Morally Wrong

In their continuing effort to top each other and thus earn the title of author of the “Most Outrageously Hypocritical Political Statement of the week,” this week various high-profile members of the GOP yacked up some pretty jacked up big league BS.

Among the runners-up this week include:

In 3rd place: Russell Pearce’s flimsy attempt to flim-flam his way around being caught without a clue, jumping on the broken bandwagon of Republicans trying to label the Constitution as “Unconstitutional.” As the sponsor of the incendiary SB-1070, AZ Legislative District 18′s State Senator, Russell Pearce, has leapt to national prominence over his outspoken stance on America’s immigration issue, and become the latest in the series of poster boys for the thinly veiled racism and xenophobia that passes for Republican policy these days. Like Joe the Plumber without the looks, or Palin without the brains.

Pearce has even posted his studied and misquote studded opinions on the 14th Amendment on his website, and thus professes himself an expert. Weighing in on the latest GOP “Wrong is Right and Ignorance is Strength” fad, on prime-time CNN no less, Friday Aug. 6th, feigning massive moral and mental superiority, “Prof” Pearce’s pompous points were precisely punctured by … first, interviewer Anderson Cooper, then debate opponent Paul Begala, and then, after the break, internationally respected Constitutional historian, Eric Foner was brought in to further poke holes in any attempts at a claim of legitimate Constitutional precedent, or functional scholarship for that matter, by the GOP for their recent anti-14th Amendment rant. The 14th Amendment was written to establish the rights of citizens and non-citizens alike, to protect the children of immigrants, in a nation built of immigrants. Imagine that.

Also worthy of consideration in recent news was the GOP push to perpetuate the Bush era rich guy tax cuts. To keep that straight, those tax cuts for the richest 2% of the population that Bush swore we could afford cost us hundreds of billions each year in uncollected revenue and will drive up the deficit by as much as a trillion a year for the foreseeable future according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Now, even Alan Greenspan and David Stockman (Reagan era budget director), with all the due vengeance of reformed whores, have copped to the fact that GOP Congressional leaders are apparently parading around with their pants on fire. Rather than the GOP foisted myth that “Secret Socialist Commie Obama” has been single-handedly destroying our economy, bankrupting us all through all sorts of unnecessary spending;” it’s actually the Bush tax cuts that are the single most important component of our structural deficit and current GOP efforts to continue them is a disastrous mistake … and a deliberate deception. Stockman goes so far as to say, ” Mr. McConnell’s stand puts the lie to the Republican pretense that its new monetarist and supply-side doctrines are rooted in its traditional financial philosophy.” This from a party which has repeatedly claimed an irreproachable reputation for fiscal austerity as a guise to challenge and even derail many of Obama’s efforts.

Yep, those were some great moments in hypocrisy. But there’s no point in further following the Eric Holder model of prosecuting governmental abuses (i.e. “Beating around the Bush”), so let’s get to the goodies: This week’s title, “Morally Wrong,” comes to us from the howler of a quote from Defense Secretary Robert Gates, an Obama Republican holdover from the previous administration. This quote was regarding Wikileaks’ recent public posting of years’ worth of US military dirty laundry. While dodging specifics about pursuing charges with the Department of Justice, just yet, Gates appeared to invoke a higher law in condemning Wikileaks and its putative founder, Julian Assange: “There’s also a moral accountability. And that’s where I think the verdict is guilty on Wikileaks.” Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen also manned a pulpit to call out the sinner and took up the call of morality to pillory Assange, claiming the US government had a “moral obligation” to the people in the Af-Pak theater of operations and should be the sole authority when it comes to how much the public should know about the wars waged in their name.

To recap: in late July the international whistle blower website, Wikileaks, released their latest bombshell exposing corruption and conspiracy on a massive scale. Already internationally acclaimed for helping concerned citizens document the misdeeds and cover-ups of various corporations and governments, Wikileaks operates on a simple principle: its “primary interest is in exposing oppressive regimes in Asia, the former Soviet bloc, Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East, but we also expect to be of assistance to people of all regions who wish to reveal unethical behavior in their governments and corporations.” In Kenya, Iceland, Thailand, Britain and Australia, for example, conspiracies revealed have rocked nations.

This time their sources had revealed a cache of info on a case of mismanaged war on a massive scale — murder and abuse and misuse of funds at an incomprehensible level: a compendium of more than 91,000 on-the-ground reports of misguided violence, greed, and/or stupidity. Unfortunately the culprits this time were us, as in the US military, in just the latest revelation of our continuingly misguided misadventures in Afghanistan.

To make matters worse, the documents quite clearly revealed a pattern that our supposed best buddy in the war on terror, Pakistan, was actually in bed all along with Al-Qaeda, with the Taliban, and basically with just about every other crank in the neighborhood who hated baseball, apple pie, and/or Chevrolet. Allegations of the Pakistan aiding, abetting, and even being agents of terror against the US have never been honestly addressed ever since 9/11 Truthers were marginalized trying to draw attention to the 2004 UK Guardian article documenting that “General Mahmoud Ahmed, the then head of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), wired $100,000 before the 9/11 attacks to Mohammed Atta” and in the wake of the 9/11 investigation, the US government was trying to hush this revelation up.

A war promoted under false pretenses, perpetuated for profit, and inflicting untold misery and death on the civilian population, and for what cause? Because they don’t like us enough? Our friend in the war is the world’s number one exporter of opium and our other friend works for our sworn enemies. But Wikileaks was not supposed to reveal any of that.

Like Ellsberg before them, Wikileaks’ publication of the low-level “low-threat” (according to the New York Times) military logs, was not likely to endanger the lives of the men in the field nearly as much as it will the boys in the back room. Furthermore, according to CNN, “neither Gates nor Mullen, who appeared on both the CBS program Face the Nation and the NBC program Meet the Press, could cite a specific example of any Taliban attacks based on information from the leaked materials.”

So, to recap, sell a war with lies, under-man it for years to focus on the other fiasco in Iraq (also sold with lies, etc.), partner up with drug dealers and double agents, bomb a stone-age country back to the pebble-age, inflame the region against our country, invoke religious intolerance, and then tolerate and cover-up widespread corruption and abuse. This is the legacy of former Iran-Contra player, CIA/Council on Foreign Relations figure, Robert Gates and the last four years of his war. No wonder he wants to hide it. Meanwhile the guys who report on it are the bad guys, are “morally wrong”?

Ha-ha, I get it! You, Robert Gates, are a hypocrite AND the winner of this week’s title as the author of the “Most Outrageously Hypocritical Political Statement of the Week.”

And the losers? Everyone else.

Mikel Weisser teaches social studies and poetry on the left coast of Arizona. He can be reached at weisser@frontiernet.net. Read other articles by Mikel.

121 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. hayate said on August 10th, 2010 at 10:14am #

    “General Mahmoud Ahmed, the then head of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), wired $100,000 before the 9/11 attacks to Mohammed Atta” and in the wake of the 9/11 investigation, the US government was trying to hush this revelation up.”

    And who did he work for? The israelis, or the americans, or both?

  2. PatrickSMcNally said on August 10th, 2010 at 11:17am #

    > 2004 UK Guardian article documenting that “General Mahmoud Ahmed, the then head of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), wired $100,000 before the 9/11 attacks to Mohammed Atta”

    That’s an unsubstantiated allegation circulated by the Indian press, which has many reasons to want to plant rumors about Pakistan. Remember that there has been a long-standing cold war going on unofficially between India and Pakistan. There’s no evidence yet that the ISI had anything to do with 911.

  3. PatrickSMcNally said on August 10th, 2010 at 12:02pm #

    Here’s a good illustration of why it’s probably smart to remain suspicious of all claims from the Indian press about an alleged ISI-link to 911. This article comes straight from the old records of The Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs:

    http://web.archive.org/web/20060226205639/www.jinsa.org/articles/articles.html/function/view/categoryid/1948/documentid/2219/history/3,2360,1947,1948,2219

    —–
    India Combats Complex Web of Pakistani-Supported Terror Cells
    Counter-Terror Aid and Timely Assistance After Kargil Clashes
    Paved Way for Close Israeli Ties

    … But salvation in the war on terror may be arriving from a seemingly unlikely source; one embroiled in its own war against terrorists – Israel…

    Sharon’s visit caps a period of unprecedented growth in Indo-Israeli relations. While relations were indeed more than lukewarm at the birth of official ties in 1992, they heated up when India’s Bharatiya Janata Party came to power in March 1998 and grew warmer still after the 1999 artillery duels between Pakistani and Indian militaries in the mountainous border area close to the Indian town of Kargil. The performance of the Indian military was found wanting and, according to press reports, Israel rushed to provide needed military technologies to New Delhi…
    —–

    Sounds like the people in Indian intelligence who pushed this story about Pakistan-wires-money-to-Atta are best pals with the same people who brought you the Saddam-Hussein-msterminded-911 gobbledy-gook. OK, I’m not saying that that proves the Indian story is necessarily wrong, but let’s remember to keep a skeptical eye here.

  4. mnbob said on August 10th, 2010 at 2:10pm #

    Mr Weisser, you forgot some important quote from David Stockman. Taken from NPR’s transcript of “All things considered”.

    “Because the Republicans abandoned their old-time fiscal religion in favor of two theories, which I think are now proving to be both wrong and highly counterproductive and damaging.

    One was monetarism, which said let the dollar float on the international markets. Let 12 men and women at the Fed decide whether to raise or lower interest rates, and use the Fed to try to run this massive economy. What they’ve done instead is run the printing press; they’ve flooded the world with dollars. The whole monetarist policy has been a mistake.

    The second thing was the perversion of supply side. Yes, there was a good idea that in certain circumstances, lower tax rates will encourage economic activity and savings. But when you make it a religion, when you make it a catechism and you say you cut taxes no matter what the circumstance, what the season, what the condition, then I think the whole idea has been perverted.

    By getting off track over the last 30 years, the Republican Party has basically given up its historic view that the key thing was financial discipline, financial responsibility, and that we had to live within our means. Today, we have two free lunch parties and as a result, we’re borrowing ourselves into grave danger with each passing month and
    year. ”

    Oh and another interesting question and answer, again from NPR’s transcript.

    “RAZ: In other words, you’re saying he has to not just end the tax cut for the top 2 percent or 1 percent of Americans, but the middle-class, the so-called middle-class tax cuts as well.

    Mr. STOCKMAN: Absolutely. The tax – the Bush tax cuts costs $300 billion a year: 100 billion to the top 2 percent, 200 billion to the middle-class. So I ask the White House, why is a $175,000-a-year family going to be given a tax break that we can’t afford – a large tax reduction, tens of thousands of dollars a year? To me, it makes no sense. ”

    Now I apologize if I read what you wrote wrong, but I believe your fabricating statements from Mr Stockman to prove your own case. Shame on you!

    Now please explain to me, how 300 billion in tax cuts causes a 1 trillion dollar deficit? I’ve always been good at math, but I must have missed something along the way.

    Mr Stockman is right we have 2 free lunch parties, but only 1 trying to feign fiscal conservatism.

    What are we supposed to do? Elect the party that spends like drunken sailors, or the party that is drunken sailors?

  5. mikel weisser said on August 10th, 2010 at 4:41pm #

    To clarify: the only David Stockman quote in the article is this:

    “Stockman goes so far as to say, “Mr. McConnell’s stand puts the lie to the Republican pretense that its new monetarist and supply-side doctrines are rooted in its traditional financial philosophy.”

    The ‘billions and trillions’ reference is clearly attributed to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities in the paragraph above and is my own language, not as a quote.

    ” hundreds of billions each year in uncollected revenue and will drive up the deficit by as much as a trillion a year for the foreseeable future according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.”

    Here is the article from which my summary was drawn:
    “Critics Still Wrong on What’s Driving Deficits in Coming Years
    Economic Downturn, Financial Rescues, and Bush-Era Policies Drive the Numbers”
    By Kathy Ruffing and James R. Horney

    http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3036

    And here is the passage i summarized:

    “Together with the economic downturn, the Bush tax cuts and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq explain virtually the entire deficit over the next ten years (see Figure 1).

    The deficit for fiscal year 2009 was $1.4 trillion and, at nearly 10 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), was the largest deficit relative to the size of the economy since the end of World War II. If current policies are continued without changes, deficits will likely approach those figures in 2010 and remain near $1 trillion a year for the next decade.”

    No need for fabrication. While you may not agree with my summarization, or politics i suppose, i can’t find the justification for your accusation and so the shame is on you. Pre-emptive apology accepted.
    -yzur

  6. mnbob said on August 10th, 2010 at 8:08pm #

    Mr Weisser,

    Here is the entire quote from Mr. Stockman. As printed in the NYT July 31st 2010.

    “More fundamentally, Mr. McConnell’s stand puts the lie to the Republican pretense that its new monetarist and supply-side doctrines are rooted in its traditional financial philosophy. Republicans used to believe that prosperity depended upon the regular balancing of accounts — in government, in international trade, on the ledgers of central banks and in the financial affairs of private households and businesses, too. But the new catechism, as practiced by Republican policymakers for decades now, has amounted to little more than money printing and deficit finance — vulgar Keynesianism robed in the ideological vestments of the prosperous classes.”

