The Bushites are not imcompetent, INhert, they’re crazy.  They have conducted a political counterrevolution in the US power system tht is largely unrecognized by the American population.  Successfully locking it in so it will be carried on by Obama.

The reason they appear to be incompetent, aside from Bush pretending to be stupid because he is trying to be a ‘regular guy’ as opposed to Elite progressives,
is because his stated objectives conflict sharply with his opeative objectives.  He his actually promoting goals of the neolibs, Zionist and militaristic while pretending to promote the interests of the American population and American power system.  The long term interests of American power are opposed to his short term interests.

His operatiave objectives, however, proposed by PNAC and Brzezinski, are insame.  What Hobsbawm called the standard megalomania of imperialisms.  The US as a Superpower does not have the power to do what they propose.  This obvious failure has drastically curtailed US world power in a few short years. 
But there is no competant way to pursue insanity, as Obama, and his adherants, will find out.  It winds up the way Hitler’s Germany did or militarized Japan.
And as Israel will.

Gee, ITW—I just dont see any of the accusations that you made here—you know people saying that the “Taliban is a popular party”, etc. Perhaps if you didnt exaggerate so much, ...

I think you cant get another thread out of your mind.

Tony—I would agree with this.

ITW—Of course the planes hit the WTC. How does that PROVE that it was Al Qaeda??I think they were involved…but, wtf??? Why do you think that Afghanistan woudl “now be at peace”? All of your assertions are just conjecture. What is more, I dont belive that we (or many other countries) want peace in Afghanistan (I mean the govt), at least not until we get a pipeline through.

The people of Afghanistan may hate the Taliban—but I can guarantee you that they hate us more! This should have been handled as an intl criminal matter—9/11. The fact that it was not makes our actions in Afghanistan, criminal and, probably irrepairable.

Bush et al (who is Cheney’s ass puppet—he even moves his lips) is NOT stupid, IS incompetent, but, achieved much of what the neo-cons intended! (Shock Doctrine) LOOK at how it “ends” for them! They have alot more money and, what do most of them care about?

Who said (on this thread) that Israel was behind it? I fear that you are joining the “trollers” ranks—people who troll, on a specific issue—Obama, Israel, Hillary (not makin’ friends here, am I?)—-just looking for anything “anti their cause”. It leads to silly assertions…

ITW,

On 9-11, nobody I know says the planes didn’t hit the towers. I think bin Laden was very much involved. It’s just that I think there were ongoing contacts between some elements of the CIA and bin Laden that go back to the days when the U.S. was arming the Mujahedeen against the Soviet Union, and that bin Laden had inside help from these elements which saw the attack as a pretext for invasion of the Middle East and the establishment of a full military dictatorship at home.

Obama says we need to be there to “stamp out Al Qaeda”, but I suspect the more important reason is to be able to secure or pacify the country enough to be able to put oil pipelines through from central Asia to the Indian Ocean.

Let’s start with something we all agree on: Bush screwed up the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Let’s go on to something ELSE we all agree on: the war in Iraq was TOTALLY unjustified, illegal and criminal.

Now let’s go to where we disagree: On the war in Afghanistan.

IF the WTC and Pentagon attacks WERE engineered by Al Qaeda, based in Afghanistan and integrated with the repulsive Taliban, then our attack and driving out of power of both was totally justified.  However, had we NOT pulled our resources out of Afghanistan to start and fight the illegal war in Iraq, Afghanistan would be at peace, and we would have been the first nation to do that.  Why? Because most of the people DETEST the Taliban and are terrified of them.  But now it’s almost as much of a mess as Iraq because the same incompetents were in charge of both.  What to do now? I don’t really know, and I don’t think Obama knows, but I DAMN well know McCain didn’t have a clue.

But SO many hear believe that Al Qaeda was not behind 9/11 (despite my having friends who SAW the planes hit), and have bought into a) the immediate slander by Islamic fanatics that somehow the Israelis were behind it (????) or the equally nutty idea that Bush&Co;was behind it (the same ones who couldn’t figure out how to finish Afghanistan OR Iraq) (???)

Now we see Pfaff try to tell us that the vile evil Taliban regime is no more than the most popular party in Afghanistan.  I guess it’s OK with these folks that the Taliban will stone to death an “adulteress” even if she’s a rape victim.

I do not understand people here.  Bush is evil and vile: granted.  But this incompetent muttonhead hasn’t SUCCESSFULLY gotten ANYTHING to work—how could he and his fellow imbeciles have pulled off 9/11?  It just doesn’t parse.

