Letters to the Editor
-
The real story
The Daily show tonight explains the real story of Cheney's incoherent personality better than all of us combined. Absolutely brilliant, and in hindsight the the only explanation that makes sense. If you did not see it, catch the Daily show rerun at your first opportunity, or go to the web site.
-
Second-string Machiavellis
The dream for the neocons is a world beholden to America for whatever oil they are allowed to purchase from the Gulf. What doomed Saddam was not anything he did, or anything Al-Qaeda did, it was the increasing demands of India and China on the oil market. His treasure and lack of WMD became too tempting as new oil discoveries failed to keep up with rising demand.
The pressure campaign on Iran may end up with the real target being attacked: Iranian gas pipelines, oil tanker loading terminals and refineries. All unremarked upon by the cooperative US press, that will only notice the military and nuclear assets being blown up. The oil and gas fields won't be attacked, they will be preserved for the day an Iranian Maliki will ask for US protection.
Until then, the US oil companies and their British and Dutch allies will reap the profits of a tighter market. Even the threat of attack on Iran now is raising the prices they can charge in futures contracts. But they want effective control of all of the Gulf's oil reserves..if they dare risking the effort in Iraq, that is. Four years of bribes to 'opinion leaders' from Bremer and Khalilzad, omnipresent American propaganda and the suppression of anti-occupation media haven't made a dent in the anti-occupation opinion of most Iraqis... its only gotten worse. So the Cheney/Bush occupation needs the Iraqi politicians to give them cover politically from the bunkers in the Green Zone. But the Americans are being played, by the SCIRI, Al-Dawa and their Iranian friends who marvel in gleeful hope that the Americans will reduce the Iraqi Sunni population to a powerless minimum. Then Iran will be sincere when they say they want the US to leave, but not before. The Iranians are the first-string Machiavellis for now.
-
are we EVER gonna know the truth here?
Seven years later I'm still hoping to find out who attended Dick's secret energy meetings. Any doubts that these metings included discussions of how to divvy up Iraq oil, post Saddam? We worker bees just ain't entitled to the facts I guess.
-
Amusing indeed
A conservative encyclopedia sounds a but like Aryan science to me.
On another note, the previous thread is crawling with carpet-chewing right-wingers, all excited about dirty words on the left. Yet here, in a discussion of the dirtiest word of all, Cheney, we get nothing. Guess they don't like him either.
-
Sigh.
Every once in a while my husband and I are guests at the country pile. The laird of the manor, so to speak, is an ex British ambassador to Libya, had the largest law firm in the middle east for yrs and was Cheney's Europeand counsel at one time.
He let me read a speech he wrote a several yrs back regarding the American invasion. This was written for a speaking tour in the States, I'm not sure of specific audiences, but what is important is the content. He precisely forecasted what would happen in the aftermath, including Iran, and he provided productive suggestions as to what could be done about it, as well as creating a Federation of Israel, Jordan, eventually Lebanon, etc.
Well, suffice it to say, he's no longer Cheney's counsel and though he's been invited back, he has no desire to give speeches to what I assume were many grumbling neocons in the audience. But what always makes me laugh when I think of that great read is the last paragraph. I paraphrase, but it's something like...'I have no monopoly of opinions on these matters and I do not say that I am right but all I can tell you is that after forty years in the Region I am more likely to be right thana lot of you....'
And hey, no snarky remarks about the Brits from my fellow americans s.v.p.
We've only our administration to thank for Doug Feith and those ridiculous architects...but it is bizarre to go back to a Vanity Fair article about Feith and the neocons....he was being interviewed for his 'intellectual approach' and all the while his research libary was filled with facts about how the Brits had failed withe similar approach...well, enuf rambling...just must wait patiently for GG's next article.
-
Glenn, a small correction
Hope you read this, so I'm posting in the newest thread.
In your post from yesterday about the hallmark of idiocy, you claim that "It is also worth nothing, as several commenters did, that most of the largest right-wing blogs do not allow comments at all precisely because they know the monstrous sentiments that would spew forth." However, it seems that in fact, many right-wing blogs DO allow comments. Exaples appear to be (from http://www.instapunk.com/archives/InstaPunkArchiveV2.php3?a=991) Hugh Hewitt, Little Green Footballs, Protein Wisdom, Ace of Spades, LaShawn Barber, The Anchoress, et al.
You may want to add a correction to this post so that people do not focus on this statement. That is, if it is true of course, I have no statistics on the relative sizes of right-wing blogs.
I really enjoy reading your blog. The fact that this post of yours has caused such an uproar must be a good sign, showing that your audience is growing.
Kind regards,
-
@Rob Van Stee
However, it seems that in fact, many right-wing blogs DO allow comments.
Yes, Glenn knows that, and early in his blogging history cited the entire LGF comments sections as one of the ten worst Americans in the world. But the very largest and most powerful right-wing blogs, e.g., Instapundit and Poweline, do not permit comments. Glenn Reynolds has specifically stated he does not because he fears what would be said by commenters and being tarred with it. (He opens comments once in a very, very blue moon on a singular post basis).
Powerline has never, to my knowledge, allowed comments. They rather recently have established some sort of moderated message board at a separate site, but one cannot comment to their posts at their site. Then there is Althouse; while she nominally allows comments, her policy for deleting and banning is so extreme and arbitrary that nothing seriously critical of her arguments is permitted for long -- and she openly embraces a policy of "just cuz I don't like it." She bans people left and right who have taken her to task for her foolishness. There is no more ban/delete-happy blogger on any of the reasonably well-known blogs.