    When quoting someone it is best to quote them accurately. A partial quote is a quote intended to deceive.

    Also your math still doesn’t add up. I read the article you referenced, they mostly just wanted to critique a Heritage Foundation report. I’m Ok with that, but their math doesn’t add up very well either. The cost of tax cuts to the upper 2% of income earners is about 100 billion a year, and the costs of the war currently are roughly 160 billion a year. Adding the 2 together I don’t come up with 1.4 trillion. Even if we add in the additional tax cuts to everyone else about 200 billion we still only make it a third of the way to 1.4 trillion. Heck the total outlays of the Defense Department are 688 billion. So if we add up the DOD budget, rounding up; 700 billion, plus the 300 billion tax cuts, we still don’t get to 1.4 trillion

    As for the size of the deficit relative to GDP being the largest since WW II, you fail to mention spending at DOD in 1945 consumed over 35% of GDP, and had consumed over 30% the two preceding years. Just as an aside DOD spending in 1940 was under 2% of GDP, went to 5% in 41, and over 15% in 42.

    Thank You

    PS. what does yzur mean?

  7. mikel weisser said on August 11th, 2010 at 8:58am #

    yzur means “weisser,” a silly 4 letter misspelling for my 7 letter name. It is generally meant as a friendly gesture.

    I still take exception with insistence that i intend to deceive. The extension of the quote only further supports my contention that according to Stockman, the GOP is being irresponsible and disingenuous in calling for the extension of Bush tax cuts.

    Further while the DOD and the tax cuts are components of the deficit I don’t believe the CBPP article says that they are the only reasons for the deficit. I happen to promote the idea of a social service government; but entitlement spending does cost money.

    As for the DOD stats, i failed to mention those, because, though they are interesting, they did not advance my point. There is a difference being attempting to deceive and staying on topic. I actually write often about slashing the DOD budget (i agree the $700B figure as an valid apx current budget), but that wasn’t the point in this article.
    –yzur

  8. mnbob said on August 11th, 2010 at 3:44pm #

    Mr. Weisser

    I agree the Republican party has been irresponsible, as I said “Mr Stockman is right we have 2 free lunch parties, but only 1 trying to feign fiscal conservatism. ” . And boy oh boy we do have a social service government. I recall reading a press release from the co-chairman of the Presidents new panel on deficit reduction, I’m sorry I don’t recall what its called. They illustrated the problem we have, all current federal revenues only pay for entitlement spending.

    The Republican party had a lot of help in this its called the Democrat party. I have yet to see any evidence they were any more responsible, and for the most part they’re worse. As I alluded to, we sent in the drunken sailors to replace the pretenders.

    I’d like to see the DOD budget reduced to 2-3% of GDP, I’d like medical expenditures to be reduced to 7-8% of GDP. I think we’d all like that. Its not reality! The reality is we are in the situation we’re in because of entitlement spending not in-spite of.

    I’m sorry I’ve been so critical of you, but I think you’ve been a little disingenuous in your criticism of Republicans. After all the Democrats have not been willing to raise taxes, or cut spending enough to eliminate the deficit, and pay down the national debt. Which by the way without any meaningful spending cuts, would require more than doubling of taxes.

    Your very bright, turn your attention to solving the problem. Not just blaming others for the problem. The former is far more difficult.

    We’ve beaten this dead horse long enough, I wish you and your family well.

    Bob

  9. teafoe2 said on August 11th, 2010 at 3:59pm #

    Naomi Klein writes:

    The movement that Milton Friedman launched in the 1950s is best understood as an attempt by multinational capital to recapture the highly profitable, lawless frontier that Adam Smith, the intellectual forefather of today’s neoliberals, so admired – but with a twist. Rather than journeying through Smith’s “savage and barbarous nations” where there was no Western law (no longer a practical option), this movement set out to systematically dismantle existing laws and regulations to re-create that earlier lawlessness. And where Smith’s colonists earned their record profits by seizing what he described as “waste lands” for “but a trifle,” today’s multinationals see government programs, public assets and everything that is not for sale as terrain to be conquered and seized – the post office, national parks, schools, social security, disaster relief and anything else that is publicly administered. [The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism,[376] pp. 241-242.]

    I decided to post this just as an antidote to the rightwing garbage posted by this “bob”, just to get us back in the realm of intelligent discussion.

    Scratch a “Libertarian” and you find an individual who has one overriding priority: a hatred of paying taxes, or paying employees more than the bare minumum.

    They’ve gotten so crazy now with their “Freedom” mythology that they won’t even pay for public fire departments to protect their own property.

    Yes, it bothers me to see all this rightwing stuff show up on DV. To me, “Dissident” means dissenting from the Conventional Idiocy we can read or watch anytime in the MSM.

  10. Don Hawkins said on August 11th, 2010 at 4:05pm #

    If we wish to survive we must think outside the box don’t be afraid to do just that. Have you ever heard someone on TV say you can’t say that on TV think about the families out there. Heeeeere’s Johnnie or Fox New’s is good for the head as we all go down the drain in not such slow motion. Oh the elections are coming November in the greatest nation on Earth and those commercials on the way for this thinking or that thinking and grand speeches to keep you and me and the families in total confusion the state of being mixed or blended so as to produce indistinctness or error; indistinct combination; disorder; tumult as strangeness spreads through out the land.

  11. Don Hawkins said on August 11th, 2010 at 4:24pm #

    It sure look’s like a little economic downturn Worldwide and very soon most on Wall Street will be out looking for a job. They will need our help we can show them how to change brakes on there car or farm labor that I still do at times has it’s moments. Now if you do help them maybe just cut the grass a secret never turn your back on them never and watch them around the silver.

  12. Don Hawkins said on August 11th, 2010 at 4:39pm #

    Suppose They Gave a War and Nobody Came? How about if dumb ass politicians gave a rally and nobody came take the TV outside and break it into a million pieces don’t vote so far does that do a damn thing join the tea party and work from within to put the Capitalist system in the garbage heap. That’s just morally wrong oh really.

  13. Max Shields said on August 11th, 2010 at 4:56pm #

    teafoe2 so now Naomi Klein is worthy of using to make your case? Sorry I’m confusing you with your buddy Deadbeat who thinks Klein is an infiltrated into the BSD movement.

    I do think you’ve got something there regarding the “No New Taxes”, but I wouldn’t blame it on the itsy bitsy group called libertarians.

  14. JoeJ said on August 11th, 2010 at 5:29pm #

    Libertarians take responsibility for nothing, do drugs, and have sex with anyone. Hmm great people!

    teafoe2: Scratch a “Libertarian” and you find an individual who has one overriding priority: a hatred of paying taxes, or paying employees more than the bare minumum.

  15. Don Hawkins said on August 11th, 2010 at 5:35pm #

    No new tax’s hell work under the table no credit cards cash for all you buy on the black market I might add take from the rich and give to the poor at ever opportunity car insurance get real and the funny part is all of that is already happening and more on the way. I think they have a word for it it’s called survival as a few get what’s called free money the kind you can’t run out of while enjoying the orange chicken in an air conditioned tent with porcelain toilet seats in the port-a-potty. I have a porcelain toilet seat and do I take a shit from time to time no am from the planet Zenon we don’t do that and the other day put orange marmalade on some chicken and baked it at 350. Not bad nothing I would want all the time.

  16. hayate said on August 11th, 2010 at 10:21pm #

    Max Shields said on August 11th, 2010 at 4:56pm

    Have you a useful purpose, at all?

  17. Deadbeat said on August 12th, 2010 at 1:32am #

    I’d like to see the DOD budget reduced to 2-3% of GDP, I’d like medical expenditures to be reduced to 7-8% of GDP. I think we’d all like that. Its not reality! The reality is we are in the situation we’re in because of entitlement spending not in-spite of.

    This assessment is incorrect. Entitlement spending — primarily Social Security — did not add to one penny of the debt or deficits. The tax burdens where shifted to Social Security by the Alan Greenspan commission in 1983 to make up for the tax cuts to the rich via the 1981 Kemp/Roth tax cuts. Reagan also increase Defense spending that that is what cause the deficits and ensuing debts. It is estimated that 80% of the debt is due to the huge defense spending and tax cuts for the rich. The blame being placed on “government spending” and “entitlements” is a deliberate attempt to shift blame from the rich and from Capitalism.

    teafoe2 so now Naomi Klein is worthy of using to make your case? Sorry I’m confusing you with your buddy Deadbeat who thinks Klein is an infiltrated into the BSD movement.

    Klein book was an attempt to use neoliberalism as a scapegoat for the War on Iraq in order to shift analysis away from Zionism. Thus her explanation of neoliberalism is sound. Her USE of neoliberalism is what the criticism is about.

  18. Don Hawkins said on August 12th, 2010 at 3:30am #

    Let’s see today what’s on my agenda ok today I’ll wake up and put my suit on have breakfast keep it light call for the car and head for the top floor. Once at the top floor my people are there and we are going to see who we can screw over today. A few floors below more of my people are in front of a computer fast trading help’s pay the bills. Maybe a call from Steve Forbes who says ok we stopped any progress on climate change done deal now this tax increase for the rich no no no. So I get out the rolodex under L for lobbyist make a few call’s and tell them to put on those alligator shoes and short skirt don’t forget the check book you can be in DC by 11. Time for lunch ribs today with a few close friends and maybe the talk is about the up coming elections and just how to keep you and me and the families in total confusion the state of being mixed or blended so as to produce indistinctness or error; indistinct combination; disorder; tumult as strangeness spreads through out the land. Ok time to hit the course back 9 make a few more calls then off to CNBC to do Closing Bell got to keep those electrons moving. Let’s see hello Mr. fat cat and your thought’s on this tax increase? First let me say you look marvelous and to let this administration raise tax’s on the rich will be a travesty think about the little children the families women men the birds the animals this will hurt what about there future? Thank you Mr. fat cat we love you very very much. Then dinner with a few more close friends on the best way to keep us all in slavery while we all go down the drain in not such slow motion while they spend the kind of money you can’t run out of, oh really. That’s just morally wrong waiter bring me another plate of that orange chicken and fill this glass it’s only half full.

  19. Max Shields said on August 12th, 2010 at 4:44am #

    hayate apparently I’m not angry enough for the likes of “you”. You just run along and continue you ziofascist know it all spree. Aren’t you just comfy you have the ziofascist by the tail….you know who the enemy is and it’s clearly them. Now run along.

  20. Max Shields said on August 12th, 2010 at 8:40am #

    Deadbeat: “Klein book was an attempt to use neoliberalism as a scapegoat for the War on Iraq in order to shift analysis away from Zionism. Thus her explanation of neoliberalism is sound. Her USE of neoliberalism is what the criticism is about.”

    Deadbeat you’ve done nothing but rail against Klein as a zionist gatekeeper and BSD infiltrator, and bash her work on Friedman and neoliberalism and Chicago economics.
    Are you that hard up for “friends” that you’ll twist your own epithets into new found praise?

  21. teafoe2 said on August 12th, 2010 at 10:49am #

    come on, Shields, stop the petty personal attacks & the juvenile namecalling. you’re sabotaging your own credibiility. if you have a political point to make, make it.

    BTW, the acronym is BDS.

  22. franco_american1962 said on August 12th, 2010 at 2:09pm #

    The two major parties in America are in many ways practically the same. The suborning of the Constitution, and its vitiation, by years of “progressive” legislation, on both sides of the isle, has only resulted in greater opacity of our nation’s, nay, every individual’s, protection against the incursions of a meddling, collectivist, government. These days, the Constitution is indeed being impugned, and the rule of men (those very same who swore an oath to defend the Constitution), has “progressively” supplanted the rule of law; the supreme law of the land.

  23. franco_american1962 said on August 12th, 2010 at 2:11pm #

    The latter should read “and the supreme law of the land”.

  24. lichen said on August 12th, 2010 at 3:46pm #

    Naomi Klein’s book was brilliant; I know that because I’ve actually read it. She showed accurately how free market capitalism was employed in both the war and “reconstruction” of Iraq; she showed how milton freidman’s students were behind the coup against Allende, and she examined the Shock Doctrine, a thesis that cannot be reduced into some dogmatic statement about “zionism” and “neoliberalism.”

  25. Don Hawkins said on August 12th, 2010 at 3:50pm #

    50 fires are burning in central and northern parts of the country, according to the Reuters news agency.
    The country’s civil defence agency says that 1,500 firefighters have been mobilised to tackle the blazes.
    Around 18,000 hectares (44,500 acres) of forests and bushland are now believed to have been affected.
    Temperatures in some areas were forecast to reach 40C (104 degrees Fahrenheit). BBC

    Ok enough is enough just watched Glenn Beck and he is going to preach to people in DC I think it’s 821 a tent revival and climate change is a progressive hoax as our forests burn. Our so called leaders are brain dead business just cares about profit and we get to go down the drain in not such slow motion this is nut’s. Who would like to stand up first CNN, NBC tell the truth we need a World summit and fast no more games yes the system must change it’s going to send of all into hell. We will not stand for it’s to late bullshit yes we know this will not be easy enormous effort and part of that effort is to slow down we know that. Business as usual is now beyond madness like Hansen said kind of like a war. Come on this will not work unless we work together these ideologies will fold like a house of cards on a windy day as there house of cards is built on bullshit and you know it. Happy, happy talk isn’t going to get it the truth the knowledge. Come on out there in media land stand up let’s try it has to start somewhere.

