Re #95843 by Inherit The Wind on 8/18 at 6:12 pm

This is Truthdig, run by progressive/socialist Robert Scheer. It does not seem likely that he would authorize a policy of censoring everybody but Godsend. It’s more likely that the weekend blog monitor has been sniffing glue.

#95800 by Peter RV on 8/18 at 12:23 pm

This looks more incompetent than deliberate. Truthdig seems to have hired somebody’s junior high-school nephew at $1.00 an hour to do blog monitoring on weekends. If they keep this up, I won’t vote for them at next year’s Webbys.

For a free and open forum try iraq-war.ru

Re #95757 by the 1Sgt on 8/18 at 2:08 am

Sarge,

All I can say is that all your posts that I have seen have been non-abusive, on topic and valuable contributions to the discussion. I cannot imagine why Truthdig would do this. Truthdig, may we have an expanation, please?

THE WEB ADMINISTRATORS HAVE BANNED ME FROM POSTING ON THIS WEBSITE AND ERASED MY POSTS. THERE IS REALLY NO WAY TO CONTINUE INTELLIGENT DISCUSSION HERE WHEN THE POLICIES ARE THAT OF A POLICE STATE.

SPECIAL MEASURES HAD TO BE TAKEN TO POST THIS MESSAGE

#95617 by Nabih Ammari on 8/17 at 5:01 am
(Unregistered commenter)

“What has happened to Iraq is not just a tragedy but
also a colossal crime of gigantic proportions.”

Nabih,

A crime against all humanity, indeed. Hanging is too good for the perpetrators.

test
kmjflrkrifjmfvvv

Re #95614 by Douglas Chalmers on 8/17 at 4:09 am

Thanks for the support. Of course, my comments were not off topic, but some idiot blog monitor who has not been following the conversation can’t be expected to see that, I guess.

Briefly, I was only going to reply to Peter RV, atheo and Nabih that I agree with them that Saddam did have a positive side in modernizing Iraq, advancing gender equality and other forms of social progress, and that Nabih’s claim that the stronger Iraq became under Saddam the more it was a threat to U.S. regional hegemony is absolutely correct. However, I think it should also be said that Saddam destroyed his own accomplisments and ruined his country by engaging in two wars, first with Iran and then with Kuwait. History will not judge him kindly for his belicosity and his bad judgment.

Please oh please, dear monitor, don’t delete this.

#95590 + #95585 by Tony Wicher on 8/16 at 9:23 pm: “...For some reason the last several comments I made seem to have disappeared....”
+ #95585 by Tony Wicher: “...By the way, in memoriam of Saddam, I would like to say something. I was very struck by the video of his hanging. What struck me was never mentioned by any of the newscasters as they played the scene over and over. It was that Saddam looked dignified, and died like a man. When Bush is convicted for war crimes and treason, which I hope he will be, I would like him to be hanged too, just to see how much dignity he could muster....”

Its the new order, they’ve decided to take Fridays out on you guys - er, I mean “off-topic posts are being blitzed generally. Things were getting really bad in some of the Hillary topics, + religion topics. Everyone has suffered. Just think of it as something you have sacrificed for the greater good of Cally-fornia.....

Interesting to notice what you said about Saddam at his demise. I agree totally and he had obviously re-made himself after losing his family and his country. Like some Shakespearean King Lear, he died more of a man then than Bush or Cheney will ever be......

Quote Baghdad Burning: A Lynching - “… One of them called out to Saddam, “Go to hell…” (in Arabic). Saddam looked down disdainfully and answered “Heya hay il marjala…?” which is basically saying, “Is this your manhood…?”. http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/

I have noticed the same

Folks,

For some reason the last several comments I made seem to have disappeared.

By the way, in memoriam of Saddam, I would like to say something. I was very struck by the video of his hanging. What struck me was never mentioned by any of the newscasters as they played the scene over and over. It was that Saddam looked dignified, and died like a man. When Bush is convicted for war crimes and treason, which I hope he will be, I would like him to be hanged too, just to see how much dignity he could muster.

Tony,

Let’s remember that most of what we “know” about Saddam Hussein’s Bath party regime is just demonisation designed to sell aggression on the Iraqis. Indeed, Nabih’s premise that educational and cultural advancement was the real threat posed by Iraq has factual merit. To me, the threatened party is Israel, not big oil.