Well, I guess the flaming will begin…Kill a man and you’re a murderer.  Kill an article of faith an you’re a HERETIC!!!.

problemsolver—Can you be more specific, or, is it just too difficult? What sort of “stronger military response” shall we launch? Against whom? Anyone and everyone?This will not create more jihadists , how? Should we just kill all Afghanis? All Muslims?

NATO did not “ignore” the Taliban before 9/11—you said it yourself—we trained and armed them…

It is true that we promoted the Taliban…how shall we now “combat it”? When will we decide that they are an ally again?

How will it not become Vietnam with sand? Who should go? Just working class Guard and Reserve? Your kids? Grandkids? Great grandkids?

This is the only place they have…when would they be likely to “give up”?

When should we stop paying people to not kill us? Before or after we sell them the arms to do it with?

A “strong military response” is what we always do—it doesnt seem to work. What, more troops? More bombs? A draft? Mercenaries? What??? Because, just carpet bombing doesnt seem to be having the desored effect.

Tony—I would agree. International rule of law.

I think we need to back off of the militarism in general. We are not (never were, really) in a position to decide, on our own, what is “just”. The entire world would probaly agree with thzt now, unfortunately.

HOw about a Dept of Peace?(As Kucinich proposed)

I wish I could believe that Bush et al would be brought to justice…

If PE Obama does not want to pursue it, a Congress that wouldnt stand up to Bush, will certainly be more careful about standing up to Obama.

I think some EU Intl courts have already held a “trial” for Rummy, although , of course, he didnt show! lol..There was also talk of Cheney not going overseas, as he could be arrested by criminal courts, in Italy, I think—extraordinary rendition stuff…maybe they should use it on him..just a thought..

By KDelphi, November 17 at 11:32 am
————————& #8212;———————R 12;———————— —-K,

I don’t think we have any disagreement. Strict pacifism regards all violence including self-defense as morally wrong. This is a position that may make sense to some people from a religious standpoint. Also, non-violent resistance to power has been used most effectively by Gandhi, Martin Luther King, etc. But that is a political strategy that does not apply in every case. True self-defense is a valid justification for war, but the problem is that no warring country admits to being the aggressor; they all claim to be acting in “self-defense”. What is self-defense, what is aggression and where both countries are to blame for a conflict (which is usually the case) should be up to judges in the World Court to determine. The U.S. attack on Iraq is a clear case of aggression, the World Court should try those responsible (Bush-Cheney) and I hope this will happen. 

The only valid reason I can think of for sending an army to war other than self-defense is the defense of the human rights of others. Here also, the judgment ought to be made by an impartial judge on the World Court, not by any individual country. We cannot have countries acting as vigilantes on the world stage. We need international rule of law.

Tony Wicher—I suspect I would have little quarrel with you, but, are you saying that pacifism allows for self defense? Because, historically it does not (You know, Ghandi, Jesus Christ, Quakers/AFSC—who have enraged me at times, when I have marched with them—they wil not defend themselves!)

Self defense is in reaction to a direct threat to one’s life and limb. I would suggest that what we are doing , well,everywhere, right now, is not self defense.

Further, to me, it appears to be WORSE than useless. It is creating MORE rage towards the US.

Maybe I am just not being clear, or contradicting myself…dont know.Point it out to me, please.

God, with a father like Emmanuel Senior who needs enemies? And bin Laden might be dead but on the other hand the CIA gave him and his fighters so much laundered crime money in the 90’s that he could also be living in luxury somewhere. He can also afford plastic surgery, unlike many Americans (burns victims and the like) with no health care who actually need it.

Hulk2008,

``The US needs to develop air, wind, solar, natural gas, vanilla extract, whatever ... then extricate itself from that briarpatch ASAP so the locals can go back to their self-inflicted 1000-year wars. 

Let ‘em choke on their filthy oil.”

Oh but Kissinger and Cheney and the Bushes would never allow that, not till the very last filthy drop is expropriated

Just started reading this book titled “The True Story of The Bilderberg Group” by Daniel Estulin, who they didn’t waste time in attempting to do away with (by removing the floor of an elevator that he was awaiting way up in a Toronto office block hoping to be transported to the ground floor in a swoosh, but which almost ended in a spectacular splosh, at the shaft’s distant bottom).

