It Can’t Be Repeated Too Often (Until It Sinks In), Cont’d
The American educational system at every level is an immensely expensive obstacle to culture and learning.
America is not a Christian county. It is a post-Christian country.
Ex-President Bush is guilty of great crimes and has done his country irreparable damage. (Although only an insignificant handful of people have noticed.)
By launching a war of choice, Bush has taken our country across a constitutional and moral border. There is no return.
For the first time in our history, the whole world regards the U.S. with wariness. (Self-designated righteousness doesn't make any difference.)
Invite the world, invade the world, in debt to the world. Is it possible to imagine a more certain program for disaster?
The definition of terrorism is the spilling of innocent blood for political advantage. What governments do more of this than any other?
Bush's successor does not have any idea how to solve any of the country's crises and is not capable of considering any solution that does not first guarantee payoffs to his major constituents—the very rich, the bureaucracy, and the connected members of minority groups.
No American politician achieves significant power unless he is approved by the bankers and the media. No one who gains that approval can possibly have any integrity or capacity for genuine statesmanship.
The common trait of nearly all politicians is a degree of psycopathy. To lie plausibly and without compunction is an innate trait.
All major politicians are captives of the status quo and incapable of doing more than papering over disaster with short-term expedients.
America was not founded as a "nation of immigrants." It came into being as many communities of brave settlers and pioneers, who adapted their British law and religion for the use of their free communities. However, America is now a nation of immigrants in the exact sense of the term.
Entries(RSS)
Clde, What do you think of radia star Michael Savage?
Clde, What do you think of radio star Michael Savage?
Clyde, what do think of radio star Michael Savage?
An ignorant, offensive demagogue making money out of the public market for pseudo-conservatism. Not that Savage matters or that it matters what I think of him.
what crimes is he (Bush) guilty of? Putting out propaganda saying that he's torturing Muslims? This is no crime.
He also took the brunt of responsibility for the toppling of Baathism in Iraq and replacing it with sharia law.
Seemingly, everyone that wants to appease the Arabs should be very happy about this. I just don't see him as being any more nefarious than Clinton--pulverizer of innocent Serbs and Sudanese.
America is not a Christian county. It is a post-Christian country.
Too true! If I were dictator, I would want to know when each and every appointee's last confession was, and then I'd double check with the priest to be sure I was not being deceived by some conniving Khazar.
slim,
How about taking upon himself the authority to declare, launch, and manage all operations of a U.S. war? How about the federal takeover of the American education system and the expansion of the already-existing federal takeover of the health insurance system? How about being responsible, usually with a compliant Congress, for heaping upon the American people a catastrophic debt which can never be paid? Are these not crimes???!!! For proudly and defiantly committing the aforementioned direct and flagrant violations of the U.S. Constitution, the former president should have been impeached, removed from office, and executed. He would have been if America were a real country.
"America is not a Christian county. It is a post-Christian country."
This is an insight, Dr. Wilson, that neither mainstream liberals nor conservatives seem to acknowledge. Listening to certain conservatives, you would think that America is still a basically Christian nation that, for reasons unknown, sometimes elects Marxists to the presidency, tolerates abortion on demand, and worships money and power over God and country. Listening to many liberal groups, you would think that a Christian theocracy is constantly lurking around the corner. The truth, however, is that whatever word you use to describe America, Christian simply cannot be one of them. Christianity certainly has no public voice in America anymore. Even the pro-life movement uses leftist rhetoric in order to validate itself within the greater modern culture.
By the way, Dr. Wilson, your piece for this issue, "Letter from Carolina," was beautifully written and altogether inspiring. Even a Northerner like me was touched by your memorial to days long past. You have stirred within me an admiration for the old south -its history and its people- that will probably never die.
And so in me.
Brock,
The government gave itself the power to do whatever it wants in the NSA of 1947. Clinton was even more militaristically aggressive than Bush.
I'll grant that Bush just so happened to be president during the State Department's most repulsive policy. The State Dept doesn't change it's people or policy every 4-8 years. It's been a lying, warmongering body for a long time.
There are ways in which Michael Savage is more conservative than Rush or Hannity. He is less of a GOP water carrier. But he is essentially a nationalist and a militarist.
