The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Howard Zinn Archive
Empire or Humanity?
What the Classroom Didn't Teach Me About the American Empire
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_81258478

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

[Republished from April 1, 2008]

With an occupying army waging war in Iraq and Afghanistan, with military bases and corporate bullying in every part of the world, there is hardly a question any more of the existence of an American Empire. Indeed, the once fervent denials have turned into a boastful, unashamed embrace of the idea.

However, the very idea that the United States was an empire did not occur to me until after I finished my work as a bombardier with the Eighth Air Force in the Second World War, and came home. Even as I began to have second thoughts about the purity of the “Good War,” even after being horrified by Hiroshima and Nagasaki, even after rethinking my own bombing of towns in Europe, I still did not put all that together in the context of an American “Empire.”

I was conscious, like everyone, of the British Empire and the other imperial powers of Europe, but the United States was not seen in the same way. When, after the war, I went to college under the G.I. Bill of Rights and took courses in U.S. history, I usually found a chapter in the history texts called “The Age of Imperialism.” It invariably referred to the Spanish-American War of 1898 and the conquest of the Philippines that followed. It seemed that American imperialism lasted only a relatively few years. There was no overarching view of U.S. expansion that might lead to the idea of a more far-ranging empire — or period of “imperialism.”

I recall the classroom map (labeled “Western Expansion”) which presented the march across the continent as a natural, almost biological phenomenon. That huge acquisition of land called “The Louisiana Purchase” hinted at nothing but vacant land acquired. There was no sense that this territory had been occupied by hundreds of Indian tribes which would have to be annihilated or forced from their homes — what we now call “ethnic cleansing” — so that whites could settle the land, and later railroads could crisscross it, presaging “civilization” and its brutal discontents.

Neither the discussions of “Jacksonian democracy” in history courses, nor the popular book by Arthur Schlesinger Jr., The Age of Jackson, told me about the “Trail of Tears,” the deadly forced march of “the five civilized tribes” westward from Georgia and Alabama across the Mississippi, leaving 4,000 dead in their wake. No treatment of the Civil War mentioned the Sand Creek massacre of hundreds of Indian villagers in Colorado just as “emancipation” was proclaimed for black people by Lincoln’s administration.

That classroom map also had a section to the south and west labeled “Mexican Cession.” This was a handy euphemism for the aggressive war against Mexico in 1846 in which the United States seized half of that country’s land, giving us California and the great Southwest. The term “Manifest Destiny,” used at that time, soon of course became more universal. On the eve of the Spanish-American War in 1898, the Washington Post saw beyond Cuba: “We are face to face with a strange destiny. The taste of Empire is in the mouth of the people even as the taste of blood in the jungle.”

The violent march across the continent, and even the invasion of Cuba, appeared to be within a natural sphere of U.S. interest. After all, hadn’t the Monroe Doctrine of 1823 declared the Western Hemisphere to be under our protection? But with hardly a pause after Cuba came the invasion of the Philippines, halfway around the world. The word “imperialism” now seemed a fitting one for U.S. actions. Indeed, that long, cruel war — treated quickly and superficially in the history books — gave rise to an Anti-Imperialist League, in which William James and Mark Twain were leading figures. But this was not something I learned in university either.

The “Sole Superpower” Comes into View

Reading outside the classroom, however, I began to fit the pieces of history into a larger mosaic. What at first had seemed like a purely passive foreign policy in the decade leading up to the First World War now appeared as a succession of violent interventions: the seizure of the Panama Canal zone from Colombia, a naval bombardment of the Mexican coast, the dispatch of the Marines to almost every country in Central America, occupying armies sent to Haiti and the Dominican Republic. As the much-decorated General Smedley Butler, who participated in many of those interventions, wrote later: “I was an errand boy for Wall Street.”

At the very time I was learning this history — the years after World War II — the United States was becoming not just another imperial power, but the world’s leading superpower. Determined to maintain and expand its monopoly on nuclear weapons, it was taking over remote islands in the Pacific, forcing the inhabitants to leave, and turning the islands into deadly playgrounds for more atomic tests.

In his memoir, No Place to Hide, Dr. David Bradley, who monitored radiation in those tests, described what was left behind as the testing teams went home: “[R]adioactivity, contamination, the wrecked island of Bikini and its sad-eyed patient exiles.” The tests in the Pacific were followed, over the years, by more tests in the deserts of Utah and Nevada, more than a thousand tests in all.

When the war in Korea began in 1950, I was still studying history as a graduate student at Columbia University. Nothing in my classes prepared me to understand American policy in Asia. But I was reading I. F. Stone’s Weekly. Stone was among the very few journalists who questioned the official justification for sending an army to Korea. It seemed clear to me then that it was not the invasion of South Korea by the North that prompted U.S. intervention, but the desire of the United States to have a firm foothold on the continent of Asia, especially now that the Communists were in power in China.

Years later, as the covert intervention in Vietnam grew into a massive and brutal military operation, the imperial designs of the United States became yet clearer to me. In 1967, I wrote a little book called Vietnam: The Logic of Withdrawal. By that time I was heavily involved in the movement against the war.

When I read the hundreds of pages of the Pentagon Papers entrusted to me by Daniel Ellsberg, what jumped out at me were the secret memos from the National Security Council. Explaining the U.S. interest in Southeast Asia, they spoke bluntly of the country’s motives as a quest for “tin, rubber, oil.”

Neither the desertions of soldiers in the Mexican War, nor the draft riots of the Civil War, not the anti-imperialist groups at the turn of the century, nor the strong opposition to World War I — indeed no antiwar movement in the history of the nation reached the scale of the opposition to the war in Vietnam. At least part of that opposition rested on an understanding that more than Vietnam was at stake, that the brutal war in that tiny country was part of a grander imperial design.

Various interventions following the U.S. defeat in Vietnam seemed to reflect the desperate need of the still-reigning superpower — even after the fall of its powerful rival, the Soviet Union — to establish its dominance everywhere. Hence the invasion of Grenada in 1982, the bombing assault on Panama in 1989, the first Gulf war of 1991. Was George Bush Sr. heartsick over Saddam Hussein’s seizure of Kuwait, or was he using that event as an opportunity to move U.S. power firmly into the coveted oil region of the Middle East? Given the history of the United States, given its obsession with Middle Eastern oil dating from Franklin Roosevelt’s 1945 deal with King Abdul Aziz of Saudi Arabia, and the CIA’s overthrow of the democratic Mossadeq government in Iran in 1953, it is not hard to decide that question.

Justifying Empire

The ruthless attacks of September 11th (as the official 9/11 Commission acknowledged) derived from fierce hatred of U.S. expansion in the Middle East and elsewhere. Even before that event, the Defense Department acknowledged, according to Chalmers Johnson’s book The Sorrows of Empire, the existence of more than 700 American military bases outside of the United States.

Since that date, with the initiation of a “war on terrorism,” many more bases have been established or expanded: in Kyrgyzstan, Afghanistan, the desert of Qatar, the Gulf of Oman, the Horn of Africa, and wherever else a compliant nation could be bribed or coerced.

When I was bombing cities in Germany, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and France in the Second World War, the moral justification was so simple and clear as to be beyond discussion: We were saving the world from the evil of fascism. I was therefore startled to hear from a gunner on another crew — what we had in common was that we both read books — that he considered this “an imperialist war.” Both sides, he said, were motivated by ambitions of control and conquest. We argued without resolving the issue. Ironically, tragically, not long after our discussion, this fellow was shot down and killed on a mission.

In wars, there is always a difference between the motives of the soldiers and the motives of the political leaders who send them into battle. My motive, like that of so many, was innocent of imperial ambition. It was to help defeat fascism and create a more decent world, free of aggression, militarism, and racism.

The motive of the U.S. establishment, understood by the aerial gunner I knew, was of a different nature. It was described early in 1941 by Henry Luce, multi-millionaire owner of Time, Life, and Fortune magazines, as the coming of “The American Century.” The time had arrived, he said, for the United States “to exert upon the world the full impact of our influence, for such purposes as we see fit, and by such means as we see fit.”

We can hardly ask for a more candid, blunter declaration of imperial design. It has been echoed in recent years by the intellectual handmaidens of the Bush administration, but with assurances that the motive of this “influence” is benign, that the “purposes” — whether in Luce’s formulation or more recent ones — are noble, that this is an “imperialism lite.” As George Bush said in his second inaugural address: “Spreading liberty around the world is the calling of our time.” The New York Times called that speech “striking for its idealism.”

The American Empire has always been a bipartisan project — Democrats and Republicans have taken turns extending it, extolling it, justifying it. President Woodrow Wilson told graduates of the Naval Academy in 1914 (the year he bombarded Mexico) that the U.S. used “her navy and her army… as the instruments of civilization, not as the instruments of aggression.” And Bill Clinton, in 1992, told West Point graduates: “The values you learned here will be able to spread throughout the country and throughout the world.”

For the people of the United States, and indeed for people all over the world, those claims sooner or later are revealed to be false. The rhetoric, often persuasive on first hearing, soon becomes overwhelmed by horrors that can no longer be concealed: the bloody corpses of Iraq, the torn limbs of American GIs, the millions of families driven from their homes — in the Middle East and in the Mississippi Delta.

Have not the justifications for empire, embedded in our culture, assaulting our good sense — that war is necessary for security, that expansion is fundamental to civilization — begun to lose their hold on our minds? Have we reached a point in history where we are ready to embrace a new way of living in the world, expanding not our military power, but our humanity?

Howard Zinn (1922–2010) was a historian, playwright, and activist. He wrote the classic A People’s History of the United States and A People’s History of American Empire, told in comics form, with Mike Konopacki and Paul Buhle. He taught at Spelman College, a black women’s college in Atlanta, where he became active in the civil rights movement. After being fired by Spelman for his support of student protesters, Zinn became a professor of political science at Boston University. He was the author of many books, including an autobiography, You Can’t Be Neutral on a Moving Train. He received the Lannan Foundation Literary Award for Nonfiction and the Eugene V. Debs award for his writing and political activism.

(Republished from TomDispatch by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Foreign Policy, History • Tags: American Military, BookReview 
Of Related Interest
Kosovo_position_within_Serbia
shutterstock_192607253
shutterstock_125767211
Or How to Further Enrich “The Masters of the Universe”
Hide 102 CommentsLeave a Comment
102 Comments to "Empire or Humanity?"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. While never explicitly stated, this whole essay depends on a worldview that differs little from Rousseau’s “noble savage”, in other words, a fairy tale. It reads to me as just so much handwashing. The main takeaway is that Howard Zinn is among the bien pensant and wants to distance himself from all the savagery of the modern world.

    My motive, like that of so many, was innocent of imperial ambition. It was to help defeat fascism and create a more decent world, free of aggression, militarism, and racism.

    Like all leftists he wants us to believe that his motives are selfless, that his politics are free of that nasty personal ambition.

    How does professor Zinn propose to deal with the likes of ISIS, Boko Haram, Hindu “extremists” who burn Christians or eaters of beef, African witch doctors who dismember albinos for their magical body parts, etc.? If he, or someone, does not deal with them then how are we to “create a more decent world”.

    No sale on the cop-out that all the world’s ills flow from European “Imperialism”. That opinion belongs with the naifs and nuts. Man has always been a wolf to man with “progress” being slow, bloody, and incremental.

    Mankind does seem to be moving in the direction of worldwide governance. How else to deal with “aggression, militarism, and racism”? Good luck on even getting everybody to agree on a definition of those terms. IF we do progress that way (and IF that is “progress”) he may rest assured that it will be a bloody, destructive process and not one bit free of self interest on the part of the winners.

    The professor doth protest too much.

    Read More
    • Disagree: Orville H. Larson
    • Replies: @matt
    How does professor Zinn propose to deal with the likes of ISIS

    Zinn aside, here's my proposal: Arm Hezbollah. To the teeth.
    , @Fred Reed
    Zinn of course is exactly right. I wonder how many of the bow-wow-woof commenters have been in a war? Covered one? Spent a year on a casualty ward because of it? Lost friends in one? Seen dead villagers dead for no reason?
    , @KA
    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-deciders/
    The Deciders
    The disastrous Iraq policies that led to ISIS were not President Bush’s.
    By John Hay • October 27, 2015

    "The cast of characters includes President George W. Bush; L. Paul “Jerry” Bremer, the first civilian administrator of postwar Iraq; Douglas Feith, Bush’s undersecretary of defense for policy; Paul Wolfowitz, Bush’s deputy secretary of defense; I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, chief of staff to Vice President Richard B. Cheney (and Cheney’s proxy in these events); Walter Slocombe, who had been President Clinton’s undersecretary of defense for policy, and as such was Feith’s predecessor; Richard Perle, who was chairman of Bush’s defense policy board; and General Jay Garner, whom Bremer replaced as the leader of postwar Iraq....The various accounts present an array of neoconservative thinkers—notably Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, and Walter Slocombe—who implemented their own policies rather than those of the president they served.

    'In the same story, the Times claimed that “The Bush administration did not just discuss keeping the old army. General Garner’s team found contractors to retrain it.”


    IS is the creation of Kissinger , his protege Bremer,Wolfowitz,Libby, Slocombe and Michael ledeen

    send them to Syria fight IS
    , @annamaria
    But are not you interested in having a functioning Bill of Rights for yourself? The simplest ways to protect the Bill of Rights seem to be an enforcement of transparency on the top. The transparency would have certainly showed in whose exactly interests the US have been wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in the Middle East (and creating the rivers of blood). Without such transparency, the following story will remain an ordinary one for the republic (along with the most recent "enhanced interrogation" development): ".. Jesus de Galindez, a lecturer at Columbia University, was kidnapped in Manhattan by U.S. government cutouts and delivered to Dominican Republic dictator Rafael Trujillo. Trujillo then had Galindez, whose exposés of corruption Trujillo feared, boiled alive and fed to sharks, and ordered the murder of the American pilot who’d flown Galindez there. All under the beneficent gaze of CIA Director Allen Dulles."
    https://theintercept.com/2015/11/02/the-deepest-state-the-safari-club-allen-dulles-and-the-devils-chessboard/?comments=1#comments
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /article/empire-or-humanity/#comment-1206117
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Reading the footnotes I am reminded that Professor Zinn no longer plagues this world with his material presence. Modify tenses in my comment accordingly.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. Junior [AKA "Jr."] says:

    Great article! I absolutely loved finding out the story of how Mr. Zinn started on his journey for truth. Thanks for republishing this Mr. Unz.