Anyway this is rather interesting. On page 29 Estulin points out that ``Bilderberg meetings are always frank,” but don’t always end harmoniously [with consensus]. Apparently in recent times French, British and American attendees have practically come to blows—over Iraq’s rich oil and natural gas reserves. Figures. In 2003 Dominique de Villepin, then France’s Foreign Minister, confronted Kissinger with “if only [you] Americans had told [us] the truth about Iraq,” the French “would not have vetoed [your] UN resolutions. The rest of the world is not stupid, Henry.” According to sources, gloomily Hank walked away, [muttering to himself, “Damn! How did they ever discover what we were up to? Sometimes life just isn’t fair…”]

Naturally the only problem with mentioning the Bilderbergers is that they’ll go even deeper underground… perhaps meet on the moon or Mars next, well away from prying eyes and ears.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YT3fzi-9D5Y&feature =related

Re Robert, November 14 at 10:32 am #

Reuters Nov. 13 reports

Top Obama aide apologizes for father’s remarks

http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE 4AC99K20081113

U.S. President-elect Barack Obama’s chief of staff Rahm Emanuel apologized to an Arab-American group on Thursday for comments disparaging Arabs made by his father.

The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee sent a letter to Emanuel calling on him to distance himself from remarks made by the elder Emanuel in an interview with an Israeli newspaper following his son’s appointment last week.

In the interview, Benjamin Emanuel was reported as saying: “Obviously, he will influence the president to be pro-Israel. Why wouldn’t he? What is he, an Arab? He’s not going to clean the floors of the White House.”

While some political analysts have said Rahm Emanuel, a veteran Democratic congressman, should not be held responsible for the actions of his father, there was also a sense that an apology was unavoidable.

“Today, Rep. Emanuel called Mary Rose Oakar, president of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, apologized on behalf of his family and offered to meet with representatives of the Arab-American community at an appropriate time in the future,” a statement from his office said.

The committee, in a statement on its website, said Emanuel told Oakar it was unacceptable to make such remarks against any ethnic or religious group.

“From the fullness of my heart, I personally apologize on behalf of my family and me. These are not the values upon which I was raised or those of my family,” the group quoted him as saying.

Oakar welcomed the apology, saying: “We cannot allow Arabs and Muslims to be portrayed in these unacceptable terms.”

By KDelphi, November 15 at 2:41 pm #

Tony—I did not say I was a Pacifist—look. I said defensive war. I believe in defending oneself. There is nothing that we are doing now that can be considered “defensive”.

9/11 shouldve been treated as an intl criminal matter.
————————& #8212;———————R 12;———————— —-
K,

Sorry, you did say that self-defense was a just reason for war. I would only add that there are other possible reasons. For example, it would not have been defensive but would have been justified if Clinton had intervened in Rwanda to prevent genocide. In general, however, I agree with you that terrorists should be viewed as international criminals and the right way to deal with them is via an international police force (a beefed-up INTERPOL) under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, and not by unilateral action by the United States or any other one country. The strengthening of international law is the only answer, and the only way to do this is for the United States to join the ICC and announce that it will fully comply with its decisions.

Justified war? No justified stupidity. Idiotic talk about smart wars almost prevented me for voting for Barry. As Louis Michel has said: “Poverty is the most urgent crisis facing the world.”
Anyone who advocates for greater militarism is in fact promoting poverty, economically, ecologically, and yes, spiritually.
For those who claim otherwise, they are lying to themselves. The actual reality in existence can be discovered, but few take the trouble to do so. The advocacy for extending violence can be a very clever argument, but it does not change the fact that is an ethical deceit.
Safety and security are always brandished about to justify increasing military expenditures. The fear of death is always used, when in fact the reality is that I am going to die eventually, and so is everybody else.
For those who accept the pro-military con job, just consider all the resources wasted in your devotion to increasing death: from fire pits, to cluster fragments, to water, land and people destroyed, and for what? So you can feel superior? By inflicting unforeseen damage on someone you never met?
Again, Louis Michel: “It is not the impossible that gives cause for despair, but the failure to achieve the possible.”

Arius, there may not be much we can do about the wars of the past, but we can sure do something about the wars of the present, as well as try to prevent wars of the future—mainly by changing this country’s entire foreign policy. I suspect that if we don’t change it ourselves, of our own free will, outside circustances (like a possible new Great Depression, for instance) will force a change against our will.

By Paul_GA, November 15 at 8:32 pm #

So you don’t think we should have gotten involved in WWII?

Interesting…

“How Many Villages Must We Bomb Before We Find bin Laden?”

ummmm… I’m gonna guess a whole helluva lot since he’s likely hiding out in some mountains (or dead) and not in any villages in the first place.

(is there a prize for the correct answer ?)

Paul-GA—Yes. But, needing a social safety net as I do now, I would prefer to be a British subject! Unfight the Revolutionary War!

; )

KDelphi, perhaps the last just war the USA ever fought was the Revolution. All this country’s other wars were, if not outright unjust, at least questionable in their justification.