Re #95330 by Nabih Ammari on 8/15 at 11:57 pm

Nabih,

I also agree with the great majority of your post, especially the part about Jesse Helms saying that if Israel did not exist, we (that is, we imperialists) would have had to invent it. I do take some exception to this part: 

-After the Iran-Iraq war which lasted from 1980-1988
Iraq was becoming a role model for the rest of the
Arab countries to emulate,in most fields of human
endeavors,ranging from genuine political idependence
to emancipation of women to elimination of illiteracy to the best health-care system in the Arab World to the superb dedication of the Iraqi elites and Iraqi professionals to the progress and advancement of Iraq as a sovereign identity capable of keeping Iran’s ambitions to dominate the whole region in check,at all times.All of that meant that Iraq had become more powerful than its actual size.Such developments were incompatible with the agenda of the oil interest and of course the Israel Firsters as well.”

I think this is a little too complimentary to Saddam. I would say that Saddam was a dictator in the mold of Stalin, whom he admired. At first he did do a lot to modernize Iraq, but I would say he really blew it by attacking Iran, which destroyed Iraq’s economy and wasted all that he had accomplished. The Kuwait invasion was partly an attempt to grab enough oil to pay off his debts.

Nabih,

While I agree with almost all of your post, I don’t see the case made as to how Saddam Hussein posed an extraordinary threat to oil interests.You state that Iraq was “ capable of keeping Iran’s
ambitions to dominate the whole region in check”. To me, this would indicate that preserving the status quo would have been in the interests of the West.
I would like to see somebody lay out the supposed diferences between Iraqi and other producer’s oil development and trade policies that made Iraq a unique problem for big oil. Short of a convincing, major divergence, it would be obvious that the destruction of Iraq is about nothing other than maintaining Israeli dominance and serves only zionist interests.

Tony, Yes the MIC is an ever present power in US politics. However the application of warmaking capability is not willy nilly. The victims are not drawn at random. Rumsfeld and Cheney serve Jewish capital and the JINSA organisation is a good starting point for you to assess the confluence of zionist power with the MIC. The interests of the Rockefeller family and big oil in general have fallen from primary importance. If big oil were predominant, the US would have cut Israel off decades ago and Arabists would be running foreign policy. Reagan and his old testament religious fanatics would have never risen to the top level of US power. As usual, finance rules, commodities and labor are secondary.

Re #95272 by atheo on 8/15 at 6:02 pm

“Tony, I just read Thy Will Be Done, a 900 page history of the Rockefeller families businesses. It just so happens that two individuals were the key players in removing Nelson Rockefeller from national politics for good in 1976, Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney. In view of the decline of US hegemony and financial wherewithal following the lost war in Vietnam, this fits neatly. An American era ended, a new one based on international banking and finance began. Tony, your analyses seem to reflect the 60’s not the present.”

atheo,

Maybe I’m an old fogey, but I am looking at a process of decline and fall of an empire which began with the Vietnam war but is only now after forty years reaching its denoument. I have been watching events all this time and there is a continuity that goes back to the sixties and back farther to WW II and WW I. The grip of the military-industrial complex on the U.S. was not broken by Vietnam. The same bastards, such as Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc. and those whom the represent are still running things, and as for the Democrats, they have been almost as bad as Republicans, and still are. The only one running for President that does not talk like an imperialist is Kucinich, and so he is treated as some sort of left-wing weirdo by the mainstream media.

The military budget stands at $750 billion, far exceeding the rest of the world combined. Yet our army is broken and on the verge of falling apart. Where is all that money going?

Of course Saddam Hussein was suckered into invading Kuwait, that’s a well known and established fact, however it niether proves that it was to eliminate an enemy of Israel or to consolidate control of oil.
The oil trade has changed totally since the days of Mossadegh, anymore, his proposals would seem tame, the same could be said for Saddam Hussein’s challenges to oil multinationals in the early 70’s. What matters is the current situation, not historical positions:

1) At present, Iran is as open to multinational corporate penetration as any significant oil producer, yet the US is interfering with international trade. Why is that?

2) Saddam Hussein was dealing with Haliburton and open to increased opportunities for US multinationals in 2002, yet the US invaded. Why was that?

3) The US installed a puppet regime in Lebanon, yet Israel created a pretext to invade the nation in 2006. Why was that?

None of these events have furthered the interests of US based multinational corporations or improved western control over or access to oil.