"America was not founded as a “nation of immigrants.” It came into being as many communities of brave settlers and pioneers, who adapted their British law and religion for the use of their free communities. However, America is now a nation of immigrants in the exact sense of the term"
Very true. And it only took since 1965 to accomplish.
Slim,
Does being less aggressive with the military than Clinton, or the fact that the State Department has been a lying, warmongering body for a long time excuse the fact that Bush broke the laws of this nation?
Hmmmmmm.........smacks of relativism and denial of moral absolutes.
Justitia,
It's all 'grand theater'--the illusion that this is something new (the government lying ridiculously and breaking all kinds of laws). Many here are familiar with Dr. Trifkovic's work and the US betrayal of the Serbs. The sponsorship of axis-allied puppet regimes is a US policy that goes back a long time. US policy can't get any more illegal or repugnant than our attack against the Serbs.
This grand theater just makes people think that this is something new, something possibly orchestrated by 'neocons', when it's just the same ole same ole pro-Islamist policy.
While Americans are bamboozled into thinking one thing, Khalilzad was carrying out real US policy:
"War Sirens Herald Iran's Hour of Revenge
By Khairallah Khairallah
(London) Financial Times
March 24, 2003
Financial Times; March 24, 2003, Monday Usa Edition 1; Section: Comment & Analysis; Pg. 17; Headline: War Sirens Herald Iran's Hour Of Revenge; By Khairallah Khairallah
========================================================
It may be part of George W. Bush's axis of evil; some predict it will be next on the list for US pre-emptive action; but Iran is the only one of Iraq's neighbours that wholeheartedly supports regime change in Baghdad, even if via a US-led invasion.
Getting rid of Saddam Hussein and his government is one of the few objectives on which the various factions of the Tehran regime agree. Since becoming convinced that the Bush administration is indeed determined to effect forcible change in Iraq, Tehran has been egging on Washington, albeit in private. Whenever the US has needed Tehran's help, the Iranians have been more than happy to oblige.
Take last December's London conference of Iraqi opposition groups. That gathering would not have been possible had Iran not encouraged its Shia cats-paw, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (Sciri), to attend. Iran strong-armed Abdulaziz al-Hakim, the Sciri representative, to adopt positions similar to those espoused by Zalmay Khalilzad, the US government representative. In exchange for its efforts, Iran was rewarded with a political statement from the conference that - for the first time in modern Iraqi history - spoke of a "Shia majority" in Iraq. This meant the US was no longer able to ignore the sectarian reality of Iraq. Iran, keen for change in Iraq, realised early on that this could be achieved only with US military involvement..."
The American people were lied to, not unlike during the 1990s. Was Bush/Cheney repulsize? Of course. IMO, they presided over a 'protocols' slander campaign against Israel. And Clinton/Albright were also repulsive, same for Bush Sr/Baker(?) and all the rest.
Took me a long time to learn to examine facts, evidence, ignore absurdities and 'big lie' agitprop. It's very ugly what lurks beneath. It's well hidden--but there are websites that tell the truth, just not many of them.
Slim,
I understand the fact that it is all a grand illusion, but your argument is non sequitor. You go from asking what crimes did Bush commit to stating that "It’s all ‘grand theater’–the illusion that this is something new (the government lying ridiculously and breaking all kinds of laws)."
Again I ask, regardless of how many people have been breaking the law or for how long they have been breaking the law, does that excuse a man from breaking the law?
Just because there are corrupt cops in a city does that give me the excuse to rob banks, run traffic lights, shoot people, etc. because they dont follow law?
If I steal $10,000 and another man steals $100,000 does that make me any less guilty of breaking the law as he?
Maybe I am misunderstanding you, but I think you are mixing two separate issues.
"Bush’s successor does not have any idea how to solve any of the country’s crises.."
I disagree with this. The problem is that the US is governed by internationalists who do not care about Americans. If the government put the interests of the US first, it would be very easy to solve the current problems. The solution is simply to pull the US tropps out of other countries (65 countries so far I believe), let other countries solve their own problems and put America first. The problem with this is that the US is governed by the military-industrial complex whose goal is to bleed the Americans white and make as much money as possible on the collapse of the US.