Diminishing Horizon –page 2

U.S. seems to have eight major goals assigned to CIA to make sure that Pakistan Government in Islamabad performs:-

•  That Pakistan gives a full support to U.S on war against Terror and that Zardari government only takes pro-US. Decision thus indicating that Zardari is the weak and corrupt leader leading to his zero sum governance.

•  The power cuts, food shortages and prevalent miserable life to create a justification for the severe economic down turn in Pakistan reaching its bottom low in order to bring Pakistan under IMF regime.

•  Coerce Pakistan to improve her relations with India despite perpetual violence in Kashmir and water blockade of rivers flowing from Indian held Kashmir area to create a draught like situation in Pakistan to destroy its main staple food crops.

•  Fomenting an evasive settlement of Kashmir to compel and dictate Pakistan to cut its defence budgets and reduce it large standing Army deployed in Kashmir and thus make Pakistan a most vulnerable state; easy to be over run by any invading force.

•  To Support sub-nationalists groups like Awami National party (ANP)leading to a dismemberment of Pakistan. Although ANP is in governance in the NWFP province (near by FATA area also comes in its jurisdiction). CIA has very successfully infiltrated ANP lines. ANP is being helped to move toward its old dream of greater Pashtunistan; that to say dismemberment of NWFP. Map of greater Pashtunistan are already in distribution and Mega bill boards are on display on NWFP main roads.

•  Use of pliant and supportive media to create chaos and confusion and to aerate an atmosphere of despondency among masses.

•  CIA to directly control the war against Pakistan in tribal areas to create chaos and instigate terrorism.

•  To make case that Pakistan is compelled to recognise Israel as a sovereign state for which plans are underway. 

•  In view of the prevalent chaos in the country and with its economy ditching; justify the case of vulnerability of Pakistan’s nuke weapons and missile program in order to neutralized and taken them out.

All of the above strategy points are being addressed simultaneously.  There is no doubt that Obama is not going to change the Bush policies towards Pakistan but is only going to accelerate the unfinished agenda. Kashmir remains a major stumbling block to justify reduction of Pakistan army, hence even before he won; Obama was loud and clear on his future moves. U.S. strategy is obvious – Pakistan should only have a glorified police force to fight the Taliban militants and does not need a large standing army.
————————< br /> Love for all, Hatred for none

Diminishing Horizon

“I don’t care who does the electing, so long as I get to do the nominating.” Said William Marcy Tweed - (1823-1878).  Tweed was head of Tammany Hall, the Democratic Party political machine that played a major role in the politics of 19th century New York.
In Pakistan also, it did not matter who voted in the latest ‘elections’ held in February 2008. It was the CIA which did the nominating which brought about PPP government and Asif Ali Zardari, the widower of Miss Benazir Bhutto as President.

      In the ongoing U.S. war against terror; reportedly the ‘intelligence sharing plan’ of ISI of Pakistan with CIA has met a colossal failure. Invariably CIA has been successful in launching an anti-Pakistan movement in Pakistan in Federal Administered Area to destabilize the country; a shadow like organisation depicting the original Afghani Taliban. This movement is named as; Tehrik e Taliban of Pakistan (TTP). With all the available technologies and amount of intelligence; not to reach Osama bin laden is very strange; because to get hold of Osama was never a CIA plan; nor it is now. Osama myth of his being at large is just an enabling tool; to justify and prolong U.S. forces stay in Afghanistan.

In Pakistan, CIA backed TTP has since brought havoc in the society through covert operations like bomb blast, kidnapping for ransom, beheading of innocent personals, torching of girls schools and other suicidal incident inside Pakistan. Marriott Hotel bombing is one of the many incidents. Pakistan was forced to move its Armed forces to crush this insurgency where lot of killing and collateral damage and loss of lives is happening. Reportedly there is a mark success on this front.

But CIA has now declared an aggressive covert war against Pakistan. In a desperate attempt to counter the successes of Pakistan army against CIA as well as RAW (Indian agency) backed terrorist groups in the tribal areas of Pakistan; various voices full of panic are being echoed from the CIA head office at Langley, USA over the success of Pakistani strategy in tribal areas. The CIA’s game is falling apart and they are getting more and more ruthless and sinister. Seeing that CIA plan is about to collapse; with a vengeance CIA has since sprung up extensive remotely controlled Drones attacks (CNN says attacks are being controlled from some seven thousand miles away at Creech Drone air base, Nevada, USA.) Rather then assisting Pak Army in Bajur Swat area in her operation, Drone are only targeting those militants who have signed peace deals with Pakistan or have joined hands with Pakistan army to isolate and hunt the anti Pakistan terrorist TTP gangs. These provocative actions are jeopardising the whole situation and is creating anarchy with a view to instigate the victims to rabble-rouse and under mine the ruling government in Islamabad. It is most sinister, ruthless and criminal betrayals by the CIA and U.S against its major ally as well as the front state—-Pakistan in the ‘U.S. war against terror’. It is the dirtiest and sickest part of US foreign policy.

