Innocence?

So, let's review the "innocent" facts here.

In July, a trailer for the film was posted on YouTube. In September, a stooge dubbed it into Arabic and brought it to the attention of the Arab-language press. Just in time to provoke convenient riots, (which anyone could have predicted as a response to such stimulus), and then the perfectly-timed attacks on the US embassies/consulates in Benghazi and Cairo. Which all just happened to take place on September 11th.

And you expect me to accept this as coincidence? While it's true I was born in the afternoon, it was not yesterday afternoon. And this whole affair reeks of Mossad. It follows the same pattern of manipulation, provocation, and false-flag attacks, a pattern which goes clear back to the Lavon Affair of the 1950's, (which Israel finally admitted to in 2005).

This is just too damn convenient, and if we ask ourselves cui bono?, the one clear answer, the one clear winner from all this, if it is accepted at face value, is Israel. An Israel whose ever-more-strident demands for someone, anyone, to attack Iran, are being increasingly ignored and marginalized. An Israel grown desperate for attention.

There is no innocence on display here, dear reader. There is no innocence at all. This is a display of pure, naked, bloody-hands-up-to-the-elbows guilt on the part of the Zionists.

To Drone Or Not To Drone

So now we are told that the bodies of the two Turkish aircrew have been recovered from the wreckage of the F-4 that was shot down by Syrian air defenses on June 22.

Before I begin, please examine these two stories on the supposed finding of the bodies -

The story at Al Jazeera is here.

The story at PressTV is here.

Note that the AJE story says, "The military has been conducting a search operation since the jet was downed on June 22 and this week brought in a specialised ship to recover the wreckage, some 1,000 metres underwater."

On the same subject, the PressTV story says, "According to Turkish sources, the bodies of Captain Gokhan Ertan and Lieutenant Hasan Huseyin Aksoy were found on the Eastern Mediterranean sea bed by a US deep-sea exploration vessel on Wednesday. The bodies were located at a depth of 1,260 meters."

Interesting, no? The now-western-aligned Al Jazeera makes no mention of the fact that the deep-sea recovery vessel was an American ship. Let us bear in mind, dear reader, that AJE is owned and controlled by the Emir of Qatar, and Qatar is one of the main financiers of the "Syrian resistance".

Note that the AJE story denies that the Turkish military gave any information on where the bodies were found, while the PressTV story explicitly states the depth of water and general location.

Ah, the joys of being a citizen of the 21st century, sifting through all the different flavours of bullshit, attempting to triangulate some approximation of truth from the alignment of the lies.

It is worth noting that the Latakia Basin does closely approach the shore at that point. I am told that the water just off the beach plunges abruptly to 3000 feet or more (1000 meters). And yet, this all seems so very convenient, and I cannot help but be reminded of the equally-convenient "burial at sea" of Osama bin Laden, which neatly prevented any forensic examination of the body.

Honestly, I don't know enough about the specialized disciplines of diving and air crash investigation to comment on whether the bodies are likely to have remained intact under such circumstances, or whether it is reasonable for the location of the wreckage to have taken 12 days.

So, was I off-base in reporting that the F-4 was an unmanned drone? Possibly so. It wouldn't be the first time I have made a bad call, and I severely doubt it would be the last. Such are the perils of speculation, such are the perils of being a blogger, such are the perils of being human. And yet, I still have my doubts.

There is, in this current age, given the extent to which all information to which we have access has been massaged, edited, and manipulated, a very real need for a healthy level of skepticism. And yet, at what point does skepticism become paranoia? That, dear reader, is for you to decide.

It Was A Drone

I'm going to be very brief today, my friends. It was a Drone.

The Turkish F-4 Phantom apparently shot down over Syria 3 days ago, was in fact a QF-4, an unmanned, remotely controlled model used as a target drone. The reason they cannot find the pilot or the backseater is simply because there never were any humans aboard the aircraft.

Now, let's ask ourselves, what point was there to sending an unmanned target drone conversion of a usually-piloted aircraft into Syrian airspace? One could argue that perhaps it had been fitted with a reconnaissance package of some sort. But, in a day when the US and its allies regularly deploy swarms of purpose-built recon drones, with abilities far superior to anything that might be retrofitted to a badly-aging F-4 designed back in the 1950's, how would this make any practical sense?

The other possibility that suggests itself to the twisted, cunning and slightly-paranoid mind of your faithful correspondent is this - it was a setup. How would they have managed this? Well, they would have sent the drone in on what looked like an attack profile, and then when the Syrians launched a SAM at it, reversed course as fast as the airframe would allow and headed back out of Syrian airspace, back over the Mediterranean.