  26. Don Hawkins said on August 12th, 2010 at 4:02pm #

    Oh lose advertising tell the truth NBC feeling lucky come on we will send you donations just ask go for it tell the truth. A little outside the box well yes but so is the end of civilization as we know it as a start.

  27. Don Hawkins said on August 12th, 2010 at 4:25pm #

    I wrote of all into hell and should have written all of us into hell. This war we are fighting now there is no winners strange game to say the least.

  28. Max Shields said on August 12th, 2010 at 5:20pm #

    teafoe2 does it really matter what the order of letters are? I mean is it your aim to take trite to a new level?

    So, you think that Deadbeat who has endlessly denounced Naomi Klein on DV for EVERYTHING she’s ever written or said, is just seeing a little clearer these days? He has never bought “neoliberalism”. Neoliberalism is a Chomskyite creation, don’t ya know. His tirades have aligned Klein with Chomsky and all that you all think that means. Expecting a little accountability is a far cry from “petty personal attacks”. An observation is now a “personal attack”?

    Since you feel you must speak up for Deadbeat one must ask but why? Have you followed Deadbeat’s posts on DV for the last 2+ years? Unless you’ve changed your id I would assume the answer is NO.

  29. teafoe2 said on August 12th, 2010 at 5:36pm #

    since this uh, person? thinks the order of letters is unimportant, I will henceforth refer to and address him as Xam, phonetically pronounced “scam”;-)

    That Xam insists on casually scrambling the acronym BDS indicates to me the lack of respect he has for the BDS effort and for the Corrie family.

    The reason why Boycott comes first, Divestment next, and Sanctions last is quite obvious. But the important point is, that’s how the Palestinians who issued the original called designated it. Fiddling with the order of the letters only shows how little Xam is really connected to or concerned about what the Palestinians are going through.

    Have a little respeto.

  30. teafoe2 said on August 12th, 2010 at 5:42pm #

    Xam posts: “Klein’s book was an attempt to use neoliberalism as a scapegoat for the War on Iraq in order to shift analysis away from Zionism. Thus her explanation of neoliberalism is sound. Her USE of neoliberalism is what the criticism is about.”

    Thank you Xam, whambam I agree with you 110pct:)

  31. teafoe2 said on August 12th, 2010 at 5:49pm #

    I appeal to the DV editors and readers: to me this is an example of a petty personal attack, consisting entirely of personal insults. I see no attempt to make a political point:

    “hayate apparently I’m not angry enough for the likes of “you”. You just run along and continue you ziofascist know it all spree. Aren’t you just comfy you have the ziofascist by the tail….you know who the enemy is and it’s clearly them. Now run along.”

  32. mikel weisser said on August 12th, 2010 at 6:11pm #

    You all are way interesting. Hope DV keeps publishing my work, i want to see what you come up with next!

    Don Hawkins, please add more punctuation; i like some of your sections, but punctuation is so important they invented it just for times like this.

    BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome) has been debunked: turns out that Bush really was a really dangerous really f&*%ed-up f&*%-up and we in the liberal media were right all along and until a debater acknowledges this grave error of originally supporting, now perpetuating, the old (now discredited Bush paradigm) they will only have limited credibility.

    The Boycott-Divestment-Sanctions is to my mind a great sequence–ensuring citizen and corporate buy-in BEFORE gov’t action–but i still don’t think that’s what was meant. Either way, it’s surely not BSD. Companies and individuals that maintain investments after gov’t sanctions (SEE Prescott Bush) are war criminals.

  33. JoeJ said on August 12th, 2010 at 6:12pm #

    “Moral accountability” who is doing the killing – Wikileaks or the Zionist controlled US Government!

    “There’s also a moral accountability. And that’s where I think the verdict is guilty on Wikileaks.” – barf!

    From Harry Truman on, all these creeps are going to history’s hell as traitors to America’s promise!

  34. teafoe2 said on August 12th, 2010 at 6:16pm #

    Anyone care to comment on this?

    Iran Contra: Marriage of Friedmanism and Neoconservatism

    “The Iran Contra operation, which involved Neocons and Friedmanites in close collaboration, represented the total integration of Neocon ideas for transforming the Middle East with Friedmanite “free market” economic aggression against a Latin American state which had partially freed itself from US capitalist control.

    By the end of the Reagan administration both the World Bank and the IMF were transformed into aggressive mechanisms of Friedmanite intimidation and control by and for US corporate and banking interests that during the Reagan administration had become even more Jewish & Zionist, thanks largely to Israeli governmental manipulation of the US economy facilitated by the new funding and investment orientation that followed the Camp David Accords.

    No longer would the international ZPC simply have one settler colony but it would develop new purely revenue generating virtual colonies through the acquisition of formerly state-owned corporations of developing countries whose markets were forced open to Western and in a steadily increasing number of cases to Israeli and ZPC investment.

    Paul Wolfowitz’ desire to lead the World Bank after architecting policy to disintegrate Iraq with the Second Iraq War makes perfect sense as a way for the ZPC to maintain total control over one of the most economically important Arab countries.”

  35. Max Shields said on August 12th, 2010 at 7:07pm #

    teafoe2 said on August 12th, 2010 at 5:49pm #

    Let me answer teafoe2 since you’ll not get a response from anyone but your 3-some tribe, No it’s not a personal attack it is a response to a personal attack.

  36. Don Hawkins said on August 13th, 2010 at 4:17am #

    Sent this to the greatest minds in human history who this very day are spreading the word and……………………………..

    Ok,

    Let’s say there is a God does God control what happens in the Universe or did he/she just create it? As we know God is usually referred to as he interesting concept. Now was it a little loud yesterday in front of the stock exchange? Ok the people in front yesterday do they shop at family dollar and the people inside shop at Goldman Sachs. The question does come up who is doing God’s work? Lloyd say’s they are and the people out front are not or if we go with God just created the Universe we all are? Now is there a devil and if so are these the devil’s words?

    Cold hearted orb
    That rules the night
    Removes the colours
    From our sight
    Red is gray and
    Yellow white
    But we decide
    Which is right
    And
    Which is an Illusion

    Did anybody happen to see that Rep from Texas last night on Anderson Cooper show and the whole having babies for the devils work part. That was God’s work or just strange. Of course here in the States the elections in November and after watching that nut case from Texas this thinking can we say we will see more of it sort of in the coming day’s for a few reasons like commercials and grand speeches to keep you and me and the families in total confusion the state of being mixed or blended so as to produce indistinctness or error; indistinct combination; disorder; tumult as strangeness spreads through out the land and if so is this God’s work? Wait not you as you are to smart for that sort of thinking. Ok are you Democrat or Republican and what side does God’s work better oh there is no better just God’s work. Glenn Beck will be in DC what is it 821 and will he be doing God’s work? Ok now just on the off chance God created the Universe and said help yourselves good luck wow it would then be up to us. Yes it is up to us and up to us to do what? So far it appears to be to create total confusion the state of being mixed or blended so as to produce indistinctness or error; indistinct combination; disorder; tumult as strangeness spreads through out the land oh that’s not true oh yes it is wise ones.

    Don

  37. mikel weisser said on August 13th, 2010 at 7:20pm #

    I wanted to comment on the Inran-Contra, but the Zionist this or that holds little interest for me. I seethe state of Israel as committing their own santized version of a Warsaw Ghetto with Gaza and fear their final solution. BUT too much discussion of Zionism begins to feel like listening to reasons that Muslims shouldn’t have a mosque in downtown Manhattan.

    Iran-Contra is indeed the perfect synthesis of the inevitable outcome neocon foreign policy mixed with neoliberal economics. Iran-Contra, like WMDs, is a smoking gun that should be flogged until addressed. It shows the true depth of the organized challenge to abuse the American people at the unjustified fiat of our rulers, first dealing w/ our enemies, then w/ outlaws and on and on. Indict, reopen, reteach, this should never have been buried.

    But to Don Hawkins:

    I follow no certain religion, but i think: god created all and is all and all is god. You, me, this keyboard, that galaxy, etc. There is no devil, except the one we create with our actions & share in our dreams.

    You’re right: The very idea of terror babies is such bald faced hoakum even McCarthy’s machinations. But it bodes ill that they would go that far this soon; and are still being condoned & supported by MSM.

  38. hayate said on August 13th, 2010 at 7:34pm #

    The reason zionism gets mentioned so often is because they are top dog among the fascist oligarchy. They have the most influence. They are also the most insidious of the corporate fascists, having successfully neutralised far more of the opposition to fascism than any effort before has, save for nazi Germany in their “occupied territories”. For progress to be made in eradicating fascism, zionism has to be taken out of the picture first. Or we’ll continue chasing our tails, as we are now.

    Think of it like alcoholism, you need to remove the alcohol from the patient for there to be any real progress in recovery. Then, work on the things that lead the patient to the alcohol abuse.

  39. Maien said on August 13th, 2010 at 10:38pm #

    Well said, Hayate.

  40. Deadbeat said on August 13th, 2010 at 10:43pm #

    lichen writes …

    Naomi Klein’s book was brilliant; I know that because I’ve actually read it. She showed accurately how free market capitalism was employed in both the war and “reconstruction” of Iraq; she showed how milton freidman’s students were behind the coup against Allende, and she examined the Shock Doctrine, a thesis that cannot be reduced into some dogmatic statement about “zionism” and “neoliberalism.”

    [1] “free market capitalism” is neoliberalism.

    [2] You omit the fact that Milton Friedman who is the target of her attack was against the Iraq War.

    I too read Klein’s book as well and saw her on tour.

    However it is NOT as you frame it …

    reduced into some dogmatic statement about “zionism” and “neoliberalism.

    If Ms. Klein stuck to Latin American there would be NO issue but transferring the basis for the Chilean coup to the War on Iraq was a specious attempt of shifting the focus away from Zionists influence on the war on Iraq.

    Far from “dogma”, Ms Klein’s behavior raises doubts about her motives not about her knowledge of neoliberalism.

  41. Max Shields said on August 14th, 2010 at 5:19am #

    mikel weisser said on August 13th, 2010 at 7:20pm #

    Well said mikel.

    It would be interesting to see if this obsession with Zionism could move to one side as the world is full of complex interconnections none of which are personality or ideologically driven. Never to even entertain the place of systems and how behavior is determined by the interplay of contrived and natural systems is to simply play into the very pathology witnessed in the Is/Pal or US/AfPak to name but a couple.

    I agree mikel that when one gets down into the Zionist gutter of ideological religion one takes on the very tactic of that ideological pathology. Looking for Mrs. O’Leary’s cow to blame for it all is just like the drunk who in the dark is looking for his house keys under the lamp post. When asked where do you think you lost them, he replies: “probably by my door”. But than why are you looking here? He responds: “because this is where the light is.”

    Even the “debates” here are plagued with this escalation of chatter, not to prove a point but to deride the other of his/her’s. Is it really so crazy to ask: what if the world boycotted Israel, what would/could that lead to? Is that any different than had we asked: what if we escalated in Vietnam?

    Are we all to follow some monolithic “party” line and if not be called out as some kind of zionist? In other words, can we THINK for ourselves or are we doomed to this followers role? Do the “followers” of Petras believe that all his posts are “brilliant” and without question, “accurate” of a view of the world? Likewise do the “followers” of Chomsky believe his views are completely accurate and without flaw? Can we actually think Petras has some very valid points without swearing allegiance to his every point? Ditto Chomsky?

    On another thread, someone indicated that science is about understanding not manipulating. Yes, pure science is. So why can’t that same reasoning be applied to our world views, rather than these cookie cutter cartoonish notions?

  42. Don Hawkins said on August 14th, 2010 at 5:39am #

    Money power and orange chicken not in that order sir the air force is awaiting your orders sir.

  43. Don Hawkins said on August 14th, 2010 at 5:46am #

    And then a voice that was music to my ears said, “stand down and stand up your choice”.

  44. Don Hawkins said on August 14th, 2010 at 7:16am #

    http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/08/11/global-boiling-russia/

    This article put’s it well and so far the big plan well money power and orange chicken not necessarily in that order.

  45. Don Hawkins said on August 14th, 2010 at 7:27am #

    to +4.5, which translates into “less than once every 15,788″. If you read the article it was there some say 2.1 million years is a better number but not ready to make the leap just yet. So when we hear a hundred year storm think 15,788 storm or if bold 2.1 million year storm.

  46. mary said on August 14th, 2010 at 7:52am #

    Messrs Weisser and Shields are not Palestinians whose land has been occupied and who have the boot of the occupier on their throats.

  47. Max Shields said on August 14th, 2010 at 8:14am #

    mary, yes, no one, least me, is denying the injustice, the inhumanity and the “boot” of an occupier regarding Israel (occupier) and the Palestinians (occupied).