Tony, I just read Thy Will Be Done, a 900 page history of the Rockefeller families businesses. It just so happens that two individuals were the key players in removing Nelson Rockefeller from national politics for good in 1976, Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney. In view of the decline of US hegemony and financial wherewithal following the lost war in Vietnam, this fits neatly. An American era ended, a new one based on international banking and finance began. Tony, your analyses seem to reflect the 60’s not the present.

Re #95223 by the 1Sgt on 8/15 at 2:29 pm

I’ve been monitoring your conversation here Tony and Atheo. I’m starting to wonder if this was a double ploy all along, with Saddam faked into attacking Kuwait after US threat assessments delivered to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia were ignored. Saddam rolls into Kuwait and this gave the US strategy life. US policy in the gulf has always been centered on protection of “oil”. This meant literal ownership of the theater, only possible with garrisoned forces. Interesting…”

Sarge,

The thesis that Saddam was sucker-punched in Gulf War I was put forth at the time by Walt Rostow, among others. I’m sure Bush wanted a war, just on general principles. Bushes always love war. They’re in the war business.

I’ve been monitoring your conversation here Tony and Atheo. I’m starting to wonder if this was a double ploy all along, with Saddam faked into attacking Kuwait after US threat assessments delivered to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia were ignored. Saddam rolls into Kuwait and this gave the US strategy life. US policy in the gulf has always been centered on protection of “oil”. This meant literal ownership of the theater, only possible with garrisoned forces. Interesting…

atheo,

The Republican-Jewish site is certainly no surprise. Yes indeed, Jews have been moving righward because of the alliance of Zionism with imperialism. I forsee a radical split among Jews if this keeps up, between those who have thrown their lot in with the imperialists and those whose better natures forbid them from doing so.

atheo,

I completely agree with the Antony Loewenstein article.

“Why would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us? I’ll tell you what I think the real threat and actually has been since 1990 - it’s the threat against Israel… And this is the threat that dare not speak its name, because the Europeans don’t care deeply about that threat, I will tell you frankly. And the American government doesn’t want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it is not a popular sell.”

I don’t agree with this. Iraq was no real threat to Israel either. The only “threat” there has ever been in this region is countries that “threaten” U.S. hegemony. U.S. and Israeli propaganda join together to interpret any threat to such hegemony as a threat to Israel. When Mossagdeh nationalized the oil in Iran he threatened that hegemony, was overthrown and replaced by the compliant Shah. The Shah was overthrown by the current non-compliant Shia theocracy. It immediately became the biggest enemy of the U.S. - not because it was any threat to the U.S. considered as a democratic country, but as a threat to U.S. imperial hegemony in the Middle East. Saddam was considered a compliant client and given aid against Iran by the Bush I administration. But then Saddam made the mistake of invading Kuwait. Some say the Bush I Administration suckered him into it. In any case, after that he was no longer treated as a client. Of course the imperialists have been gunning for Syria all this time too. With Bush 2 they thought they were going to finish the job in the whole region, which they called “spreading democracy in the Middle East”. Meanwhile, Israel ("the only democracy in the Middle East") have remained their ferociously loyal attack dogs.

atheo

Did you watch this video?

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=2879&id=10983-5016030-hp _Z6J&t=2

Strange that everything Cheney said in 1994 on the video has come true in the wake of Gulf War 2. Why did he change his mind? Why did he decide that to “take out Saddam” was the right thing to do after all? “Imperial hubris” is the only reason I can think of.

Like you, I am wary of another “false flag” attack coming up.

It seems to me that you see the problem as U.S. policy that is against U.S. interests because it favors Israeli interests, whereas the problem I see is U.S. policy that is against the interests of the American people in that it increases the wealth and power of imperialists while impoverishing and disempowering the people. In both cases policies that do not benefit the United States, that is the American people considered as a whole, result. In both cases it is a failure of democracy within the United States that is the biggest danger. But I don’t say the failure comes from an outside source, such as Israel. The rot comes from within.

Does the Israeli Tail Wag the American Dog?