On the whole to describe the real and wider U.S. game against Pakistan, for which the recent elections in Pakistan were engineered and a regime change was brought about can be best summarized in the following paragraph.

(Continued; please see the next post)

Tony—I did not say I was a Pacifist—look. I said defensive war. I believe in defending oneself. There is nothing that we are doing now that can be considered “defensive”.

9/11 shouldve been treated as an intl criminal matter.

It is not “politically” tenable? Who ever said politics was moral?

There are things we should do to help Afghanistan. But, I think, the best we coudl do right now, is to GTF out and cut them a check (although I have no idea where we would get it—probably just rob the working classes again! )We obviosuly have no idea how to “fix” their country. Maybe they do.

PS Sorry—will have to check out HuffPO link later—my browser is unstable.

I agree with your assessment in the purview that is currently our debacle in Afghanistan. While I agree with most of your posits, I disagree with that statement regarding “by general acknowledgment corrupt, American sponsors a weak government in Kabul.” Ok weak, for sure. Corrupt, what government isn’t? But it is the denotation/connotation of corruption to which I must take exception.

The Taliban, translated “religious students” in Pastun, were recruited in their madrassas by the CIA to fight an anti-Russian counter-insurgency during the daze of the soviet invasion. We essentially encouraged their rabid fundamentalist Islam (anti-atheist soviet infidel hatred), armed them and set them loose.

It’s inarguable that during their reign as overlords of Afghanistan, the Taliban were less corrupt than then Karzai’s government. Gross corruption was endemic; its scale massive in that it pervaded all aspects of life. Education for women was outlawed; approximately 45-60 teachers accused of operating cladestine schools executed, some in the most inhuman ways (disemboweled, limbs tied to trucks and pulled apart); adulterers were publically stoned on Sundays in the soccer stadium (all sports had been outlawed). Music was forbidden; photography (Islam forbids depiction of humans)was a crime punishable by death; there were no courts of justice-sharia, the traditional Islamic system was eschewed-relatives of anyone accused of a crime would bribe officials who, in turn,arrested them for suborning(while keeping the money). Clean-shaven men were forced to grow beards, were fined if they didn’t and imprisoned.

The Taliban was quintessentially governed by an secretive, mysterious absentee Khandahari religious leader, the Amir Mullah Omar, who dispensed money from foreign contributors-most notably the tyranical and extremist Saudi Arabian Wahhabi,a militant form of Sunni Islam considered apostacy by most other Sunni traditionalists which is the only form of Islam practiced in SA- to run the government which was essentially the military. Only Pastun-speaking tribesmen could be in-charge although 50% of the Afghanis spoke Persian. No representation of other ethnic groups were allowed. The Hazaris, declared “non-muslim” were singled out for ethnic cleansing pograms which eventually escalated into genocide.

To compare the Taliban’s corruption, devoid of every core value held sacred by civilized societies, to Karzai’s adminstration is, as far as I’m concerned, moot. I would venture that America and NATO are the corrupting influences by way of their indiscrimate militarism. Though I can’t imagine they are worse than the former Taliban governors they remain foreign infidels in a country of firm believers. Our invasion has accomplished nothing as certifiable as victory. Instead our noisome impact on Afghanistan has been cultural: we’ve neglected to understand the potent force of a shared religion that operates as nationalism in the absence of law and order, continuing poverty, lack of social services, and most importantly, education.

Re KDelphi, November 15 at 10:20 am

I disagree. Pacifism is not a politically tenable position. There is such a thing as a good, just and necessary war; WW II remains the prime example. The problem is that the great majority of wars are neither good, just or necessary but stupid. Iraq is a prime example. I do agree with you that an intelligent foreign policy is one which does not lead to war. At a certain point, WW II became necessary, but if there had been intelligent foreign policy going back to the end of WW I and the Treaty of Versailles (“The peace to end all peace”) there would never have been a Hitler or a WW II.

As to Afghanistan, after 9-11 I originally supported going after bin Laden as a just and necessary act of self-defense. But the initial U.S. military action was botched and failed to achieve its objective (getting bin Laden). At this point, seven years later, I am inclined to agree with you that futher military adventures in Afghanistan would be stupid, especially since I now think the Bush Administration was involved, which did not occur to me at that time. I think we should still try to do something to help the Afghan people and dry up sources of funding for narcoterrorists, such as buying up the opium crop and helping to build infrastructure.

