|
|||||||||
Posted December 3, 2002
Journalism
Regarding "Fighting Dirty" by Justin Raimondo:
As many in this country who value quality journalism are forced to, I rely on the Washington Post and New York Times for more reasonable news than I receive on TV....
It is disgusting that the story on a weapons inspector's sexuality should be promoted with only one purpose being served. ...
What if our biggest newspapers had run stories about Jefferson's infidelity a couple of days after the Declaration of Independence had been produced? It isn't that hard to get a subculture of cynicism to overturn even the noblest of deeds. Whoever wrote, and especially made the decisions to publish, this article should be sent to the tabloids where garbage belongs. ...
Rights
Regarding "All I want for Christmas is a bombed-out dollhouse," by Krista Foss:
Dean McMillen (Guerneville, California): I read your [Eric Garris's] comment(s) in an article concerning this new toy, and I quote: "This is not just another war toy – it's a total paradigm shift in the war toy industry. It's setting up the young people for this new kind of war, where soldiers come into your house and take it over when they need to."
What "war" are we talking about here? I don't see it. I'm an 11 year vet of both the United States Marine Corps and the US Army and never once have I "commandeered" another's home for my use "whenever I needed to."
Who are you to say my kid can't play with a toy that you dislike? Come on. You people always shove your right (one that I helped you keep) to Freedom of Speech, burn the flag, and protest down everyone's throats. Then you turn around and decide that "this toy isn't appropriate for your kid, so we're going to fight to have it pulled from the shelves"? Boy, what an oxymoron that is.
Why don't you let me be the judge of what's good or bad for my kid? You didn't sit with my wife for 23 hours in a hospital while she gave birth to our daughter! So what do you think gives you the right to take something away from her because you don't like it? Pfff...
I don't know why everyone thinks that the military are a bunch of "ministers of death praying for war." 99.9% of the guys I knew, as well as myself, never want(ed) to go to war with anyone! Yeah, you have your 1% of crazy bastards "who have nothing to lose, so what the hell." So, out of respect, I wish people would quit blaming the military for everything that goes bad in the world and look a little further up the chain. Simple fact is, if we didn't have the military – we'd be f*cked!
Oh, and you think you have it bad here? Why don't you spend a few months in Somalia, surrounded by an unseen enemy, deplorable poverty and violence. I guarantee you'd look at your situation in a whole new light.
Eric Garris: You clearly didn't read anything else on our site, and made a lot of inaccurate assumptions about us.
In fact, we support your right to buy the toy. We support your kid's right to play with it. We support JC Penney's right to sell it. We also have a right to give our opinion and to voluntarily boycott JC Penney. We are not flag-burners. I am, personally, a Republican and a patriot.
You go on and on about what we believe, putting actual quotes in my mouth. But, hey, I even support your right to do that.
Dean McMillen: I don't want to fight with you, Mr. Garris, but according to the article in Canada's Globe and Mail, I again quote: "Antiwar.com has been pushing the US department store chain JC Penny to remove Forward Command Post from its on-line catalog and stores. (Calls to the head office 972-431-1000 - were not returned.)"
The words "pushing" and "remove" must've thrown me off? Huh, sounds like you're trying to wipe it clean from sight to me – period.
By the way, all the things I said in my initial message were in no way directed toward "you" as an individual, or even just your group. I meant "you" as a conglomerate of people (i.e. protesters). And I in no way insinuated that you don't have the right to do so. That's one of the finer points about living in this country: You actually have rights. (Also, I'm not a Republican – but I am a patriot.)
EG: Voluntary boycotts are a long-standing American tradition. We would like JC Penney to voluntarily remove it, under pressure from concerned customers. Everything involved is voluntary. We don't support government or any other forced actions. That is what is great about freedom and the free market. We can use our voices to try to accomplish things we want without getting the government involved. But having the government ban such things would be worse than seeing them sold.
Saudi Scapegoat
Regarding "War Party Dumps Bush?" by Justin Raimondo:
Saudi Arabia is once again is being used as a scapegoat by many in the west nowadays, instead of pointing the fingers at real culprit. Usama might have been born in Saudi Arabia, but the one country that made Usama what he is now, is none other than the United States of America – like Saddam before him, and Noriega before them. If all these who are demanding that Saudi Arabia be held accountable for the actions of some of its born sons were such honest people, they would be calling for the same from the American government!
Technology Transfer
Regarding "A North Korea-Pakistan Connection?" by Praful Bidwai:
...Bidwai's claim, "The most stunning of these may be the world's first instance of the actual transfer, from one state to another, of advanced know-how to make nuclear weapons," is utter and complete nonsense. Assuming Pakistan did transfer nuclear technology to North Korea, it hardly would be the first. It totally ignores the fact that both India's and Pakistan's nuclear programs could not have come into existence themselves without "actual transfer, from one state to another, of advanced know-how to make nuclear weapons." (To see a list of countries that contributed to India and Pakistan's know-how see http://www.diaspora-net.org/nuclear/candu_india_pakistan.htm). Also see: Tim Weiner, "U.S. And China Helped Pakistan Build Its Bomb," New York Times, June 1, 1998; Steven Erlanger, "US Tells Moscow to Halt Ballistic Missile Aid to Iran," New York Times, August 22, 1997. Let's also not forget Israel's and South Africa's nuclear programs aren't all homegrown.