- If the United States is unable to distinguish the world’s or its own real needs from those of another state and that state’s lobby, then it simply cannot say that it always acts in its own best interests. By Kathleen and Bill Christison (ex CIA Analysts) http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article17217.htm
- Is Americans’ support of Israel unshakeable? By Linda S. Heard, Online Journal Contributing Writer http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_1986.shtml
- Israel and US interests aren’t identical By Antony Loewenstein http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=4387

January 26, 1998 Letter by leading Zionists and neoconservatives asking US to attack Iraq and change its regime http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm
“Groups Push For Sanctions, Fear US Will Falter on Iran,” By Ori Nir, Forward - Sep 1, 2006 issue
http://www.forward.com/articles/groups-push-for-sancti ons-fear-us-will-falter-on/
“Why would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us? I’ll tell you what I think the real threat and actually has been since 1990 - it’s the threat against Israel… And this is the threat that dare not speak its name, because the Europeans don’t care deeply about that threat, I will tell you frankly. And the American government doesn’t want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it is not a popular sell.” Pentagon Defense Intelligence Board Member Philip Zeikow, 10 September 2002
Contrary to Chomsky, the US has no interest in supporting Israel http://www.voltairenet.org/article143635.html

Re #94970 by atheo on 8/14 at 8:19 pm

The occupation of Iraq is part of a general project for hegemony in the area. It’s imperialism in its last stages of stupidity and madness. The neocons thought they were the last superpower. They thought they could install a puppet government, take a big piece of the oil, and go on to Iran. Zionists among them, who are certainly many, egged them on. That was and still is the plan. It’s stupid, it’s headed for failure, but it is the plan. It is a lot like Vietnam. In that conflict, the imperialists maintained control, and we have had 40 years of Republican reaction in this country, to the point where we are the laughingstock of the civilized world. They must not maintain control this time. Are you with me?

Tony, what you need to do is detail some facts linking big oil to the promotion of the invasion, something comparable to this:

Republican Jewish Coalition

http://www.rjchq.org/

The last decade has seen tremendous growth in the number of jews identifying with Republican ideas and the GOP. The Republican Jewish Coalition, founded in 1985, is the sole voice of Jewish Republicans to Republican decision makers and the Jewish community, expressing our viewpoint on a wide variety of issues.

The Republican Jewish Coalition is the well-respected representative of the Jewish community to Republican elected officials and party leaders and is the pre-eminent Republican organization in the Jewish community.

With a strong presence in Washington, D.C. and chapters around the country, the RJC is making a difference for the growing Jewish Republican movement in America.

The group has supported a hard-line approach to negotiating an Israeli-Palestinian peace accord, criticizing President Clinton for “appeasing Chairman Arafat” instead of requiring “responsibility and compliance from the Palestinian Authority.” Allied with Israel’s Likud government, the group supported the construction of the controversial Har Homa settlement in East Jerusalem, over Palestinian objections that the project jeopardized the peace process. It also supports continued American military support of Israel, including a recent project to build an anti-ballistic missile system.

On the domestic front, the RJC supports school choice and voucher initiatives, saying they help curb the “risk of assimilation” for some Jews living in the United States. “By lessening the financial burdens, vouchers would make a Jewish education available to the entire Jewish community,” reads one position paper. The group has supported welfare reform, lowering the estate and capital gains taxes, voluntary prayer by student groups in public school, the legal right to perform abortions, as well as tougher crime laws, including a California-style “three strikes” laws for some federal crimes.

Continue from above members include:

Lewis M. Eisenberg
Vice Chairman

Mr. Eisenberg served from 1995 to 2001 as Chairman of the Board of Commissioners of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. The Port Authority is also, of course, the owner of the World Trade Center, and Mr. Eisenberg led the agency through the first three months of recovery and clean-up after the terrorist attacks of September 11. He was recently named a member of New Yorks Lower Manhattan Redevelopment Authority, which will spearhead the rebuilding of Ground Zero.

Mr. Eisenberg is a long-time Republican activist and was recently elected Finance Chairman of the Republican National Committee. He has raised millions of dollars for the Republican Party and Republican candidates. He served on New York Governor George Patakis transition team and was a key advisor to New Jersey Governor Christine Whitman.

Michael David Epstein
Vice Chairman

Mr Epstein is very active in the Jewish community; he serves in a leadership capacity in the Melvin J. Berman Hebrew Academy, the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), Aish HaTorah, the Jewish National Fund, and the State of Israel Bonds.

Lawrence Kadish
Honorary Chairman

He is the founding chairman of the Committee for Security and Peace in the Middle East and the American Middle East Information Network. Encouraged and supported by Mr. Kadish, these two institutions have sought to strengthen democracy and encourage pluralism in the Middle East and around the globe. Mr. Kadish has been a supporter of the Investigative Project which conducted a strategic review of world wide terrorism and cautioned Americans on the eve of September 11th that systematic terrorism was threatening our nation?s security. Lawrence Kadish has also served as a contributor to various organizations including the Foundation for Media and Public Affairs, the Foundation for Responsible Government, the Center for Security Policy and the Drug Free America Foundation.