The most sensible statements about Afghanistan I have seen coming from the Obama team have come from Zbigniew Brzezinski. See, for example, this article from Huffpost:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/25/brzezinski -warns-against_n_114999.html?page=4&show_comment_id=143 54439#comment_14354439

The very concept of a “good” war, is immoral.

The “just war” concept, would have to be a DEFENSIVE war—-when is the last time the US did that?

With Afghanistan/Pakistan apparently about to succeed Iraq as the “Indian Country” du jour for the U.S. military, the answer to the lead question will likely turn out to be:  As many villages as there are.  There are no effective controls on the allamerican war-machine, given its own ruling “role” in the allamericanpipedream. 

No doubt theamericanpeople sense instinctively that if their armed forces aren’t kept occupied abroad they will certainly find something to do in “the homeland.”  Hell, they may well have the “homefront” as just one in a two- or three-front “war,” in-any-case.

Having “sown the wind,” americans themselves are doomed to become the ultimate bumped-off “crop.”  Now things’ve gone so far even some last-minute Native Guidance has only the slimmest chance of ameliorating that fate to any extent at all.  Anyhow, there’s no sign your lost “leaders” are anywhere near asking us surviving Savages for the help you all really need.

Still, the Tiyoshpaye Way remains open to those who can see there is no other, for Human Beings here on Turtle Island.  We’ll be keeping a look-out for you.

HokaHey!

The Bush-Cheney end of term “Pardons” will tell the tale. ANYONE who believes this whole 911>Bin Ladin>Iraqistan>Bailout thing, deserves our impending doom and gloom. NO, I take that back…...Americans are good trusting people and NOBODY deserves the slow and painful economic slog that is in our collective future. This is Fascism folks and it sucks!!

I do not know if bin Laden is alive, but I’ve always had this feeling….

With the Bush fanily being so invested/divested in teh Bin Laden/Saudi Group (Carlysle Group), and their families being friends for so many years, (Uncle Abdullah used to come for Xmas!);

the Reagans and Bush’s had the Taliban to the White House; Reagan, when asked why he would “work with” bin Laden agasint the USSR because bin Laden “was a terrorist”—Reagan replied, “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”.

and then , after 9/11, the Bin Laden family is given a free plane ride out of the country, and are said to have “totally disowned Osama..”.I just dont believe it. He has a mother. Well, I think that , no matter how angry she may have been at Osama for “going fundamentalist” (if she was, in fact, angry at all!), he is still her son (and his father’s and related to teh Saudis).

I think that there was/is an agreement between the two families. I think that thhat is why we “pulled out of Tora Bora” when you could hear Osama bin Laden on his radio.(If, indeed, they ever could)

Or, the military made it all up.

Or the Pentagon made it all up.

Or, Bush knows that bin Laden had little or nothing to do with it, but, he also knew he woudl claim it anyway….

What does anyone else think?

I think that I do not trust “our” govt at all!

I also think we need to close all of our military bases, withdraw from all “wars” and start taking care of our own people.

There may not be “smart” wars, LostHills, but there are *just* wars—and I define them as follows:

(1) a war of national defense against a foreign invader; and

(2) a war of national liberation against either a foreign occupier, or a home-grown despot.

Any other war is unjust. If this country accepted criteria like these, it wouldn’t waste so much blood and treasure on war (and preparation for war).

There are no “smart wars.” If Obama chooses to take ownership of Bush’s wars and try to win them, then he is likely to meet the same fate as LBJ and go down as a failed one term president. That he tries to separate the war in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan and the “war on terror” into three separate entities presages his likely failure as a president. Cut and run, brother, or be prepared to go down in flames. It’s all one war, it’s Bush’s war, and it’s unwinnable.

Perhaps pres Barry will surprise us and end the US involvement in Afghanistan forth-with.

But then again, he will more than likely continue america’s final dying wish, the resource war for any and all oil in the middle east. That plan will make all the lunatic fringe groups in the US, from the neocons and neoliberals, to AIPAC and the wacko right, filled with joy since all of these unlikely allies will be getting something they want. Thye neos get there war of global domination, AIPAC gets a constant flow of military aid to their homeland(and a continued blind US eye to jewish attrocities) and the wacko right gets their religious war to lead them up to their anticipated end of days rapture party.

And while all this goes on, the earth is still getting warmer, the population is exploding, fresh water becomes scarce, and surfing may be possible in Harrisburg PA.