    I didn’t know that Mr. Zinn had died. His book, “A People’s History of the United States” was one of, if not THE, most influential books that I have read in my lifetime. I remember being over at a friends house almost 20 years ago and noticing it in his collection. I had always liked history and so asked him to borrow it. Before reading it, I thought that I knew history pretty well. After reading it, I realized that I had NO idea of what history really was. I had always heard the phrase, “History is written by the victors” but never really fully comprehended its implications until reading his book. It opened my eyes to the fact that what they tell you happened, is not always the case and to question EVERYTHING. I would compare my reading of his book to Neo taking the red pill in the Matrix and it started me on my journey down into the rabbit hole. I once was blind, but now I see… or trying to at least. For that, I’ll be eternally grateful to Mr. Zinn.

    On a side note, I just read an interesting article about the meeting that Mr. Zinn talks about in the article of “Franklin Roosevelt’s 1945 deal with King Abdul Aziz of Saudi Arabia.” Great stuff for anyone that wants to find out more about the origins of the American-Saudi relationship.

    http://www.ameu.org/getattachment/51ee4866-95c1-4603-b0dd-e16d2d49fcbc/The-Day-FDR-Met-Saudi-Arabia-Ibn-Saud.aspx

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. Ah, yes. We are a nation of thieves and murderers, and yet Zinn didn’t mind having a share of the spoils. Typical lefty.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KA
    This is as good an argument as is the basis for the reprimand of his the son or daughter by a pedophile following the exposure of the dastardly act .
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Great Battle for Blair Mountain"] says:

    The late Howard Zinn and his best friend Noam Chomsky are waging Jewish ethnic warfare against The Historic Native Born White American Majority…the racial group they violently hate.

    The Southwest belongs to The Historic Native Born White American Majority…not to Mexico.

    Noam Chomsky does not support the right of return for Palestinians.

    Noam Chomsky also owns a Mansion on Martha’s Vineyard…he is loaded with money.

    Noam Chomsky is onboard with the policy of Muslim Male Yoot mass gang rape of The Women of Europa.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Snarglefargus
    First, in so far as I am able to determine, Howard Zinn is not Noam Chomsky. Second, while there may be some sense in which in which the Southwest belongs to "The Historic Native Born White American Majority", it is rapidly being re-occupied by Mexicans and as such, like it or not, is becoming, de-facto, part of Mexico again.
    , @AndrewR
    Serious question: do you copy and paste "The Historic Native Born White American Majority" or do you type it out each time? I would suggest you just write it out once in any given comment, abbreviating subsequent uses to THNBWAM
    , @another fred

    The Southwest belongs to The Historic Native Born White American Majority…not to Mexico.
     
    Consider the concept of oversharpening a knife or a leader who takes his people into a war that they have no stomach for.

    Sort of like there are bumperstickers here in the south that say "If my ancestors had known how this would turn out they'd have picked their own damn cotton".

    Everything decays eventually, but I think the extended conquest of the Southwest will prove to be one of the factors that shortens the life of the Republic (Texas excepted, which was an independent republic on its own, sort of).

    There is always a minority that will fight to the death, sometimes, like the 300 they make a difference, but eventually reality asserts itself. One may assert that it was possible to bring in the slaves or the Hispanic population without damage to the Republic, but I don't think history will assent.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. Junior [AKA "Jr."] says:

    How does professor Zinn propose to deal with the likes of ISIS

    Just a guess, but maybe he would say a good place to start would be our government not creating, financing, and arming them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred

    Just a guess, but maybe he would say a good place to start would be our government not creating, financing, and arming them.
     
    I'll go along with some of the arming, maybe some of the financing, but not the creating. They are the natural product of the cycles of a tribal Muslim culture.
    , @interesting
    you took the words right out of my mouth.

    But what is most telling is that poster not understanding this fact and in a way perfectly describing the brainwashing this article points to,
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Great Battle for Blair Montain"] says:

    The open borders nonwhite immigration enthusiasm of Howard Zinn..Noam Chomsky…and Paul Craig Roberts…has had enormous,monumentally devastating economic consequences for The Historic Native Born White American Majority Working Class…and as a consequence, Native Born White American Working Class Male Teenagers make their way to the Military Recruiters Office and “volunteer” as canon fodder for the Greedy Cheating Class Mega-Ceo.

    Zinn,Chomsky and Paul Craig Roberts are aiding and abetting the EVIL EMPIRE.

    Unz

    Get that greedy piece of shit Noam Chomsky on Unz Review and have him debate the Unz Review Commenters.

    By the way, I know for a fact that Chomsky has a very large home on Martha’s Vineyard with acres of land.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Biff
    Kill Whitey!!!!!!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. @Junior

    How does professor Zinn propose to deal with the likes of ISIS
     
    Just a guess, but maybe he would say a good place to start would be our government not creating, financing, and arming them.

    Just a guess, but maybe he would say a good place to start would be our government not creating, financing, and arming them.

    I’ll go along with some of the arming, maybe some of the financing, but not the creating. They are the natural product of the cycles of a tribal Muslim culture.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Drapetomaniac
    "They are the natural product of the cycles of a tribal Muslim culture."

    And of course the US, current most destructive stealing killing country in the world, is the natural product of Western Civilization.

    Man is rotten to the core, and his idiot child government is many times worse.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Junior [AKA "Jr."] says:

    Some unbelievable idiots commenting on this article. I’ll just let Gen. Smedley Butler say all that needs to be said to the fools.

    http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html

    Read More
    • Agree: Orville H. Larson
    • Replies: @War for Blair Mountain
    I ordered twenty copies of General Smedley Butler's "War is a Racket" from Amazon last night.

    Two memorials on the LIE for two dead 19 year White Teenagers who served as canon fodder in the USMC in Afghanistan...over the Sag Harbor bridge which is named after another 19 year White Teenager who had his head blown off in Afghanistan...Justin Haerter...the Ferry to Shelter Island....named after another 19 year White Teenager serving as canon fodder in Afghanistan....closed coffin funeral....over to the Westhampton Beach Bridge...named after a Chaminade High School Grad serving as canon fodder in the Navy Seals....closed coffin funeral...the Taliban hacked him to death after he fell out of the back of a helicopter...

    Democratic Party-Republican Party labor policy....
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. matt says:
    @another fred
    While never explicitly stated, this whole essay depends on a worldview that differs little from Rousseau's "noble savage", in other words, a fairy tale. It reads to me as just so much handwashing. The main takeaway is that Howard Zinn is among the bien pensant and wants to distance himself from all the savagery of the modern world.

    My motive, like that of so many, was innocent of imperial ambition. It was to help defeat fascism and create a more decent world, free of aggression, militarism, and racism.
     
    Like all leftists he wants us to believe that his motives are selfless, that his politics are free of that nasty personal ambition.

    How does professor Zinn propose to deal with the likes of ISIS, Boko Haram, Hindu "extremists" who burn Christians or eaters of beef, African witch doctors who dismember albinos for their magical body parts, etc.? If he, or someone, does not deal with them then how are we to "create a more decent world".

    No sale on the cop-out that all the world's ills flow from European "Imperialism". That opinion belongs with the naifs and nuts. Man has always been a wolf to man with "progress" being slow, bloody, and incremental.

    Mankind does seem to be moving in the direction of worldwide governance. How else to deal with "aggression, militarism, and racism"? Good luck on even getting everybody to agree on a definition of those terms. IF we do progress that way (and IF that is "progress") he may rest assured that it will be a bloody, destructive process and not one bit free of self interest on the part of the winners.

    The professor doth protest too much.

    How does professor Zinn propose to deal with the likes of ISIS

    Zinn aside, here’s my proposal: Arm Hezbollah. To the teeth.

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred

    How does professor Zinn propose to deal with the likes of ISIS

    Zinn aside, here’s my proposal: Arm Hezbollah. To the teeth.
     
    That creates the image in my mind of using a grizzly to get rid of an invasive mountain lion.

    Not a real improvement.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. I had never read anything by Howard Zinn before this. It is a good reason for reading the Unz Review.

    Read More
    • Replies: @WorkingClass
    Mr. Wizard:

    You seem like a curious fellow. Please do read Zinn's A People's History Of The United States. It is American history from the point of view of the people who actually lived here. It's an enjoyable read and provides a perspective unavailable anywhere else. It is considered subversive by imperialists which adds a bit of spice in my opinion.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. @War for Blair Mountain
    The late Howard Zinn and his best friend Noam Chomsky are waging Jewish ethnic warfare against The Historic Native Born White American Majority...the racial group they violently hate.

    The Southwest belongs to The Historic Native Born White American Majority...not to Mexico.

    Noam Chomsky does not support the right of return for Palestinians.

    Noam Chomsky also owns a Mansion on Martha's Vineyard...he is loaded with money.

    Noam Chomsky is onboard with the policy of Muslim Male Yoot mass gang rape of The Women of Europa.

    First, in so far as I am able to determine, Howard Zinn is not Noam Chomsky. Second, while there may be some sense in which in which the Southwest belongs to “The Historic Native Born White American Majority”, it is rapidly being re-occupied by Mexicans and as such, like it or not, is becoming, de-facto, part of Mexico again.

    Read More
    • Replies: @War for Blair Mountain
    Howard Zinn was Noam Chomsky's closest friend.

    The Mexican invasion of the Southwest can be halted and reversed...like all other invasions are in human history. When The Historic Native Born White American Majority transitions out of cognitive dissonance and arrives at the mental state of "Toto..I don't think we are in Kansas anymore"...Patriotard AMUURICA!!!!!!!!!! goes out the window, and Native Born White American Racial Patriotism comes in the window. By the way..Noam Chomsky is very well aware that this is a very real possibility. I think Noam is right....

    White Leftists will be held accountable...


    My reply to Snarglefoargus.....
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Great Battle for Blair Mountain"] says:
    @Junior
    Some unbelievable idiots commenting on this article. I’ll just let Gen. Smedley Butler say all that needs to be said to the fools.

    http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58pTA2fUxA8

    I ordered twenty copies of General Smedley Butler’s “War is a Racket” from Amazon last night.

    Two memorials on the LIE for two dead 19 year White Teenagers who served as canon fodder in the USMC in Afghanistan…over the Sag Harbor bridge which is named after another 19 year White Teenager who had his head blown off in Afghanistan…Justin Haerter…the Ferry to Shelter Island….named after another 19 year White Teenager serving as canon fodder in Afghanistan….closed coffin funeral….over to the Westhampton Beach Bridge…named after a Chaminade High School Grad serving as canon fodder in the Navy Seals….closed coffin funeral…the Taliban hacked him to death after he fell out of the back of a helicopter…

    Democratic Party-Republican Party labor policy….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. Eustace Tilley (not) [AKA "Schiller/Nietzsche"] says:

    You were not a very smart boy during WWII and you are not a very smart boy now.

    There is plenty of information out now on “the ruthless attacks of September 11th” which either calls into question or contradicts the official version of the 9/11 Commission. Do you have a copy of their official report, Dr. Zinn? (As a professional academic [i.e., court] historian, you should.) Turn to the index. Look for either “Building 7″ or “Solomon Brothers Building” in that index. Neither is even mentioned. Hmmm…

    You would perhaps rather not mention the “dancing Israeli art students”, mysterious white vans in New Jersey, insider foreknowledge on Wall Street of the attacks, the scarcity of Children of Israel inside the Twin Towers at the time of the attacks, etc. Sounds too much like a wacko “conspiracy theory”, and you don’t believe in those, do you?

    Smart boy!

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous

    You were not a very smart boy during WWII and you are not a very smart boy now.

     

    Hey genius with the fancy handle Mr Zinn passed away in 2010. This article is republished from 2008.

    Smart boy!
     
    Who, him or you?
    (Sound of laughter)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Great Battle for Blair Mountain"] says:
    @Snarglefargus
    First, in so far as I am able to determine, Howard Zinn is not Noam Chomsky. Second, while there may be some sense in which in which the Southwest belongs to "The Historic Native Born White American Majority", it is rapidly being re-occupied by Mexicans and as such, like it or not, is becoming, de-facto, part of Mexico again.

    Howard Zinn was Noam Chomsky’s closest friend.

    The Mexican invasion of the Southwest can be halted and reversed…like all other invasions are in human history. When The Historic Native Born White American Majority transitions out of cognitive dissonance and arrives at the mental state of “Toto..I don’t think we are in Kansas anymore”…Patriotard AMUURICA!!!!!!!!!! goes out the window, and Native Born White American Racial Patriotism comes in the window. By the way..Noam Chomsky is very well aware that this is a very real possibility. I think Noam is right….

    White Leftists will be held accountable…

    My reply to Snarglefoargus…..

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Serving under Johnson and then Nixon I learned that both Democrats and Republicans are bloody imperialists. People who love the empire will naturally hate Zinn. And me. Its mutual.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    come on now, both world wars were exactly for the purpose of paving the way for the american empire. we have always waited on the sidelines for the dumb asses(britain, france, germany, russia, japan) to exhaust them themselves before we do a sweep at the end. all the former big players got knocked down to almost nothing in terms of power. the soviets were never a real threat but for the nukes.

    we just waited on the sidelines to reap all the benefits.

    what we are doing in the ME right now is sort of like that, making sure they stay like shit holes to be exploited by us/west/israel.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Eustace Tilley (not)


    You were not a very smart boy during WWII and you are not a very smart boy now.

    There is plenty of information out now on "the ruthless attacks of September 11th" which either calls into question or contradicts the official version of the 9/11 Commission. Do you have a copy of their official report, Dr. Zinn? (As a professional academic [i.e., court] historian, you should.) Turn to the index. Look for either "Building 7" or "Solomon Brothers Building" in that index. Neither is even mentioned. Hmmm...

