Pat
teaches some history to the neocons
Saddam,
the only one who has used WMDs? Only one ignorant of history
would believe such a thing, says
Pat Buchanan:
If using Weapons of Mass Destruction
against civilians is "what makes Saddam so distinguished
in the field of evil," why does not using atomic
bombs on civilians disqualify Truman from the pantheon
of moral heroes?
The
answer: it doesn't. Considering that the US supported
Saddam when he supposedly gassed the Kurds, the US
and its war hawks have no legitimacy in labeling Saddam
as "evil." Moreover, our history shows we and
our allies are guilty of the same transgressions:
During World War II, the British manufactured 5 million
anthrax cattle cakes to drop on Germany. As George Rosie
tells it in the Glasgow Herald: "The aim of Operation
Vegetarian was to wipe out the German beef and dairy herds
and then see the bacterium spread to the human population."
"Engaging in '... willful blindness.'"
Lew
Rockwell quotes Dick Cheney:
"the president has asked Congress for an 8 percent
increase for veterans' health care and a 7 percent increase
for veterans' programs overall." [Loud applause.]
Rockwell
continues:
With the audience warmed up with your money, Cheney got
on to the business at hand, which is killing.
According
to the administration's doctrine, safety for American
citizens can only be assured with Ashcroft ripping
apart the constitution, the military patrolling the
streets, keeping
Israel fully armed, eliminating due process and labeling
all things Arab "evil" and thus dispensable.
But hey, I am only "engaging in 'willful blindness.'"
Poor
Bush: facts are in the way of war
Proof
of WMDs is no longer required for an attack on Iraq. One
report points out that
America
refuses to rule out an invasion even if inspectors are
let in and find nothing untoward.
First,
there
is no evidence that Iraq has nukes. It doesn't matter,
says the administration, Saddam is actually just hiding
them. It appears the hawks are assuming WMDs. If
that is the case, Minority
Report-like justice will become commonplace in US
foreign policy.
Bush should read
this
The "Big Lie:"
"They kill us because of our freedom, our capitalism
and our democracy!"
Sure, says Charley Reese. The"Big Lie"
demonstrates Bush and Co.'s ignorance of cause and effect
and basic axioms of human action:
But, as a consequence of the Big Lie, Bush is doing
absolutely nothing to end terrorism. Terrorism, like all
human action, proceeds from a cause for a purpose. If
you want to end it, you have to remove the cause.
Unfortunately,
many believe removing the cause is "letting the terrorists"
win. These folks tend to forget that rattlesnakes bite
back if you stick your hand in their nest.
Oh those neocons....
Neocons
have condemned Scowcroft, Kissinger, Zinni and company
as sympathizers with the "antiwar left." John
B. Judis analyzes
the criticism aimed at the war's opponents. It is
strange how ignorant the supposed conservatives at The
Weekly Standard etc. are of their own
intellectual history. Their "new world order,"
devoid of all evil, terrorists and "unacceptable
regimes" resembles one of the most important worries
of the real Right: empire.
