dying. That, in the final analysis, will be the only real legacy of the Bush and Obama presidencies.
Read more by Philip Giraldi
- Boxed into a Corner on Iran – August 25th, 2010
- Tales from the Northwest Frontier – August 18th, 2010
- Hillary’s Enemies List – August 11th, 2010
- A Cakewalk Against Iran – August 4th, 2010
- Who Owns General Petraeus? – (http://tinyurl.com/whoownsgeneralpetraeus) July 28th, 2010
Article printed from Antiwar.com Original: http://original.antiwar.com
JAMES PETRAS — The State and Local Bases of Zionist Power in America
JAMES PETRAS — The State and Local Bases of Zionist Power in America
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2010/09/james-petras-the-state-and-local-bases-of-zionist-power-in-america/
‘Neocons controlling the show’
Phil Giraldi with friend Jihan Hafiz on Russia Today: Neocons controlling the show
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owls797BSGE
‘JINSA John’ Bolton is full of ‘Hogwash’:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-ikY-JJ8Lo
Neocons Resurfacing in Obama Administration:
http://america-hijacked.com/2010/08/27/neocons-resurfacing-in-obama-administration/
Ron Paul’s statement: “Iraq – An End or an Escalation?”
Ron Paul’s statement: “Iraq – An End or an Escalation?”
| Iraq – An End or an Escalation? |
| Amid much fanfare last week, the last supposed “combat” troops left Iraq as the administration touted the beginning of the end of the Iraq War and a change in the role of the United States in that country. Considering the continued public frustration with the war effort, and with the growing laundry list of broken promises, this was merely another one of the administration’s operations in political maneuvering and semantics in order to convince an increasingly war-weary public that the Iraq War is at last ending. However, military officials confirm that we are committed to intervention in that country for years to come, and our operations have in fact, changed minimally, if really at all.After eight long draining years, I have to wonder if our government even understands what it is to end a war anymore. The end of a war, to most people, means all the troops come home, out of harm’s way. It means we stop killing people and getting killed. It means we stop sending troops and armed personnel over and draining our treasury for military operations in that foreign land. But much like the infamous “mission accomplished” moment of the last administration, this “end” of the war also means none of those things.
50,000 US troops remain in Iraq, and they are still receiving combat pay. One soldier was killed in Basra just last Sunday, after the supposed end of combat operations, and the same day 5,000 men and women of the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment at Fort Hood were deployed to Iraq. Their mission will be anything but desk duty. Among other things they will accompany the Iraqi military on dangerous patrols, continue to be involved in the hunt for terrorists, and provide air support for the Iraqi military. They should be receiving combat pay, because they will be serving a combat role! Of course the number of private contractors – who perform many of the same roles as troops, but for a lot more money – is expected to double. So this is a funny way of ending combat operations in Iraq. We are still meddling in their affairs and we are still putting our men and women in danger, and we are still spending money we don’t have. This looks more like an escalation than a draw-down to me! The ongoing war in Iraq takes place against a backdrop of economic crisis at home, as fresh numbers indicate that our economic situation is as bad as ever, and getting worse! Our foreign policy is based on an illusion: that we are actually paying for it. What we are doing is borrowing and printing the money to maintain our presence overseas. Americans are seeing the cost of this irresponsible approach as our economic decline continues. Unemployed Americans have been questioning a policy that ships hundreds of billions of dollars overseas while their own communities crumble and their frustration is growing. An end to this type of foreign policy is way overdue. A return to the traditional American foreign policy of active private engagement and non-interventionism is the only alternative that can restore our moral and fiscal health. |
Tea Party Hijacked by Neocons as Ron Paul Foreign Policy is Pushed Aside
Tea Party Hijacked by Neocons as Ron Paul Foreign Policy is Pushed Aside
http://Tinyurl.com/TeaPartyHijacked
MSNBC’s Chris Matthews addressed the Tea Pary split between Ron Paul supporters and Sarah Palin neoconned Republicans on his ‘Hardball’ program today:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/#36652249
Sarah Palin is just a neocon advocate for former PNAC Neocon chairman Bill Kristol:
Neoconned Sarah Palin and the Israel Lobby:
US Partial Withdrawal from Iraq
US Partial Withdrawal from Iraq
(take a look at this Press TV ‘Fine Print’ reality check on the ongoing JINSA/PNAC/AEI Neocon ‘A Clean Break’ inspired Iraq quagmire)
The Iraq Debacle: The Legacy of Seven Years of War
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/08/19-10
Ron Paul’s statement: “Iraq – An End or an Escalation?”