    You would perhaps rather not mention the "dancing Israeli art students", mysterious white vans in New Jersey, insider foreknowledge on Wall Street of the attacks, the scarcity of Children of Israel inside the Twin Towers at the time of the attacks, etc. Sounds too much like a wacko "conspiracy theory", and you don't believe in those, do you?

    Smart boy!

    You were not a very smart boy during WWII and you are not a very smart boy now.

    Hey genius with the fancy handle Mr Zinn passed away in 2010. This article is republished from 2008.

    Smart boy!

    Who, him or you?
    (Sound of laughter)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. @WorkingClass
    Serving under Johnson and then Nixon I learned that both Democrats and Republicans are bloody imperialists. People who love the empire will naturally hate Zinn. And me. Its mutual.

    come on now, both world wars were exactly for the purpose of paving the way for the american empire. we have always waited on the sidelines for the dumb asses(britain, france, germany, russia, japan) to exhaust them themselves before we do a sweep at the end. all the former big players got knocked down to almost nothing in terms of power. the soviets were never a real threat but for the nukes.

    we just waited on the sidelines to reap all the benefits.

    what we are doing in the ME right now is sort of like that, making sure they stay like shit holes to be exploited by us/west/israel.

    Read More
    • Replies: @WorkingClass
    You seem to be saying I should calm down and learn to love the Empire. If not, I don't get your point.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. Biff says:
    @War for Blair Mountain
    The open borders nonwhite immigration enthusiasm of Howard Zinn..Noam Chomsky...and Paul Craig Roberts...has had enormous,monumentally devastating economic consequences for The Historic Native Born White American Majority Working Class...and as a consequence, Native Born White American Working Class Male Teenagers make their way to the Military Recruiters Office and "volunteer" as canon fodder for the Greedy Cheating Class Mega-Ceo.

    Zinn,Chomsky and Paul Craig Roberts are aiding and abetting the EVIL EMPIRE.

    Unz

    Get that greedy piece of shit Noam Chomsky on Unz Review and have him debate the Unz Review Commenters.

    By the way, I know for a fact that Chomsky has a very large home on Martha's Vineyard with acres of land.

    Kill Whitey!!!!!!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. @Astuteobservor II
    come on now, both world wars were exactly for the purpose of paving the way for the american empire. we have always waited on the sidelines for the dumb asses(britain, france, germany, russia, japan) to exhaust them themselves before we do a sweep at the end. all the former big players got knocked down to almost nothing in terms of power. the soviets were never a real threat but for the nukes.

    we just waited on the sidelines to reap all the benefits.

    what we are doing in the ME right now is sort of like that, making sure they stay like shit holes to be exploited by us/west/israel.

    You seem to be saying I should calm down and learn to love the Empire. If not, I don’t get your point.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    just agreeing with you and giving my own 2cents.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. @Wizard of Oz
    I had never read anything by Howard Zinn before this. It is a good reason for reading the Unz Review.

    Mr. Wizard:

    You seem like a curious fellow. Please do read Zinn’s A People’s History Of The United States. It is American history from the point of view of the people who actually lived here. It’s an enjoyable read and provides a perspective unavailable anywhere else. It is considered subversive by imperialists which adds a bit of spice in my opinion.

    Read More
    • Replies: @War for Blair Mountain
    Wrong...the book is from the point of view of a Leftist Jew who hates The Historic Native Born White American Working Class.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Great Battle for Blair Mountain"] says:
    @WorkingClass
    Mr. Wizard:

    You seem like a curious fellow. Please do read Zinn's A People's History Of The United States. It is American history from the point of view of the people who actually lived here. It's an enjoyable read and provides a perspective unavailable anywhere else. It is considered subversive by imperialists which adds a bit of spice in my opinion.

    Wrong…the book is from the point of view of a Leftist Jew who hates The Historic Native Born White American Working Class.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Osman
    "The Historic Native Born White American Working Class"

    In other words, gasp! " illegal economic migrants and invaders" from Europe. Amazing these people think they have the god given right to invade and settle all of God`s green earth but the minute a few refugees (including Mexican and Central Americans fleeing decades of destabilization and looting of their countries by the US) come to their shores (refugees they helped to create in the first place btw) then all hell breaks loose and they start baring their collective teeth with calls for violence and in many cases actual violence against refugees even women and children http://sandiegofreepress.org/2014/07/ugly-americans-block-migrant-buses-in-murrieta/. They complain about being "swamped" but the reality is in comparison to countries like Pakistan, Iran, Kenya, Lebanon, Turkey, the refugee numbers in Europe is a drop in the bucket. And these countries are quite poor in comparison to Europe, North America, and Australia. Most importantly these countries did not cause the conflicts or economic dislocation that generated these refugees (Turkey and Pakistan maybe an exception here)which the West did. Yet you don`t here all the whining and moaning or God forbid calls for violence or expulsion against refugees that you here in the West. This is nothing but pure hypocrisy and shamelessness on the part of some Europeans and their settler colonialist descendants in North America and Australia. But I wouldn`t expect much better from the descendants of slavers and imperialist warmongers. Basic human decency and compassion is too much to expect from such people.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. @WorkingClass
    You seem to be saying I should calm down and learn to love the Empire. If not, I don't get your point.

    just agreeing with you and giving my own 2cents.

    Read More
    • Replies: @WorkingClass
    I get it now. Sorry to be so dense. Thanks for coming back.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. AndrewR says:
    @War for Blair Mountain
    The late Howard Zinn and his best friend Noam Chomsky are waging Jewish ethnic warfare against The Historic Native Born White American Majority...the racial group they violently hate.

    The Southwest belongs to The Historic Native Born White American Majority...not to Mexico.

    Noam Chomsky does not support the right of return for Palestinians.

    Noam Chomsky also owns a Mansion on Martha's Vineyard...he is loaded with money.

    Noam Chomsky is onboard with the policy of Muslim Male Yoot mass gang rape of The Women of Europa.

    Serious question: do you copy and paste “The Historic Native Born White American Majority” or do you type it out each time? I would suggest you just write it out once in any given comment, abbreviating subsequent uses to THNBWAM

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. @matt
    How does professor Zinn propose to deal with the likes of ISIS

    Zinn aside, here's my proposal: Arm Hezbollah. To the teeth.

    How does professor Zinn propose to deal with the likes of ISIS

    Zinn aside, here’s my proposal: Arm Hezbollah. To the teeth.

    That creates the image in my mind of using a grizzly to get rid of an invasive mountain lion.

    Not a real improvement.

    Read More
    • Replies: @matt
    Anyone who thinks Hezbollah isn't an improvement over ISIS hasn't the foggiest clue what either organization is like.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. woodNfish says:

    It is easy to see who in the comments section is still blinded by the power or our federal mafia’s propaganda, and it is very powerful. I do disagree with Zinn’s idea that WWII might have been more imperialism on our part. Japan attacked the US and when the US rightly declared war on Japan for that sneak attack, Germany declared war on us. They made their choices and they were destroyed for it. Tough shit for them!

    Zinn is absolutely right about the other police actions taken by the federal mafia against foreign nations.

    The US is the most militaristic nation in history with the most mind-numbingly stupid and easily manipulated populace in history.

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred

    The US is the most militaristic nation in history...
     
    Not to argue that the US is peopled with angels or that God is on our side, but you must have a mind-numbingly stupid concept of history.
    , @interesting
    "US rightly declared war on Japan for that sneak attack"

    too fucking funny!!! I literally laughed out loud when i read that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. @War for Blair Mountain
    The late Howard Zinn and his best friend Noam Chomsky are waging Jewish ethnic warfare against The Historic Native Born White American Majority...the racial group they violently hate.

    The Southwest belongs to The Historic Native Born White American Majority...not to Mexico.

    Noam Chomsky does not support the right of return for Palestinians.

    Noam Chomsky also owns a Mansion on Martha's Vineyard...he is loaded with money.

    Noam Chomsky is onboard with the policy of Muslim Male Yoot mass gang rape of The Women of Europa.

    The Southwest belongs to The Historic Native Born White American Majority…not to Mexico.

    Consider the concept of oversharpening a knife or a leader who takes his people into a war that they have no stomach for.

    Sort of like there are bumperstickers here in the south that say “If my ancestors had known how this would turn out they’d have picked their own damn cotton”.

    Everything decays eventually, but I think the extended conquest of the Southwest will prove to be one of the factors that shortens the life of the Republic (Texas excepted, which was an independent republic on its own, sort of).

    There is always a minority that will fight to the death, sometimes, like the 300 they make a difference, but eventually reality asserts itself. One may assert that it was possible to bring in the slaves or the Hispanic population without damage to the Republic, but I don’t think history will assent.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. @woodNfish
    It is easy to see who in the comments section is still blinded by the power or our federal mafia's propaganda, and it is very powerful. I do disagree with Zinn's idea that WWII might have been more imperialism on our part. Japan attacked the US and when the US rightly declared war on Japan for that sneak attack, Germany declared war on us. They made their choices and they were destroyed for it. Tough shit for them!

    Zinn is absolutely right about the other police actions taken by the federal mafia against foreign nations.

    The US is the most militaristic nation in history with the most mind-numbingly stupid and easily manipulated populace in history.

    The US is the most militaristic nation in history…

    Not to argue that the US is peopled with angels or that God is on our side, but you must have a mind-numbingly stupid concept of history.

    Read More
    • Replies: @woodNfish
    The US has been in a state of almost constant war since the end of WWII and not a single one of those actions has ever had anything to do with national defense. I have a very realistic view of history and you are still drinking the koolaid.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. @ WorkingClass

    it isn’t snowing snow you know
    its snowing buttercups

    http://www.geocities.ws/scripturesfrommage/famouspoets/eecummings/thanbyyon.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @WorkingClass
    Thanks other fred. I will keep it for my epitaph.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. Fred Reed says:
    @another fred
    While never explicitly stated, this whole essay depends on a worldview that differs little from Rousseau's "noble savage", in other words, a fairy tale. It reads to me as just so much handwashing. The main takeaway is that Howard Zinn is among the bien pensant and wants to distance himself from all the savagery of the modern world.

    My motive, like that of so many, was innocent of imperial ambition. It was to help defeat fascism and create a more decent world, free of aggression, militarism, and racism.
     
    Like all leftists he wants us to believe that his motives are selfless, that his politics are free of that nasty personal ambition.

    How does professor Zinn propose to deal with the likes of ISIS, Boko Haram, Hindu "extremists" who burn Christians or eaters of beef, African witch doctors who dismember albinos for their magical body parts, etc.? If he, or someone, does not deal with them then how are we to "create a more decent world".

    No sale on the cop-out that all the world's ills flow from European "Imperialism". That opinion belongs with the naifs and nuts. Man has always been a wolf to man with "progress" being slow, bloody, and incremental.

    Mankind does seem to be moving in the direction of worldwide governance. How else to deal with "aggression, militarism, and racism"? Good luck on even getting everybody to agree on a definition of those terms. IF we do progress that way (and IF that is "progress") he may rest assured that it will be a bloody, destructive process and not one bit free of self interest on the part of the winners.

    The professor doth protest too much.

    Zinn of course is exactly right. I wonder how many of the bow-wow-woof commenters have been in a war? Covered one? Spent a year on a casualty ward because of it? Lost friends in one? Seen dead villagers dead for no reason?

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred
    I have no argument with the concept that war is hell and to be avoided whenever possible. I have no argument against the fact that essentially all American wars have been tragic wars waged in vain. My argument is that man's history has not been differently blighted by the same.

    Individual lives, no doubt.

    I would much prefer a history where we had foregone the conquest of the Southwest. I would much prefer a history where we had left the Germans to dominate Europe in 1914. I would vastly prefer that Africans had not been brought here in chains. I believe my home in Alabama would be vastly better off that way.

    But that is not to say that what we have done, or could have done, would alter the course of world history and that is the argument that moralizers like Zinn make. My argument is that of Bakunin, "If you took the most ardent revolutionary, vested him in absolute power, within a year he would be worse than the Tsar himself."

    IMO Zinn was just that full of shit. I remind you, his argument was not with the war, just its motive.

    , @iffen
    The premise that a person cannot have an informed opinion about the foreign policy of the US unless they have been in a war or have seen the bodies of people killed in a war is in line with the other ideas one finds in your writings. I could suggest that expatriates have no standing to write about their native country, but that would be as silly. However, if you really enjoy pecker measuring contests some of us did lose close friends in the war. Despite the passing of 48 years, some of us can still see him in his casket with the twice as white as snow fabric cap covering the place where the top of his head used to be. I don’t know what chronicle number you are up to these days on how blacks mucked up your beloved boyhood southland. In any case, I have spent more years here than you, and I am still here, and despite what you report, life was not just full cupboards of cornbread and unlimited jars of sorghum before black people got recognized by law as citizens.
    , @Orville H. Larson
    Too many guys who warmonger are armchair commandos, the kind who'll fight to the last drop of YOUR blood.

    If you're a bellicose bastard, if you advocate war, fine. Of course, you should ask yourself this question: Would I be willing to do it myself? You don't want to be like "Five Deferments Dick" Cheney, that armchair commando of renown.
    , @KA
    This has proved to be recurrent theme missing in the writings of the warmongers Neocons They would not shed their blood or their close cousins .


    "The most recent proposal from the Project for a New American Century has certainly struck a nerve among Americans—although that shouldn’t make us think it won’t sail through successfully, like the invasion of Iraq. In a recent press release, PNAC called on the U.S. government to institute the military draft, and induct U.S. servicemen and women directly into the Israeli Defense Force.

    “We decided it would be easier simply to cut out the middleman,” said William Kristol, chairman of PNAC and editor of The Weekly Standard. “We’re pretty sure that in the next few weeks Bush will finally greenlight our attack on Iran, and we’ve let him know through ‘channels’ that air strikes simply aren’t going to be enough. We want Army divisions in Teheran, Navy carriers all along the Straits of Hormuz, and National Guard units patrolling the length of the Iranian border with Syria. And the Israeli border with Syria. Nothing else will preserve the security of the UnitedstatesandIsrael,” Kristol said, using the new, contracted form of the two political entities which has become common in the news media, particularly in discussions of the Iranian threat.