    But if the goal is justice and peace in that region than the leverage points and actions need to comport with that goal. One can strongly agree with the sentiment of a Isreal boycott but is it the most effective means of achieving the results. Is a boycott and divestment the leverage point that will produce the desired results? Thinking through, and understanding that is more important than the sentiment. And while there are those on DV dealing in personalities and conspiracies, it just might be that Chomsky is simply indicating he thinks a boycott/divestment could backfire as it is proposed. Should that be dismissed because of some “hidden predefined conspiracy theory of “gatekeeping”? Or should it be clear headedly evaluated.

    Making this about “Chomsky” or personality, completely reduces the argument to cutting an elephant in half – you don’t get two elephants; you get a mess. Keep your eye on the problem. The solutions are rarely obvious.

    One can agree or disagree, but the tenor of the arguments here, are to ignore the thoughtfulness of considering one’s goals and actions and determining whether the actions are up to the goal.

    In the end, like it or not, the cure usually lies in our relationship with our “enemy”.

  48. PatrickSMcNally said on August 14th, 2010 at 8:26am #

    Deadbeat said: “You omit the fact that Milton Friedman who is the target of her attack was against the Iraq War.”

    Yes, he was. That conflicts with something else on this page.

    teafoe2 said:

    —–
    Anyone care to comment on this?

    Iran Contra: Marriage of Friedmanism and Neoconservatism
    —–

    Friedman, whatever else one may say about him, was not married to JINSA.

  49. PatrickSMcNally said on August 14th, 2010 at 8:46am #

    This is real Milton Friedman in action:

    http://www.jcpa.org/jcprg7.htm

    —–
    Privatization of the Israeli Economy

    … Since the beginning of the privatization process in Israel (in 1985), a number of possible methods of privatization have been available, with two variations being dominant. The first and most popular is the sale of the entire enterprise to a private company or individual, which accounted for 45 percent of privatized companies during the period 1985-1997. The sale of a controlling interest in government companies was never done through the stock market. In some cases a minority stake was issued to the public, but the controlling interest was sold through private placement.
    —–

    Neo-conservatives have generally supported such measures, but Milton Friedman can more honestly be regarded as the Godfather of such privatization.

  50. Max Shields said on August 14th, 2010 at 9:02am #

    I agree that Friedman was not a card carrying neocon. His economics in many respects are very toublesome because as played out they cause immense damage. Some of this damage such as one sided “free market” trade, one could argue, have attributed to as much (more?) strife than than some of what the Zionists have unleashed. But it is important to note that he was but one man whose influence was given more than taken, in my opinion. He does not seem to be a proponent of war, conventionally speaking, nor was he a determined factor in the elimination of Allende.

    He seems to have been a person with a deep confiction regarding his economic principles…some of which could dovetail with a number of ideologies given the topic.

    Deadbeat, though, has professed another angle to his point regarding Klein’s attacks on Friedman. Deadbeat’s argument since Klein’s publication of said book was that she is part of the “gatekeepers” and by going after Friedman she is detracting from her agenda. It is this illogical proposition that makes Deadbeat’s posts challenging at best. He’s lined up sides and will develop strawmen characters to support his overriding argument of some kind of “American Left” that is undermined by the likes of Klein, et al.

  51. PatrickSMcNally said on August 14th, 2010 at 9:09am #

    Klein attempts to blame the Iraq war as a byproduct of Friedman’s insidious thought. Deadbeat was just pointing out that Klein accidentally missed both the fact that Friedman was against the war as well as the fact that JINSA was for it. If not deceitful, Klein was certainly being retarded at a minimum.

  52. Max Shields said on August 14th, 2010 at 10:41am #

    My point was quite simple. Having followed Deadbeats argument regarding Klein I’ll stick what I posted above.

  53. teafoe2 said on August 14th, 2010 at 10:42am #

    “BUT too much discussion of Zionism begins to feel like listening to reasons that Muslims shouldn’t have a mosque in downtown Manhattan.”

    What a nonsensical proposition. I wonder why discussion of Zionism “feels” uncomfortable to you. Uh, you’re Jewish, right? Got a lingering attachment to the Jewish State, the only place where Jews can live amongst other Jews and live a Jewish life?

    Wake up: Zionism is Agenda Item #1, and will continue to be until it is defeated, abolished, disappeared from the face of the earth.

  54. Max Shields said on August 14th, 2010 at 10:53am #

    teafoe2, here is what mikel said: “I seethe state of Israel as committing their own santized version of a Warsaw Ghetto with Gaza and fear their final solution. BUT too much discussion of Zionism begins to feel like listening to reasons that Muslims shouldn’t have a mosque in downtown Manhattan.”

    Do you get it teafoe2, mikel may even agree with your position on Israel but that overplaying the use of Zionism begins to take on the same diatribe as JDL trying to stop the mosque in Manhattan.

    But instead of questioning his position you personally attack him, teafoe2.

  55. teafoe2 said on August 14th, 2010 at 11:43am #

    Zionist gunsel Xam posts: “…the world is full of complex interconnections none of which are personality or ideologically driven. …entertain the place of systems and how behavior is determined by the interplay of contrived and natural systems…”

    This is an example of what I call Navasky logic, thinking that accords with late The Nation honcho Victor’s explanations of world history and developments. I say “late” because Victor has been dead from the neck up for at least two decades.

    All responsibility for wars, economic distress, etc etc is uniformly blamed on impersonal abstract “forces” thus neatly absolving the persons and groups from responsibility for their actions. Most Navaskyites cloak their reactionary propaganda with a smokescreen of “Marxism” ala Eduard Bernstein, but Xam is not interested in any of that lowerclass focussed ideology; he has other strata in mind when he posts here. Right, Xam? (unlike Xam I make no claim to be clairvoyant; I’m just extrapolating from what he writes.)

    If you’ve ever actually participated in the class struggle at the grassroots/rank&file level, you know how important the leadership factor is. Ideology when internalized by masses of people becomes a material force. The existence of the Zionist State and its continued defense by most US Jews and their allies/flunkeys proves that to be a fact.

    Xam would like you to believe that we focus on Chomsky because we don’t like his personality, which is an echo of Dubya telling us “The terrorists attacked us because they hate our Freedom”.

    The fact is that Chomsky’s name is something to conjure with. Even the BDS “FAQ’ page lists it at the top of the list of those who have endorsed “particular BDS actions”, no doubt because they think his name lends legitimacy to their efforts overall, including those Chomsky has at other times condemned as “hypocritical”.

    There are two main reasons why it’s crucial to deconstruct Chomsky’s function in the ZioImperialist strategy to cripple & misdirect popular opposition to Isreali criminality. One is that he poohpoohs the degree of influence wielded by the ZPC over US policy; the second is his opposition to BDS, calling it “hypocritical” in a blast of contorted illogical fork-tongue psuedo-arguments.
    But many many people take Chomsky’s every utterance as the second coming of Albert Einstein. Americans pre-programmed by the combination of ideological indoctrination and obedience training known as the US Educational System respond to Chomsky as the ultimate Authority Figure. Just like the students in the famous experiment, if Dr C says Turn Up the Juice, most immediately crank the variable pot to the Max mark.

    And so day after day we see Xam cranking away. As diligent as the youthful Bertrand Russell:) (if you don’t get the reference, ask Ralph Schoenman:)

    short pawz for th cawz…

  56. teafoe2 said on August 14th, 2010 at 11:58am #

    Xam, the following is a question: “I wonder why discussion of Zionism “feels” uncomfortable to you. Uh, you’re Jewish, right? Got a lingering attachment to the Jewish State, the only place where Jews can live amongst other Jews and live a Jewish life?”

    If it seems ill-founded by the one asked, he has only to say so. I found his statement so internally contradictory that I couldn’t help wondering where the H. he could be coming from, so I asked. If my guess re his motivation is wrong, I’ll stand corrected.

  57. Maien said on August 14th, 2010 at 12:11pm #

    Just a comment Max (and discussion buddies) and no I haven’t read all of your posts to all of the posted articles. You wrote, “Even the “debates” here are plagued with this escalation of chatter”. I see that you too, are a part of the ‘chatter’. A good question to ask is: Has the chatter produced any clarity for the participants or readers? Sometimes it is better to stop the chatter and actually do something…. however small to create change in the immediate physical environment, which I am sure you and all of the commentators actively manifest each day. After all… otherwise the exercise is just a lot more hot air.

  58. Max Shields said on August 14th, 2010 at 12:16pm #

    You could have said you aren’t clear about what I mean rather than go off on this nonsensical talk out Victor at the Nation Magazine.

    But to your post – No, I’m not proposing ” uniformly blam[ing]ed on impersonal abstract “forces” thus neatly absolving the persons and groups from responsibility for their actions.” You do cook up some interesting stuff. No my introduction is a systems view. I don’t read Nation or Victor N.

    On the other hand, I am not proposing that all evil is Zionism. What I am saying is that much of what goes on, large and small, is part of a system (natural and contrived). For the most part we need to realize our limits within the natural system, and realize that contrived systems (political, social, international, cultural, economical) have structure underpinnings that create very complex interconnections that are or become dysfunctional. We are part of those connections. Sometimes the harder you push against the system the harder it pushes back. The faster you try to go, the slower you end up going. It’s observable. It’s not ideology. It is, drum roll, REALITY!

    Do you pay taxes? What do your taxes go to? Do you feel any connection between those payments and $3 billion that go to Israel or the trillions that go to sustain US military and economic world empire? Would not paying your taxes change the situation? How many others would it take to change the situation? If we all stopped paying our taxes would – the militia come out (as it as during the history of the US since its inception as a national government)? Or would it succumb to the “will” of the people? What is the right leverage point to constructively change the course of specific conditions?

    We can talk till we’re blue in the face about Zionism. Anybody can talk and blame this and that. Paranoia begins to take over and we’ve solved nothing. We simply trade fears.

    But your argument is much like what I’ve observed here, a kind of mythic guilt by association. First you introduce a character (Victor) and say that what ever I have to say is just like him, and by the way he’s been dead from the neck up for some time…

    It’s hard to take you seriously because your “arguments” are anything but serious. (Perhaps you’ll relate one of my posts to something your daddy said to you before he spanked you…that’s how ludicrous this pairing sounds).

  59. teafoe2 said on August 14th, 2010 at 12:17pm #

    Xam writes: “Is it really so crazy to ask: what if the world boycotted Israel, what would/could that lead to? Is that any different than had we asked: what if we escalated in Vietnam?”

    Yes, Xam, the above is so crazy I don’t see how even you could say something so idiotic.

    Of course it would be reasonable, if the idea of boycotting Izreal was completely new to you, to ask what such a boycott could lead to. But you present yourself as someone knowledgeable about public affairs; Chomsky is held out by the bulk of “progressive” media as the World’s Greatest Authority on I/P and ME issues. Palestinian Civil Society issued the call for BDS in 2005, so most of us have long ago weighed all the pros & cons. That Chomsky at this late date still insists on posing such a phony “question” proves to me that there’s something wrong with his head. Unless it’s really something wrong with his heart? Unless it’s the soft spot reserved their for “fellow jews”, no matter how criminal?

    Your second sentence is where things REALLY get crazy.

    There is no possible correspondence between the two questions you pose. The subjects of the two interrogatory sentences are completely different. And who the hell is “we”, for crysache? You can include yourself in the aggregate of those who had the power to escalate in Vietnam or not, if you want to. But don’t try to saddle me with it.

  60. Maien said on August 14th, 2010 at 12:22pm #

    Hey teafoe2 … I like that! “Xam”. I like a lot of what you say! And the Xam, is neat. I noticed or “feel” as if some of these comments come in sort of sideways and are set up to just breeze on through, blowing away some of the stench so that people stop thinking about the original issue. I call this a distraction.

  61. Max Shields said on August 14th, 2010 at 12:23pm #

    Maien said on August 14th, 2010 at 12:11pm #

    Actually what I do is to change where I am. But that is serious (and fun, and challenging and fatiguing). Here, I find the “chatter” to be complacent because it has “discovered” a simple answer to all of our problems and built all kinds of narratives around it. If, instead of Zionism, it was Zooba. And Zooba was an algae that took over the planet by conspiring with the water and air, I’d be saying pretty much the same thing I’m saying here – WE ARE ZOOBA; WE ARE THE ENEMY. Now what are we going to DO about it?

  62. Max Shields said on August 14th, 2010 at 12:33pm #

    Toefoe2 may you someday live in peace…but watch out for those Zoobas they’ll get ya!!!

    The comments, Maien, don’t come in sideways. But you do have to stay with it to catch on. Othewise you’re just breezing through, like you said.

  63. teafoe2 said on August 14th, 2010 at 12:48pm #

    Xam tries to sidestep what I said about his “systems view” by informing us that he’s never read The Nation.

    My mention of Navasky etc was just a little color commentary I threw in, thinking it might help some by illustrating what I was talking about. Most progressive activists, even if they detest The Nation & all it stands for, have at one time or another checked it out, if for no other reason that it’s still the number one “Left-Liberal” weekly publication, which millions of Democrats and some Greens read faithfully. Sorry Xam, I didn’t realize how much you’re devoid of curiousity, my bad.