A Clean Break:
US between two Wars – Empire
http://america-hijacked.com/2010/08/27/the-us-between-two-wars-empire/
A campaign for war with Iran begins
A campaign for war with Iran begins
If neocons can’t get Obama to attack Iran, they are creating a narrative so the next Republican president will
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/08/13/trita_parsi_jeffrey_goldberg
A Neocon Preps US for War with Iran
http://america-hijacked.com/2010/08/13/a-neocon-preps-us-for-war-with-iran/
President Petraeus: The Neocons’ Choice:
http://america-hijacked.com/2010/07/14/president-petraeusthe-neocons-choice/
…
http://tinyurl.com/Petraeustheneoconschoice
Israel to attack Syria (and drag US into it!)?
Following just received from Gen (Ret) James David who is mentioned on the cover of the third edition of former Republican Congressman Paul Findley’s ‘They Dare to Speak Out’ book about the power/influence of the pro-Israel lobby (AIPAC and similar) on the US political system and media (keep in mind that Israel attacking Hezbollah in Syria and Lebanon would be in accordance with the ‘A Clean Break’/war for Israel agenda that the Iraq invasion was based on as well): A Clean Break: http://tinyurl.com/cleanbreak
Israel planning to attack Hezbollah arms depots in Syria
Report: Israel planning to attack Hezbollah arms depots in Syria
The Kuwaiti newspaper Al Rai reports that Israel is preparing to strike Hezbollah targets in Syria; Al-Arabi Al-Quds reports that western diplomats have asked Bashar Assad to refrain from interfering with Israel-PA direct peace talks.
By Jack Khoury and Haaretz Service Tags: Israel news Syria Hezbollah
Israel is planning to attack Hezbollah arms depots and weapons manufacturing plants in Syria, the Kuwaiti newspaper Al Rai reported on Saturday.
The report is based on Western sources who asserted that Israel has increased its military force level along the northern border in the Golan Heights and Mount Dov areas.
The report cited European sources who claimed that recent Israeli unmanned aerial drone flights over Lebanon and Syria signal Israel’s intentions to carry out operations in the area.
 |
Israel Air Force F-16 taking off on a mission. |
| Photo by: AP |
According to the report, Israel plans to attack Hezbollah weapons depots, including ones deep inside Syria that store long-range rockets.
The Al Rai report said that the situation on the Israel-Syria border is tense and that Syria could respond immediately to any Israeli attack and not demonstrate the restraint that it did after the Israeli Air Force bombed a suspected nuclear reactor in Syria in the fall of 2007.
According to the report, Syria’s military is on high alert and is strengthening its anti-aircraft defenses along the border with Israel and at strategic sites within Syria.
Western diplomats to Assad: Don’t interfere in Israel-PA talks
Also on Saturday, the Al-Quds Al-Arabi newspaper reported that western nations, including the United States, have in recent days asked Syria to refrain from negatively interfering with the upcoming direct peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, set to open next week in Washington.
According to the report, American officials expressed their firm opposition to Syrian President Bashar Assad taking any position or exerting any influence on the talks, as they fear that another failure of peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians could lead to even graver consequences than did past failed talks.
The report said that Assad was also asked to restrain Palestinian militant organizations that operate on Syrian territory, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad.
The Nazification of the United States
VDARE.COM – http://vdare.com/roberts/100826_nazification.htm
August 26, 2010
The Nazification of the United States
death of the First Amendment
Chuck Norris is no pinko-liberal-commie, and Human Events is a very conservative publication. The two have come together to produce one of the most important articles of our time, “Obama’s US Assassination Program.”