Listen to the rhetoric carefully, my friends. The key phrase being repeated is "where the plane was shot down", that's what they keep saying, over and over, in order to fix it in the minds of the media and the public.

But that's not what matters. What matters is where the drone/plane was at the time the SAM was launched at it.

One must give the powers-that-be full credit for a cleverly-managed media campaign. They're definitely not subtle, and they're not nearly as clever as they seem to think they are, but they do know how to manage public opinion, and they do know how to focus attention on the red herring.

Now they have their casus belli. And we all know what comes next.

Israel Attacks US Navy Ship

Forty-Five years ago today, the USS Liberty was attacked in international waters by unmarked aircraft and torpedo boats of the Israeli Navy.

The attack lasted two hours. Out of the crew of 294 officers and men, which included three civilians, 34 were killed and 173 wounded.

The whitewash of this incident continues to the present day, but the apparent facts of the matter are that the attack was absolutely deliberate, and carefully planned as a false-flag attack, with Egypt intended to take the blame. Israel, and their vehement lobby of apologists, continue to assert that the whole thing was a mistake. But the use of unmarked aircraft and boats, the fact that the USS Liberty was flying an enormous US flag throughout the attack, the fact that no other ship in the world had a profile like the USS Liberty, these things alone would be enough to refute the claims that it was a mistake.

Crew attempting to abandon ship were attacked in their lifeboats by the Israelis. This is a war crime, whoever the ship might have belonged to.

Twice, aircraft dispatched by the US Sixth Fleet to assist the Liberty were recalled, both times by direct order of the White House. This is betrayal, cold, stark, and undeniable.

Twice, there have been investigations of the USS Liberty incident. Both investigations have absolved Israel of blame. But, tellingly enough, in neither investigation have any of the surviving members of the Liberty's crew been allowed to testify. How does one explain this, other than as a blatant cover-up?

Links below for further information-

USS Liberty veterans organization

Dead In The Water, a BBC Documentary

USS Liberty Memorial, a site by Jim Ennes, a survivor of the attack

Statement by Adm Thomas H Moorer

Lies About Syria

Let's be blunt here. The entire media narrative we are being fed about Syria is a reeking crock of shit. The whole song and dance about -
Evil Assad is murdering his people and the Syrian resistance are a group of high-minded freedom fighters struggling to liberate their nation from tyranny and establish a democratic Syrian state with freedom and equality for all.

All of that is BS. The ugly truth of the matter is that the Syrian resistance are, in large part, foreign mercenaries backed by Qatar, Saudia Arabia, and the USA, and that said resistance are acting as agents provocateurs in an attempt to justify military intervention by NATO, in order to bring about regime change in Syria and install a puppet government.

As evidence of this, the Houla massacre is being distorted and exploited by a media campaign which was obviously prepared well in advance. The statement by the chief of the UN’s observer mission to the effect that the killers were unknown and further investigation needed was ignored. The UN resolution immediately submitted called upon the Syrian Army to stop using heavy weapons against inhabited areas, despite the Houla victims having been killed with small arms; the eye witnesses described the attackers as "men in plain clothes.”

Out of one side of their mouth the UN talking heads say that Houla was caused by heavy bombardment with tanks and artillery. Out of the other side of their mouth, they say that “the majority of the victims were killed execution-style”. Well, which is it? The hasbara isn’t even internally consistent, let alone consistent with external reality.

And yet nation after nation has booted its Syrian diplomats, under this pretext, even France, to my utter disappointment. (Then again, Hollande may not be completely in charge. DGSE has often seemed to act independently, regardless of the wishes of France’s civilian government).

The people who run the nations of the West are indescribably evil, yes, but they are not stupid. It is inconceivable that these European nations are actually deceived by the hasbara. They must know the truth. Therefore, it logically follows that they find it to be in their own best interests to pretend to believe.

Then again, one of the greats of early science-fiction (Asimov perhaps?) once said something like – “Never postulate conspiracy to explain that which could be explained equally well by incompetence”. And incompetence, dear reader, is a condition which can afflict even the most intelligent of men and women.

I’m really quite puzzled by the international reaction to all of this. I can usually sort out, at least roughly, what is going on behind the scenes, if only via a process of triangulating all the various lies. But the response to recent events in Syria leaves me standing here scratching my head and muttering, “Uhhh, whiskey tango foxtrot, over?”

Another Billion Dollars For Israel

Sometimes, it's enough to make even a strong man cry, let alone a wimp like me.

The House of Representatives has just approved the new defense spending bill, totaling some 608 billion US dollars. Included in that bill is roughly a billion US dollars for Israel, to pay for Tel Aviv to build various missile systems.