Lawrence Kadish has been topping lists of Republican donors since George H. W. Bush was president.

Tony,

You haven’t developed a coherent argument, how do the “record profits” relate to the occupation of Iraq?

Re #94962 by atheo on 8/14 at 7:55 pm
----------------------------------------------------
I believe there is something Eisenhower called the “military-industrial complex” that profits from war. I believe that with Cheney and Bush it has the reins in its teeth and intends to go all the way to total dictatorship. It profits from all kinds of war. Cheney gets rich on it. Oil companies are rolling in record profits. Is that so hard to understand?

Yes Tony, you cite “generally accepted” dogma from the likes of lifelong zionist and Israel lobby denier, Noam Chomsky. However, the dogma makes so little sense that you are unable to detail how it is working right now in regard to Iraq. I’m not asking for “authority” citations. I want you to explain why you believe.
By the way, I concur with your “imperialism” theory with the exception that it hasn’t been applicable for almost 40 years, since the US lost the excessively financed Vietnam war and had to drop the gold link. Keep trying, I have yet to hear you explain how $1,000/barrel Iraqi oil is serving America’s “imperial interests.

“Tony, what case have you made? You suggest a book and cite incongruent references to OBL. What does OBL have to do with a “war for oil” in Iraq? You have not been able to summarise in your own words how the US war planners have benefitted US oil interests by their actions.”

OK, I have nothing better to do for the next half hour (at which point I intend to go watch yesterday’s rerun of “The Daily Show") so I’ll give it a try. Please at least try to address my points, in your reply.

I do not believe I have to cite any particular book to support my claim that the primary interest of the Western powers in this part of the world is and has been oil sit it was discovered there. This is part of my general education. I believe in the importance of economics in determining political processes. I am not going to argue with you or cite authorities about this. They are too numerous to mention.

I also believe in a concept of imperialism, which simply means the idea of hegemony, of a sphere of compliant regimes, which can be exploited in the interest of the rulers of the empire. I believe the United States largely took over for the British in the Middle East after WW II, after they got out of Palestine just in time to let the Zionists take over. The U.S. has since had an hegemonic agenda which has culminated under Bush II. Imperial hubris has set in, and the empire is falling.

Do you agree with this picture, or do you not, and if not, where do you disagree? I say all this is common knowledge. 

Something pretty close to the general geopolitical picture of the world that I accept is to be found in Noam Chomsky, “Hegemony or Survival”.

Tony, what case have you made? You suggest a book and cite incongruent references to OBL. What does OBL have to do with a “war for oil” in Iraq? You have not been able to summarise in your own words how the US war planners have benefitted US oil interests by their actions.

Tony,

“Your inability to make your case should give you pause.”

In your eyes, maybe. In the eyes of people with a real education and grasp of history, it’s open and shut.

Tony,

Your inability to make your case should give you pause. Yes, Britain furthered zionism, under intense pressure from Jewish creditors (the empire overextended and had to borrow, sound familiar?). Yes, FINANCIAL forces are dominant in US politics, without promotion from zionist wealth and media, no US Federal level politician can maintain office (with a scattered few exceptions). Unlike the “war for oil” thesis, these facts are easily proven and repeatable:

http://www.leftcurve.org/LC28WebPages/WarForIsrael.html

Tony,

“Aramco is owned and operated by the government of Saudi Arabia. OBL has never considered the oil industry a particular focus. He is almost certainly deceased in any event. How any of this supports your “war for oil” thesis is not coherently explained. I would suggest reading Daniel Yergin’s The Prize for a better understanding of the oil industry.”

atheo,

I have no idea whether bin Laden is deceased or not. But I do believe that economic forces are the decisive ones in politics, and that oil has been the primary bone of contention in the Middle East since it was discovered there. That makes the whole U.S. imperial geopolitical strategy understandable to me. You seem to believe that it’s all the result of Israeli/Zionist manipulation of the U.S. government and media. This to me is the tail wagging the dog. Zionists at the beginning of the 20th century knew they needed a protector and they made a deal with the British. You know this, right? The Americans took over for the British and European colonialists at the end of WW II. Are we agreed on that? The U.S. has attempted to keep hegemony in the are ever since.Why? One main reason: OIL. Not Israel. Israel is just a pretext.

