Letters to the Editor
-
Jim
I usually post a link, thanks for the reminder. The speech has been discussed before, most recently comparing it to Zell Miller's speech before the Republican National Convention in 2004.
http://www.harrybrowne.org/articles/GoebbelsAndMiller.htm
-- Jim Montague
I am confused. I followed the link and found the following:
In fact, the speech I quoted above didn't come from Joseph Goebbels. It was delivered by an American — Senator Zell Miller at the Republican convention last week. I had to change only a few words in order to disguise the source. Republicans cheered Miller enthusiastically — even as he quoted Franklin Roosevelt saying, "All private plans, all private lives, have been in a sense repealed by an overriding public danger."
So, are you saying that it was actually Goebbels or no? The way I read Mr. Browne's post, that doesn't seem to be the case. It seems to me as though he is saying, that while the Miller speech was Goebbels'esque and the sentiments are the same, that it was not an actual Goebbels speech. Am I missing something?
-
@ adnoto
I wonder what Move-on's response will be?
I've seen several MoveOn ads on CNN here in Atlanta the last couple of days about "Bush the betrayer".... With this, along with the anti-Giuliani ads, I think they're just warming up. ;-)
Cheers,
-
Nabbleblather's been namejacked!
One point that for some curious reason hasn't been mentioned is that Abizaid should never have been appointed CENTCOM commander in the first place, since he lacks the required objectivity to serve in such a sensitive post. For Abizaid not only is of Arabic ethnicity, but he apparently attended some kind of madrassa as a child, where he learned to speak Arabic. How can a man of such divided loyalties have been entrusted with US military policy in the Middle East?
-- nabalzbbfr
Brilliant parody! My hat's off to you, my good man. But it's not nice to namejack anyone, even a sleazoid eedjit like Nabbleblather.
Cheers,
-
MoveOn’s position during MSNBC interview
The executive director did no backing down as expected and when he was asked what he thought about the lack of Dem support in the Senate and whether it had damaged the Democrats, he said polls show the country had not bought the Bush-Petraeus show, his org would be talking in future ads about betrayal and it did not represent the Beltway, but the rest of America.
-
Innuendo & Implausible Deniability (continued): Ledeen's New Book - - wink wink wink
Ledeen's new book, "The Iranian Time Bomb", argues that Iran controls al-Qaeda, and that Iran is the greatest threat in the world, and that all attempts to use diplomatic measures with Iran have been and will be futile or counterproductive appeasement, and that we need to move on from Iraq into a "regional" mideast war.
But Ledeen claims that he's not endorsing a "massive" war against Iran.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=N2Y5YzI1YmM4ZDhkMWQxNzg4MDVjZDdjM2VhNDhhMTA=
Interview
September 5, 2007Tick, Tock
Michael Ledeen on The Iranian Time Bomb.An NRO Q&A
[...]
KATHRYN LOPEZ: If there’s one message you hope to effectively get out to members of Congress, especially this month, what might it be?
MICHAEL LEDEEN: That they’re debating the wrong question. We have to win the war, but the real war, not the battle for Iraq. We must have a winning strategy for Iran and Syria. I don’t think it requires the use of massive military power, although I do think we should attack both the terrorist training camps in Iran and Syria and the sites in Iran where the new explosive devices are being manufactured and assembled. In other words, I agree with Lieberman, although I don’t think he is yet prepared to talk about a regional war.
KATHRYN LOPEZ: If we bombed Tehran tomorrow, what might happen?
MICHAEL LEDEEN: There is no intelligent answer to that question, except: we’d kill a lot of people. there’s a recent poll according to which the general attitude is, if you’re going to bomb us to bring down the regime, that’s O.K. but if you’re going to bomb us to shut down some nuclear facilities, we’re against it. But I have no idea if those polls are reliable. it makes sense to me, but I’m not in Tehran.
- - Michael Ledeen, interviewed by Kathryn Lopez
So, according to Michael Ledeen, the world's greatest expert on Iran, there's "no intelligent answer" to that question of whether to bomb Tehran tomorrow . . . but hey, wink wink wink, the oppressed Iranian proletariat might really love us if we did that, wink wink wink.
-
Reading Comments
God but I'm sick of watching Jeff Gordon talking to his car.
-
Attacking Iran
Some "expert" was on TV -- FOX or CNN -- right after 9/11 saying we should nuke Iran. Anyone remember that?
-
How low can they go?
During a week when the latest poll showed approval levels for Congress were hovering below 20%, the Senate has showed once again the kind of behavior that has led to the vast majority of Americans holding them in contempt. It's bad enough that we had to endure pro-Petraeus propaganda for 6 months - once MoveOn pointed out what everybody was thinking, that Petraeus was just another shill for Bush, the Senate finally found it possible to take action.
Great job, guys!
Congress remains woefully out of touch with the American public, and this attempt to rally to the side of traditionally authority figures is simply coming across as pathetic. During a Summer when one Senator is caught soliciting sex in a men's bathroom at an airport and another is found to have had numerous liasons with prostitutes, who does the Senate condemn? The fake bastions of morality? Of course not.
The Senate stands for traditional images of morality. Guess what guys - there is more to morality than putting on a uniform. Lying matters.
-
sysprog @ sysblog
You should become a proprietor of your own blog. I'd read you.
-
To be fair it's only one letter off.
"Ledeen did answer your question. Selling arms to Iran was worse than a crime (which would require intent), it was a blunder. They meant to sell arms to Iraq, but they screwed up, and by the time they realized their mistake, they'd lost the receipt."