    “The political party that gets on board with our patriotic plan will receive our concerted support. The party which argues for a less proactive policy will pay an electoral price for its extremism,” said Kristol."

    http://www.talkdemocrat.com/showthread.php?122-The-U-S-Israeli-Draft
    , @Sean the Neon Caucasian
    I've done my fair share of shooting, sir. Zinn is a cockroach.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. @Astuteobservor II
    just agreeing with you and giving my own 2cents.

    I get it now. Sorry to be so dense. Thanks for coming back.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. Art says:

    “I recall the classroom map (labeled “Western Expansion”) which presented the march across the continent as a natural, almost biological phenomenon.”

    Sorry – but it was a “biological phenomenon.” It is 100% certain that “manifest destiny” was a tribal function. It was the Euro tribe against the Indian tribe. Tribal wars are a biological function. Biological based emotions drive war. Biological survival is the essence of war – always has been – always will be.

    p.s. A civilization that requires 1,000 acres per person to survive – is going to lose out to a civilization that requires 10 acres per person to survive – end of story.

    p.s. Those that love government the most, cry the loudest about the treatment of the Indians – but it was the government war machine that was responsible for the worst and most murderous actions. How typical of the liberal mind.

    p.s. Force for good is an oxymoron.

    Read More
    • Replies: @OutWest
    You’re referencing the old, bad government. The new, good government recognizes past errs and rectifies them. That’s why it needs more authority.

    It’s a rolling phenomenon.
    , @another fred

    p.s. Force for good is an oxymoron.
     
    Oh, how true, now please explain to me what "good" is.

    Just to be sure you understand, I don't like pain and don't want it for my friends or family, but I have known some narcissists and one sociopath (pretty sure, but that's a nebulous concept) and they were kind of nasty people. I do not like them at all and they are pretty destructive, should they be killed or is that the "bad" kind of force.

    But if we don't and they do bad things like kill other people (two, at least, were murderers) then, are we bad or good?

    It's all so confusing.

    , @Workforlivn
    Life itself is essentially appropriation, injury, overpowering of what is alien and weaker; suppression, hardness, imposition of one's own forms, incorporation and at least, at its mildest, exploitation. "Exploitation" does not belong to a corrupt or imperfect or primitive society: it belongs to the essence of what lives, as a basic organic function; it is a consequence of the will to power, which is after all the will of life. - Nietzsche
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. @Fred Reed
    Zinn of course is exactly right. I wonder how many of the bow-wow-woof commenters have been in a war? Covered one? Spent a year on a casualty ward because of it? Lost friends in one? Seen dead villagers dead for no reason?

    I have no argument with the concept that war is hell and to be avoided whenever possible. I have no argument against the fact that essentially all American wars have been tragic wars waged in vain. My argument is that man’s history has not been differently blighted by the same.

    Individual lives, no doubt.

    I would much prefer a history where we had foregone the conquest of the Southwest. I would much prefer a history where we had left the Germans to dominate Europe in 1914. I would vastly prefer that Africans had not been brought here in chains. I believe my home in Alabama would be vastly better off that way.

    But that is not to say that what we have done, or could have done, would alter the course of world history and that is the argument that moralizers like Zinn make. My argument is that of Bakunin, “If you took the most ardent revolutionary, vested him in absolute power, within a year he would be worse than the Tsar himself.”

    IMO Zinn was just that full of shit. I remind you, his argument was not with the war, just its motive.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I doubt that there'd be an Alabama without malaria resistant Africans.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. OutWest says:
    @Art
    “I recall the classroom map (labeled “Western Expansion”) which presented the march across the continent as a natural, almost biological phenomenon.”

    Sorry - but it was a “biological phenomenon.” It is 100% certain that “manifest destiny” was a tribal function. It was the Euro tribe against the Indian tribe. Tribal wars are a biological function. Biological based emotions drive war. Biological survival is the essence of war – always has been – always will be.

    p.s. A civilization that requires 1,000 acres per person to survive – is going to lose out to a civilization that requires 10 acres per person to survive – end of story.

    p.s. Those that love government the most, cry the loudest about the treatment of the Indians – but it was the government war machine that was responsible for the worst and most murderous actions. How typical of the liberal mind.

    p.s. Force for good is an oxymoron.

    You’re referencing the old, bad government. The new, good government recognizes past errs and rectifies them. That’s why it needs more authority.

    It’s a rolling phenomenon.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Great Battle for Blair Mountain"] says:

    So you want to give Yoseminite,Smokey the Bear,California Beaches to Iran and China…you are a traitor. I never liked Southern Secessionists. What has happened to California was a deliberate policy decision…a cheap labor policy decision. You are a jackass…while you are watching jock-sniffing Roll Tide!!! Football…China’s genetic borders may only be a few miles a way.

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred

    So you want to give Yoseminite,Smokey the Bear,California Beaches to Iran and China…you are a traitor.
     
    I assume that was aimed at me.

    How in the hell did Iran and China get in the discussion? (rhetorical question, you don't have to answer)

    Just for the record I am not a "secessionist". The Southern "secessionists" wanted to take over even more of Mexico (historical fact) and that would only have been more of a problem, IMO.

    FYI, (not that it matters much) I have ancestors on both sides of that fight, plus some in Scotland and Germany who did not come over until after the fracas. I just think our reach was beyond our grasp. History will tell.

    Are you able to make logical arguments or just attack straw men? As the other Fred says, bow-wow-woof!

    Unless you can come up with something reasonable I will henceforth ignore you.

    Bye now.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. @Art
    “I recall the classroom map (labeled “Western Expansion”) which presented the march across the continent as a natural, almost biological phenomenon.”

    Sorry - but it was a “biological phenomenon.” It is 100% certain that “manifest destiny” was a tribal function. It was the Euro tribe against the Indian tribe. Tribal wars are a biological function. Biological based emotions drive war. Biological survival is the essence of war – always has been – always will be.

    p.s. A civilization that requires 1,000 acres per person to survive – is going to lose out to a civilization that requires 10 acres per person to survive – end of story.

    p.s. Those that love government the most, cry the loudest about the treatment of the Indians – but it was the government war machine that was responsible for the worst and most murderous actions. How typical of the liberal mind.

    p.s. Force for good is an oxymoron.

    p.s. Force for good is an oxymoron.

    Oh, how true, now please explain to me what “good” is.

    Just to be sure you understand, I don’t like pain and don’t want it for my friends or family, but I have known some narcissists and one sociopath (pretty sure, but that’s a nebulous concept) and they were kind of nasty people. I do not like them at all and they are pretty destructive, should they be killed or is that the “bad” kind of force.

    But if we don’t and they do bad things like kill other people (two, at least, were murderers) then, are we bad or good?

    It’s all so confusing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. iffen says:
    @Fred Reed
    Zinn of course is exactly right. I wonder how many of the bow-wow-woof commenters have been in a war? Covered one? Spent a year on a casualty ward because of it? Lost friends in one? Seen dead villagers dead for no reason?

    The premise that a person cannot have an informed opinion about the foreign policy of the US unless they have been in a war or have seen the bodies of people killed in a war is in line with the other ideas one finds in your writings. I could suggest that expatriates have no standing to write about their native country, but that would be as silly. However, if you really enjoy pecker measuring contests some of us did lose close friends in the war. Despite the passing of 48 years, some of us can still see him in his casket with the twice as white as snow fabric cap covering the place where the top of his head used to be. I don’t know what chronicle number you are up to these days on how blacks mucked up your beloved boyhood southland. In any case, I have spent more years here than you, and I am still here, and despite what you report, life was not just full cupboards of cornbread and unlimited jars of sorghum before black people got recognized by law as citizens.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art
    p.s. Force for good is an oxymoron.

    Oh, how true, now please explain to me what “good” is.

    A good human action is one that extends your life – your family’s life – your culture’s life. A good human action does not engender retribution from society.

    A bad human action is one that makes tomorrow uncertain. A bad action makes it probable that something injurious is going to happen in the future. Without question, one bad action often leads to more bad actions – that can lead to a catastrophic cycle of events.

    None of us can make and take all “good actions” all of the time – but we can make enough of them today, that all together can make a good tomorrow possible, if not probable.

    When government force is applied – the freedom to make “good” decisions is limited. It is a given that the human spirit rebels against being forced to do anything. Unintended consequences follow.

    p.s. In the heat of battle taking a life defending one’s self is acceptable. But giving a government the power to take a life post battle, only leads to more trouble.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. @War for Blair Mountain
    So you want to give Yoseminite,Smokey the Bear,California Beaches to Iran and China...you are a traitor. I never liked Southern Secessionists. What has happened to California was a deliberate policy decision...a cheap labor policy decision. You are a jackass...while you are watching jock-sniffing Roll Tide!!! Football...China's genetic borders may only be a few miles a way.

    So you want to give Yoseminite,Smokey the Bear,California Beaches to Iran and China…you are a traitor.

    I assume that was aimed at me.

    How in the hell did Iran and China get in the discussion? (rhetorical question, you don’t have to answer)

    Just for the record I am not a “secessionist”. The Southern “secessionists” wanted to take over even more of Mexico (historical fact) and that would only have been more of a problem, IMO.

    FYI, (not that it matters much) I have ancestors on both sides of that fight, plus some in Scotland and Germany who did not come over until after the fracas. I just think our reach was beyond our grasp. History will tell.

    Are you able to make logical arguments or just attack straw men? As the other Fred says, bow-wow-woof!

    Unless you can come up with something reasonable I will henceforth ignore you.

    Bye now.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @another fred
    I have no argument with the concept that war is hell and to be avoided whenever possible. I have no argument against the fact that essentially all American wars have been tragic wars waged in vain. My argument is that man's history has not been differently blighted by the same.

    Individual lives, no doubt.

    I would much prefer a history where we had foregone the conquest of the Southwest. I would much prefer a history where we had left the Germans to dominate Europe in 1914. I would vastly prefer that Africans had not been brought here in chains. I believe my home in Alabama would be vastly better off that way.

    But that is not to say that what we have done, or could have done, would alter the course of world history and that is the argument that moralizers like Zinn make. My argument is that of Bakunin, "If you took the most ardent revolutionary, vested him in absolute power, within a year he would be worse than the Tsar himself."

    IMO Zinn was just that full of shit. I remind you, his argument was not with the war, just its motive.

    I doubt that there’d be an Alabama without malaria resistant Africans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    Such doubts suggest that you are stupid.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. conatus says:

    I would wonder if Mr. Zinn felt guilty after blowing up all those fascists from the air and turned around doing a volte-face? Hellstorm and all that. I think we did a number on the Germans and we were adamantly against a negotiated surrender(which might have left Dresden and Hamburg intact), preferring to firebomb and slaughter Germans to an unconditional Ragnarok.
    Perhaps Mr. Zinn had more second thoughts the more he read. He turned those second thoughts into a lifetime of criticism of the military.

    I have nothing against defending ourselves but we do go to extreme lengths to do so. We involve ourselves in conflicts that, even though I am not World Emperor(yet) or even President, seem to not involve our self defense. Libya?Kosovo? WTF?

    We do spend a lot, something like more than the next 14 countries combined.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

    And we have 700 or so bases all over the world? all the while having the Atlantic and Pacific to defend ourselves from invasion(yet we do nothing about being invaded by Mexico?).
    Sure the percentages of our GDP we spend are not that great but still do we really need to involve ourselves in the entire world?
    Our Middle Class is taxed to defend the sea routes by which goods are transported so their jobs might be outsourced to a foreign country.
    That does not make sense.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  41. @another fred
    @ WorkingClass

    it isn't snowing snow you know
    its snowing buttercups

     

    http://www.geocities.ws/scripturesfrommage/famouspoets/eecummings/thanbyyon.html

    Thanks other fred. I will keep it for my epitaph.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. iffen says:
    @Anonymous
    I doubt that there'd be an Alabama without malaria resistant Africans.

    Such doubts suggest that you are stupid.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. KA says:
    @another fred
    While never explicitly stated, this whole essay depends on a worldview that differs little from Rousseau's "noble savage", in other words, a fairy tale. It reads to me as just so much handwashing. The main takeaway is that Howard Zinn is among the bien pensant and wants to distance himself from all the savagery of the modern world.

    My motive, like that of so many, was innocent of imperial ambition. It was to help defeat fascism and create a more decent world, free of aggression, militarism, and racism.
     
    Like all leftists he wants us to believe that his motives are selfless, that his politics are free of that nasty personal ambition.

    How does professor Zinn propose to deal with the likes of ISIS, Boko Haram, Hindu "extremists" who burn Christians or eaters of beef, African witch doctors who dismember albinos for their magical body parts, etc.? If he, or someone, does not deal with them then how are we to "create a more decent world".

    No sale on the cop-out that all the world's ills flow from European "Imperialism". That opinion belongs with the naifs and nuts. Man has always been a wolf to man with "progress" being slow, bloody, and incremental.

    Mankind does seem to be moving in the direction of worldwide governance. How else to deal with "aggression, militarism, and racism"? Good luck on even getting everybody to agree on a definition of those terms. IF we do progress that way (and IF that is "progress") he may rest assured that it will be a bloody, destructive process and not one bit free of self interest on the part of the winners.

    The professor doth protest too much.

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-deciders/

    The Deciders
    The disastrous Iraq policies that led to ISIS were not President Bush’s.
    By John Hay • October 27, 2015

    “The cast of characters includes President George W. Bush; L. Paul “Jerry” Bremer, the first civilian administrator of postwar Iraq; Douglas Feith, Bush’s undersecretary of defense for policy; Paul Wolfowitz, Bush’s deputy secretary of defense; I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, chief of staff to Vice President Richard B. Cheney (and Cheney’s proxy in these events); Walter Slocombe, who had been President Clinton’s undersecretary of defense for policy, and as such was Feith’s predecessor; Richard Perle, who was chairman of Bush’s defense policy board; and General Jay Garner, whom Bremer replaced as the leader of postwar Iraq….The various accounts present an array of neoconservative thinkers—notably Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, and Walter Slocombe—who implemented their own policies rather than those of the president they served.