We are told there's no money for a jobs program, we are told there's no money for extended unemployment benefits, there's no money for Food Stamps, there's no money for Medicare or Medicaid, there's no money for anything to help the long-term unemployed.

But hey, there's always money for the military, hundreds of billions of dollars, no problem. And of course, it's no problem to soak the US taxpayer in order to subsidize the brutally racist apartheid occupation state known as Israel. Of course. AIPAC has decreed that it must be so, and every elected official in Washington worships at the anus of AIPAC.



(Open Salon readers can watch the video here)

Sometimes, dear reader, sometimes, the utter wretched injustice of it all is simply overwhelming. There are roughly 10 million of us 99ers out here, people who have worked all their lives, paid their taxes, voted their conscience, done their best to be good citizens. And now, when we have reached late middle age, we find ourselves unemployed and unable to find any work, at any wage. So how does the government deal with this crisis? How do they react to the fact that 75% of the 99ers are over fifty years of age, how do they respond to the blatant age discrimination to which this indisputably attests? They deny that we exist. They say that we are "no longer looking for work", and don't even include us in the unemployment figures. Because of they did, if the USA figured unemployment rates by the same standard that Europe uses, Obama would have to own up to the actual unemployment rate of over 20%.

And, of course, that would ruin Obama's chances of re-election.

So, Mr President, after you've spent the last 4 years raping us up the ass, we're supposed to vote for you again? After the NDAA, and the extension of the bitterly mis-named Patriot Act, after all the other atrocities you have perpetrated upon those of us who were naive enough to believe your lies and vote for you, after you've killed Habeas Corpus, and presided over the gutting of the Bill of Rights, we are supposed to vote for another 4 years of this crap? When your best argument is that you defrosted the frozen body of OBL, (who never had anything to do with 9/11), and peddled a bullshit story about having gunned him down, and a year later that's the best thing you can come up with, you expect us to vote for you again? Just how stupid do you think we are?

 If I was that much of an idiot, (or that much of an asshole), I'd be a Conservative.

Chemical Weapons

Today, April 29th, has been recognised by the United Nations as the first annual day of remembrance for the victims of chemical warfare. Iran, as the target of the largest campaign of chemical warfare ever waged, has hosted a conference to commemorate this occasion.

In 1980, the newly declared Islamic Republic of Iran was invaded by Iraq under Saddam Hussein. Most observers accept that the United States, which was then an important ally of Iraq, urged the attack in an attempt to topple the new and still uncertain Iranian government. Certainly the US government supplied Saddam Hussein with some of the chemical weapons which were used against Iran; the remainder of the chemical weapons were purchased from France and Germany, which also supplied the Iraqi military with tanks, aircraft, and other conventional weapon systems

Iraq declared that during the last 5 years of the war it used against the Iranians roughly 1800 tons of Mustard gas and 750 tons of nerve gas. Note that this is the only documented use of nerve gas which has ever been committed. Let it also be clearly understood that these chemical weapons were not simply used against military units, but primarily against civilian population centers in five Iranian border  provinces. During the course of the eight year war with Iraq, over one million Iranians were attacked with chemical weapons. To this day, 100,000 Iranians are suffering the after-effects of these chemical attacks.

So, dear reader, the next time you're being subjected to another increment in the ongoing barrage of warmongering anti-Iranian propaganda which is inflicted upon us by the Zionist media machine, stop and consider the past for a moment. Think about those untold thousands of dead Iranians, killed with chemical weapons supplied to Iraq by the USA, France, and Germany. And then ask yourself, do you think the Iranians perhaps have some reason for their mistrust?



(Open Salon readers can watch the video here)

Agonies of Shame

A response to this article in Desertpeace.

"He said, 'tell them your tax money is killing us.' That’s the bottom line. You have a responsibility here in the US."

In terms of abstract moral responsibility, yes, absolutely - no argument, no excuses.

But in purely pragmatic terms, you should understand that the US government has become totally unresponsive to the will of the people. The USA is not a democracy. The USA is an oligarchy, a plutocracy, a kleptocracy, choose whatever term pleases you best, but "We, The People" no longer have any control over "our" government. None, zero, zip, nada.

Peaceful protest isn't going to change that. Peaceful reform is impossible, because the powers-that-be have systematically corrupted the very organs of government upon which peaceful reform depends. They control everything except our minds, and with some of my fellow citizens, I wonder about even that.

So tell me I'm responsible, and I agree. Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. But what, by the 999 names of God, do you expect me to do about it? Yes, I boycott Israeli products. Yes, I encourage others to do the same. And that counts for what, maybe 1% of the moral responsibility?

Do not misunderstand me. I am not rejecting responsibility, I am not evading it. In truth I am writhing in agonies of shame. I am just pointing out that in purely practical terms, there is sweet Fanny Adams I can do about it.

