Posts
April 9, 2007, Washington, DC... The RJC will launch a television advertising campaign on national cable networks criticizing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for her trip to Syria and her remarks after meeting with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad.
The 30-second spot, entitled "Dangerous," notes that while the Democrats promised a tough foreign policy, Speaker Pelosi's visit to Damascus weakened America's security. The visit encouraged a regime that is a sponsor of terrorist organizations responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent men, women, and children, and of American soldiers.
Cooperation between Islamists and the left is growing
Iran Prepared to Start 'Industrial Scale' Uranium Enrichment
Bolton: Iran Probed, Found Weakness and Won.jpg)
Hmmmm.....
Larwyn’s Linx: Republicans Must Defend Matt Gaetz To End The Use Of
Salacious Lies In Politics
-
*Send us news tips! Sponsored by My Private Journal*
Bug-Zapper Indoor Outdoor - Blue Tech
Nation
• Republicans Must Defend Matt Gaetz To End The Use Of...
14 hours ago
Necons lied about going into Iraq. We went into Iraq to steal oil. This is wrong and unamerican. This unilateralism is undermining international law, the legitimacy behind Israel's existence, and the prosecution of the Nazi's. If Jews would step back and think a minute they would realize that neocons lusted after Iraq oil, not democracy, and want Iran to trade in dollars, but are not serious about their nukes any more than they are serious about North Korean nukes. In fact North Korea is irrelevant because they don't have oil. Anyway, I am part Jewish, and I hate to see Jews and the nation of Israel suckered in by these immoral people, neocons, who are unamerican and who will drop Israel or any country like a hot potato if they do not serve their perverted interest of world domination.
ReplyDeleteDear Gary, I publish your comment because you do not engage on personal attacks as most on your side of the aisle do. To answer your comments one by one:
ReplyDelete1) No, Bush and "neocons" did not "lie", you can say that they/we were wrong (like Kerry, Clinton, Albright and all the rest on Iraqi WMD's) but to say that we "lied" is to assert a premeditated conspiracy. Nonsense.
2) To steel Iraq oil? Nonsense, almost all of Iraq post-war oil contracts have gone to Chinese and European countries. That is a typical conspiracy theory with no basis in reality.
3) Un-American? Are you questioning others patriotism? Because I know how the left complains whey their patriotism is questioned.
4) Unilateralism is undermining...? Please. The Iraq war was authorized by the UN, the US Congress, and may countries participated and continue to participate today. Just because France is not involved does not make is "unilateral.” And how that is undermining Israel's legitimacy? The Prosecution of Nazi's...Sorry, I don't get it, perhaps my IQ is too low.
5) Neocons don't care about North Korean and Iranian Nukes, and only care that they trade in US dollars? OK, that's so far out there for me I have no idea how to answer that conspiracy theory, I'll let the reader decide.
6) Neocons are "immoral" and "un-American," who would drop Israel like a hot potato if it came down to it, and are trying to "dominate the world." Really? Again, I have no idea how to answer that. We neocons must be really, really bad people...
I appreciate the time to share in this forum. I will post from time to time if permitted. I have some links that I will post that clarify my positions. As to your points I have a few counter responses.
ReplyDelete1. Wolfowitz, (Wolfinsheepsclothingowitz)recently admitted they lied. But he continued to lie when he said the lie masked regime change, not oil greed. Wolfo is a neocon. If he said they lied, they lied.
2. Most of the reserves are given to US and British companies. The others were let in to those who did not oppose our mission or hinder it. It is a payoff.
3. The UN secretary general said the war was illegal. Hardly authorized by the UN. They failed to get the final authorization.
4. Unilateralism undermines international law and the UN charter. Therefore it undermines everything the UN stands for, and its very existence. Unilateralism also ends up in Geneva conventions being ignored.
5. Facts are facts. North Korea is not a problem because they do not have oil that can be traded in American dollars. Iran does have that oil and it is not being traded in American dollars.
6. I do not accuse neocon followers of being unamerican. But I do accuse the ones on the inside who know what is going on of being unamerican.
Here is a link that essentially shows Mr Wolfinsheepsclothingowitz did view WMD as a lie, or maybe just a fib according to his ethics. BTW his ethics are barely above Bugsy Segal. Anyway here is the link: http://www.mrcranky.com/movies/italianjob/10.html
ReplyDeleteHere is the link regarding the attack on Iraq from a position of weakness because of neocon desire to control the world's oil, as much as is possible, or at least what currency it is traded in: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=ENG20061014&articleId=3482
1) Usually the term "Neocon" is used by the far left and the far right in a negative sense to describe a "Jewish conspiracy." When asked who the evil conspirators are, they almost always point to the Jewish names. It's an easy prediction.
ReplyDelete2) The United States (and other countries) are operating in Iraq under the authority of United Nations resolutions authorizing their presence, It's easy to verify: www.http://www.cfr.org/publication.html?id=5862
3) Is oil important? yes! Did you walk to work today or did you drive? Did you use heating oil to heat your house this winter, or did you use lots of blankets? So the easy answer to your assertion is that...YES, Iran is more important than North Korea because of it's oil, and because of its strategic location in the Straits of Hormuz where the vast majority of oil is shipped through (narrow water-way), if closed could cause a world-wide recession with billions of people impacted and entire economies collapsing. The oil allows the Iranian to have resources to buy weapons and technology that North Korea would only dream of, and unlike North Korea, the Iranians are a radically religious regime that cannot be deterred by mutual assured destruction (MAD), which make them far more dangerous than North Korea or the former Soviet union. So again, YES to the Oil-Iran issue. To pretend otherwise is to be wildly naive.