This is history. This is not some conspiracy theory. This is what is going on right under your nose.

Tony,

Aramco is owned and operated by the government of Saudi Arabia. OBL has never considered the oil industry a particular focus. He is almost certainly deceased in any event. How any of this supports your “war for oil” thesis is not coherently explained. I would suggest reading Daniel Yergin’s The Prize for a better understanding of the oil industry.

Tony,

“In what way does shock and awe provide an oil benefit. Please make a coherent argument.

Bin Laden never stated anything about selling oil as far as I know. If you have a source, could you share it? “

atheo,

Osama bin Laden is the son of the richest businessman in Saudi Arabia. He believes the U.S. is in Saudi Arabia for the oil, and has said so a million times. Look at any of his statements since he declared war on the U.S. in 1993. His whole economic objective is to take away the oil business from Aramco-Exxon-British Petroleum. Please read Michael Scheuer’s “Imperial Hubris” and also his earlier “Through Our Enemy’s Eyes” to get some sort of picture of the man. You sound capable of doing your own research, but I will look up the link for you. It’s authentic.

#94310 by Tony Wicher on 8/12 at 2:54 pm: “...Re #94227 by atheo on 8/12 at 8:35 am: “...“Please flesh out your “war for oil” thesis. How exactly does it work? Really, not hypothetically. Is it going well? Does it explain the US’ rising economic hegemony ..........Atheo, I appreciate the challenge. No, it is going very badly for the imperialists. They are losing and getting desperate. The more desperate they get, the more desperate Israel gets, too, because they are in it together, and if the imperialists lose, so do the Zionists. Are they desperate enough to start a nuclear war......”

Poor guys - butting heads but not reconciling your ‘arguments’ while the emenmy gets on with its “war for oil” anyway.

I was posting something on this too - see Ceyhan-Tblisi-Baku (BTC) oil pipeline issue at http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArt icle&code=CHO20060726&articleId=2824 or my regional comments at #94193 by Douglas Chalmers on 8/12 at 5:10 am http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20070810_lebanese_ strike_a_blow_at_us_backed_government/ Cheers!

Tony,

In what way does shock and awe provide an oil benefit. Please make a coherent argument.

Bin Laden never stated anything about selling oil as far as I know. If you have a source, could you share it?

Saddam Hussein was selling all the oil he could at $18/barrel until the invasion though. Current prices are over four times that and given that the US imports most of it’s oil consumption this must be factored into the current ongoing trade deficits which jeopardise the dollar’s exchange value.

You state:

“they can’t admit how badly they screwed up so they are plowing ahead”

This defies logic, nobody wastes $12 billion monthly ongoing simply to not admit that they shouldn’t do it. This seems like an extremely weak explanation that does not warrant credibility. The fact that it is taxpayers money is irrelevant because it is still money that they control. If in fact it is only about funneling money to their cronies, why would they choose a scam that only gets less than 10 cents on the dollar back to their buds?

Please keep working on this thesis. Or try presenting a new one.

Re #94320 by atheo on 8/12 at 3:21 pm
(370 comments total)

“If it is “going badly”, please at least explain how it was supposed to work. Also explain why the US continues to spend $12 billion per month on the occupation if it isn’t producing their intended results. I can provide an explanation for why they continue the occupation, but it doesn’t include access to oil (which will be made available to the global market whenever the occupation ends).”

atheo,

Those are good questions. First, how was it supposed to work? Well, shock and awe, don’t you know. The Arabs were supposed to cower in fear at our awesome display of power. As neocon Michael Ledeen put it,
“Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business.” Now the idea that this could really work is the result of what Scheuer calls “imperial hubris”, the title of his book. Such hubris makes one miscalculate. One overestimates one’s own power, underestimates that of the enemy. As Sun Tzu put it, he who knows himself and his enemy will win every battle, but he who knows neither himself nor his enemy will lose every battle. Our idiot imperialists are in the latter category.

Next, why do the imperialists continue to spend $12 billion a month on the occupation? Well, they can’t admit how badly they screwed up so they are plowing ahead. On to Iran! Besides, they are not spending their own money, it’s the taxpayer’s money, which they are putting in their pockets via defense contracts. The more money goes into military spending, the richer they get.

Bin Laden has said that if the U.S. will just stop trying to control Arab governments and get out of the Middle East, he will be happy to sell us all the oil we want at a fair market price. I take him at his word. I for one would like to oblige him and get the hell out of there. But that does not translate into obscene profits for oil companies and defense contractors. And where does that leave Israel? Up shit creek without a paddle.