Latest Developments in Syrian Farce

French Journalist Thierry Meyssan has another excellent article on what's really happening with Syria.

Reading this will give you a sense of deja vu, I can virtually guarantee. The contrast between the story as spun by mainstream media, (including, sadly, Al Jazeera), and Meyssan's account of what's really going on is almost surrealistic.

It's the same old, same old Zionist propaganda machine at work again, as abetted and enabled by their lackeys at the US State Department, but Meyssan shares with us a few little tidbits that the MSM are not covering, such as the following quote -

General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and General James Mattis, commander of United States Central Command, finally admitted that the U.S. Air Force was not in a position to bomb Syria, if ordered to, considering that the country is now equipped with Russia’s most effective anti-aircraft system in the world.

Oh my.

Land Day

The photo above clearly illustrates the utterly shameless brutality with which Zionist police and military met the peaceful Land Day protests in Occupied Palestine. The Palestinian man is injured and bleeding, firmly restrained by two burly soldiers, and being pepper-sprayed in the face at a range of about two inches.

I don't think further words from me would add anything to the picture.

Don't believe me? Want to see it from an MSM source? Here you go

Story at Desertpeace here.

George Galloway Goes Off

Greetings, dear reader. Your favorite beady-eyed marsupial is greatly distracted by other considerations at the moment, hence the lack of recent updates, but here is a lovely video of George Galloway going off on a caller last November. While it may, at seven minutes in length, challenge the attention spans of some people, I'm confident that anyone with the patience to still be reading my blog after all this time can handle it.

George gets rather excited, in the manner of talk show hosts the world over, but he has some very good points to make. And his caller is the exact English counterpart of the sort of American who watches Fox news.



Open Salon readers can watch the video here

R.I.P. Al Jazeera

I have avoided writing about this until now, because there was little substantial evidence to back up the rumors, but now that has changed.

Al Jazeera English has been prostituted, and is no longer a reliable source of information.

This all began a bit over a year ago, with the departure in late 2011 of Wada Khanfar, who had been director-general of Al Jazeera since its inception. At that time, there were rumors that the Emir of Qatar, who owns Al Jazeera, was ending his previous policy of non-interference. Apparently, the Arab Spring has frightened the Emir, as it has frightened all the despots of the Middle East, and he has decided to cast his lot whole-heartedly with the Western Powers.

The first rumors emerged about a year ago, during the Libyan campaign, alleging that much of AJ's supposedly "live" coverage from Tripoli was actually shot upon a sound stage in Doha, (Qatar), which was made up to look just like the main square in Tripoli (Libya). Certainly, beyond a doubt, Al Jazeera was leading the charge in the information war against the Gaddafi regime.

At about that same time, the USA suddenly stopped blocking AJ from broadcasting in the USA, with no explanation of why, other than the usual mealy-mouthed bureaucratic bullshit.

And, over the last year, Al Jazeera has been leading the propaganda campaign against Syria, lobbying hard for military intervention, while totally ignoring the disturbing indications that there is an orchestrated covert effort by western powers to destabilize Syria. This, along with the Libyan campaign, is another step in the plan of Middle East conquest laid out by PNAC, the Project for a New American Century.

At this point, it is worth digressing a bit in order to interject a note of cold realism. The peoples of the western world in general, and we Americans in particular, have a painfully naive yearning for situations to be simple. Mesmerized by movies and television, we desperately want it all to be a simple matter of good guys and bad guys, white hats and black, with a happy ending where the hero marries the girl and they all live happily ever after.

Life is not like that, however desperately we may wish it to be.

In the Middle East, there are no good guys. It is never a matter of good guys versus bad guys. It is a matter of bad guys versus worse guys. There are no heroes, and every faction's hands are bloody up to the armpits. No amount of denial or wishful thinking will change this.

Similarly, there are no completely neutral, completely reliable sources of information in the world. This is a Holy Grail which does not exist. The only thing a netizen can do, is to take in what she can from what sources seem least biased, and attempt to triangulate an approximate truth from there.

Bashar al Assad, while not quite the evil tyrant his father was, is certainly no angel. But he is the chief of state of a sovereign nation. And there is a well-orchestrated effort underway to overthrow the Assad government. This effort consists of mercenaries, spies, and "journalists" who are in the employ of western intelligence agencies. The narrative being related to us by the mainstream media is an absolute fabrication.

For a first-hand account of events in Syria by French journalist Thierry Meyssan, see this story.

For the now-emerging details of increasing resignations from Al Jazeera, in protest against the increasingly obvious political agenda of its new directors, see the video below.