    But Navasky & his mag are not the point. The point as I see it is this “systems approach” you and he both happen to espouse.

    He abolishes the Ruling Class from history; you want to wave your magical green wand and Poof: the ZPC vanishes from the scene, to be replaced by “complex systems”.

    This much makes sense: “…contrived systems (political, social, international, cultural, economical) have structure underpinnings that create very complex interconnections that are or become dysfunctional…”

    I should say it makes some sense up to a point. Your list of “systems” suffers from vagueness, “apples & oranges syndrome”, no reflection of the logical or/and material relationships between the items listed. But let’s look at your “structure underpinnings”.

    Well, you don’t identify any, nor do you trace any of the “interconnections” that you describe as “becoming dysfunctional”. So in the end all you offer is more generalities.

    BTW, if for you the “system” is just “becoming dysfunctional”, you’ve been living in a different system than most of us. For the people on the bottom, Capitalism has been “dysfunctional” from the jump, ever since they ran my forebears off the croft so they could run sheep on it. Ran the other side of the family off the farm so they’d have no choice but to dig coal “Down In The Mine”.

  64. teafoe2 said on August 14th, 2010 at 1:01pm #

    Xam posts: “Sometimes the harder you push against the system the harder it pushes back. The faster you try to go, the slower you end up going. It’s observable. It’s not ideology. It is, drum roll, REALITY!”

    As the banana core said to the apple peel as both were floating down the Blau Donau on a sunny Sunday afternoon, in the company of a loquacious cowpie who’d just said “Isn’t it wonderbar to be floating down this beautiful river on this schoen schoen Sunday afternoon?”…
    “Listen to that shit.”

    What Xam posts is pure scabology. Boss psychology: “Yes we’re screwing you but you can’t do a damn thing about it, so lay back & enjoy it”.

  65. Max Shields said on August 14th, 2010 at 1:06pm #

    teafoe2 mumble mumble mumble… are you talking to yourself again? who’s this XAM poster?

    It’s hard when you have to think rather than spout the obvious party lines. You’re just not up to it. Well it’s almost Monday and you’d best get ready for school.

  66. Don Hawkins said on August 14th, 2010 at 1:10pm #

    Boring this will not be in just a few years a little shift into second gear many groups out there and as we see no good so far as long as fossil fuels the cheapest way to produce energy they will be used. Why you ask money, power and orange chicken. I used a comma that is used to indicate a separation of ideas or of elements within the structure of a sentence. That’s why I don’t use them. Money power orange chicken they are one.

  67. teafoe2 said on August 14th, 2010 at 1:13pm #

    Advocating non-payment of Taxes is a favorite notion of rightwing crackpots, teapotters and Rethuglicans posing as “Libertarians”, who’ve been promoting “tax-strike” fantasies for decades. If it was going to work it would have worked by now.

    The main thing non-payment of taxes by individuals could accomplish is further defunding of public services. Yes a lot of people refused to pay taxes during Vietnam etc. But the effect was insignificant.

    So go ahead, refuse to pay all the taxes you can get away with, more power to you. I predict however the main result you’ll get is a visit from the IRS. Or a County Assessor’s notice put on your door by a deputy sheriff:)

    In reality this nonsense about not paying taxes amounts to the same thing as the “TOSCA” fantasy: a fantasy. It ain’t happening.

    Get Real:)

  68. Don Hawkins said on August 14th, 2010 at 1:28pm #

    Moneypowerorangechickenairconditionedtentsthinkoutsidetheboxinsomewaysmuchfasternogapstothetrainedeye

    And in Turkish
    aragüçportakaltavukklimalıçadırpekçokyöndenkutunundışındaçokdahahızlıeğitimligözehiçboşlukdüşünüyorum

  69. Don Hawkins said on August 14th, 2010 at 1:35pm #

    Bingo just tried to translate the Turkish back to English the computer would not let me do it. So who is still smarter me or the computer me.

  70. Deadbeat said on August 14th, 2010 at 2:23pm #

    “Xam” is Max spelled backward.

  71. Max Shields said on August 14th, 2010 at 2:29pm #

    And Deadbeat is teafoe2 spelled upside down. You are something with your multiple ids here on DV.

  72. Hue Longer said on August 14th, 2010 at 2:43pm #

    teafoe2 said on August 14th, 2010 at 1:13pm #
    “Advocating non-payment of Taxes is a favorite notion of rightwing crackpots, teapotters and Rethuglicans posing as “Libertarians”, who’ve been promoting “tax-strike” fantasies for decades. If it was going to work it would have worked by now.
    The main thing non-payment of taxes by individuals could accomplish is further defunding of public services. Yes a lot of people refused to pay taxes during Vietnam etc. But the effect was insignificant.
    So go ahead, refuse to pay all the taxes you can get away with, more power to you. I predict however the main result you’ll get is a visit from the IRS. Or a County Assessor’s notice put on your door by a deputy sheriff:)
    In reality this nonsense about not paying taxes amounts to the same thing as the “TOSCA” fantasy: a fantasy. It ain’t happening.
    Get Real:)”

    uh oh!

    DB? Questions, comments?

  73. Don Hawkins said on August 14th, 2010 at 2:45pm #

    In Seleucid and Parthian times, the astronomical reports were thoroughly scientific; how much earlier their advanced knowledge and methods were developed is uncertain. The Babylonian development of methods for predicting the motions of the planets is considered to be a major episode in the history of astronomy.
    The only Greek Babylonian astronomer known to have supported a heliocentric model of planetary motion was Seleucus of Seleucia (b. 190 BC).[17][18][19] Seleucus is known from the writings of Plutarch. He supported Aristarchus of Samos’ heliocentric theory where the Earth rotated around its own axis which in turn revolved around the Sun. According to Plutarch, Seleucus even proved the heliocentric system, but it is not known what arguments he used (except that he correctly theorized on tides as a result of Moon’s attraction).
    Babylonian astronomy served as the basis for much of Greek, classical Indian, Sassanian, Byzantine, Syrian, medieval Islamic, Central Asian, and Western European astronomy.[20]

    Mesopotamian religion was the first to be recorded. Mesopotamians believed that the world was a flat disc[citation needed], surrounded by a huge, holed space, and above that, heaven. They also believed that water was everywhere, the top, bottom and sides, and that the universe was born from this enormous sea. In addition, Mesopotamian religion was polytheistic.
    Although the beliefs described above were held in common among Mesopotamians, there were also regional variations. The Sumerian word for universe is an-ki, which refers to the god An and the goddess Ki. Their son was Enlil, the air god. They believed that Enlil was the most powerful god. He was the chief god of the Pantheon, equivalent to the Greek god Zeus and the Roman god Jupiter. The Sumerians also posed philosophical questions, such as: Who are we?, Where are we?, How did we get here?. They attributed answers to these questions to explanations provided by their gods.

  74. Hue Longer said on August 14th, 2010 at 2:52pm #

    wrong Max….DB has had polite interchanges with teafoe2 concerning differences with Glen Ford and that last post flies in the face of everything non Ziocentric DB stands for except for not paying child support. They will still happily hold hands because even though your views with DB or even T42 may be closer on given issues than they are between them, your inability to disregard everything but Zionism concerning the world’s woes will not get them to see any similarity with you—even when it comes to denouncing Zionism.

  75. Deadbeat said on August 14th, 2010 at 2:55pm #

    TF2 writes …

    If you’ve ever actually participated in the class struggle at the grassroots/rank&file level, you know how important the leadership factor is. Ideology when internalized by masses of people becomes a material force. The existence of the Zionist State and its continued defense by most US Jews and their allies/flunkeys proves that to be a fact.

    Great insight. Both Max and Bozh (when he was here on DV) formulated ludicrous talking points against ideology. Such rhetoric, especially used by Max, conflated Capitalism and Socialism as “ideologies” concluding that both should be rejected on that basis. This bit of sophisticated rhetoric is really designed to refute Socialism as an idea that dissidents need in order to provide answers. The net effect of this anti-Ideology rhetoric maintains the status quo.

    In this current environment many people are being told that we “need to all get along”. Knowing that Socialism may incite a reactionary backlash the tendency is to reject ideology so as to not ruffle feathers.

    Ideology lays the basis for movements and is desperately needed in order to become that material force for change.

  76. Deadbeat said on August 14th, 2010 at 3:07pm #

    Hue Longer writes …

    uh oh!
    DB? Questions, comments?

    What’s your point?

  77. Deadbeat said on August 14th, 2010 at 3:27pm #

    Hue Longer writes …

    wrong Max….DB has had polite interchanges with teafoe2 concerning differences with Glen Ford and that last post flies in the face of everything non Ziocentric DB stands for except for not paying child support. They will still happily hold hands because even though your views with DB or even T42 may be closer on given issues than they are between them, your inability to disregard everything but Zionism concerning the world’s woes will not get them to see any similarity with you—even when it comes to denouncing Zionism.

    [1] I have never advocate not paying child support.
    I am AGAINST “child support” because that is not what it is. It is PARENTAL PECUNIARY. It has nothing to do with the support of children. First off real child support cannot exist in Capitalism but even so if you want child support then people would have access to free housing, transportation, education, health care, food, clothing, clean water, good pay, recreation, etc. Those are thing that provide child support.

    [2] [Tf2 & DB] will still happily hold hands because even though [Max Shields] views with DB or even T42 may be closer on given issues than they are between them.

    That’s incorrect. On the key issues Max Shield’s views are in divergence.

    [1] While Max has progressive views regarding Israel on the matter of American Jewish Zionism we are pole apart.

    [2]We are poles apart regarding the corruption of the Left by both professionalism and Zionism.

    [3] On the importance of Marxism especially as a way to learn, understand, and articulate the current crisis we are poles apart.

    [4] Max belittles the importance of ideology which is vital for movement.

    The main causes of strife in the United States today are the control of her political economy by both Zionism and Capitalism. I welcome your comments if believe otherwise and please enumerate what you think the causes might be. Perhaps you can add some REAL insight to this discussion.

    thx
    DB

  78. Max Shields said on August 14th, 2010 at 5:59pm #

    Hue Longer excellent observation. The DB/teafoe2 thing has almost nothing to do with what I post. One must swear allegiance to anti-zionism and resoundingly prounouce it the only EVIL in the world ad nauseum, and that anything the USA has ever done (or will do) was/is Zionist inspired and coerced (George Washington was a tool of Zionists, don’t ya know); and that Americans are just plain dumb and must be led by the nose by Zionists. To question this, is to question the holy grail. One must never do this. There is no topic which has not been conspired by Zionists and if you are not a Zionist it’s because you don’t want us to believe that you are, but you are….

    Hence this loving “friendship” between two posters who either can’t read or refuse to believe that what one posts is what one wishes to say.

    Take teapots, sorry teafoe2, last note on my remark about taxes. I used it as a thought experiment and he doesn’t EVEN see it. He rambles on about rightwing nuts not wanting to pay taxes. This teapot sees Max Shields and he just types away, mindlessly. It’s hilarious.

  79. Max Shields said on August 14th, 2010 at 6:22pm #

    Deadbeat it is your lack of clarity when you talk about the “Left”. There have been many posters who, after noting your relentless bashing of this thing you call the “American Left” would ask: Who exactly are you talking about? Is it what the media calls the left? Is it the wishy-washy liberals, is it an anti-war group? Who do you have in mind? I don’t recall ever reading an answer to those inquiries. Deadbeat would just go on and on about this “Left” being the reason for the ills of the USA. And then he’d go on and on about how the US was not an empire, not imperialists, that only Chomskyites believed that nonsense. And then he’d never fail to interject Chomskyites into all his posts regardless of the main topic. He was determining who, here, was a Chomskyite…who followed Chomsky and believed every word of Chomsky. There have been a few who spoke well of Chomsky, but I never read any fervent “believer” in Chomsky on DV, never.

    Even when someone would criticize certain postions Chomsky has had (such as moi), that was not enough for Deadbeat. No, if you don’t despise Chomsky than you’re a Chomskyite. If you think America is an empire than you are a Chomskyite. If you think that the US started all these wars than you are a Chomskyite. If you think that neoliberalism is at fault for the assasinations of democratically elected officials in developing nations, than you are a Chomskyite.

    As far as ideology goes…we differ. Important but hardly an irrational stand to have opposing positions on whether ideology serves transformational movements or not.

    The real issue with Deadbeat is the irrationality of his arguments. Whether his child support issues play into his world view, or he’s turned Capitalism into his enemy not because he’s found a real solution, but because he sees it as a personal problem, I really don’t know. I sense less cogency and more of a simplistic viewpoint, a single enemy to wrap his mind around and focus his attention: Zionism. We all know the ills of this fanatical ideology, such as it is or has become…but for Deadbeat it is the ONE and ONLY EVIL. He scours Black Agenda to see how frequently Glen Ford uses the word Zionism. Sees it rarely mentioned…could Glen Ford be a…no..heaven forbid…yes he could be a Chomskyite…no way…perhaps.

    What we’ve gathered on DV of late is less critical thinking, and more shallow detailed pedants who seem to lack the essential ability to put together an argument without copying wikipedia. Thoughtless Wikipedia “EXPERTS”.