Tony,
If it is “going badly”, please at least explain how it was supposed to work. Also explain why the US continues to spend $12 billion per month on the occupation if it isn’t producing their intended results. I can provide an explanation for why they continue the occupation, but it doesn’t include access to oil (which will be made available to the global market whenever the occupation ends).

Re #94227 by atheo on 8/12 at 8:35 am
(368 comments total)

“Please flesh out your “war for oil” thesis. How exactly does it work? Really, not hypothetically.
Is it going well? Does it explain the US’ rising economic hegemony?”

Atheo,

I appreciate the challenge. No, it is going very badly for the imperialists. They are losing and getting desperate. The more desperate they get, the more desperate Israel gets, too, because they are in it together, and if the imperialists lose, so do the Zionists. Are they desperate enough to start a nuclear war? That remains to be seen.

Have you read “Imperial Hubris” by Micheal Scheuer, the former head of the CIA bin Laden desk in the late 90’s? I was very impressed by it. He and bin
Laden agree that that the U.S. invasion of not only Iraq but also Afghanistan exactly played into bin Laden’s hands. Our imperialists thought they were “the last remaining superpower”. They thought they could establish, in Bush I’s words, a “New World Order” (novo ordo seclorum, also on the $1 bill) where, as he put it, “what we say goes” anywhere in the world. These dreams of glory have faded, Americans are sick their rhetoric, and they would just like to have medical care, decent schools and bridges than don’t collapse. Will the people prevail, or will the imperialists manage to stamp out the last vestiges of American democracy? That is the question.

God Bless You Cindy Sheehan!

http://smokingmirrors.blogspot.com

#94252 by atheo on 8/12 at 10:42 am
(368 comments total)

the 1sgt,

Andrews AFB had fighters ready to go on 9/11 according to it’s official web site. That’s a few minutes from the pentagon, yet the pentagon was struck practically an hour after the second hit in NY. No, I don’t believe in such coincidental failures to protect the most defended site on Earth.
The pentagon also has SAMs which were never used, and then there’s Minetta’s testimony (the plane is ten miles out, do the orders still stand?). Keep trying.

======================================================
No need for me to try anything. You won’t listen. I was on active duty 24 years in the Air Force. I tell you our C3 was inept and our alertforce practically non-existent, consisting of Guard and reserve forces, un practiced and not ready but you don’t want to see the merit in that. They caught us with our pants down, completely by surprise (the military). The right hand did not know what the left hand was doing. This is borne out by the fact the 4th JET was headed for the white house and/or Congress before it crashed in PA. You get it? Even a 4th Jet and still no one was able to shoot it within minutes, even though Cheney had given the order. It crashed in PA because of the passengers.

Believe what you will.

August 12, 2007

U.S. And Israel Close Gap on Defense Aid Payouts

By REUTERS

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - The United States has yielded to some Israeli demands on how new U.S. military aid will be paid out, ending a brief dispute over the issue, an Israeli official involved in the talks said on Sunday…

“Tom Lantos, a U.S. congressional leader, described ratification of the aid increase to Israel as a certainty.

“(It) will receive congressional support and will guarantee, for the next decade, along with Israel’s own determination and military capability, the security of this nation,” he told reporters during a visit to Jerusalem.”

http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSL12391202 0070812?pageNumber=2&sp=true

the 1sgt,

Andrews AFB had fighters ready to go on 9/11 according to it’s official web site. That’s a few minutes from the pentagon, yet the pentagon was struck practically an hour after the second hit in NY. No, I don’t believe in such coincidental failures to protect the most defended site on Earth.
The pentagon also has SAMs which were never used, and then there’s Minetta’s testimony (the plane is ten miles out, do the orders still stand?). Keep trying.

#94100 by atheo on 8/11 at 6:44 pm
(365 comments total)

the 1sgt,

Am I to suppose that Clinton was responsible for the multiple excercises (that confused patriotic airmen) that occurred on 9/11? Ever hear about Able Danger? Did Clinton order the fighter jets to travel east over the Atlantic from Andrews AFB? Was it Clinton’s fault that those dispatched from Falmouth flew at 1/3 speed? Did Clinton force Rumsfeld to put himself in sole charge of decisions involving shoot downs as of 6/01? The questions are many.
=====================================================
The questions will always remain Atheo. Don’t get hung up on “military preparedness” and exercises. If you were in the DoD today you would know how lame those two words sound.