Yup, Barry sure has been left a huge shit sandwich! And nobody is there to cut off the crusts.

By Fadel Abdallah, November 14 at 2:28 pm #

In the secret manual of the twentieth century crusaders against Islam, dubbed conveniently “war on terror,” ...”
==================
In a previous comment I erroneously wrote the “twentieth century” when fact it should have been the “twenty-first century.”

I guess that what dates in reality just since the beginning of Bush’s administration, it seems to me as it has been an eternity. However, in real time this crusade has been long in the planning during the twentieth century!

In the secret manual of the twentieth century crusaders against Islam, dubbed conveniently “war on terror,” the real terrorists of the world will not be satisfied till every village with a “madrasa” (i.e.) school for children, where they learn the rudiments of reading, writing and the Qur’an, is terrorized and destroyed. After all these are the places where some desperate hopeless youth might pup up as freedom fighters (i.e. terrorists according to the civilized West)and this is the place where the so-called president-elect Obama wants to intensify this terrorist-false war on terror!

Bombing weddings and killing innocent civilians is not the way to find bin Laden or fight the war against terrorism. When we bomb innocent victims, we are creating future terrorists. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are losing propositions. The people do not want us there, and we should not be there.

President Obama needs slowly find a way out of those places and bring our military back home. We tried to fight a “western” style war in Vietnam and failed. What has supperior weaponary done for the war on terror and the capture of bin Laden? Please, please, President Obama, find a way out of this quagmire.

Yes, exactly, godistwaddle; why are the cuban exile right wing terrorists allowed to live luxuriously in Miami?  The arrogance, the putrid, disgusting fucking arrogance of so many people in this country who think that there is simply a right to murder millions of people and bring up this ghost as an excuse! When are albright, clinton, rice, the bushes, kissinger, and so many more going to be brought to justice?

Something like 70% of afghan citizens support negotiations with the taliban; another 55% or so would support a coalition government with the taliban.  Let them have their damn country already, and stop pretending that there is some great difference between the karzai’s warlord party and the taliban.

in 2000 Ben Laden was extremely ill & in need of dialasis; you REALLY THINK he is running around with a full hospital etc from cave to cave somewhere in Afghanistan or Pakistan where THEY told us that the Americans were not even looking for him. PERCEPTION MANANGEMENT folks: how our Gov wants YOU to believe what is said. What do YOU believe happened when Pearl Harbor was bombed? That just “out of the blue” (as we have been told) repeatedly, that they just “attacked” the USA? Might I suggest strongly you read “day of deceit” one of many books telling how the USA deliberately set it up & provocted the attack? The bombing of the twin towers: why not study how these particular 2 towers fell when being hit by airplanes when NO OTHER BUILDING IN HISTORY has ever gone down when hit by airplanes? Our country was NOT looking for him (big surprize) because he is NOT running around the “caves”; and isn’t it just incredibly amazing that “laura Bush’s” heroic trip to a “war torn” country meeting with a “woman in a tent” said to be Afghanistan, where she was told how “wonderful wonderful wonderful” the USA was for helping to save “abused women”. (The good ol’ woman in distress syndrome!) used again with success by the press to make the PUBLICS PERCEPTION be something OTHER than what was really going on as http://www.democracynow.org reported within a week of it that “we the public” are being given FALSE PICTURES by the Pakistanian who wrote the book “desent into Chaos”; and within less than a month, what HE said was going on, was then reported by the “press” if you call them that: the propaganda machine fed info by the political & Corp & Pentagon machine to the “public”.

Bin Laden’s spectral presence in the American imagination is like a ghost clanking boxcutters in our collective attic. The strident tones of this article and many of the comments tells me that he haunts us still.

By concentrating on the doppelganger of terrorism, this article underestimates the problems and complexities of Afghanistan by half. If you are looking for a more cogent assessment of the situation I suggest having a look at Frontline’s recent piece on the subject.

Whatever the hazards in Afghanistan, and there are many, we should ask ourselves if we truly want the Taliban controlling that region again, because that is what we will be facing if we pull up stumps. While Saddam Hussein’s role as a totalitarian bogeyman was undoubtedly trumped up to sell us on a war we didn’t want or need, the Taliban are the real thing.

With Pakistan’s future also in the balance, what to do in Afghanistan is a genuine dilemma. To suggest that there are easy answers to the problem is irresponsible, or just plain ignorant.

Robert, one of the first things Obama did upon becoming the Democrats nominee was to buddy up to AIPAC.  What’s that tell you?