(Open Salon readers can watch the video here)

And yet, again, remember to keep your salt shaker handy. Russia Today is a useful source of information, but they are far from unbiased.

Hang on to your hat, dear reader, it is going to be a wild ride from here. Let's just hope your faithful correspondent is still alive and blogging a year from now. Let's hope there is still an intact world in which bloggers can exist, a year from now. Keep your head up, your eyes and ears open, and don't forget to check your six.

Sanctions In Trouble

Oh, my, but the world is not cooperating.

China's response to Geithner's arm-twisting visit was not just refusal, but outraged refusal.

Japan is remaining politely equivocal , which means they're not going to play ball either. After all, the Japanese never say flat-out "No", it's just not polite.

South Korea has also refused to go along with US plans for unilateral sanctions against Iranian oil.

Asia in general is not impressed.

And the Russians have flatly refused to play.

Europe might be a different story, and then again, it might not. One could wonder if the sudden downgrade of European credit ratings by S&P over the weekend was not either a threat or a punishment for Europe's reluctance to screw its own fragile economy through soaring oil prices. For that matter, what the fuck is Obama thinking? Doesn't he need an economic recovery in the US if he hopes to get re-elected this Fall?

And what news source has not just the best coverage of the topic, but the only comprehensive coverage, who are the only ones willing to ask the ugly questions? PressTV again, much to my embarrassment and disgust. Not that I have anything against PressTV, just that I'm outraged by the fact that they're the only ones willing to really discuss the issue.




(Open Salon readers can watch the video here .

When Anti-Semitism Is Abused

Apologies to Sarah Wildman for stealing her title, but it was so appropriate.

I'm not even going to add anything of my own to this, dear reader, lest the eloquence of her message be adulterated. I'm just going to point you to this article at Desertpeace, written by Sarah Wildman, on the use and abuse of the term "Anti-Semite".

Go, Sarah, go!

Persian Gulf Follies

Yesterday, it was reported that Iran has threatened to close the vital Strait of Hormuz if the USA follows through on plans to impose a total embargo upon the Iranian oil industry.

Today, we are informed that our nation's government has responded with counter-threats, and that a representative of the US 5th Fleet, (which is permanently assigned to the Persian Gulf, and based in Bahrain), chimed in with further hawkish saber-rattling.

This raises a number of questions in the tiny marsupial mind of your faithful correspondent. Not least of these would be, why do we have an independent statement by the 5th Fleet? Is the US Navy now a power unto itself? Does the State department no longer handle diplomatic chores for the United States of (corporate) Amerika? A minor point, you may opine, but still one more indicator that we live in a post-democratic nation-state.

On to the substance of the issue.

The painful part about being a student of history, is that one can often see the parallels, and guess what happens next. The hazardous part about being a student of history, is that one can often guess wrong. None the less, let's play the game of historical parallels for a bit, shall we?

The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, which occurred on December 7th of 1942, roughly seventy years and three weeks ago, should not have been a surprise. The Anglo-Dutch-US consortium which controlled all oil resources in the Pacific at that time had imposed a complete oil embargo on Japan, using the colorful excuse of Japanese expansion in China.

Yes, I use the term "colorful excuse" deliberately. The Rape of Nanking occurred in 1937, and its details were known in western capitals within weeks, at most. So it took the powers-that-be four long years to decide that those naughty Japanese must be punished? Horseshit. In 1937, nobody in the West gave a damn about the Chinese. By 1941, Roosevelt was desperately seeking an excuse to drag the USA into another European war.

And so the device of an oil embargo was decided upon. Japan, then as now, was totally dependent upon oil imports. US economists predicted that the Japanese economy would collapse within six months without oil. And yet, when Japan responded with a military assault upon the colonial possessions of the embargoing powers, we were caught by surprise? Again I say, horseshit. Anyone who knew anything about Japanese culture and history could have predicted that Japan would fight rather than fold. And even a cursory study of Japanese military history would have revealed that the surprise attack was an old favorite tactic.

Now fast-forward 70 years. Granted Iran and Japan are very different nations, with very different cultures and historical traditions. Imperial Japan was territorially expansionist; Iran hasn't invaded a neighbouring country for over 200 years. The Achilles' Heel of Imperial Japan was oil imports, and that of Iran is its oil exports.

And yet, there are parallels. In both cases, the nation being embargoed was perceived to be a threat to the power of the US Navy. In both cases, the nation being embargoed was perceived to be a threat to the colonial practices of the Western Powers. And in both cases, the subtle hand of the Zionists was at work behind the scenes.

Whoa, Possum, you say! That came out of left field; how the fuck do you figure that?