    ‘In the same story, the Times claimed that “The Bush administration did not just discuss keeping the old army. General Garner’s team found contractors to retrain it.”

    IS is the creation of Kissinger , his protege Bremer,Wolfowitz,Libby, Slocombe and Michael ledeen

    send them to Syria fight IS

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred

    IS is the creation of Kissinger , his protege Bremer,Wolfowitz,Libby, Slocombe and Michael ledeen
     
    That these people were blunderers, fools, and filled with hubris I do not doubt. Stirring in the hornets nest that is the Middle East was a fools errand, but I do not agree that IS was their creation.

    One may argue with compelling facts that they plowed the ground where these seeds sprouted, but there is a problem with Islam that is unique in the modern world. Islam alone has at its core the merging of politics and religion, not from the ambition of men, but from the words and deeds of its founder who asserts divine imprimatur to rule the entire world.

    If you watch the PBS program on Islam, presented by a Muslim in favorable light, even he admits that the assumption of power at Medina by Muhammad creates a dilemma that haunts them until today. That Islam claims power over all men is a fact.

    http://www.pbs.org/empires/islam/

    The only similar counterpart I know of is when the Roman Catholic Church asserted the right to rule politically over men several centuries back. There is a good book by a Jesuit Priest, Malachi Martin, on the subject - "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church". But for the Roman Church to take this position they had to make a rather odd interpretation of the Gospels which they seem to have finally rejected.

    Others have made the claim in the name of Jesus, but it is so foreign to the Gospels that it can't stick. Only Islam has a "legitimate" doctrinal claim to rule the earth (Christianity claims this only after the second coming).

    IMO, this claim is what "creates" IS. This claim, wed to the claim that Muhammad was the perfect man and the seal of the prophets, will be the basis for the coming war. There is no other path open to them. Islam has painted itself into a corner.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. Art says:
    @iffen
    The premise that a person cannot have an informed opinion about the foreign policy of the US unless they have been in a war or have seen the bodies of people killed in a war is in line with the other ideas one finds in your writings. I could suggest that expatriates have no standing to write about their native country, but that would be as silly. However, if you really enjoy pecker measuring contests some of us did lose close friends in the war. Despite the passing of 48 years, some of us can still see him in his casket with the twice as white as snow fabric cap covering the place where the top of his head used to be. I don’t know what chronicle number you are up to these days on how blacks mucked up your beloved boyhood southland. In any case, I have spent more years here than you, and I am still here, and despite what you report, life was not just full cupboards of cornbread and unlimited jars of sorghum before black people got recognized by law as citizens.

    p.s. Force for good is an oxymoron.

    Oh, how true, now please explain to me what “good” is.

    A good human action is one that extends your life – your family’s life – your culture’s life. A good human action does not engender retribution from society.

    A bad human action is one that makes tomorrow uncertain. A bad action makes it probable that something injurious is going to happen in the future. Without question, one bad action often leads to more bad actions – that can lead to a catastrophic cycle of events.

    None of us can make and take all “good actions” all of the time – but we can make enough of them today, that all together can make a good tomorrow possible, if not probable.

    When government force is applied – the freedom to make “good” decisions is limited. It is a given that the human spirit rebels against being forced to do anything. Unintended consequences follow.

    p.s. In the heat of battle taking a life defending one’s self is acceptable. But giving a government the power to take a life post battle, only leads to more trouble.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. @Art
    “I recall the classroom map (labeled “Western Expansion”) which presented the march across the continent as a natural, almost biological phenomenon.”

    Sorry - but it was a “biological phenomenon.” It is 100% certain that “manifest destiny” was a tribal function. It was the Euro tribe against the Indian tribe. Tribal wars are a biological function. Biological based emotions drive war. Biological survival is the essence of war – always has been – always will be.

    p.s. A civilization that requires 1,000 acres per person to survive – is going to lose out to a civilization that requires 10 acres per person to survive – end of story.

    p.s. Those that love government the most, cry the loudest about the treatment of the Indians – but it was the government war machine that was responsible for the worst and most murderous actions. How typical of the liberal mind.

    p.s. Force for good is an oxymoron.

    Life itself is essentially appropriation, injury, overpowering of what is alien and weaker; suppression, hardness, imposition of one’s own forms, incorporation and at least, at its mildest, exploitation. “Exploitation” does not belong to a corrupt or imperfect or primitive society: it belongs to the essence of what lives, as a basic organic function; it is a consequence of the will to power, which is after all the will of life. – Nietzsche

    Read More
    • Replies: @Drapetomaniac
    Nietzsche was describing the animal world, which includes mankind.

    Man appears to be the missing link between anthropoid apes and human beings.
    — Konrad Lorenz

    Humankind is what mankind is slowly, reluctantly, evolving towards. It is extremely easy to identify those who haven't evolved - it takes only one question.
    , @Art
    "“Exploitation” does not belong to a corrupt or imperfect or primitive society. it belongs to the essence of what lives, as a basic organic function; it is a consequence of the will to power, which is after all the will of life."

    That statement is wrong, it is from another time. It does not have to be that way. It is obvious that we can work together for a better future.

    “Exploitation” means a zero-sum you win I lose economic world, where nothing for tomorrow is created for those who participate. It is where one side takes all the income but what the worker needs to show up tomorrow for another day of labor.

    In America’s un-perfect past we were surrounded by an economic society that was endlessly creative – it was a win-win society. Some of what was created exceeded what was used in a day. That excess was saved. Most everyone in the economy could save something for tomorrow and the future.

    p.s. With that said, sadly it is true today, that Wall Street is turning America into an exploited culture. Today with most every economic interaction, WS takes a slice for itself. It has become pernicious - it is exploitive. There is no locally owned "main street" anymore – 9 out of 10 business are Wall Street controlled - 9 out of 10 dollars flow to WS coffers. They do not care about their customers or employees actual wellbeing. They exploit both. Our economy has reverted backwards to a short term three month profit horizon.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. @KA
    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-deciders/
    The Deciders
    The disastrous Iraq policies that led to ISIS were not President Bush’s.
    By John Hay • October 27, 2015

    "The cast of characters includes President George W. Bush; L. Paul “Jerry” Bremer, the first civilian administrator of postwar Iraq; Douglas Feith, Bush’s undersecretary of defense for policy; Paul Wolfowitz, Bush’s deputy secretary of defense; I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, chief of staff to Vice President Richard B. Cheney (and Cheney’s proxy in these events); Walter Slocombe, who had been President Clinton’s undersecretary of defense for policy, and as such was Feith’s predecessor; Richard Perle, who was chairman of Bush’s defense policy board; and General Jay Garner, whom Bremer replaced as the leader of postwar Iraq....The various accounts present an array of neoconservative thinkers—notably Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, and Walter Slocombe—who implemented their own policies rather than those of the president they served.

    'In the same story, the Times claimed that “The Bush administration did not just discuss keeping the old army. General Garner’s team found contractors to retrain it.”


    IS is the creation of Kissinger , his protege Bremer,Wolfowitz,Libby, Slocombe and Michael ledeen

    send them to Syria fight IS

    IS is the creation of Kissinger , his protege Bremer,Wolfowitz,Libby, Slocombe and Michael ledeen

    That these people were blunderers, fools, and filled with hubris I do not doubt. Stirring in the hornets nest that is the Middle East was a fools errand, but I do not agree that IS was their creation.

    One may argue with compelling facts that they plowed the ground where these seeds sprouted, but there is a problem with Islam that is unique in the modern world. Islam alone has at its core the merging of politics and religion, not from the ambition of men, but from the words and deeds of its founder who asserts divine imprimatur to rule the entire world.

    If you watch the PBS program on Islam, presented by a Muslim in favorable light, even he admits that the assumption of power at Medina by Muhammad creates a dilemma that haunts them until today. That Islam claims power over all men is a fact.

    http://www.pbs.org/empires/islam/

    The only similar counterpart I know of is when the Roman Catholic Church asserted the right to rule politically over men several centuries back. There is a good book by a Jesuit Priest, Malachi Martin, on the subject – “The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church”. But for the Roman Church to take this position they had to make a rather odd interpretation of the Gospels which they seem to have finally rejected.

    Others have made the claim in the name of Jesus, but it is so foreign to the Gospels that it can’t stick. Only Islam has a “legitimate” doctrinal claim to rule the earth (Christianity claims this only after the second coming).

    IMO, this claim is what “creates” IS. This claim, wed to the claim that Muhammad was the perfect man and the seal of the prophets, will be the basis for the coming war. There is no other path open to them. Islam has painted itself into a corner.

    Read More
    • Replies: @geokat62

    Others have made the claim in the name of Jesus, but it is so foreign to the Gospels that it can’t stick. Only Islam has a “legitimate” doctrinal claim to rule the earth (Christianity claims this only after the second coming).
     
    Care to reference the exact passages in the Koran that suggest that Islam should rule the earth? Why does the Koran make references to People of the Book ( Jews and Christians) if Muhammed thought Islam were the only legitimate religion?
    , @KA
    Do you think that these folks go to Iraq to correct the world vision of Islam? Let me help you again- either you don't or you do.
    If you did ,chances are you also believe that these folks did right thing by choosing a preemptive wars and intentionally by creating total chaos . Then you ideologically belong to these folks who swear allegiance to DNA and tribe based collective interests .
    You might so -no I do not agree to what they did. In that case you should desist from juxtaposing your view of Islam with the actions of these animals and should start juxtaposing your view of Islam with the different solutions that you have in mind . I can help you there also.
    Bush jr tried to change through the new program - winning hearts and minds of Islamic world , after he realized how badly he had been burnt by the incendiary Zionist and Evangelic phospohorus from behind . That dawned on him after he figured out - to paraphrase you- "US has painted itself into a corner " -arising out of the belief of being 1 -City on the Shining Hill,2 Indispensable Nation, 3 American exceptionalism . 4 You are with us or against us. Both failed because solution for fabricated problems can galvanize mass murder , secure loot and booty also known as neoliberal dispensation or Chicago School Consensus but could not constructively address the real issues . Real issues in Middle east have always been the exploitation ,oppression,abuse and support for Israel. Not how the Koran views the Christian or America .

    May be ISIS has been reading Islam from you angle . But it is not that scary given the fact that has been historically and traditionally wrong .

    But what is scary is the weakness hidden in the US executive branches that are in plain view. Lets focus on the departing salvo from the same article

    "This episode highlights a weakness in the executive branch that is ripe for exploitation under any administration. When the neoconservative Frank Gaffney, speaking about George W. Bush, told Vanity Fair, “This president has tolerated, and the people around him have tolerated, active, ongoing, palpable insubordination and skullduggery that translates into subversion of his policies,” it seems incredible to think that he failed to see the irony of his assertion. But for those who have a deep understanding of how the government works, it is quite possible to undermine a president, then step back and pretend to have had minimal involvement, and finally stand in judgment" http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-deciders/

    The checks and balances offered by the Congress and Senate to the compromised Presidential Office sounds more like the efforts of al Nusra and FSA offering resistances to ISIS .
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. @Junior

    How does professor Zinn propose to deal with the likes of ISIS
     
    Just a guess, but maybe he would say a good place to start would be our government not creating, financing, and arming them.

    you took the words right out of my mouth.

    But what is most telling is that poster not understanding this fact and in a way perfectly describing the brainwashing this article points to,

    Read More
    • Replies: @Junior
    Right on Interesting! Brainwashing and Kool-aid is EXACTLY right. But most of these commenters aren't Kool-aid drinkers because they don't believe the bullshit that they write. They are Kool-aid dispensers. Provocateurs.

    They know damn well that Mr. Zinn didn't hate this country. He wrote the things that he did because he LOVED this country and didn't want it to continue on the path to destruction that the MIC, Elite, and their sell-outs are leading us down. Criticism of American Policy and telling the REAL history of America is NOT un-patriotic. It's the exact opposite when you care enough to call out the bullshit. Being un-patriotic is blindly accepting and staying silent when our true American ideals are not being followed. Howard Zinn's patriotism is a call for change from the wrong path to the right path to make America the great nation that was intended from its beginning.

    Mr. Zinn spoke nothing but the truth. Anyone can look up ANY of his statements if they need proof of it. I beg everyone, don't fall for these fake sabotaging liars that besmirch such a great man's name for controversy. Controversy sells, but you have to be a sell-out to do it.

    Things ARE about to get "crazy Eddie" as that idiot another fred said. They are about to get unzbelievably crazy and so the reasons for it must be brought to light as Mr. Zinn and Gen. Butler did, and Chomsky is doing. The truth of what has brought us to this point MUST be remembered so as not to repeat them and to try to stop the crazy from happening. But if it's too late, which I hope it's not, we gotta stick together and make sure that we don't allow humanity to get thrown out the window by lunatics when things DO start to go even more crazy as they are about to when their planned ponzi-dollar collapse happens. And to the people who are trying to stir the pot for WHATEVER your reasons, you need to stop because it corrupts the truth and you are NOT helping... unless that is your aim. It'z allz I can standz, and I can't standz no more! Et tu, Blutoz?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E86PG3CTSvk
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. @woodNfish
    It is easy to see who in the comments section is still blinded by the power or our federal mafia's propaganda, and it is very powerful. I do disagree with Zinn's idea that WWII might have been more imperialism on our part. Japan attacked the US and when the US rightly declared war on Japan for that sneak attack, Germany declared war on us. They made their choices and they were destroyed for it. Tough shit for them!

    Zinn is absolutely right about the other police actions taken by the federal mafia against foreign nations.

    The US is the most militaristic nation in history with the most mind-numbingly stupid and easily manipulated populace in history.

    “US rightly declared war on Japan for that sneak attack”

    too fucking funny!!! I literally laughed out loud when i read that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. woodNfish says:
    @another fred

    The US is the most militaristic nation in history...
     
    Not to argue that the US is peopled with angels or that God is on our side, but you must have a mind-numbingly stupid concept of history.