It seems only yesterday that Americans, or those interested in their civil liberties, were shocked that the Bush regime so flagrantly violated the FlSA law against spying on American citizens without a warrant. A federal judge serving on the FISA court even resigned in protest to the illegality of the spying.
Nothing was done about it. “National security” placed the president and executive branch above the law of the land. Civil libertarians worried that the US government was freeing its power from the constraints of law, but no one else seemed to care.
Encouraged by its success in breaking the law, the executive branch early this year announced that the Obama regime has given itself the right to murder Americans abroad if such Americans are considered a “threat.” “Threat” was not defined and, thus, a death sentence would be issued by a subjective decision of an unaccountable official.
There was hardly a peep out of the public or the media. Americans and the media were content for the government to summarily execute traitors and turncoats, and who better to identify traitors and turncoats than the government with all its spy programs.
The problem with this sort of thing is that once it starts, it doesn’t stop. As Norris reports citing Obama regime security officials, the next stage is to criminalize dissent and criticism of the government. The May 2010 National Security Strategy states: “We are now moving beyond traditional distinctions between homeland and national security. . . . This includes a determination to prevent terrorist attacks against the American people by fully coordinating the actions that we take abroad with the actions and precautions that we take at home.”[PDF]
Most Americans will respond that the “indispensable” US government would never confuse an American exercising First Amendment rights with a terrorist or an enemy of the state. But, in fact, governments always have. Even one of our Founding Fathers, John Adams and the Federalist Party, had their “Alien and Sedition Acts” which targeted the Republican press.
Few with power can brook opposition or criticism, especially when it is a simple matter for those with power to sweep away constraints upon their power in the name of “national security.” Deputy National Security Adviser John Brennan recently explained that more steps are being taken, because of the growing number of Americans who have been “captivated by extremist ideology or causes.” Notice that this phrasing goes beyond concern with Muslim terrorists.
In pursuit of hegemony over both the world and its own subjects, the US government is shutting down the First Amendment and turning criticism of the government into an act of “domestic extremism,” a capital crime punishable by execution, just as it was in Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s Russia.
Initially German courts resisted Hitler’s illegal acts. Hitler got around the courts by creating a parallel court system, like the Bush regime did with its military tribunals. It won’t be long before a decision of the US Supreme Court will not mean anything. Any decision that goes against the regime will simply be ignored.
This is already happening in Canada, an American puppet state. Writing for the Future of Freedom Foundation, Andy Worthington documents the lawlessness of the US trial of Canadian Omar Khadr. In January of this year, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the interrogation of Khadr constituted “state conduct that violates the principles of fundamental justice” and “offends the most basic Canadian standards about the treatment of detained youth suspects.” According to the Toronto Star, the Court instructed the government to “shape a response that reconciled its foreign policy imperatives with its constitutional obligations to Khadr,” but the puppet prime minister of Canada, Stephen Harper, ignored the Court and permitted the US government to proceed with its lawless abuse of a Canadian citizen.[Khadr ill-served without Supreme Court prescription, By Chantal Hébert, August 11, 2010]
September 11 destroyed more than lives, World Trade Center buildings, and Americans’ sense of invulnerability. The event destroyed American liberty, the rule of law and the US Constitution.
Paul Craig Roberts [email him] was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during President Reagan’s first term. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. He has held numerous academic appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University, and Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. He was awarded the Legion of Honor by French President Francois Mitterrand. He is the author of Supply-Side Revolution : An Insider’s Account of Policymaking in Washington; Alienation and the Soviet Economy and Meltdown: Inside the Soviet Economy, and is the co-author with Lawrence M. Stratton of The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice. Click here for Peter Brimelow’s Forbes Magazine interview with Roberts about the recent epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.
Pro-Attack On Iran? Anti-Israel!
Pro-Attack On Iran? Anti-Israel!
http://us1.campaign-archive.com/?u=0e7994932b5c293ad6e9e40d8&id=796461c361&e=c802deafcb
A Neocon Preps US for War with Iran
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2010/08/a-neocon-preps-us-for-war-with-iran/