In 1941, the Zionists wanted the USA committed to the European disaster that we now call World War II, both in order to defeat Germany and also to follow through on plans for the creation of Israel.

Here in late 2011, the Zionists want the USA committed to war with Iran, in order to further the interests of Israel, or at least the perceived interests of the ultra-conservative cabal which currently controls Israel's government.

(And this is as good a place as any to gently remind ourselves that there are good people in Israel, and blaming all Israelis for the horrid crimes of the Israeli government would be every bit as unjust as blaming all Americans for the horrid crimes of the US government.)

So, once again, we have an oil embargo being used to provoke an armed conflict. And yet, the world of 2011 is vastly different from that of 1941. Today, we have stern warnings against precipitate action from the Russians and Chinese, both of whom have a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, with the veto power granted by that permanent seat.

As horrid as the thought may be, as painfully as my heart cries out in grief for the potential suffering of the common people both in Iran and here in the USA, I am very much afraid that the reactionaries will succeed in provoking a shooting war involving Iran, sometime in 2012.

What the consequences of that war will be, dear reader, that I cannot begin to say. And neither can the criminal psychopaths who control Washington DC and Tel Aviv.



(Open Salon readers can watch the video here)

Even A Blind Pig...

As the old saying goes, even a blind pig finds an occasional acorn.

Foreign Policy magazine is not one of my favorite online publications, being altogether too conservative and mainstream for my taste, but every now and then, they do publish something worth reading. Such is very definitely the case in the latest column by Stephen M. Walt.

This column is the latest is an ongoing editorial catfight between the author and Jeff Goldberg, an ardent Zionist who writes for both Atlantic magazine and Bloomberg. This little spat all started when Mr Walt wrote a blurb for the fly cover of a book which dared to criticize Israel. So now Mr Goldberg has accused Mr Walt of being an anti-Semite, (oh noes!), etc, etc, ad nauseam. And the column linked above is a response by Mr Walt and his associate John Mearsheimer.

"Possum," you think, "why are you wasting my time with an editorial bitchfest between two over-educated East Coast Establishment assholes?".

Well, because in the course of his oh-so-genteel defense, John Mearsheimer makes some very interesting points about what was actually said and not said, and about the nature of the whole Zionist debate.

The book in question is "The Wandering Who", by Gilad Atzmon. In spite of the title, it has nothing to do with Pete Townshend or Roger Daltrey. (And, no, I'm not making any money off the link to Amazon).

As I said, there are some interesting points made here, which is why I'm posting about this whole issue. Not least among these interesting points is a sterling example of just how the Zionists use partial truths to slander people. let me quote one paragraph -

Let me make one additional point about Goldberg's mining of Atzmon's blog posts. Goldberg ends his attack on me with the following quotation from a Feb. 19 blog post by Atzmon: "I believe that from [a] certain ideological perspective, Israel is actually far worse than Nazi Germany." That quotation certainly makes Atzmon look like he has lost his mind and that nothing he has written could be trusted. But Goldberg has misrepresented what Atzmon really said, which is one of his standard tactics. Specifically, he quotes only part of a sentence from Atzmon's blog post; but when you look at the entire sentence, you see that Atzmon is making a different, and far more nuanced point. The entire sentence reads: "Indeed, I believe that from [a] certain ideological perspective, Israel is actually far worse than Nazi Germany, for unlike Nazi Germany, Israel is a democracy and that implies that Israeli citizens are complicit in Israeli atrocities." This is not an argument I would make, but what Atzmon is saying is quite different from the way Goldberg portrays it.

See what I mean? The author offers up an agonizing observation on the moral dangers of representative democracy, in which the leaders which we elect can then take unilateral actions, of an utterly reprehensible nature, in which we are morally complicit. And Goldberg massages that into a simple statement of extremism.

Take the time to read the column linked above, my friends. It's not easy reading, but it is worth your while.

Obama Sucks Israel's Cock Again

Proving once again that he is Israel's whining bitch apologist, Barak Hussein Obama, our ever-so-noble President, in all his Nobel prize winning glory, stood up and delivered a speech to the UN that Desertpeace has quite accurately described as "a defense of Jim Crow in Israel".

Way to go, Mr President. I'm sure Abraham Lincoln, whom you so admire, would have totally agreed with your unconditional support of a racist, fascist Israeli government.

Meanwhile, Israel is busily arming its mad-dog, religious-fanatic "settlers" even more heavily than before, and drawing them pictures of when to shoot.

Oh, but tonguing Israel's anus wasn't enough for our President, oh no, not by half. He had to go for broke with comments like this...

I took office at a time of two wars for the United States. Moreover, the violent extremists who drew us into war in the first place -- Osama bin Laden, and his al Qaeda organization -- remained at large. Today, we've set a new direction.