    The US has been in a state of almost constant war since the end of WWII and not a single one of those actions has ever had anything to do with national defense. I have a very realistic view of history and you are still drinking the koolaid.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. @another fred

    Just a guess, but maybe he would say a good place to start would be our government not creating, financing, and arming them.
     
    I'll go along with some of the arming, maybe some of the financing, but not the creating. They are the natural product of the cycles of a tribal Muslim culture.

    “They are the natural product of the cycles of a tribal Muslim culture.”

    And of course the US, current most destructive stealing killing country in the world, is the natural product of Western Civilization.

    Man is rotten to the core, and his idiot child government is many times worse.

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred

    Man is rotten to the core,
     
    We're just animals, so overly successful that things are about to go "crazy Eddie", but just animals. BTW, we are not so much rational animals as animals that rationalize our actions. We act on feelings and then invent explanations.

    From Ambrose Bierce:
    MAN, n.
    An animal so lost in rapturous contemplation of what he thinks he is as to overlook what he indubitably ought to be. His chief occupation is extermination of other animals and his own species, which, however, multiplies with such insistent rapidity as to infest the whole habitable earth and Canada.
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. @Workforlivn
    Life itself is essentially appropriation, injury, overpowering of what is alien and weaker; suppression, hardness, imposition of one's own forms, incorporation and at least, at its mildest, exploitation. "Exploitation" does not belong to a corrupt or imperfect or primitive society: it belongs to the essence of what lives, as a basic organic function; it is a consequence of the will to power, which is after all the will of life. - Nietzsche

    Nietzsche was describing the animal world, which includes mankind.

    Man appears to be the missing link between anthropoid apes and human beings.
    — Konrad Lorenz

    Humankind is what mankind is slowly, reluctantly, evolving towards. It is extremely easy to identify those who haven’t evolved – it takes only one question.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. Art says:
    @Workforlivn
    Life itself is essentially appropriation, injury, overpowering of what is alien and weaker; suppression, hardness, imposition of one's own forms, incorporation and at least, at its mildest, exploitation. "Exploitation" does not belong to a corrupt or imperfect or primitive society: it belongs to the essence of what lives, as a basic organic function; it is a consequence of the will to power, which is after all the will of life. - Nietzsche

    ““Exploitation” does not belong to a corrupt or imperfect or primitive society. it belongs to the essence of what lives, as a basic organic function; it is a consequence of the will to power, which is after all the will of life.”

    That statement is wrong, it is from another time. It does not have to be that way. It is obvious that we can work together for a better future.

    “Exploitation” means a zero-sum you win I lose economic world, where nothing for tomorrow is created for those who participate. It is where one side takes all the income but what the worker needs to show up tomorrow for another day of labor.

    In America’s un-perfect past we were surrounded by an economic society that was endlessly creative – it was a win-win society. Some of what was created exceeded what was used in a day. That excess was saved. Most everyone in the economy could save something for tomorrow and the future.

    p.s. With that said, sadly it is true today, that Wall Street is turning America into an exploited culture. Today with most every economic interaction, WS takes a slice for itself. It has become pernicious – it is exploitive. There is no locally owned “main street” anymore – 9 out of 10 business are Wall Street controlled – 9 out of 10 dollars flow to WS coffers. They do not care about their customers or employees actual wellbeing. They exploit both. Our economy has reverted backwards to a short term three month profit horizon.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RobinG

    Life itself is essentially appropriation, injury, overpowering of what is alien and weaker; suppression, hardness, imposition of one’s own forms, incorporation and at least, at its mildest, exploitation. “Exploitation” does not belong to a corrupt or imperfect or primitive society: it belongs to the essence of what lives, as a basic organic function; it is a consequence of the will to power, which is after all the will of life. – Nietzsche
     
    Not wrong or outdated. Too bad you chose to read that so narrowly, and to see only the social/political meaning of 'exploit'. (Read 'utilize'.) We all exploit natural resources. What do you eat, anyway? (Some virus is exploiting you now, I'll wager.)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. matt says:
    @another fred

    How does professor Zinn propose to deal with the likes of ISIS

    Zinn aside, here’s my proposal: Arm Hezbollah. To the teeth.
     
    That creates the image in my mind of using a grizzly to get rid of an invasive mountain lion.

    Not a real improvement.

    Anyone who thinks Hezbollah isn’t an improvement over ISIS hasn’t the foggiest clue what either organization is like.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. jivilov says:

    Ah yes, Howard Zinn, another hate-Amerika Lefty who, as the late historian John Diggins noted, “Live off of liberalism, but not for it.”

    This essay is fine as far as it goes. Most of us would prefer to live in a world without war, with liberty, justice, and material plenty for all. Perhaps someday, when all human cultures, religions, tribes, nation-states, empires, etc. share the same values and belief systems we may eventually get there. Until then it’s an unfortunate fact of life that some people will strive for advantage, and if they run a country they’ll try to spread their influence as much as possible.

    And yeah, the occupation of Iraq was badly handled. Whether you agree (as I do) or not that invasion was justified, most of us were disgusted by the chaotic mismanagement which followed. (Whatever possessed Dubya to allow Bremer to disband the Iraqi army and almost totally de-Baathize the Iraqi civil service? That thoroughly alienated the Sunnis and provoked their insurrection.) No doubt if Iraq were a viable, prosperous state today a lot of the “No Blood for Oil” rhetoric would be simply water under the bridge. Didn’t happen though, so the finger-pointing continues to this day.

    On a broader plane, the stuff Zinn does–like A People’s History of the US–is one-sided and naive. The elite minority which supposedly runs the US government can do no right, and those who lost (indigenous Americans, blacks, labor unions, feminists, Mexicans, Filipinos, etc.) are virtuous innocents. The American people themselves have been “striving, against corporate robber barons and war makers, to make those ideals [of the Declaration of Independence] a reality — and all of us, of whatever age, can find immense satisfaction in becoming part of that.”

    All very nice for those who like to believe in conspiracy theories and the intrinsic goodness of the American people. Unfortunately this fails to take into account the “common man’s” (before women had the vote anyway) complicity in the dispossession of the “Indians,” the enslavement of blacks and continued white supremacy under Jim Crow (along with its de facto assertion in the North), popular enthusiasm for wars against Spain, Imperial and Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, North Vietnam (don’t forget Nixon won in 1972 by a landslide), Afghanistan and Iraq, along with his (or her) basic suspicion of any “radical” economic plan that would upset the economic applecart by killing the Golden Goose of capitalism.

    Yet the US must have been doing SOMETHING right all along. Otherwise tens of millions of immigrants wouldn’t have picked up stakes to take their chances in “the land of opportunity” over the centuries. They’re still doing it, in fact, including from countries that used to be the source of slave labor, were once colonized, or suffered the effects of US invasion. So let me pose this question to the Shade of Zinn (or his living supporters): Why have people from all over the planet voluntarily thronged to the shores (or nowadays, airports) of a country that’s so presumably elitist, oppressive, war-mongering, racist, sexist, and so forth?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Junior

    Why have people from all over the planet voluntarily thronged to the shores (or nowadays, airports) of a country that’s so presumably elitist, oppressive, war-mongering, racist, sexist, and so forth?
     
    It's quite obvious that you're an Elitist lapdog that's willing to give the Elite a free pass on all the damage that they've inflicted on this country. The Elite have been trying to take total control of this country from the People for MANY years and are coming very close nowadays. They are close but still haven't. For all it's faults America is STILL the land of opportunity and hope. The people that flock to our shores come for the American Dream. The ones that come legally come because, same as the many Americans that you put down in your post, they still have hope of turning America into the nation that it was intended to be. The American Dream. The American Dream which you and your Ayn Rand Elitist ilk are trying to turn into an Atlas Shrugged American Nightmare.

    Most of us would prefer to live in a world without war, with liberty, justice, and material plenty for all. Perhaps someday, when all human cultures, religions, tribes, nation-states, empires, etc. share the same values and belief systems we may eventually get there.
     
    And here is where you reveal yourself to be the Globalist that you are. Globalists like you who are willing to destroy America in your quest for a Global One-World-Government. Globalists who pretend to care about "humanity" as they disgustingly seek to slaughter humanity to reduce population by famine, disease, and war. Globalists who hide behind the facade of doing it for the betterment of "humanity, when it's obvious that it's all about making a smaller human population that is easier to control. It's not about "humanity" to you Globalists, it's about power. That's all that you Ayn Rand Elitists care about. Being selfish. You say "for humanity", but all you really mean is "screw everybody else, as long as I'm getting mine."

    P.S. you never answered my question from your article Ilana, so ARE they related to Jacob Schiff?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. geokat62 says:
    @another fred

    IS is the creation of Kissinger , his protege Bremer,Wolfowitz,Libby, Slocombe and Michael ledeen
     
    That these people were blunderers, fools, and filled with hubris I do not doubt. Stirring in the hornets nest that is the Middle East was a fools errand, but I do not agree that IS was their creation.

    One may argue with compelling facts that they plowed the ground where these seeds sprouted, but there is a problem with Islam that is unique in the modern world. Islam alone has at its core the merging of politics and religion, not from the ambition of men, but from the words and deeds of its founder who asserts divine imprimatur to rule the entire world.

    If you watch the PBS program on Islam, presented by a Muslim in favorable light, even he admits that the assumption of power at Medina by Muhammad creates a dilemma that haunts them until today. That Islam claims power over all men is a fact.

    http://www.pbs.org/empires/islam/

    The only similar counterpart I know of is when the Roman Catholic Church asserted the right to rule politically over men several centuries back. There is a good book by a Jesuit Priest, Malachi Martin, on the subject - "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church". But for the Roman Church to take this position they had to make a rather odd interpretation of the Gospels which they seem to have finally rejected.

    Others have made the claim in the name of Jesus, but it is so foreign to the Gospels that it can't stick. Only Islam has a "legitimate" doctrinal claim to rule the earth (Christianity claims this only after the second coming).

    IMO, this claim is what "creates" IS. This claim, wed to the claim that Muhammad was the perfect man and the seal of the prophets, will be the basis for the coming war. There is no other path open to them. Islam has painted itself into a corner.

    Others have made the claim in the name of Jesus, but it is so foreign to the Gospels that it can’t stick. Only Islam has a “legitimate” doctrinal claim to rule the earth (Christianity claims this only after the second coming).

    Care to reference the exact passages in the Koran that suggest that Islam should rule the earth? Why does the Koran make references to People of the Book ( Jews and Christians) if Muhammed thought Islam were the only legitimate religion?

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred
    The claim to rule the earth is not that they will do so, but that they have a right to and should fight against disbelievers and slay them wherever they find them. Muslim doctrine does not just come from the Quran but from the ahadith. Examples are too numerous and I am not going to do your home work for you. I have two copies of the Quran but they are stored away in a ten x ten rental space and I am not going to dig them out.

    The simple fact is that Islam claims to rule its adherents as a sovereign government because Muhammad did so and it claims the "right" to rule wherever it can gain power.

    The references to "peoples of the book" are varied, but cannot be interpreted (nor can the whole Quran) without understanding the doctrine of abrogation and the history of Muhammad and the Quran.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naskh_%28tafsir%29

    Muhammad did start out very friendly to both Christianity and Judaism, but when he was rejected by them he gradually turned against them. There is no doubt that he draws on the same "Abrahamic" history, and cites the familiar characters ("prophets"), but it is made clear in the ahadith and Quran that Jews and Christians are considered to have falsified scriptures. By example Muhammad taught that if Jews resisted his authority they died.

    Christian and Jews are granted dhimmi status, but only if they accept subjugation, i.e. rule by Islamic authority. If they do not accept subjugation the Muslim is commanded to fight them until they do so. There is no limit to where they are to extend their authority except the limit of their ability to conquer.

    http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=9&verse=29

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. RobinG says:
    @Art
    "“Exploitation” does not belong to a corrupt or imperfect or primitive society. it belongs to the essence of what lives, as a basic organic function; it is a consequence of the will to power, which is after all the will of life."

    That statement is wrong, it is from another time. It does not have to be that way. It is obvious that we can work together for a better future.

    “Exploitation” means a zero-sum you win I lose economic world, where nothing for tomorrow is created for those who participate. It is where one side takes all the income but what the worker needs to show up tomorrow for another day of labor.

    In America’s un-perfect past we were surrounded by an economic society that was endlessly creative – it was a win-win society. Some of what was created exceeded what was used in a day. That excess was saved. Most everyone in the economy could save something for tomorrow and the future.

    p.s. With that said, sadly it is true today, that Wall Street is turning America into an exploited culture. Today with most every economic interaction, WS takes a slice for itself. It has become pernicious - it is exploitive. There is no locally owned "main street" anymore – 9 out of 10 business are Wall Street controlled - 9 out of 10 dollars flow to WS coffers. They do not care about their customers or employees actual wellbeing. They exploit both. Our economy has reverted backwards to a short term three month profit horizon.

    Life itself is essentially appropriation, injury, overpowering of what is alien and weaker; suppression, hardness, imposition of one’s own forms, incorporation and at least, at its mildest, exploitation. “Exploitation” does not belong to a corrupt or imperfect or primitive society: it belongs to the essence of what lives, as a basic organic function; it is a consequence of the will to power, which is after all the will of life. – Nietzsche

    Not wrong or outdated. Too bad you chose to read that so narrowly, and to see only the social/political meaning of ‘exploit’. (Read ‘utilize’.) We all exploit natural resources. What do you eat, anyway? (Some virus is exploiting you now, I’ll wager.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. KA says:
    @another fred

    IS is the creation of Kissinger , his protege Bremer,Wolfowitz,Libby, Slocombe and Michael ledeen
     
    That these people were blunderers, fools, and filled with hubris I do not doubt. Stirring in the hornets nest that is the Middle East was a fools errand, but I do not agree that IS was their creation.

    One may argue with compelling facts that they plowed the ground where these seeds sprouted, but there is a problem with Islam that is unique in the modern world. Islam alone has at its core the merging of politics and religion, not from the ambition of men, but from the words and deeds of its founder who asserts divine imprimatur to rule the entire world.