Justitia,
Had he committed all of these crimes--he'd be facing repercussions.
He doesn't seem to be facing any repercussions at all. His enemies are not attacking him. How do we know that he was any more crooked than any prior president? Because our big-lie media says so?
I don't know exactly how many countries have American troops stationed in them, but there are more than 65. I believe it's at least 80. Apparently the secret purpose is to help suppress any revolt when a world government is announced after World War Three.
Most people will roll their eyes when you mention the New World Order, although it has been publicly boosted by Kissinger, Clinton, both Bushes, and by David Rockefeller in his MEMOIRS published in 2000. O ye deaf, dumb and blind!
from Dr. Trifkovic's personal website:
"Nazism and Islam shared a quest for world dominance, demand for the total subordination of the free will of the individual, belief in the abolishment of the nation-state in favor of a “higher” community (in Islam, the Umma; in Nazism, the Volksgemeinschaft), and belief in undemocratic governance by a divine leader (an Islamic caliph; the German Führer)."
There are very few websites that provide analysis from the viewpoint that I think is correct: the US works with the EC and Arab countries to strategically use Islamist terrorism as a weapon in breaking down enemies. Brzezinski has openly admitted that the US does this, which is not surprising given the origins of the US State Department. It is well hidden behind the type of agitprop one would expect from such a governmental body.
"Had he committed all of these crimes–he’d be facing repercussions."
So Slim, if someone commits a crime and A. Doesnt get caught. or B. Faces no repercussions.
then the crime is no longer a crime? WOW....
You havent answered any of my questions in the previous two posts. All you keep doing is babbling on about big media and whether he was just as guilty or less than any other previous president. For the last time....THATS NOT THE POINT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Again and for the last time I ask:
Regardless of how many people have been breaking the law or for how long they have been breaking the law, does that excuse a man from breaking the law?
Just because there are corrupt cops in a city does that give me the excuse to rob banks, run traffic lights, shoot people, etc. because they dont follow law?
If I steal $10,000 and another man steals $100,000 does that make me any less guilty of breaking the law as he?
Justitia,
You have no idea if he was breaking the law or not. You are relying on media that lies out the wazoo.
It is correct that the ruling elites are above the law. They pretend to be against monopolies and for free trade--but they use their full power to cripple other countries that are not compliant with the West, or they cut off all weapon supplies to a country other than from the US--thus making other countries into lackies of the US.
I can't help you if you live in a world where you think that everything in CNN or the NYT is true, or a world where the ruling elites must obey the same laws as the rest of us.
@16, Andy, Dr. Wilson is right and you are right. The point being that Barack Obama is a puppet of the internationalists; and so was his opponent in the election, John McCain. The only man who was not in the pocket of the internationalists was Ron Paul, but I am sure you have noticed that he was villified/ridiculed in the MSM, most of which is owned by internationalists. Therefore, we have President Obama and not President Paul.
Again you never answered my questions.
Sorry, Justitia, but it seems to me that Slim did answer you by saying he disagrees with the premise of your questions - namely, that it is unknowable to those of us relying on the media whether or not the law was broken.
David C,
that is correct. Given the fact that his governmental 'enemies' are not going after him at all, it seems that it was a bunch of grand theater, not unlike this 'torturing of the Islamists' (which evidently goes on when we are not actively creating states for them...).
Kosovo was a coup for the internationalists as that region(with the exception of Albania and Bulgaria) is mostly Orthodox. A good way to instigate the divide and conquer strategy for future use. Keep surpressing the Serbs and driving them out of their own lands ala the Palestinians and replace them with Muslims that breed like rabbits and you are going to get a much worse problem over time. Pretty soon the Muslims will move en masse into Serbia proper, where the Muslim minorities in Serbia proper already will no doubtedly cause trouble. It was also a good excuse to get NATO forces into Russia's back yard.
Bruce,
It is quite a slander to compare Serbs, rescuers of US airmen in WWII, concentration camp victims, to palestinians--a piece of international community husseini inspired agitprop used to demonize Jews.