A new direction, Mr President? You mean by killing Habeas Corpus and escalating drone attacks in Pakistan, drone attacks that kill 39 times as many civilians as "militants"?

At the end of this year, America’s military operation in Iraq will be over. We will have a normal relationship with a sovereign nation that is a member of the community of nations. That equal partnership will be strengthened by our support for Iraq -- for its government and for its security forces, for its people and for their aspirations.

Yeah, right, but we'll leave behind 10,000 fully-armed "trainers" and roughly 4 times that many mercenaries in the guise of "private security personnel". Oh, but we're completely withdrawing from Iraq, really!

As we end the war in Iraq, the United States and our coalition partners have begun a transition in Afghanistan. Between now and 2014, an increasingly capable Afghan government and security forces will step forward to take responsibility for the future of their country. As they do, we are drawing down our own forces, while building an enduring partnership with the Afghan people.

No, asshole, the war in Afghanistan is just getting to the crucial stage, and the Taliban have momentum on their side. You ain't seen nothing yet. And how can you talk about "building an enduring partnership with the Afghan people" when most of them hate our guts because we have occupied their nation and murdered their kin? Just how stupid do you think we are, Mr President, to swallow blatant bullshit like this? What kind of brain-dead morons do you take us for?

The fact is peace is hard. But our people demand it. Over nearly seven decades, even as the United Nations helped avert a third world war, we still live in a world scarred by conflict and plagued by poverty. Even as we proclaim our love for peace and our hatred of war, there are still convulsions in our world that endanger us all.

No, you worthless cock-bandit, peace is easy. You just stop killing people and end your occupation of their countries, you stop supporting fascist governments that murder their own people, you stop pandering to the corporations and the Zionist Lobby.

In short, Mr President, you simply retrieve your misplaced testicles from wherever you have them hidden, and do your job. You remember the words of your oath of office and live up to them. Of The People, By The People, For The People. It's very simple. You quit being a whimpering pussy and be a President.

Asshole.

Straight Talk From A Spook

I have said this before, but it's more true than ever. I am really coming to seriously admire Robert Grenier.

This man can speak the truth so compellingly, and yet manage a sense of the whimsical, a brief and eloquent thought spared for what-might-have-been. Who would ever have expected it from a former spook? I am forced to reconsider my image of the CIA, in spite of their manifold and heinous crimes against humanity, their crimes against sanity.

The article to which I refer is here.

Then again, what is the CIA, really?

On the one hand, if you go to their website, at www.cia.gov, and choose World Factbook from the blue menu at the right, you can find a truly excellent online reference source, one which contains blunt, factual, astonishingly undiplomatic appraisals of any number of nations and situations around this world of ours. Back at the main site, if you examine the menu on the left, there is a listing for the CIA "Kids' Page". I confess, I haven't had the courage to look. My excuse is that I'm not a parent, (much to my sorrow and regret), and therefore I'm not qualified to assess the situation. If you're a parent and you do have the courage, let me know what you find, please.

On the other hand, we all know their reputation. There are some who describe the CIA as essentially the private army of the Bush Dynasty. I suspect that the CIA to which these folks refer is essentially the directorate of operations. But who knows?

In conclusion, let me offer a personal anecdote from years ago. In the late 1970's, I was contemplating career decisions, of the sort we all have to make long before we have any realistic idea what we are committing ourselves to, or just how far-reaching the effects of such decisions will be. An older female relative, whom I most emphatically will not identify by name, asked me if I'd considered a career with the CIA. I replied that no, I had not thought about it, and added that it was my understanding that one could not merely walk in and apply for such jobs, but that one must be invited to apply. She looked me right in the eye and asked, "would you like to be invited?".

The point of this story is not that this female relative of mine was an evil woman. She was rather stern and serious for my tastes, and hellishly judgmental, but she was not evil by any means. The point of this story is that the CIA is composed of people, people much like thee and me.

For the record, I said No, thank you. Just imagine how different a man I might be today, if I had said Yes, thank you. Granted, with my basic irreverence for authority, I might well have wound up dead or in prison. But, on the gripping hand, I might have wound up a man much like Robert Grenier.

Thor's Day

Ah, what lovely times in which to live!

I'm not even going to rant about the aftermath of the Norwegian Shooter incident, except to say that the discourse in Israel, on the Hebrew language websites, is disgusting. There are far, far too many Israelis saying that the Norwegians "had it coming" for supporting Palestine. Such bigoted, hateful, narrow-mindedness sows the seeds of its own destruction, and when it happens, perhaps the world will say that Israel "had it coming".