  80. teafoe2 said on August 14th, 2010 at 6:52pm #

    And here we have Xam erecting more strawmen, putting more words in my mouth, expecting me to read his mind and EVEN understand that when he says something he meant something else.

    Let me ask Xam to post a quote where I said “Zionism is the only evil in the world” or anything close to that.

    Lissen Xam, and anybody who finds his BS plausible, the reason that I focus on the Palestine/Isreal issue is that it is so intimately connected to the problem of Power in the US-based, Zionist-controlled nearly all-encompassing globalized militarist empire.

    Yes, the Palestinians are suffering incredibly under the Zionist bootheel. At the same time, the Mexican economy has been destroyed by NAFTA and other US actions, forcing millions to try to make it across the border to El Norte in hopes of finding a way to survive.

    Something like half of all US Black males between sixteen and fortyfive are in the clutches of the “Justice” system.

    Colombians are caught in the crossfire between a vicious US-sponsored Counterinsurgency campaign and equally vicious narcotics gangs. Which is to over simplify the Colombiano’s predicament, which includes widespread hunger, lack of medical care, etc etc.

    In Bangladesh the population somehow continues to endure a nightmare, except it is real.

    Jump to Sri Lanka: anyone like to volunteer to spend next week in the shoes of a Tamil?

    Myanmar anyone? Anybody been to Timor lately? Or Aceh?

    Heard any plausible lies recently about Darfur? Eastern DRP? How’d you like to be a Black coalminer in “liberated” South Africa? Or a “nomadic pastoralist” in the Sahel?

    What if somebody waved a magic wand and turned you Presto Chango into a Pi ku ni in a shack on the outskirts of Browning?

    Little old white ladies dying of cancer in suburban “rest homes” are also suffering.

    Totally innocent gentle cows are being led to the slaughterhouses every hour of every day. Just shut your eyes for a second and turn off the babble of words bubbling up from your brain: if you listen you can hear them screaming.

    I could go on listing instances of evil for quite a while. The point I’m making is this, Xam: I’m at least as aware of all the other instances of evil on the planet besides what’s being done to the Palestinians as you are, and probably more so, since I’m not as locked into a jive whitebread “Eco-Libertarian” mindset as you are.

    As I said, the reason the ZPC is the prime focus right now is the fact that has managed to take over a majority interest in the US imperialist system. The ZPC, or perhaps more precisely the Judonean State Apparatus, is now in control of the US State and all its branches, Financial, Military-Political, and Ideological.

    (“Judonea” is a term some scholarly observers have adopted which enables them to refer to the ZPC in the US and the Zionist Entity in the ME by one word. It’s compounded from the Latin “iud”(aeus) and the name by which the former Commonwealth of Poland and Lithuania was most often known in non-Slavic languages, “Polonia”. It was in Polonia that European Jewry enjoyed its Golden Age.I find the term convenient and descripive.)

  81. teafoe2 said on August 14th, 2010 at 7:11pm #

    The point Xam can’t get through his hardhead is POWER.

    POWER and the abuse of same is why DB, myself, Jeff B, Jas Petras, Idrees at Pulse Media, Philip Weiss at Mondoweiss, Hatem Bazian, Grant Smith and others focus on the ZPC. (If anybody is uncertain what social/economic/political Power is, check the dictionary).

    As people who have been trying to understand who is running US Capitalism for most of our adult lives, and how they’re doing it, our attention flows to where Power is concentrated. To the locus of effective decision-making, to who/what determines the allocation of resources, when to set what forces of production in motion and when to keep them idle, what dollar amounts to allot to socially useful programs like foodstamps and unemplyment insurance, and what amounts go to the support of military adventures, including those launched by the IOF.

    Let me pull your coat, Xam: the US political process is not a total mystery. Yes they keep things as opaque and confusing as they can, but those of us who’ve made it a priority to try to understand it have been able to observe many prominent features of it.

    Maybe if you’d spent more of your career carefully observing and studying the US political process you’d have a better idea what’s going on, and wouldn’t waste your time making so many ridiculous charges.

    “Henry George”:) Hahaha:)))

  82. Hue Longer said on August 14th, 2010 at 8:37pm #

    I’ll address this to T42 since DB is hiding…

    T42, Your rant about non taxpayers was directed at Max but I’m tellin ya DB is that “crackpot” you describe. it begs why he will no doubt be given a pass for being part of “rightwing crackpots, teapotters and Rethuglicans posing as “Libertarians”, who’ve been promoting “tax-strike” fantasies for decades”.

    Ask him about not paying taxes and if you find some kind of gentlemanly disagreement after saying all that shit about him, why is it you can’t do this for someone who has less differences with you than that concerning Zionism? Anti Zionism really looks like a religion with you guys. I should put “Anti Zionism” in quotes because you do a disservice to Anti Zionism by not being logically principled against it…rather it smells of justifying emotional agenda with dishonest reason

  83. Don Hawkins said on August 15th, 2010 at 3:33am #

    If you go to Google and type in climate bill well I saw only one article from Houston climate change alarmists ignore scientific method. Then went to just climate change a few articles. George Orwell or Aldous Huxley if alive today and given a few day’s to take a look would both probably just say, ah ha. How about Galileo if he could see this?
    http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/sxi/goes14/latest.html

    Let’s see Galileo and house arrest but today what Orwell and Huxley wrote about has happened sort of and no need to put say James Hansen or Lovelock on house arrest no no no the system has put all our minds under house arrest. How about the human’s who think they run the system they know so there minds are not under arrest wrong that little prison for the mind they are right at the top. This is amazing to see and hear and a secret never forget always’ remember the system makes it so easy to forget at least for a few more years. I think many of us know what’s coming down the tract and just here in the States the change over oh crap, what happens to the wide-eyed observer when the window between reality and unreality breaks and the glass begins to fly? Then of course this part, our amazing intelligence seems to have outstripped our instinct for survival. We plunder the earth hoping that accumulating material surplus will make up for the profound, unfathomable thing that we have lost. Arundhati Roy

    I started a new paragraph feels strange but what the heck and the accumulating material surplus will make up for the profound, unfathomable thing that we have lost and when the accumulating material surplus is no more or at best ruff to say the least what system will we see? I guess like Lovelock said we human’s are active animals and climate change is way to complex for our little bit bigger brains. Try the orange chicken it’s all the rage I hear.

  84. Don Hawkins said on August 15th, 2010 at 9:30am #

    Here in the States the part that for a few minutes is amazing to watch is so called leaders from business and so called leaders in Washington get on TV and talk there pathetic line of bullshit with the elections coming in November that prison for the mind will be in full gear. How many know what would have to be done to make a real try probably most but who stands up none. Why is this the case because they are wimps that’s why they are afraid of being real you mean they are not real no they are not 100% pure unadulterated illusion it makes them who they are. How do these so called leaders in there many shapes and sizes say that oh that’s right respectfully disagree yes respectfully disagreeing over illusion of knowledge better known as bullshit. If we go outside there’s dirt, trees, the Sun, the Stars but the few have managed in there attempt at fame and fortune to help us forget about the real world it’s just better that way. Just on the off chance now at 100% again the change over will not be boring. It’s Sunday am trying to keep it light or is that lite on the new and improved weight loss system. If you would have let us drill in Alaska we wouldn’t have had the oil spill? The Democratic party is the people’s party. The reason we went into Iraq was WMD’s. Coal is our friend. Social security should be privatized. The human mind should be privatized and don’t forget to sign up for my new’s letter buy my new book and have you seen my new extreme account. Fox New’s is fair and balanced and CNN is in search of the truth. Oh don’t forget to buy the new handy dandy plastic thing call call now no shipping and handling and you can have another one for just shipping and handling in the greatest nation on Earth I almost forgot don’t raise the tax’s on the wealthy as the tide raises all boats. I should stop before I get myself in trouble. Climate change could be a problem in 100 years the Earth is 8 thousand years old but who really knows for sure? It’s up to us our choice. The tide raising all boat’s is a good one.

  85. Max Shields said on August 15th, 2010 at 9:44am #

    Hue, again you’re on point. But we’ve smoked out our teafoe2.

    Hi dan e. You gave it away with the Henry George note. Only dan e was around during the Henry George “discussions”. teafoe2 just appeared under 2 months ago.

    Honest discourse at least requires consistency with whom one is “speaking to”.

  86. teafoe2 said on August 15th, 2010 at 10:44am #

    dear Xam: you’re jumping to conclusions again. let me repeat on of “dan e”s favorite expressions: Assume Nothing:)

    What makes you assume that everybody who reads DV also posts comments?

    Hooey Longer characterizes my statement re the “tax strike” scam as a “rant”, so why shouldn’t I describe his post as a pile of pointless dogdoo?

    DB and I agree on many things, especially the big things. We also disagree on a number of points. Similarly I found many of dan e’s posts really superb, others less so.

    So you youngsters go ahead and keep trying to bolster your wounded egos by making wisecracks. Anytime you’re ready to say something relevant to the issues I’ll read it. hohum.

  87. teafoe2 said on August 15th, 2010 at 11:00am #

    Hooey L. writes: “Anti Zionism really looks like a religion with you guys. I should put “Anti Zionism” in quotes because you do a disservice to Anti Zionism by not being logically principled against it…rather it smells of justifying emotional agenda with dishonest reason”

    Okay, Hooey, let’s see you post an example of what you call “dishonest reason”.
    Your argument “smells” to me very much like the familiar Zionist tactic of labelling opposition to Isreali racism and police-state aggression as being “anti-Semitic fanatacism”.

    It seems neither you or Xam can come up with a rational-sounding rebuttal to anything I’ve said, so you resort to claiming to read my mind, to knowing my emotional state, to be able to shrinkify what’s in my head without every seeing it.

    Why don’t you point out why my facts are incorrect, or where the conclusions I draw don’t logically follow?

    I challenge you both: put up or shut up.

  88. Max Shields said on August 15th, 2010 at 11:15am #

    dan e / teafoe2 we haven’t heard from dan e since you’ve come on the seen, and the last time he made mention of Henry George was well before you got here.

    Even XAM or calling Hue “Hooey” is the kind of twist dan e would come up with. Not very inventive…but that’s dan e. You’ve been found out dan e. Come on honesty will set you free.

  89. teafoe2 said on August 15th, 2010 at 11:21am #

    hohum. nothing about about anything political. hohum.

    what’s in a name? bs by anyname would smell as sweet. it doesn’t matter who said it, if it’s wrong it’s wrong, and if it’s correct it bothers the hell out of you. Why?

  90. teafoe2 said on August 15th, 2010 at 11:24am #

    this bears repeating: “Ideology lays the basis for movements and is desperately needed in order to become that material force for change.”

  91. Hue Longer said on August 15th, 2010 at 11:47am #

    T42,

    You hide now by claiming I am? I’m beginning to doubt you are an old man…this is romper room stuff, mate

    Your narrow, monomaniacal fascination with Zionism is big and everything else is small? Tell that to DB who you just referred to as one of the “rightwing crackpots, teapotters and Rethuglicans posing as “Libertarians”, who’ve been promoting “tax-strike” fantasies for decades”.

    DB, I actually applaud your message to the black bloc guy about violence…the one where you schooled him on how that benefits the state and suggested rather that he organize to not pay taxes. But you will still saddle up to this clown because as he said, “DB and I agree on many things, especially the big things. We also disagree on a number of points” ?

    Yep, a religion

  92. Max Shields said on August 15th, 2010 at 12:10pm #

    dan e (aka teafoe2) it helps to clear the “air”.

    Ideology can be as simply as believing in something that decides or pre-determines your worldview. So in that broad sense almost any method or anti-method could be considered an ideology. But that would make the term “ideology” meaningless (if it is everything it is paradoxically nothing).

    So, to put a finer point to it: ideology is an embraced worldview that sets up pre-conditions for discussing problems and solutions. To explain this we’ll use a simple example: the difference between science and scientism. One implies a narrow use of a method which does not impinge on ones worldview, the latter is a worldview that says only the natural sciences and it’s methods of discovery determines reality; that there can be no spirituality, and all views of the world must adhere to the laws of natural science. [This is ONLY an EXAMPLE, not a take off on spirituality or scientism.]

    On the other hand, looking at the world as a mix of natural and contrived complex dynamic systems could be a ideology IF it is considered the ONLY way to view the world. I know of no purveyors of systems thinking who have no place for science, or, in general, economics, or spirituality, etc.

    Looking at the world as a set of nonlinear systems (natural and contrived) does not deny Zionism. Zionism is an ideology. It pre-determines a view of the world. However as a ideology Zionism is subsumed within a larger context of complex dynamic systems. It functions within a series of feedback loops that leads to this action and that. Changing behavior is not about attacking or eradicating the ideology, but finding a leaverage point by which to shift and replace feedbacks that feed into the behavior you want to eliminate. Divestiture and boycotting Israel, for instance, should be considered as a possible leverage point. But it should not be considered without playing out the other influences that could lead to a situation for the Palestinians which is counterproductive (murderous?). Check out the First Law of Thermodynamics sometime.

