Raimondo's memory has failed him. I have never supported Robert Mugabe. Even
during the war of liberation I supported his then rival Joshua N'Komo. I have
many times criticized Mr. Mugabe, in print and on my radio shows. I have never
met Mr. Mugabe, and during the conference in Kuala Lumpur I made strenuous
and successful efforts not to do so there. I am surprised that Justin Raimondo
should misrepresent me so, especially as he has been so warm in correspondence
with me since we were there working in Kuala Lumpur together. Odd that he should
have written to me as he has when he considered me an apologist for Robert
Mugabe, don't you think? Or could there be another agenda here?
Hegemony Is Not Guaranteed
first-rate article by the prolific, ubiquitous, and often-profound Paul Craig
note here were Mr. Roberts' comments about steps the rest of the world might
take to challenge America's hegemonic belligerence and aggression. Mr. Roberts
sagely calls for a kind of moral surge in the rest of the world, especially
using boycotts and the same kind of intervention in our financial markets that
we effectively employ against our "enemies." Roberts notes that we
are multiplying the number of our "enemies" at an alarming rate and
our hubris will be our undoing. (Must we take the rest of the world down with
us? That remains to be seen.)
Why must we wait for the rest of the world to organize boycotts against us?
Why can't American political parties – on the Left, in the libertarian sphere,
etc.– and NPOs and NGOs organize with their colleagues and correspondents "across
the pond" and around the world to take on the American behemoth? The elite
rulers and owners of our world have transnational organizations and they act
in concert to impose their New World Order. Opposition to their monstrous apparatus
of control and destruction must also be transnational, and we in the "belly
of the beast" have a major part to play in that.
~ Gary Corseri
Unsaid at the Petraeus Hearings
the Iraqis govern themselves? It is obvious that the Republicans can't read
writin', and sure can't write readin'. Iraq has a written history of more than
243 generations, from 5300 B.C. to 2008. The U.S. has at its disposal a generational
record of 13.37, from 1607 to 2008. Now then, tell me who has the most experience
in governing themselves?
~ William Berka
Other Military Draft
have to agree with "Steven." Even though I did volunteer to go, I had extensive
training with the Navy Construction Battalion, who are trained with the Marine
Corps. When I got there, I felt as if many should have been sent home
and should not have been placed in the area. There are a very select few that
actually can absorb the impact a war zone has on a person, and most Navy and
Air Force personnel do not have the training to handle it. If they are going
to send the "other services," then the personnel that signed up for the fight
should be the ones going – not the cook or line handler.
think it is important that Bob Barr also be the nominee of the Constitution
Party. Both LP and Constitution Party members agree about the need to end the
war in Iraq, get rid of the Federal Reserve, and make drastic cuts in federal
taxes and spending. This agreement should be the basis of a coalition of both
parties to defeat the Republicans and restore small government. Put aside controversial
issues such as abortion and immigration, where there are legitimate grounds
for disagreement between the LP and Constitution Party positions. I would also
let slide the Constitution Party's emphasis on the Bible as the basis for its
With more than
300,000 registered members, the Constitution Party claims to be the third largest
political party, and it agrees with the LP on the most important issues –
ending the war, abolishing the Fed, and rolling back big government. Given the
difficulties that third parties have with ballot access, wouldn't it make sense
for the LP and the Constitution Party to combine resources and select Barr as
their nominee for president? Let the coalition take down down McCain first.
Make McCain lose all 50 states and start the demise of the Republican Party.
Then build on this victory to work against the Democrats, bring our troops home,
and start to dismantle the welfare state.
~ Mutsuko Kuwano
Testimony May Signal Iran Attack
piece by Paul Craig Roberts reads like a Sadrist propaganda piece. I am strongly
opposed to wars of aggression, and therefore the Iraq invasion and any possible
strike on Iran. I've enjoyed a lot of the writings over at Antiwar.com, but
this one goes a little off the deep end.
Likely Iran is
arming and supplying Iraqi insurgents; the Iranian government is not a bunch
of boy scouts. Gen. Petraeus doesn't have to make up Iranian connections to
insurgents. Iranian opposition to the U.S. occupation was foreseeable and is
quite real. The job of any general is to win the war. Petraeus does not advocate
withdrawal, because that is not what generals do, not because he is a neocon
shill. Though I admit that politics does play a part in picking generals, it
is up to the people through their elected representatives to end this war,
and at that the people have failed.
The new Democratic
Congress hasn't even enough spine to strongly challenge the administration.
This Congress received the "antiwar" vote and yet has done little more than
the previous Congress to end the war. If people want an end to war, they need
to elect politicians who actually feel the same way and will have the courage
to act on their own convictions, not by smearing a general who simply carries
out a task given him by the Congress and the executive.
~ Nick Michelewicz
the insurgents had Iranian arms, it would be the end of our helicopter gunships
The real question
is: why is Iran refusing to provide effective arms to their Shi'ite brothers
who have been invaded and occupied by the U.S. on the basis of Bush's lies?
Reese makes a good point: Those who have the oil in the Middle East seem willing
to sell it to anyone, so to establish a military presence there for the purposes
of "securing our national interests" concerning oil seems insane. But what
is not insane is to perpetuate the "petrodollar": our control of the
currency used for oil transactions. We get a lot of benefit from having the
U.S. dollar be the dominating currency for oil deals. I believe that Saddam
Hussein signed his own death warrant when he took steps to employ euros in
the Iraqi oil trade. If the euro, the yen, the yuan, or some other currency
comes to dominate oil transactions, I think our overburdened imperial economy
will burst like a popped balloon. I think that fear of such a possibility may
very well be what motivates our current aggressiveness in the Middle East,
and I would like to see the media spend a little more time investigating that
idea and explaining it to the American people.
~ James Anderson