Ted Rall points out the creation of another astroturf (fake grassroots) cat's paw organization called Americans Elect. ("Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!"). One is tempted to ask how stupid they think we are, but the probable answer is too painful to contemplate.

Al Jazeera English has an Op-Ed on the "Censorship of War Casualties in the US" which I found to be worth reading. It is a fact that the MSM goes out of its way to avoid showing Mr and Mrs America the blood and gore that is the inevitable by-product of American Imperialism.

Paul Rosenberg has an interesting piece on the New Apostolic Reformation, again at AJE. Oh, those wacky fundamentalists. If they weren't so scary, they would be highly amusing to watch.

And it was pointed out to me today that Obama has a serious problem on his hands. Well, yes, OK, he has a whole basket-full of them, but give the man a break. Middle East diplomacy is hard! Pardon the cheap shot, but I'm still thinking about the administration's comment that bringing peace to the Middle East had turned out to be much more difficult than the President had expected.

I mean, no shit, Sherlock! Just think about the colossal arrogance or colossal ignorance that comment betrayed. There has only been an issue here since 1948. That was during the administration of Harry Truman. Since then, Presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr, Clinton, and Bush Jr have all wrestled with the issue. Eleven different administrations have tried to bring peace to the Middle East. If you want to be cynical and say that nobody before Nixon tried very hard (or even at all), that's still seven Presidents, seven administrations, that have struggled with this intractable tarbaby of an issue. But Obama thought he was just going to waltz in there and fix it all up in time for the midterms of 2010.

Either the man is stupendously arrogant, or he was just ignorant of foreign affairs to a truly frightening degree. And his grasp of international issues does not seem to be improving with experience.

So, to the current issue. International support for a unilateral Palestinian declaration of statehood is snowballing rapidly. It is becoming obvious that the Palestinians will have enough support in the General Assembly to pass their measure with ease this September, barely a month from now. This is going to leave the US playing the dog in the manger by vetoing it in the Security Council.

Now, Obama is in re-election mode, utterly and shamelessly. Can he afford to alienate his Democratic base by a Security Council veto of Palestinian hopes, against the clear majority of international opinion, and just hope desperately they have forgiven him by next November? Or will that be the straw that breaks the camel's back, on top of the ugly cutbacks in Social Security and Medicare that he is crying out to give the Republicans? With the economy stalling badly, the real unemployment rate just under 20% and climbing, and jobs nowhere to be found, just how much more can Obama afford to piss-off the Left?

One Wife Not Enough

Ah, marriage, domestic bliss. Hey, what are you laughing about?

Two stories here.

Michelle Bachmann, the Great White Hope of the Clueless Right, has signed a 14-point pledge, (hey, she can count to 14, that makes her smarter than Sarah Palin), eschewing things like "polygamy, adultery, and polyandry", along with a few minor points like homosexuality, (no Bachmann-Palin slash fanfic), and Sharia Islam. Just, you know, in case she felt the urge to suddenly recite the Shahadah...

And it's interesting that she didn't include polygyny.

You can check the links above, but here's a summary.

Polygyny is a man with two or more wives, in which there is no direct marriage bond between the wives. This is what Islam endorses. This is typical of the patriarchs in the Old Testament of the Christian bible. This is also what Fundamentalist Mormons practice, although neither LDS nor RLDS endorse it.

Polyandry is a woman with two or more husbands, in which there is no direct marriage bond between the husbands. This is rare.

Polygamy is a marriage with more than two partners, in which each partner is married to each of the others. In the USA, we usually call this group marriage.

Meanwhile, back in Jordan, land of the last Hashemite king, the "Committee For Supporting Polygamy" has been launched to promote polygyny, although they call it polygamy. Confused yet? No? Well then, read on by all means. It only gets better. "Spinsterhood," says the founder, "is a dangerous social phenomenon that, if unabated through marriage, would lead to social and ethical degeneration."

Now, those of you who read this blog regularly, know by now that I am a staunch opponent of Islamophobia. I'm no Arab-basher. And I grant you that my North American perspective on society is not well-suited to judge social phenomena in the Middle East. But...

Back to the story. It seems that in Jordan, the number of unmarried women over thirty is 15 times what it was in 1981.

Now, if you want to hear a calm, reasonable Jordanian, from a charity that pays for weddings for those who cannot afford them, explain why he thinks "polygamy" (polyandry, dammit) is not a good idea, read the story and watch the video. The gentleman in question comes on about 1:15

So, the other man, at the beginning of the video, who just married his third wife. Islam allows him a total of four, do you think we could get him to marry Michelle Bachmann?

There exist a number of related posts on polyandry among the Jewish community over at the Mostly Kosher blog, much to my surprise. Life educates us every day.