November 13, 2008

Rahm’s father’s words

“Rahm Emanuel’s father, asked about whether his hire signaled closer ties to Israel, said: “Obviously he’ll influence the President to be pro-Israel. Why wouldn’t he? What is he, an Arab? He’s not going to be mopping floors at the White House.”

Now, the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee is demanding (.pdf) Rahm repudiate the remark:

The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) views this characterization of an Arab as an unacceptable smear. One can readily imagine the justifiable outcry if someone made a similar remark about African-Americans, Jews, or Hispanics, concerning cleaning the floors of the White House. Do the normal standards of decency and civility not apply when talking about Arabs? ADC asks you to disavow and repudiate these remarks publicly. We sincerely hope you will distance yourself from any demeaning characterization of any ethnic, religious, or racial group. President-Elect Obama pledged a respect for the diversity of this Nation, and Arab Americans certainly add, in a positive way, to our Country’s diversity.

No immediate response from Emanuel.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BTW, Rham Emanual’s father lives in Israel.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1108/Rahms_fath ers_words.html?showall

Psst, Bin Laden is dead! Spread the word.

James A. Swanson, Los Altos, CA
http://www.bushleagueofnations.com  [For FREE downloads of entire book]

“Stupid power” is a useful term introduced in Chapter 2 of the new book, “The Bush League of Nations: The Coalition of the Unwilling, the Bullied and the Bribed—the GOP’s War on Iraq and America,” by James A. Swanson (2008, CreateSpace Publishing, 448 pages).

Chapter 2 is entitled, “A Just War vs. Just War—Hard Power, Soft Power and Stupid Power.”

The first line of William Pfaff’s article is music to my ears:  “Barack Obama has said that he is not against war, only against stupid wars.”

Joseph Nye, in his book “Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics,” states that, ideally, neither hard power nor soft power should be used exclusively. Rather, it is usually best to combine the two—what Nye calls “smart power,” which can be considered a third category of power.

The “Bush League of Nations” introduces the term “stupid power” to reflect a fourth category of power created by the GOP’s neocon-led Bush regime.

It defines “stupid power” as “using either hard power or soft power in an incompetent, ideological, faith-based, non-analytical fashion, especially where military decisions are made by civilian bureaucrats without active military experience who intentionally ignore professional military advice.”

During the several decades of the Cold War, several American presidents, both Democratic and Republican, used a mixture of hard power and soft power—primarily the hard power of military deterrence (vs. its actual use) combined with the soft power of broad international cooperation and pressure—to help speed the collapse of the Soviet Union.

But then Bush, Cheney and the GOP neocons rode into town.

The Bush regime believes that bombing is the first and best medicine in addressing terrorism or fabricated terrorism, so long as America is doing the bombing. This faith-based belief is similar to their belief that America can simply drill its way out of its energy problems.

As for the much criticized bombing of Pakistan and Afghanistan—there is a role for smart bombs, but smart bombs become dumb bombs when dropped by dumb leaders who make dumb decisions.

Here’s a gift to patriots everywhere who are fighting to take back America. You can download for free “The Bush League of Nations” at http://www.bushleagueofnations.com. Please pass along the good news.

I ask for nothing in return, except that you consider using my book to help restore and build America.

Jim Swanson, Los Altos, CA
http://www.bushleagueofnations.com

Mr Pfaff, what I’d really like to know is why pressure was brought to bear on YouTube to take down that excellent Prof Jim Fetzer video clip titled:

“911 TRUTH: FACTS FOXED”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cjli_cwkPrw&NR=1

You know the one? It’s where Prof Fetzer takes to task those Fox anchor clowns who refuse to acknowledge Nelson Mineta’s testimony to the 9/11 Commission when he said to Lee Hamilton somethin’ to the effect as the “hijacked” aeroplane was coming in towards the Pentagon and some young communications dude would come in and report to Cheney, “The plane’s fifty miles out, sir!” Then as it got closer, “The plane’s thirty miles out, chief!” But then curiously the young guy had the compunction to ask Dick, “Do the orders still stand, Cap’n?” whereby Vice swung around so violently he almost broke his silly neck, but throwing his hand up quickly to brace it, snapped: “‘Course the orders still stand! Yer heard anythin’ to the contrary yer dumb young useless punk?!”

Anyway they’ve taken it down, even though it was so damned educational it deserved an Oscar or three, but there’s still this clip to wile away our time with:

HOW TO CREATE AN ANGRY AMERICAN [even though there are still far too few, and Obama’s bound to lose the plot ninety days into the job]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgfzqulvhlQ

Given Obama’s penchant for saying stupid things it’s really hard to figure from where his great reputation for superior intelligence derives. It’s apparently another one of those campaign myths that