Also, India itself had been accusing China – not North Korea – of transferring missile technology to Pakistan up to this point (see "India conveys its concern to China about transfer of missile technology to Pakistan"). If that were taken to be true, Pakistan would have no need to deal with the North Koreans, as I am sure China has a much better missile program than North Korea and thus a lot more to offer Pakistan. It seems very convenient that all of a sudden it is North Korea supplying the missile technology in exchange for nuclear [technology]. According to "CRS Report for Congress, CRS94-470F" of June 1, 1994, "The Director of the Central Intelligence Agency has stated that there is a 'better than even chance' that Pyongyang already possesses one or two nuclear weapons," which tends to show the North Koreans hardly needed Pakistan's help of late.
I could go on and on about it but I won't. I would just say that the Bidwai piece was nothing more than pure Indian government propaganda and should not have been featured on your site.
Observers
Regarding "Fighting Dirty" by Justin Raimondo:
"Of course, if some really rigorous checks had been done on the inspectors last time around, more than a few spies might have been unmasked, according to former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter: apparently the idea was to stake out Saddam rather than merely his weapons of mass destruction."
Alas, if only they had done this during the war in Bosnia! When looking to hire "observers," the UN would often contract to the US State Department, which would then subcontract to the Pentagon, which finally contracted to – MPRI!
Thus, at the end of the day, what you had was a private mercenary in the uniform of a pacifistic, well-meaning "observer."
Forgeries
I can't believe how little attention the US media are giving the story that a recent audio purporting to be Osama bin Laden is a fake. Some important implications and questions flowing out of this story:
It's reasonable to assume that Al-Qaeda (or whoever crafted this forgery) would not go to such extreme lengths to give the impression that bin Laden was alive, unless he was indeed dead.
Al-Qaeda (or whoever crafted this forgery) must have felt it was imperative that the world believe bin Laden was alive at this moment in time. This could indicate that the Al-Qaeda organization is faltering – and it tried this stunt in a desperate attempt to "rally the troops" as the US prepares to invade Iraq. Another possibility is Al-Qaeda (or whoever crafted this forgery) wanted to scare Western nations into not supporting the US-Israeli "war on terrorism" and probably intended for the tape to dovetail with the Bali attacks. Another more dark possibility is the phony bin Laden tape was intended to rally Western support the US-Israeli "war on terrorism" – which prior to the Bali attack was waning dramatically across the globe.
If bin Laden is dead, this may explain the apparent change in Al-Qaeda tactics and strategy – “attacking "soft" targets like the Bali nightclub and broadening their campaign to include non-American targets such as Australia and, more recently, Israel. Also such a dramatic change in tactics and strategy might be more evidence that Al-Qaeda is not really "resurgent" as George Tenet tried to claim a number of weeks ago, but rather that the organization is actually on the ropes and desperate for support and influence.
How did the CIA and the rest of the multibillion dollar US intelligence establishment miss that the tape was a fake? What did the Swiss Dalle Molle Institute for Perceptual Artificial Intelligence know that our multibillion intelligence establishment didn't? Or, was it that the US intelligence establishment did know it was a fake and they deceived us? Was the US intelligence establishment itself somehow deceived or pressured to declare the tape authentic, perhaps to garner support for the US-Israeli "war on terrorism"?
It may be useful to consider this phony bin Laden tape in light of other forgeries and possible forgeries that have appeared since the 9/11 attacks:
- the Anthrax-laced letters sent to the media and Senators Daschle and Leahy which were made to appear that they were from Islamic terrorists connected to the 9/11 attacks;
- the odd suicide letter allegedly written by Muhammad Atta;
- the passport of a 9/11 hijacker "miraculously" found several blocks from the smoldering WTC;
- Arabic flight training manuals, pictures of bin Laden, and other incriminating paraphernalia carelessly strewn about the vehicles of the 9/11 hijackers (Remember that, according to the official story, the 9/11 hijackers were extremely meticulous in hiding their association with Al-Qaeda and their plot to attack the US prior to the 9/11 attacks, and bin Laden, at least, initially denied involvement in the attacks.);
- the very poor quality bin Laden video tape found in Afghanistan (how the US obtained the tape is still a mystery) were bin Laden appears to admit for the first time that Al-Qaeda was behind the 9/11 attacks; and so forth. The motive behind all these forgeries and possible forgeries seems to be that someone wants to continually reinforce the idea of an Islamic bogeyman threatening the US and more recently the Western world and Israel.
If Al-Qaeda is the creator of this phony bin Laden tape, how did they gain the technical expertise and resources to produce a forgery that outwitted the CIA? Unless the CIA analysis was corrupted in some way (which would be a major scandal), doesn't this phony bin Laden tape sound more like the work of a top notch intelligence service like say the Mossad than a ragtag terrorist group like Al-Qaeda?
Canada's Opportunity
...If we in Canada support the war against Iraq we will also be subject to so-called terrorism. I am certain that we, as a hitherto peace loving/mediating nation, will lose this status and become as unsafe to live in as the US will certainly be in case she continues her foreign policies in the newest of her follies.
The political glitch of Francie Ducros to call the US president a moron turned out to be a global wake-up call. It reminds me of the eloquent story of the emperor and his new clothes. Bravo! It may have been a thoughtless act but it turned out to be a most effective way of calling a spade a spade!
The insane notion to pour huge sums of money to bolster our armed forces is totally illogical: We have a tiny population (and tax base) in relation to our land mass. Our armed forces are therefore minute and totally laughable. Imagine that we have to defend our unbelievably immense coastline! Our best approach is to just maintain the status quo as far as our armed forces go and seize the great opportunity to be an example to the world of freedom from oppression by armed force and global exploitation in any of its forms. ...
~ Peter
von Zezschwitz