And just as the US has stolen Serb land, it has been stealing Israel's land for 40 years, and slandering Jews that dare to live on land Israel LEGALLY gained in defensive wars, land that is strategic to Israel's survival. US policy is fixated on creating a Judenrein ME (thus the uproar over 'settlers' and the entire Jewish presence over there).
The same UN/International Community that hates Serbs also hates Israel, and the Soros/Ford NGOs have never done anything but lie about both.
slim,
"It is quite a slander to compare Serbs, rescuers of US airmen in WWII, concentration camp victims, to palestinians . . ."
How so?
Brock,
because palestinians are the pets of the 'international community', and have had 60 years of NGO big-lies spewed on their behalf.
The Serbs, an anti fascist people, are hated by the 'international community'.
Go to de-construct dot net. There is actually a story on the home page about 'Serbs on the Israeli-Hamas Conflict'.
Brainwashed, NGO supported palestinian Islamists are no friends of the Serbs.
slim,
I wasn't referring to Palestinian-Serb relations. I was talking about their situation as displaced peoples. I know that the Jews were kicked out of the Holy Land in the great diaspora centuries ago, but if we operated on the token of logic that all displaced peoples - no matter how long ago they lived on their original land - have an inalieanable right to return to that land, then Mexicans would have had the entire Southwestern U.S. returned to them decades ago. Not to mention Native Americans. Although Kosovo is a fabrication of the international community which never existed until last year, whereas Israel had an established history for centuries until the Roman invasion, you can't escape the similarities in the two situations: Palestinians and Serbians both being kicked out of their homes and off their land.
Brock,
still no similarities. Most Arabs fled at the behest of their own leaders, who lied about mass rapes, which scared Arabs into fleeing, and they also told them to flee and come back after the slaughter. The effendi never moved into UN camps, only the landless fellahin did this. Israel did not engage in any mass cleansing and Arabs that were tolerant of the civil rights of others were allowed to stay put. Were specific villages in crucial locations/topography taken over? Yes--but not out any cleansing ideology, only from a security standpoint. The zionists never engaged in torture, slaughter, mass rape, which was commonplace among thier enemies.
The real cleansing was when 800,000 Jews were cleansed from the Arab countries prior to Israel's creation. All remotely honest historians (including Trifkovic) state that this exceeds the number of Arabs forced out by Israel. And Israel quickly repatriated many and offered to repatriate more (turned down by the Arabs, whose UNRWA is a cash cow that depends on eternal refugee status).
Palestinian Arabs are no more tormented by Jews than ethnic Albanians have been tormented by Serbs.
"Sorry, Justitia, but it seems to me that Slim did answer you by saying he disagrees with the premise of your questions - namely, that it is unknowable to those of us relying on the media whether or not the law was broken."
According to that way of thinking then I guess we will never know anything for sure unless we are going to see it with our own eyes.
How then do you know, Slim, that the media you are getting your info from is correct? How do you know that they are not slanting the truth for some reason like the major "news" networks?
Im done. Babble to your hearts content.
Justitia,
the Western media lies for the government. This is documented in our national archives. Back in the 1950s, Henry Luce, Dewitt Wallace and others agreed to assist the government with agitprop.
An openminded person can examine what is absurd and what is not. Eg: it is absurd that pro-Israel Jews run the US government, which has a history of antisemitic immigration acts, eugenic ideology, and profitting from Jewish slave labor.
Some lies are easily uncovered: eg: Western media said that Milosevic's speech in 1989 Kosovo field was a violent, nationlist, saber rattling speech. It also had nary a negative word to say about our moderate ally Izetbegovic.
Using lexis nexis, you can read the speech and see that it was quite tolerant and peaceful. Izetbegovic was an Islamic supremacist monster. Thus, history is turned on its head.
Similarly, you can use lexis nexis to see how the NYT has continually lowered deathcount numbers for Jasenovic as the US became close friends with holocaust denying Croatian leader Franjo Tudjman.
And we haven't even gotten into the 'it's all about the settlements' big-lie told about the ME. You can also use a university account to read Freda Kirchway's Nation articles from the late 1940s, which expose the massive lies of the current CNN/NYT/NGO apparatus.