    I’ve read little by other posters or commentators on DV about what “we’re”
    really looking for beyond vague terms like Justice, Peace, Fairness…ok. If we settled on a single-state solution as the only practical solution for Is/Pal, than what would that look like. One could conjure a Zionist dominated state with Palestinians as second class citizens; or the reverse or a blended government and life style that would achieve a normal stasis and one would hope Justice, Peace, Fairness. We all own the outcome in some way. Would an international boycott provide that solution? Or would it somehow postpone it, exasperate a resolution by creating deeper divides?

    The same can be said about Capitalism. It is easy and loose talk to say that the problem when it is not purely Zionism is Capitalism and the solution is the eradication of both replaced by a Marxism or Socialism. How does that world look given what we know of human nature? Do we eliminate the pathologies of dysfunctional complex dynamic systems when Marxism/Socialism is the new world order? I would argue NO.

  93. teafoe2 said on August 15th, 2010 at 12:13pm #

    Hooey, where did I claim you are hiding?

    But yes, I’m hiding… from the goddam Zionist hackers who fucked my computer up so bad I had to get another one, and the Standwithus goons who published my picture on their website, after threatening me with physical harm when they showed up at an anti-AIPAC demo I helped organize. That’s why I’ve never used my real name on these Online Forums. Why make it easy for them?

    But you and your nitwit petty bourgeois pal Xam can’t think of anything better to do with your idle hours than to try to do the JDL’s job for them. In the labor movement there’s a word for guys like you two: FINKS.

  94. Max Shields said on August 15th, 2010 at 12:24pm #

    Finally to “answer” the contention that movements need ideology…perhaps…but do movements really create change? Or is it incidently? It is arguable that all of the protests and movements of the 1960s had anything significant to do with the end of the Vietnam war. All wars end out of sheer depletion of energy and resources. Are we to ignore that fact? That’s the normal course for a system. Push/Pull, Escalate/De-escalate.

    Some here have argued that WWII actually ended the Great Depression not the New Deal (unless entering WWII was part of FDR’s New Deal program?). Is it because it reduced population (young males) by sending them off to war, killing 1/2 million or so? Or because national funds were poured into the war machine? Or because the US was untouched and became a center for building much of the world’s economy? Or all and more?

    As I said earlier, (with some kind of ridicule from one of the anti-Chomsky crowd), when confronting a system, the system can push back with equal and greater force. It is not because the system is an enemy or that there is some guy behind the curtain pulling the strings. It happens all the time and there’s absolutely NO ideology involved. You want to save the starving, so you feed them, they live and population grows and starvation increases…this can be seen time and time again.

    Not everything is about Marxism and contortionists ideologies. Capitalism is not monolithic and it does all true believers in a better world a dis-service to not look critically and holistically at a complext dynamic world.

  95. Max Shields said on August 15th, 2010 at 12:30pm #

    dan e / teafoe2 you are a dishonest commentor. Not because you are hidding, but because you make comments like: “In the labor movement there’s a word for guys like you two: FINKS.”

    This kind of comment is not only inflamatory, but it is utterly unrelated to anything stated by me. No one here is a FINK; and so this is the kind of “argument” that is not just bogus but unintelligent.

    Sorry for your run in with AIPAC…not sure what that has to do with not using dan e…but…ahhh wellll.

  96. Don Hawkins said on August 15th, 2010 at 12:56pm #

    Max maybe this will help. Suppose your house burns down that is also your business and your business at the time the house burned down was on the edge of the abyss would it be better to have insurance or because your business was on the abyss you bet the farm and no insurance hoping it wouldn’t happen? To make it even more clear a forest fire was about 10 yards from your house at the time came to decide about insurance or not and the fire chief was at your door saying the wind has a 100% chance of moving in your direction. Your business was selling little plastic things to Americans made in China and the adds were already paid and you had a cocaine habit so at the end of the day you have the clothes on your back a pair of alligator shoes on no boot’s and your neighbors you owe money to are walking down Elm street toward’s you and want there money because there house also just burned down and the lake just went dry.

  97. Don Hawkins said on August 15th, 2010 at 1:17pm #

    We shall require a substantially new manner of thinking if humanity is to survive.

    So far of course is an old manner of thinking and in the twenty first century let’s add madness in for good measure. Am 20% in stock’s and 30% bond’s and 50% cash, oh goody.

  98. teafoe2 said on August 15th, 2010 at 1:37pm #

    Okay, Xam is trying to offer something resembling rational argument. I don’t care what he want’s to call me. I myself usually address people by however they choose to identify themselves, but since Xam and Hooey insist on getting personal, claiming to read minds etc, in their cases I’ve decided to just call ‘em the way I see ‘em.

    But since Xam presents a series of words which have the general appearance of an attempt to think rationally, let’s check them out:

    Xam begins with a disquisition purporting to supply us with the meaning of the term “Ideology”.

    Which is a word with at least four meanings, according to Webster. It can be used loosely, less loosely as applying solely to political thoughts/attitudes, or rigorously, as applied by Althusser et al to denote political thought which falls short of scientific rigor.

    In my opinion a better word for what DB was referring to is “Theory”, but I’ll leave it to him to define what HE meant. When I reposted the quote what I had in mind was more like “theory” which implies at least an attempt to engage in systematic thinking incorporating at least the very basic notion of logic and a conscientious attempt to verify facts before asserting their validity.

    But you continue to use “ideology” so let’s stick with that, far as possible anyway. I have no problem with the rest of the generalities you offer on the nature of ideology, except that they are so general as to be meaningless.

    But later you say: “Zionism is an ideology”. This is at best a half-truth. Zionism is much more than something in people’s heads or verbal expression of same.

    Zionism is a structure, which includes a web of human relationships and also a collossal inventory of non-human items including real estate; and also it is a set of practices, which are ongoing but have left traces in the historical record accurately describable as a trail of wreckage and felonies.

    So when we talk of Zionism, we are not talking about something that exists in the realm of ideas or of leisurely intellectual discussion. We are talking about people with the capacity to exert armed force against other people. Which they have exerted ever since they acquired a fraction of the capacity they now possess, and which they continue to use every day, against Palestinians and also against anybody else who annoys them.

    Your failure to identify Zionism as anything but an “ideology” leads you into another series of errors:
    “However as a ideology Zionism is subsumed within a larger context of complex dynamic systems.”

    If we replace your misidentification of Zionism as a phenomenon confined to the symbolic realm, and just read the rest of your sentence: “Zionism is subsumed within a larger context of complex dynamic systems”, dotz vat I bin tollink you:)

    Zionism, both as an Ideology and as an Entity existing in the three-dimensional world, does in fact exist “within a larger context of complex dynamic systems” known as Capitalism, Colonialism, Racism, Militarism, nation-states enjoying various degrees of effective sovereignty, multinational corporations enjoying similar status, networks of extended and allied Old Families, etc etc.

    But to me this next is pure gobbledygook:

    “It functions within a series of feedback loops that leads to this action and that. Changing behavior is not about attacking or eradicating the ideology, but finding a leaverage point by which to shift and replace feedbacks that feed into the behavior you want to eliminate.”

    Please explain what you mean by “feedback loops”, and how they’re connected to the Zionist entity’s decision making elite?

    Do you seriously mean to maintain that exposing Zionist mythology and the kind of pro-Izzy falsehoods the US public is inundated with daily plays no useful role in the struggle against these neo-fascists and their murderous militarized “Entity”?

    The first thing the Palestinians I met after expressing to a local Iranian student my amazement that none of the “progressive” outfits I’d just mobilized into a coalition to support some African American families being terrorized by some Nazi-KKK types in a nearby town had done or said ANYTHING at all about the Israeli invasion of Lebanon that had just taken place — the first thing these Palestinian students did was put in my hands a booklet entitled “Our Roots Are Still Alive” which provided a capsule history of the I/P conflict and an exposure of crap like Leon Uris’ “Exodus” which until then I’d assumed had some connection to reality.

    Next they set up a mini-library in my so-called “office” containing an assortment of scholarly books by people like Naseer Aruri, Ibrahim Abu-Lughod, Rabbi Elmer Berger, Israel Shahak, Hilton Obenzinger, Louise Cainkar, Ralph Schoenman, Rashid & Walid Khalidi, Rochelle Tekiner, Lee O’Brien, Lenni Brenner, plus pamphlets and booklets from EAFORD, If Americans Knew, and similar sources.

    It was only after reading several of these that I began to grasp how much Zionist ideology I’d previously accepted uncritically. I began to understand why certain Jewish friends of mine, including the guy who was Best Man at my recent wedding, had some kind of strange attitude about Arabs, why they’d made such a big deal about going to a gardenparty gathering where Mohamed Mehdi was speaking, why they were so gleeful about their plan to bait him, and why he handled their loaded questions with such ease.

    No, exposing Zionist propaganda and internalized pro-Izzy ideology is one important task in the overall anti-Racism/anti-Empire struggle. Not the only one, but a key task.

  99. Don Hawkins said on August 15th, 2010 at 1:44pm #

    I just heard a man on Fox New’s say we need to look at the market the economy from a historical perspective. Ok go back 50 years or maybe 100 years no go back about 2,000 years should cover it then of course 15,788 years comes to mind or 2.1 million if bold. The we need to look at the market the economy from a historical perspective was said after Fox New’s showed the worst flooding in Pakistani history and the Russian wheat harvest, strange.

  100. teafoe2 said on August 15th, 2010 at 2:38pm #

    Xam, it’s totally obvious why you and hooey started this business about my alias: you’re trying to bait me into disclosing enough information that your ZPC handlers can pass it to some freelance JDL types & encourage them to pay me a visit. Sorry, no cigar, might as well give it up, I’m not buying any.

    If it talks like a fink and it acts like a fink, it’s a fink.

  101. teafoe2 said on August 15th, 2010 at 2:47pm #

    except when it’s regurgitating ancient Malthusian justifications for genocide: ” You want to save the starving, so you feed them, they live and population grows and starvation increases…this can be seen time and time again.”

    This is the same crap the Brits peddled in the 1850′s to justify letting Irish children starve when there was plenty of wheat in Brit warehouses right there in Ireland. Wow, you’re a more coldblooded SOB than I realized. wow.

  102. Max Shields said on August 15th, 2010 at 2:48pm #

    Yep it’s dan e. Same old nonsensical response. Now that we’ve discovered who this teafoe2 “is”…he’s become the old dan e…a bit disturbed. Usually dan e doesn’t stick around this long (at least not under that “name”). The jig is up, old dan e boy.

    FINK, dan e, you STINK (:

  103. teafoe2 said on August 15th, 2010 at 2:52pm #

    Xam says: “All wars end out of sheer depletion of energy and resources”. Wrong. Most wars end when one side runs out of energy and resources, while the other basks in triumph and ill-gotten gains.

    Have you ever looked into Palestinian history? Or Native American Indan history?

  104. teafoe2 said on August 15th, 2010 at 3:02pm #

    Just because the Capitalist system is not YOUR enemy doesn’t mean I have to like it: “It is not because the system is an enemy or that there is some guy behind the curtain pulling the strings.”

    There you go, more Navaskyism, trying to provide cover for the capitalist rulingclass. I never said anything about “some guy behind the curtain”. It’s not one guy, it’s a bunch of them, and they’re not behind a curtain, they’re behind a bunch of blather spouted by dummies like you who buy into some variation of capitalist/zionist mythology.

    They’re hiding in plain sight, behind Chomsky/Finkelstein/Zunes/Hammond/Green and a mass of jerks like you.

  105. teafoe2 said on August 15th, 2010 at 3:06pm #

    Since you can’t come up with any political arguments, you resort to your longstanding MO: get personal. Make a big deal about “who Tfoe is really”. Good old red herring tactic. hohum.

  106. teafoe2 said on August 15th, 2010 at 3:17pm #

    re the topic Zionism, Xam offers this: “It functions within a series of feedback loops that leads to this action and that. Changing behavior is not about attacking or eradicating the ideology, but finding a leaverage point by which to shift and replace feedbacks that feed into the behavior you want to eliminate.”

    The above is what happens when some privileged sob thinks he’s so smart he doesn’t need to study politics, political theory or political history, that all he needs is the smattering of Systems Theory he came across in a Computer Engineering class, plus the smattering of pseudo-scientific jargon picked up in freshman Psych 101.

    So I guess we’re supposed to change IOF “behavior” by psyching them out with a bunch of touchy-feely tiedyed garbage left over from Haight Ashbury?

    If that’s not it, what are you really saying? What course do you think is better than the Palestinians and the worldwide Palestine Solidarity movement came up with after years of discussion and internal struggle?

  107. Max Shields said on August 15th, 2010 at 3:18pm #

    dan e (let’s just drop the teafoe2 diversion) you must lead a lonely life you’ve got to multiple yourself with new “names” on DV. There’s got to be 3 or 4 (not counting you’re multiplication by division maneuver) in the whole world. You come here on DV and make it appear we’ve got a band of merry anti-whatever (is it Chomsky or Zionism today?).

    A little too much reading dan e, and not enough thinking. A little too much anger and not enough patience to understand. You are a lesson in how not to think through to solve a problem. How’s it going for you in the real world dan e boy? Does your method work for you out there? Me thinks not.