    If you watch the PBS program on Islam, presented by a Muslim in favorable light, even he admits that the assumption of power at Medina by Muhammad creates a dilemma that haunts them until today. That Islam claims power over all men is a fact.

    http://www.pbs.org/empires/islam/

    The only similar counterpart I know of is when the Roman Catholic Church asserted the right to rule politically over men several centuries back. There is a good book by a Jesuit Priest, Malachi Martin, on the subject - "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church". But for the Roman Church to take this position they had to make a rather odd interpretation of the Gospels which they seem to have finally rejected.

    Others have made the claim in the name of Jesus, but it is so foreign to the Gospels that it can't stick. Only Islam has a "legitimate" doctrinal claim to rule the earth (Christianity claims this only after the second coming).

    IMO, this claim is what "creates" IS. This claim, wed to the claim that Muhammad was the perfect man and the seal of the prophets, will be the basis for the coming war. There is no other path open to them. Islam has painted itself into a corner.

    Do you think that these folks go to Iraq to correct the world vision of Islam? Let me help you again- either you don’t or you do.
    If you did ,chances are you also believe that these folks did right thing by choosing a preemptive wars and intentionally by creating total chaos . Then you ideologically belong to these folks who swear allegiance to DNA and tribe based collective interests .
    You might so -no I do not agree to what they did. In that case you should desist from juxtaposing your view of Islam with the actions of these animals and should start juxtaposing your view of Islam with the different solutions that you have in mind . I can help you there also.
    Bush jr tried to change through the new program – winning hearts and minds of Islamic world , after he realized how badly he had been burnt by the incendiary Zionist and Evangelic phospohorus from behind . That dawned on him after he figured out – to paraphrase you- “US has painted itself into a corner ” -arising out of the belief of being 1 -City on the Shining Hill,2 Indispensable Nation, 3 American exceptionalism . 4 You are with us or against us. Both failed because solution for fabricated problems can galvanize mass murder , secure loot and booty also known as neoliberal dispensation or Chicago School Consensus but could not constructively address the real issues . Real issues in Middle east have always been the exploitation ,oppression,abuse and support for Israel. Not how the Koran views the Christian or America .

    May be ISIS has been reading Islam from you angle . But it is not that scary given the fact that has been historically and traditionally wrong .

    But what is scary is the weakness hidden in the US executive branches that are in plain view. Lets focus on the departing salvo from the same article

    “This episode highlights a weakness in the executive branch that is ripe for exploitation under any administration. When the neoconservative Frank Gaffney, speaking about George W. Bush, told Vanity Fair, “This president has tolerated, and the people around him have tolerated, active, ongoing, palpable insubordination and skullduggery that translates into subversion of his policies,” it seems incredible to think that he failed to see the irony of his assertion. But for those who have a deep understanding of how the government works, it is quite possible to undermine a president, then step back and pretend to have had minimal involvement, and finally stand in judgment” http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-deciders/

    The checks and balances offered by the Congress and Senate to the compromised Presidential Office sounds more like the efforts of al Nusra and FSA offering resistances to ISIS .

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred

    Do you think that these folks go to Iraq to correct the world vision of Islam? Let me help you again- either you don’t or you do.
     
    Not quite sure what this question means, but I really don't have a good idea why they went. I think Bush had at least a partial desire to forestall the Apocalypse. He seems to have religious beliefs bound in his actions, especially in the speech when he said words to the effect of "If we don't act the world will drift towards catastrophe" (or may be he said disaster - something like that).

    In that case you should desist from juxtaposing your view of Islam with the actions of these animals and should start juxtaposing your view of Islam with the different solutions that you have in mind .
     
    Drawing conclusions because things are juxtaposed is a human trait that I recognize but don't give much of a damn about. I find the practice of using the trick by political manipulators and the news media repugnant, but just don't worry much about it as far as what conclusion others misapply to me. Maybe I should "desist", but I won't.

    As far as solutions, I have none and don't buy any others I've read or heard. We almost certainly headed for wars that will make a large reduction in human population, but I don't think there is anything that anyone can do about it (barring personal preparation). If you are curious, I believe that bio-weapons will play a major role. Nukes will probably be used by some of the smaller players, but I do have hope that the major powers can avoid a full exchange.

    , @another fred
    I will go read the article you link. I don't read much about politics anymore, but I will tell you that I regard the PNAC types as really deluded, but so are blank-slater liberals
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @geokat62

    Others have made the claim in the name of Jesus, but it is so foreign to the Gospels that it can’t stick. Only Islam has a “legitimate” doctrinal claim to rule the earth (Christianity claims this only after the second coming).
     
    Care to reference the exact passages in the Koran that suggest that Islam should rule the earth? Why does the Koran make references to People of the Book ( Jews and Christians) if Muhammed thought Islam were the only legitimate religion?

    The claim to rule the earth is not that they will do so, but that they have a right to and should fight against disbelievers and slay them wherever they find them. Muslim doctrine does not just come from the Quran but from the ahadith. Examples are too numerous and I am not going to do your home work for you. I have two copies of the Quran but they are stored away in a ten x ten rental space and I am not going to dig them out.

    The simple fact is that Islam claims to rule its adherents as a sovereign government because Muhammad did so and it claims the “right” to rule wherever it can gain power.

    The references to “peoples of the book” are varied, but cannot be interpreted (nor can the whole Quran) without understanding the doctrine of abrogation and the history of Muhammad and the Quran.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naskh_%28tafsir%29

    Muhammad did start out very friendly to both Christianity and Judaism, but when he was rejected by them he gradually turned against them. There is no doubt that he draws on the same “Abrahamic” history, and cites the familiar characters (“prophets”), but it is made clear in the ahadith and Quran that Jews and Christians are considered to have falsified scriptures. By example Muhammad taught that if Jews resisted his authority they died.

    Christian and Jews are granted dhimmi status, but only if they accept subjugation, i.e. rule by Islamic authority. If they do not accept subjugation the Muslim is commanded to fight them until they do so. There is no limit to where they are to extend their authority except the limit of their ability to conquer.

    http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=9&verse=29

    Read More
    • Replies: @bunga
    So let us know which religion has not done it .
    Also let us know which 20 th century political devlopments have not tried to achieve the same . Colonization , a huge porjct lasting 300 years basically achieved the same .

    So why bring the past so selctively?
    , @geokat62

    The claim to rule the earth is not that they will do so, but that they have a right to...
     
    A very important distinction... I'm glad you made it.

    Examples are too numerous and I am not going to do your home work for you.
     
    Interesting logic. Now I know how Saddam must have felt. How would you like me to prove a negative - i.e., that the Koran makes no references that Islam should rule the earth? Would you like me to append every single page of the Koran?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. @KA
    Do you think that these folks go to Iraq to correct the world vision of Islam? Let me help you again- either you don't or you do.
    If you did ,chances are you also believe that these folks did right thing by choosing a preemptive wars and intentionally by creating total chaos . Then you ideologically belong to these folks who swear allegiance to DNA and tribe based collective interests .
    You might so -no I do not agree to what they did. In that case you should desist from juxtaposing your view of Islam with the actions of these animals and should start juxtaposing your view of Islam with the different solutions that you have in mind . I can help you there also.
    Bush jr tried to change through the new program - winning hearts and minds of Islamic world , after he realized how badly he had been burnt by the incendiary Zionist and Evangelic phospohorus from behind . That dawned on him after he figured out - to paraphrase you- "US has painted itself into a corner " -arising out of the belief of being 1 -City on the Shining Hill,2 Indispensable Nation, 3 American exceptionalism . 4 You are with us or against us. Both failed because solution for fabricated problems can galvanize mass murder , secure loot and booty also known as neoliberal dispensation or Chicago School Consensus but could not constructively address the real issues . Real issues in Middle east have always been the exploitation ,oppression,abuse and support for Israel. Not how the Koran views the Christian or America .

    May be ISIS has been reading Islam from you angle . But it is not that scary given the fact that has been historically and traditionally wrong .

    But what is scary is the weakness hidden in the US executive branches that are in plain view. Lets focus on the departing salvo from the same article

    "This episode highlights a weakness in the executive branch that is ripe for exploitation under any administration. When the neoconservative Frank Gaffney, speaking about George W. Bush, told Vanity Fair, “This president has tolerated, and the people around him have tolerated, active, ongoing, palpable insubordination and skullduggery that translates into subversion of his policies,” it seems incredible to think that he failed to see the irony of his assertion. But for those who have a deep understanding of how the government works, it is quite possible to undermine a president, then step back and pretend to have had minimal involvement, and finally stand in judgment" http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-deciders/

    The checks and balances offered by the Congress and Senate to the compromised Presidential Office sounds more like the efforts of al Nusra and FSA offering resistances to ISIS .

    Do you think that these folks go to Iraq to correct the world vision of Islam? Let me help you again- either you don’t or you do.

    Not quite sure what this question means, but I really don’t have a good idea why they went. I think Bush had at least a partial desire to forestall the Apocalypse. He seems to have religious beliefs bound in his actions, especially in the speech when he said words to the effect of “If we don’t act the world will drift towards catastrophe” (or may be he said disaster – something like that).

    In that case you should desist from juxtaposing your view of Islam with the actions of these animals and should start juxtaposing your view of Islam with the different solutions that you have in mind .

    Drawing conclusions because things are juxtaposed is a human trait that I recognize but don’t give much of a damn about. I find the practice of using the trick by political manipulators and the news media repugnant, but just don’t worry much about it as far as what conclusion others misapply to me. Maybe I should “desist”, but I won’t.

    As far as solutions, I have none and don’t buy any others I’ve read or heard. We almost certainly headed for wars that will make a large reduction in human population, but I don’t think there is anything that anyone can do about it (barring personal preparation). If you are curious, I believe that bio-weapons will play a major role. Nukes will probably be used by some of the smaller players, but I do have hope that the major powers can avoid a full exchange.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bunga
    You can draw a connclusion by staying on the topic and doing an analysis of the topic at hand. Nature of Islam has nothing to do with the war planned and executed by the neoocons and bleding heart interventionist liberals . You dont introduce another iirelevant element unless you are looking for an opportnity of bashing the religion when none is warranted . So enlighten us why you intoduced the Islam .
    Also explain why you attribute the imperialism to Islam while ignore the imperialism inherent in the foreign policy of US .
    You can conquer under the banner of the relgion ,impose your standards ,and force them to embarce it.You can do same under different types of abstract values like - freedom. American duty to protect , human rights - the slogans also used in US and Latin america by the churches of both varieties not that long ago.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. @KA
    Do you think that these folks go to Iraq to correct the world vision of Islam? Let me help you again- either you don't or you do.
    If you did ,chances are you also believe that these folks did right thing by choosing a preemptive wars and intentionally by creating total chaos . Then you ideologically belong to these folks who swear allegiance to DNA and tribe based collective interests .
    You might so -no I do not agree to what they did. In that case you should desist from juxtaposing your view of Islam with the actions of these animals and should start juxtaposing your view of Islam with the different solutions that you have in mind . I can help you there also.
    Bush jr tried to change through the new program - winning hearts and minds of Islamic world , after he realized how badly he had been burnt by the incendiary Zionist and Evangelic phospohorus from behind . That dawned on him after he figured out - to paraphrase you- "US has painted itself into a corner " -arising out of the belief of being 1 -City on the Shining Hill,2 Indispensable Nation, 3 American exceptionalism . 4 You are with us or against us. Both failed because solution for fabricated problems can galvanize mass murder , secure loot and booty also known as neoliberal dispensation or Chicago School Consensus but could not constructively address the real issues . Real issues in Middle east have always been the exploitation ,oppression,abuse and support for Israel. Not how the Koran views the Christian or America .

    May be ISIS has been reading Islam from you angle . But it is not that scary given the fact that has been historically and traditionally wrong .

    But what is scary is the weakness hidden in the US executive branches that are in plain view. Lets focus on the departing salvo from the same article

    "This episode highlights a weakness in the executive branch that is ripe for exploitation under any administration. When the neoconservative Frank Gaffney, speaking about George W. Bush, told Vanity Fair, “This president has tolerated, and the people around him have tolerated, active, ongoing, palpable insubordination and skullduggery that translates into subversion of his policies,” it seems incredible to think that he failed to see the irony of his assertion. But for those who have a deep understanding of how the government works, it is quite possible to undermine a president, then step back and pretend to have had minimal involvement, and finally stand in judgment" http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-deciders/

    The checks and balances offered by the Congress and Senate to the compromised Presidential Office sounds more like the efforts of al Nusra and FSA offering resistances to ISIS .

    I will go read the article you link. I don’t read much about politics anymore, but I will tell you that I regard the PNAC types as really deluded, but so are blank-slater liberals

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred
    @ KA

    Sorry, couldn't wade through all that BS. The article seems to argue that there was a right way to go in and take over that country.

    IMO, that's like saying there's a right way to flap your arms and fly.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. @Drapetomaniac
    "They are the natural product of the cycles of a tribal Muslim culture."

    And of course the US, current most destructive stealing killing country in the world, is the natural product of Western Civilization.

    Man is rotten to the core, and his idiot child government is many times worse.

    Man is rotten to the core,

    We’re just animals, so overly successful that things are about to go “crazy Eddie”, but just animals. BTW, we are not so much rational animals as animals that rationalize our actions. We act on feelings and then invent explanations.

    From Ambrose Bierce:
    MAN, n.
    An animal so lost in rapturous contemplation of what he thinks he is as to overlook what he indubitably ought to be. His chief occupation is extermination of other animals and his own species, which, however, multiplies with such insistent rapidity as to infest the whole habitable earth and Canada.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Drapetomaniac
    Certainly agree with that.

    Most people are just humpers and thumpers, like animals.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. @another fred
    I will go read the article you link. I don't read much about politics anymore, but I will tell you that I regard the PNAC types as really deluded, but so are blank-slater liberals

    @ KA

    Sorry, couldn’t wade through all that BS. The article seems to argue that there was a right way to go in and take over that country.

    IMO, that’s like saying there’s a right way to flap your arms and fly.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KA
    That article has very limited and focussed aims- to expose the forces behind the planned destabilization of the rump society that Iraq was after the invasion and the maneuvering by the the planted psychopaths from within the administration to get that dislocation ( otherwise still preventable ) achieved behind the back of a clueless president.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. bunga says:
    @another fred

    Do you think that these folks go to Iraq to correct the world vision of Islam? Let me help you again- either you don’t or you do.
     