Clinton and the Congress both were responsible for the draw-down of the military to such an extent that on 9/11, there were only TWO alertstations in the east coast and both of them were either guard or reserve. Prior to the end of the cold war, more than a dozen air force bases with active duty pilots would have scrambled to meet those planes and maybe even shoot them down within minutes.

This might be hard to believe but it may very well be there were a series of catastrophic failures preceding and during 9/11. This is how accidents happen. Who would have thought the people perpetrating the deed on 9/11 would have taken advantage of not only our weaknesses, but used the element of surprise.

If you read some of our own doctrine on war, you will see our enemy used the very same on us.

Ghali Hassan is an independent writer living in Australia:

After more than four years of Occupation and countless pretexts to justify the bloodbath, the Occupation, the Occupation is sold as a “war” against “al-Qaeda”, a US-created proxy. The use of al-Qaeda as a bogeyman is designed to fuel a campaign of anti-Muslim hatred and keep the public in a state of fear. More importantly, the use of al-Qaeda obfuscates the presence of a legitimate Iraqi National Resistance and justified the ongoing Occupation of Iraq.

Indeed, George Bush seemed to be obsessed by al-Qaeda and is using it with increased frequency. George Bush claim that the US is fighting al-Qaeda in Iraq is simply ludicrous. “We all know now that the US military is using the name of al-Qaeda to cover-up attacks against our National Resistance fighters and civilians who wish immediate or scheduled withdrawal of foreign troops from Iraq”, Hilmi Saed, an Iraqi journalist from Baghdad told Ali al-Fadhily of Inter Press Service (IPS) in Ba’aqubah.

Of course, there is no hard evidence of al-Qaeda’s presence in Iraq. The current extremism in Iraq is the result of US Occupation. It is encouraged because it provides the US and its collaborators with a pretext and as an alternative to the Iraqi Resistance. Even if al-Qaeda exists in Iraq, its deliberately exaggerated presence and role serve US aim to cover-up the deliberate destruction of Iraq…

Let’s not forget that the situation in Iraq today is the result of an unprovoked act of aggression based on pretexts proved to be fabricated lies. American leaders (supreme criminals) and their lackeys (Blair, Howard et al.) used and continue using the events of 9/11 in the US to provoke and justify wars of aggression against peoples and nations who had nothing whatsoever to do with the events of 9/11. They are committing war crimes and should be held accountable and put on trial for their crimes. The few soldiers who are on display in a show trial are merely a propaganda ploy to divert public attention away from the supreme criminals.

DC:

“The wisdom of men is foolishness before God”

“My thoughts are higher than your thoughts” (God speaking)

The year of the pig and Ki and all the rest of the human ‘knowledge’ add up to nothing more than a hill of beans - and a small hill, at that! One might say “You’re full of beans” - and nothing but foul air is the result.

Keep your eyes on gold, RE and the Outer Oort Cloud - and you will SEE! prophecy come true And don’t wait for an ‘Official Investigation’ to deny what you can SEE! right in front of your eyes - IF they are open!

Tony,

Please flesh out your “war for oil” thesis. How exactly does it work? Really, not hypothetically.
Is it going well? Does it explain the US’ rising economic hegemony?

#94184 by omop on 8/12 at 3:22 am: “...when it comes to money EVERYONE is of the same religion....”

Seduced by the Force, ha ha!
Obiwan Kanobe

Quote: “Ki moves constantly as you breathe. You exhale and ki flows. You inhale and ki flows. You don’t suck up ki, it continues to flow into you from the universe. It is a circuit, not a balloon. We are conduits, not reservoirs .......By aligning the body ....and aligning the spirit, and focusing intent ......we exercise ki-power ....the font of ki is a vast reservoir .....we move in the universal, take strength from it, give back to it ... and are thus connected to all other things as well...”

Godsend:

While your perceptiveness is less than overwhelming and your quotations of Obi Wan Kan...are classic i tend to adhere to what Voltaire is quoted as saying:

when it comes to money EVERYONE is of the same religion.

via con dios.

#94158 by GodSend on 8/11 at 10:22 pm: “...It’s been on my website (among some other prophecies) for several YEARS! The PROPHECIES section and the sequence of 10 events is of more recent vintage....”

PS I don’t ‘predict’ anything - but go here