Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Heru-ur:
· They can just f'ing walk?
Yes, they can. And, they will. And they have:
They plotted to assassinate Kennedy. (King, et. Al.) Only Oswald didn’t walk.
They slaughtered millions in the utterly unjustifiable (and immoral) invasions and occupations of Vietnam and Iraq.
They overthrew the leaders of foreign nations who they didn’t like, and established puppet regimes (Iran, Chile, Nicaragua, Haiti come first to mind).
A few paid a mild price for the crimes of the Nixon administration, but not Nixon, Kissinger, or any other important decision maker.
The jury is still out, but they have not demonstrated convincing evidence to contradict the suspicion that they at least allowed 911 to happen, if not arranged its happening.
These are merely some of the crimes, I’m certain readers will remind me of others. They’ve all walked, the perpetrators as well as those who supported them with propaganda and financing.
They will continue to walk, just f’ing walk, because the mobsters rule the courts and the prosecutors. Gonzalez is not likely to indict himself.
Worse than that, political “opponents” are afraid to seek justice for fear of political disruption, partisan rancor, the high cost of congressional investigations, and so on.
It was Nixon who said on TV, “if the President does it, it’s not illegal”. That includes the cold-blooded murder of innocents. Yes they can, they will, and they have.
The photos and clips of Indian soldiers with single shot rifles going up against terrorists with machine guns say a lot about the courage of the soldiers and the results we too would get if libralz like Glenn were to "fix" our defense budget.
I don't recall Glenn ever writing about the DoD budget, nor him claiming to be a 'liberal', nor seeing any of the photos or clips you're referring to. In fact, if memory serves, the Bharatiya Thalsena's weapons of choice are H&K MP5 smg and the FN FAL assault rifle, making them at least as well armed as their opponents.
Notice the Indians know better than to even pretend to negotiate with the terrorist scum. They go room to room ferreting them out.
And precisely who is suggesting New Dehli negotiate with these guys?
Chavez is also a scum bag. The idea there is to win one election and make that election the last election. So he disqualifies his most effective opponents, undermines his neighbors' democracy, takes control of the media and forms alliances with fellow scum bags such as Putin.
Or George W Bush for that matter. Scum is as scum does and all that.
In the meantime, the housewives of Caracas are faced with runaway inflation and massive food shortages.
Which is President Chavez's fault...how?
None of this gets noticed by useful libral idiots like Glenn Greenvalt.
Are you suffering from Tourettes or something? Its rather hard to make out at this point.
The reason true democracy actors must always do it "by the book", is the problem of the lowered bar.
If you infringe the rules for what is seen a good reason at a time (the generic example is "there is a bomb in the town, the security services detain one of the terrorists. Is it ok to torture him to learn where is the bomb planted ?"), then there is a temptation to go further the next time a less dangerous situation arise. This slow eroding of the safeguards and individual liberties is what we have witnessed not only during the Bush era, but it started even before mid-70's, especially in Europa. This lesson was learned the hard way first by my compatriots in the algerian war, and the last repercussions of that only happened in the 90's (starting by calling it a war and not evenements).
Btw, this tricky question is a problem only for democracies. The others wont have any guilt to get an answer, and you wont have any problem to imagine which it is. But when democracies do like the autocrats, they just lose a bit of their "mandate of heaven" as chineses would call that.
That dont mean that "No" is the only answer, but that it is a very serious question and that the consequenses must be checked and accounted for. The main problem with the Bush era is the lack of accounting which resulted in angering even closest allies.
The problems that the Partition of India was designed to solve in 1947 are outlined here - written in the 1940s -
http://www.ambedkar.org/pakistan/40E1.Pakistan%20or%20the%20Partition%20of%20India%20PART%20IV.htm
(or click on signature) Its author, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar represents a point of view other than the two major ones at that time - the Gandhi/Nehru Congress [the current Indian PM belongs that party], and the Muslim League.
Those problems have not really been solved, but in some ways have been exacerbated by the Partition.
The whole world is living with the consequences today. There is no denying this statistic [not counting Mumbai in the list yet]:
"There are 150 terror incidents all over the world after 9/11 where Pakistanis have been involved either through manpower, funding or training. Out of all the suspects held at Guantanamo, almost 80% were captured in Pakistan. Almost one-sixth of those held were Pakistanis themselves."
India cannot climb out of this mess as long as Pakistan continues to exist in its current form. [And I am a pacificist at heart.]
In sympathy with 'the Canadian', for a while now I have considered 'frontline' to be a front for the c.i.a. It did not surprise me that their show this week on Chavez was blatantly one-sided. There was NO mention of the endowment for democracy, which has used money to determine political outcomes in several countries. And there was no mention of conditions in Venezuela before vs. after Chavez; just a hit piece on Chavez. It seems no coincidence that both the nyt and pbs are running the same sort of propaganda simultaneously. It's like the 'product' was completed and within a week shipped out to the various display affiliates.
The 'Jewish Center' atacked in Mumbai was Chabad Lebovitch. From my experience, the Lebovichers tend to be the most rabidly pro-israeli, anti muslim of the Hasidim. Not to paint all Hasids with the same brush, there is NeoHasid.org, a site steeped in justice for the M.E.
And for the authoritarian-inclined wobgonne, the illegal federal electronic eavesdropping started BEFORE 9-11.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