1. Well, it is unfortunate that two of the most noted neocons, Wolfo and Pearle, happen to be Jewish. But the neocons include Cheney, the Heritage Foundation, etc. If Israel and Jewish people align themselves with this corruption, that is unfortunate. The real problem is that Israel wants the US to protect them from Iran, and do not want Iran to have a nuke. But the neocons want to control Iraq oil and are in it for the wrong reasons. Their lies to the American people about the war in Iraq and why we went there reach to heaven, I tell you. It is one thing for Jewish people and Israel to work with neocons, it is another to embrace necon thinking.
ReplyDelete2. Regarding the corrupt counsel on Foreign Relations spin, the United States did not invade Iraq to make them comply. They invaded Iraq to seek regime change in order to steal their oil. That makes void the argument they make.
3. It is against the UN charter to invade a country to pillage its resources. This happened in Iraq and may happen in Iran. Bush is a war criminal, and he duped the soldiers into committing a war crime. I knew this long before Rosie, because I talked to an employee of the US government. Things are not always as they appear.
It is one thing for a government to allow immorality, (even Moses allowed divorce in a theocratic nation). It is another thing for a government to engage in an immoral act, lie about it to those who elected them, and commit torture in the process.
Remember the talking points leading up to this war as discussed on Fox news, (the talking point propaganda station of the administration)that the UN was irrelevant, crooked, corrupt, weak, unable to solve America's problems, etc. But you must realize that is our problem, and we created the problems of debt, potential dollar weakness, currency problems, etc. We created the system that financed our booms with low interest rates, but this could come crashing down if other countries quit buying our bonds, WHICH CANNOT HAPPEN IF WE CONTROL THE CURRENCY IN WHICH OIL IS PURCHASED. THAT IS WHY WE WENT TO WAR IN THE MIDDLE EAST.
Sorry for the caps, but I think it needs to be highlighted, and taught to every Jewish pre neocon, to stop them from the folly of becoming one.
You attribue motives to people as though you know what is in their hearts. There is no doubt that oil security is a major concern, and that is not an evil thing, it's a real-world issue of concern. But is it the only concern? hardly; destructive weapons in the hands of people who would do us harm is also a major concern, the teaching and spreading of radical religious hatred is also a concern. There are many concerns... I am confident enough in my views, and will let the readers decide about your comments. Many thanks,
ReplyDeleteJoe
Again Joe, if the concern is weapons, North Korea would have been THE major concern. Again, Joe, they don't have oil, and are not as big a factor as Iran and Iraq which have oil. Point is, if oil greed was even one of 10 reasons for going into Iraq it was an illegal war. Fact is it was reason number one. North Korea secured real nukes under Bush's nose, and we did nothing.
ReplyDeleteThink about it Joe. You have to think with your brain and not your gut. It is all out there if you type in such info into Google as Paul Oneil, oil, Iraq, or Bush, oil, Iraq.
You are being used by a government with no moral standards. Any government that uses the Rand Corp think tank as a major reference is without morals. This same thinking is what I got from a professor from Rand at UCSB in 1968. That is the way they think. It has not changed. The neocons are still upset about losing Vietnam. They are still on the wrong side of history in Iraq.
Finally, Bush said that Iraq was a crusade. Either he is using a religious reference that is false religion, as Jesus said his kingdom was not of this world, or he is using religion to further his greed. Either way, Bush is not what he says he is, a Christian.
George Bush is a liar and a thief. Did you ever wonder why he had such a strange reaction in the schoolroom on 9/11? It was because he got what he wanted, an incident that would put his pre 9/11 plan for dividing up Iraq oil into action. That plan's existence is fact, Joe. I am not saying that he planned 9/11, but I do believe that they looked the other way. Even a Republican congress found out that they had info of plane attacks cross their desks, (Rice and Cheney), and did nothing.
And finally Joe, when in history has a country attacked a secondary country that had no ties to the Taliban in Afghanistan? Didn't it strike you as odd? Didn't you wonder why? Now when you get the reason, you deny it to yourself. Very disturbing.
Of course Joe, here is the link that shows what the neocons were up to, wanting the oil companies to own the oil reserve lands outright. The oil companies, pragmatists that they are just stole the oil by contract instead, now standing at 70 percent of the profits, tax free. Wonderful people, all of them, Joe!!!!
ReplyDeletehttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/4354269.stm
Joe, I posted this at neocon.com. It shows that Bush people were hoping for increased oil production and quicker fulfillment of increased oil reserves to our companies. Dan Bartlett attempted to cover up the fact of this statement. Here is my post:
ReplyDeleteHere is a link showing that Laurence Lindsay, a Bush advisor in 2002 said that gas prices would most likely go down if we invaded Iraq. Another smoking gun that was later denied by Dan Bartlett. As the article says, facts do get in the way of rewriting history:
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/04/19/bartlett-caught-in-lie/