    Wonder if Deadbeat knows who he’s been josting with over the last month or so…I’m sure he’s disappointed to find that it’s just dan e come back as teapot or is it teabag.

    Now he is this Patrick fellow? There just can’t be that many fools out there. His comments soundly strangely familiar. Total disingenuous. He like to play little games of minutia to pull you in. Not really into anything in particular but like to think he can “win” an argument. Doubt he’d fair well in a face to face debate where is bluff and jiving would be called out and transparent to all.

    One day when dan e flies away like a big bird, may be DV can begin to collect some insightful discussion. First the pollution must dissipate.

  108. Max Shields said on August 15th, 2010 at 3:22pm #

    by the way, dan e, in case you notice, the spelling errors on my part are just an indication of how serious I take you…hardly worth a spell check to respond to you.

    Max Shields (:

  109. teafoe2 said on August 15th, 2010 at 4:07pm #

    Hurray! phinkoxam said something that actually is true: “Capitalism is not monolithic.”

    Congratulations, you got that much right. However the truth contained in the proposition is obscured and rendered meaningless by the silliness preceding and following.

    But let’s talk for a moment about the “non-monolithic” nature of the current power cum capital accumulation structure/process.

    Up to WWII and for a time after, the US capitalist system and society was dominated by a hegemonic network of WASPs, mostly heirs of the industrial age Robber Barons such as the five Rockefeller brothers. This group, who often referred to themselves or/and each other as “Our Sort” (not “our crowd”, that’s a Jewish usage) for decades if not centuries controlled Wall St, the Ivy League colleges, and by dint of untiring efforts of the senior Rockefeller brother John D III, controlled most of publishing and other facets of the capitalist ideological apparatus.

    But in the late sixties and early seventies, coinciding with the end of “Great Society” optimism, Vietnam-induced “malaise” and reaching a crescendo with the OPEC oil embargo, another group of capitalists with very different antecedents and ideological biases began to challenge the “Our Sort” WASPs and the Rockefellers for dominance of intra-capitalism institutions and ideology.

    Most of the new bunch were based in the South and Western regions of the US, notably Texas where the Hunt family ruled the roost, Colorado where the Coors family ran things, and the Phoenix area. The Boeing interests in Seattle, having taken over local leadership from the still powerful Weyerhauser clan based in timber-harvesting, threw its weight behind the “new emerging forces”, as did a few Old Family heirs like Richard Mellon Scaife and the Poindexter family of Baltimore, Centennial Energy, Johns Hopkins and the US Navy.

    So this made for a fairly even balance of forces on each side. Contention in the Competition/Collaboration mode continued for some years, until a new factor entered the equation: the Israeli Fifth Column.

    The addition of the US “Jewish Community”, billionaire division, to the “Cowboy” side tipped the balance decisely in the cowboy side’s favor. But there was a joker in the deck: no sooner had the Rockefellers and allies been relegated to second place in the scheme of things, than the ZPC pushed the Cowboys out of the top spot. But the Cowboys were allowed to survive in relatively good shape, and having accepted their role as Junior Partners in the Zionist/Cowboy axis, continue to enjoy their present status.

    Failure to account for the “Cowboys” and their support for/role in the hegemonic ZPC setup is, IMO, a major weakness in much contemporary criticism of the ZPC and its control of the US War & Occupation Machine.

    There’s a lot of published research on the Cowboy faction, the Hunts, Coors, Boeing/Scoop Jackson, R M Scaife et al. If you can’t find sources to validate the hypothesis offered above, let me know. I’m sure I can locate an abundance of them.

  110. teafoe2 said on August 15th, 2010 at 4:13pm #

    dear finko-xam: piss on yr ball head & watch it russ:)

  111. Deadbeat said on August 15th, 2010 at 4:14pm #

    Tf2 writes …

    Why don’t [Xam & Hooey] you point out why my facts are incorrect, or where the conclusions I draw don’t logically follow?

    In all this time I can’t recall Hue presenting facts or bring some logical perspective to the table for consideration. I’m still waiting for Hue to bring his views other than what I have outlined here as major issues facing the USA.

    On the BIG issues I’m in full agreement with Tf2. What Hue is trying to do is to inflate the small areas of disagreement between TF2 and myself in order to create a wedge and diminish the big areas of agreement that both Max and him and many on the “Left” sidestep.

    IMO The biggest issues facing the United States TODAY are Zionism and Capitalism. Both are immense problems but as TF2 writes …

    Zionism is a structure, which includes a web of human relationships and also a colossal inventory of non-human items including real estate; and also it is a set of practices, which are ongoing but have left traces in the historical record accurately describable as a trail of wreckage and felonies.

    Saying that I feel that Zionism is the more pressing of the two. The reason why Zionism more so than Capitalism and what TF2 wrote is equally applicable to Capitalism is that Zionism goes relatively unmentioned by The Left. Even a Marxist can get an audience but trying being an anti-ZPC and overtly call out Jewish power in the USA and see if you can find an audience unless you are perhaps in the Black community.

    I had a naive view of the Left until 2003 – 2004 but seeing the immense effort that The Left engages to divert attention away from the ZPC cannot be ignored. The next question is why? It is in seeking the answer to that the corruption of the Left becomes all too obvious. In other words the role of the “professional Left” (as Robin Gibbs puts it) is to limit questions, to confine the answers, and to shift the focus away from Zionism. This is why they are dubbed “gatekeepers”.

    TF2 is right about Max. His “eco-libertarianism” sound great but it doesn’t address power and IMO is part of the “gatekeeper” process.

    Going back to Glen Ford. I wish him lots of luck. While he has written critiques of Israeli Zionism but I have yet to see him make any mention of the ZPC. He does offer great analysis of White Supremacy and its legacy on the Black community. IMO it is Zionist Supremacy and its effect on the Black community (since Black Agenda is his focus) that’s missing from his analysis. Jeffrey Blankfort does a better job speaking about Zionism’s influence on Black politicians and community than African American journalists.

    Going back to the recent meeting in Albany, there was an interesting “workshop” on whether there should be a Left/Right coalition.

    The four participant were:

    Kevin Zeese, Glen Ford, Medea Benjamin and Chris Gauvreau.

    Zeese and Benjamin argued in favor of a Left/Right coalition.
    Ford and Gauvreau argued against it.

    You can find it on You Tube. This link is to Ford’s presentation.

    It was interesting for me to see who were in favor of this configuration but first let me just state my position.

    Clearly I’m against such an alignment for primarily the following reasons …

    [1] It won’t hold
    [2] It will weaken the Left.
    [3] It water’s down your ideology.
    [4] It won’t attract people of color (this was Ford’s primary argument)
    [5] It’s constrict speech.
    [6] Betrayals

    I guess I shouldn’t have been surprised by Kevin Zeese’s affirmative position. His reasons sound more like he wants an organizational “shortcut” rather than engaging in an ideological fight. This has been my critique of Zeese and his position on single payer. What Zeese IMO fails to recognize is that the Left has to become the agenda rather than followers of the agenda.

    I thought Medea Benjamin would have been against the Left/Right coalition but I guess I was wrong. She spoke about the “conservative” members of her family and where she has agreements with them. Therefore that experience warms her to the idea of “talking” to the Right and the possibility of splitting their ranks via the Left/Right coalition.

    Due to time constraints I won’t outline Ford & Gauvreau as I agreed with their conclusions.

    Based on Zeese identifying himself as a “Socialist” you’d think he’d want to spend time building up one of the many Socialist party configurations. Benjamin at least admitted a personal affinity via “conservative” family members who are against the wars. I can understand those sentiments but the Right clearly has money, resources and access. The Tea Party itself indicates that they are able to make some noise and get attention without the Left. So I don’t see how Benjamin can believe that a Left/Right coalition would result in a weaken Right. It most definitely will result in a debilitated Left — as if it needs more debilitating.

    Those on the Left who are “honestly” advocating a Left/Right coalition IMO do not want to examine how the Left got into and how long it has been in this debilitated state. That is because they are reluctant to recognize the current power configuration and by studying the Left itself is a great place to learn about it.

    If it took decades for the Left go get into this state and it’s going to take years before there is a real grassroots that can make the demands and take the kinds of action to upset the current order. Thus a Left/Right coalition CANNOT nor ever be the starting point. It is time for the Left to face reality.

  112. teafoe2 said on August 15th, 2010 at 4:19pm #

    xam has given up. not able to cope with rational arguments exposing his ignorance, he resorts one more time to his old MO, personal insults and claims of supernatural powers to read minds at a distance.

    Come on, Xam, all this personal crap is booooring. Can’t you come up with some more psuedo-intellectual verbiage so I can while away my lonely hours by demolishing it?

    Well, lemme see what else you said that I can deconstruct…

  113. teafoe2 said on August 15th, 2010 at 4:23pm #

    Thank you DB. can’t think of anything to add right now, but let me reread your post couple of times.

  114. teafoe2 said on August 15th, 2010 at 4:26pm #

    A correction: I noted on an earlier post that Ford & McKinney hadn’t endorsed the Olympia Coop petition. What I didn’t realize is that both were early signers of the main BDS petition.

  115. teafoe2 said on August 15th, 2010 at 4:39pm #

    There might be, at least theoretically, instances when some sort of joint action on the part of some “left” forces and certain of the “antiwar libertarian conservatives” might be worth considering, but since even Raimundo keeps dragging the Teabaggers along, forget it.

    There is nothing “grassroots” about this TP phenomenon. All the TP “spokespersons” who get national media attention are nothing but recycled far-right pro-war fanatics like Melanie Morgan, SF radio talkshow host who tried to organize a “caravan” of rightwing warmongers to go down to Crawford TX and disrupt what Cindy Sheehan and friends were doing. Or “TV Personality” Mark Williams, a favorite accomplice of Morgan’s and a long time krypto-kleagle professional racist.

  116. hayate said on August 15th, 2010 at 5:02pm #

    Deadbeat & teafoe2

    Points well made.

  117. teafoe2 said on August 15th, 2010 at 5:05pm #

    Ciao, hayate,

    Mil Grazie:)

  118. Max Shields said on August 15th, 2010 at 5:13pm #

    Oh yea who’s hayate? which ventriloquist is at work here? sock-puppet? real punch and judy.

    There’s just no way 3 fools spouting the same nonsense are on this planet. Got to be no more than 2 talking to themselves. Patrick is the navel gazer.

    Deadbeat wouldn’t know a BIG issue if it hit him in the head. Simmer down there.

    And now teapot is getting off on Raimundo. Geez just one enemy after another teaPOT.

  119. hayate said on August 15th, 2010 at 5:20pm #

    Max Shields said on August 15th, 2010 at 5:13pm

    You add nothing to the site. One cant be more of a zionist than that.

  120. Deadbeat said on August 15th, 2010 at 8:47pm #

    Max Shields writes …

    There’s just no way 3 fools spouting the same nonsense are on this planet. Got to be no more than 2 talking to themselves. Patrick is the navel gazer.

    Deadbeat wouldn’t know a BIG issue if it hit him in the head. Simmer down there.

    I feel sorry for Max. Now there are THREE anti-Zionists that he has to contend with. Since the Blankfort/Hammond debate I’ve noticed the number of anti-ZPC participation on DV has grown. This is a good sign.

    Also the quality of the arguments of by the anti-ZPC has improved. I’ve learned a lot about JINSA and Chaney’s’ affiliation. I hadn’t known that. I guess Antonia Juhasz , Naomi Klein nor Amy Goodman knew this either. Their investigations of Chaney stopped at Haliburton’s doorstep.

    Therefore Max you can keep on chiding me. I hope you do because I’m the least of your worries.

  121. teafoe2 said on August 16th, 2010 at 4:10pm #

    “You want to save the starving, so you feed them, they live and population grows and starvation increases…this can be seen time and time again.”

    The above excerpt from a post by Sdliehs Xam on this thread at some point yesterday has stuck in my mind. It really encapsulates what’s wrong with his thinking.

    His concept of how to respond to massive hunger in most of the world is “we feed them”. By “we”, who can he possibly mean? Is it safe to assume he has in mind the rest of the privileged social strata in which he is resident?

    Which aggregate he assumes possesses sufficient stored foodstocks to feed “them”, long enough for them to “live” and reproduce themselves. I’m sure he’s correct on that point.

    Next he parrots good old humanitarian Malthus: ” they live and population grows and starvation increases…this can be seen time and time again.”

    It apparently never occurs to armchair philosopher Rudyard Shields that if he’d get his capitalist friends bootheels off people’s necks, they’d be able to feed themselves.

    What a shame: there he is, trapped inside his cocoon of colonialist assumptions which to everybody else are plain as day but which to him are as invisible as Detective Sipowitz was to his latest profilee on the other side of the one-way glass.

    As I said earlier, this attitude of his is a carbon copy of how the Brits justified letting Irish people starve during the Potato Famine, so yes it tends to resonate with me. “The Irish are pigs”, sayeth Her Majesty.

    “They’ll just have a lot of Anchor Babies and wind up starving again, so why bother?”: thus sayeth Xamathrusta.

    Nothing like Detached Objectivity!