    Not quite sure what this question means, but I really don't have a good idea why they went. I think Bush had at least a partial desire to forestall the Apocalypse. He seems to have religious beliefs bound in his actions, especially in the speech when he said words to the effect of "If we don't act the world will drift towards catastrophe" (or may be he said disaster - something like that).

    In that case you should desist from juxtaposing your view of Islam with the actions of these animals and should start juxtaposing your view of Islam with the different solutions that you have in mind .
     
    Drawing conclusions because things are juxtaposed is a human trait that I recognize but don't give much of a damn about. I find the practice of using the trick by political manipulators and the news media repugnant, but just don't worry much about it as far as what conclusion others misapply to me. Maybe I should "desist", but I won't.

    As far as solutions, I have none and don't buy any others I've read or heard. We almost certainly headed for wars that will make a large reduction in human population, but I don't think there is anything that anyone can do about it (barring personal preparation). If you are curious, I believe that bio-weapons will play a major role. Nukes will probably be used by some of the smaller players, but I do have hope that the major powers can avoid a full exchange.

    You can draw a connclusion by staying on the topic and doing an analysis of the topic at hand. Nature of Islam has nothing to do with the war planned and executed by the neoocons and bleding heart interventionist liberals . You dont introduce another iirelevant element unless you are looking for an opportnity of bashing the religion when none is warranted . So enlighten us why you intoduced the Islam .
    Also explain why you attribute the imperialism to Islam while ignore the imperialism inherent in the foreign policy of US .
    You can conquer under the banner of the relgion ,impose your standards ,and force them to embarce it.You can do same under different types of abstract values like – freedom. American duty to protect , human rights – the slogans also used in US and Latin america by the churches of both varieties not that long ago.

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred
    The thread got sidetracked because of one paragraph in my first comment:

    How does professor Zinn propose to deal with the likes of ISIS, Boko Haram, Hindu “extremists” who burn Christians or eaters of beef, African witch doctors who dismember albinos for their magical body parts, etc.? If he, or someone, does not deal with them then how are we to “create a more decent world”.
     
    Jr. picked on the ISIS part of the above and it cascaded from there. You may notice that Muslims are not alone in the problems I list and there is an "etc." at the end. My comment is about my opinion that Professor Zinn's essay does not deal well with some very real facts in the world.

    Nature of Islam has nothing to do with the war planned and executed by the neoocons and bleding heart interventionist liberals .
     
    The war in Iraq is a digression as well, but I was responding to comments by others.

    So enlighten us why you intoduced the Islam . Also explain why you attribute the imperialism to Islam while ignore the imperialism inherent in the foreign policy of US .
     
    US imperialism was on the table and I said nothing to contradict Zinn. My point was that he, like so many leftists, argues as though the US is the source of the ills in the world when those ills are not going away even if the US does. History is full of examples of plenty of other savagery. When one argues in such a fashion it is usually for political advantage, for which Zinn is infamous. See my reply to Fred Reed at 33, above.

    You can conquer under the banner of the relgion ,impose your standards ,and force them to embarce it.You can do same under different types of abstract values like – freedom. American duty to protect , human rights – the slogans also used in US and Latin america by the churches of both varieties not that long ago.
     
    All true, but Islam (in the broad sense, I know there are sects) is unique in the world in the mixture of politics and religion that goes back to the founder and is frozen into its doctrine. It is also unique in that in that it locks all discourse and analysis into a very narrow inviolable range (again, in the broader sense). There are fundamentalist Christians and Jews who claim the literal verbatim inspiration of the Bible but the Bible is sourced from so many people over so many centuries that they cannot create anything like the consistency or narrowness of Islam.

    For all of human history humans have used any and every justification for wars and aggression, but Islam is unique in the degree to which it is locked into its core principles. What Islam is leads to some very ugly predictions about the future, but it is an Apocalyptic religion and has those predictions about itself. Christianity is an Apocalyptic religion also, but the doctrinal role of a Christian in the Apocalypse is opposite to that of a Muslim. IMO the reality of Islam is so painful and difficult that it is avoided and denied, especially by the media, but if you dig into the reality I believe you will find that it is different.

    Just so you understand, I am nearly 70 years old, I took courses in Eastern and Western religions, psychology and anthropology, plus have done a lot of reading on history and anthropology. I have traveled and worked in the Middle East. My opinions are not trivially held and do not come from what's in the media.

    I have no recommendations, no solutions, just observations.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. bunga says:
    @another fred
    The claim to rule the earth is not that they will do so, but that they have a right to and should fight against disbelievers and slay them wherever they find them. Muslim doctrine does not just come from the Quran but from the ahadith. Examples are too numerous and I am not going to do your home work for you. I have two copies of the Quran but they are stored away in a ten x ten rental space and I am not going to dig them out.

    The simple fact is that Islam claims to rule its adherents as a sovereign government because Muhammad did so and it claims the "right" to rule wherever it can gain power.

    The references to "peoples of the book" are varied, but cannot be interpreted (nor can the whole Quran) without understanding the doctrine of abrogation and the history of Muhammad and the Quran.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naskh_%28tafsir%29

    Muhammad did start out very friendly to both Christianity and Judaism, but when he was rejected by them he gradually turned against them. There is no doubt that he draws on the same "Abrahamic" history, and cites the familiar characters ("prophets"), but it is made clear in the ahadith and Quran that Jews and Christians are considered to have falsified scriptures. By example Muhammad taught that if Jews resisted his authority they died.

    Christian and Jews are granted dhimmi status, but only if they accept subjugation, i.e. rule by Islamic authority. If they do not accept subjugation the Muslim is commanded to fight them until they do so. There is no limit to where they are to extend their authority except the limit of their ability to conquer.

    http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=9&verse=29

    So let us know which religion has not done it .
    Also let us know which 20 th century political devlopments have not tried to achieve the same . Colonization , a huge porjct lasting 300 years basically achieved the same .

    So why bring the past so selctively?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. KA says:
    @another fred
    @ KA

    Sorry, couldn't wade through all that BS. The article seems to argue that there was a right way to go in and take over that country.

    IMO, that's like saying there's a right way to flap your arms and fly.

    That article has very limited and focussed aims- to expose the forces behind the planned destabilization of the rump society that Iraq was after the invasion and the maneuvering by the the planted psychopaths from within the administration to get that dislocation ( otherwise still preventable ) achieved behind the back of a clueless president.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. @bunga
    You can draw a connclusion by staying on the topic and doing an analysis of the topic at hand. Nature of Islam has nothing to do with the war planned and executed by the neoocons and bleding heart interventionist liberals . You dont introduce another iirelevant element unless you are looking for an opportnity of bashing the religion when none is warranted . So enlighten us why you intoduced the Islam .
    Also explain why you attribute the imperialism to Islam while ignore the imperialism inherent in the foreign policy of US .
    You can conquer under the banner of the relgion ,impose your standards ,and force them to embarce it.You can do same under different types of abstract values like - freedom. American duty to protect , human rights - the slogans also used in US and Latin america by the churches of both varieties not that long ago.

    The thread got sidetracked because of one paragraph in my first comment:

    How does professor Zinn propose to deal with the likes of ISIS, Boko Haram, Hindu “extremists” who burn Christians or eaters of beef, African witch doctors who dismember albinos for their magical body parts, etc.? If he, or someone, does not deal with them then how are we to “create a more decent world”.

    Jr. picked on the ISIS part of the above and it cascaded from there. You may notice that Muslims are not alone in the problems I list and there is an “etc.” at the end. My comment is about my opinion that Professor Zinn’s essay does not deal well with some very real facts in the world.

    Nature of Islam has nothing to do with the war planned and executed by the neoocons and bleding heart interventionist liberals .

    The war in Iraq is a digression as well, but I was responding to comments by others.

    So enlighten us why you intoduced the Islam . Also explain why you attribute the imperialism to Islam while ignore the imperialism inherent in the foreign policy of US .

    US imperialism was on the table and I said nothing to contradict Zinn. My point was that he, like so many leftists, argues as though the US is the source of the ills in the world when those ills are not going away even if the US does. History is full of examples of plenty of other savagery. When one argues in such a fashion it is usually for political advantage, for which Zinn is infamous. See my reply to Fred Reed at 33, above.

    You can conquer under the banner of the relgion ,impose your standards ,and force them to embarce it.You can do same under different types of abstract values like – freedom. American duty to protect , human rights – the slogans also used in US and Latin america by the churches of both varieties not that long ago.

    All true, but Islam (in the broad sense, I know there are sects) is unique in the world in the mixture of politics and religion that goes back to the founder and is frozen into its doctrine. It is also unique in that in that it locks all discourse and analysis into a very narrow inviolable range (again, in the broader sense). There are fundamentalist Christians and Jews who claim the literal verbatim inspiration of the Bible but the Bible is sourced from so many people over so many centuries that they cannot create anything like the consistency or narrowness of Islam.

    For all of human history humans have used any and every justification for wars and aggression, but Islam is unique in the degree to which it is locked into its core principles. What Islam is leads to some very ugly predictions about the future, but it is an Apocalyptic religion and has those predictions about itself. Christianity is an Apocalyptic religion also, but the doctrinal role of a Christian in the Apocalypse is opposite to that of a Muslim. IMO the reality of Islam is so painful and difficult that it is avoided and denied, especially by the media, but if you dig into the reality I believe you will find that it is different.

    Just so you understand, I am nearly 70 years old, I took courses in Eastern and Western religions, psychology and anthropology, plus have done a lot of reading on history and anthropology. I have traveled and worked in the Middle East. My opinions are not trivially held and do not come from what’s in the media.

    I have no recommendations, no solutions, just observations.

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred
    The line has those predictions about itself should have linked here:

    http://www.mille.org/scholarship.html

    Where there is this article.

    http://www.mille.org/scholarship/papers/cookabs.html
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. @another fred
    The thread got sidetracked because of one paragraph in my first comment:

    How does professor Zinn propose to deal with the likes of ISIS, Boko Haram, Hindu “extremists” who burn Christians or eaters of beef, African witch doctors who dismember albinos for their magical body parts, etc.? If he, or someone, does not deal with them then how are we to “create a more decent world”.
     
    Jr. picked on the ISIS part of the above and it cascaded from there. You may notice that Muslims are not alone in the problems I list and there is an "etc." at the end. My comment is about my opinion that Professor Zinn's essay does not deal well with some very real facts in the world.

    Nature of Islam has nothing to do with the war planned and executed by the neoocons and bleding heart interventionist liberals .
     
    The war in Iraq is a digression as well, but I was responding to comments by others.

    So enlighten us why you intoduced the Islam . Also explain why you attribute the imperialism to Islam while ignore the imperialism inherent in the foreign policy of US .
     
    US imperialism was on the table and I said nothing to contradict Zinn. My point was that he, like so many leftists, argues as though the US is the source of the ills in the world when those ills are not going away even if the US does. History is full of examples of plenty of other savagery. When one argues in such a fashion it is usually for political advantage, for which Zinn is infamous. See my reply to Fred Reed at 33, above.

    You can conquer under the banner of the relgion ,impose your standards ,and force them to embarce it.You can do same under different types of abstract values like – freedom. American duty to protect , human rights – the slogans also used in US and Latin america by the churches of both varieties not that long ago.
     
    All true, but Islam (in the broad sense, I know there are sects) is unique in the world in the mixture of politics and religion that goes back to the founder and is frozen into its doctrine. It is also unique in that in that it locks all discourse and analysis into a very narrow inviolable range (again, in the broader sense). There are fundamentalist Christians and Jews who claim the literal verbatim inspiration of the Bible but the Bible is sourced from so many people over so many centuries that they cannot create anything like the consistency or narrowness of Islam.

    For all of human history humans have used any and every justification for wars and aggression, but Islam is unique in the degree to which it is locked into its core principles. What Islam is leads to some very ugly predictions about the future, but it is an Apocalyptic religion and has those predictions about itself. Christianity is an Apocalyptic religion also, but the doctrinal role of a Christian in the Apocalypse is opposite to that of a Muslim. IMO the reality of Islam is so painful and difficult that it is avoided and denied, especially by the media, but if you dig into the reality I believe you will find that it is different.

    Just so you understand, I am nearly 70 years old, I took courses in Eastern and Western religions, psychology and anthropology, plus have done a lot of reading on history and anthropology. I have traveled and worked in the Middle East. My opinions are not trivially held and do not come from what's in the media.

    I have no recommendations, no solutions, just observations.

    The line has those predictions about itself should have linked here:

    http://www.mille.org/scholarship.html

    Where there is this article.

    http://www.mille.org/scholarship/papers/cookabs.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. KA says:

    “US diplomats coached a vanguard of unwitting Lebanese youth in CIA “Triple U” techniques (uncontrollable urban unrest). Opposition sources revealed that a downtown rally of 3000 mostly Christian student activists protesting “Syrians Out!” had been organized by the US Embassy in Beirut. The Associated Press reported on November 19, 2004, “One demonstrator appealed to the US president, holding a placard that read: ‘Bush help us save Lebanon.’

    When the stage show opened for real after Rafiq Hariri’s death, America’s Wag the Flag performance was camera-ready. Janes.com exposed that the flashy demonstrations and rallies were being engineered by one of Lebanon’s top advertising agencies and the London-based Saatchi & Saatchi. Michael Nakfour of the corporate events management company, Independence 05 – Civil Society, helped manage the Freedom Square tent city by distributing food, flags, supplies and theatrical effects, prompting American Enterprise Institute scholar Hedieh Mirahmadi to marvel; “Who would imagine one could find posters, in downtown Beirut, with the picture of President Bush in between American and Lebanese flags?” (NY Sun, 3/18/05)

    The New York Post: “US intelligence sources told The Post that the CIA and European intelligence services are quietly giving money and logistical support to organizers of the anti-Syrian protests to ramp up pressure on Syrian President Bashar Al Assad to completely quit Lebanon. Sources said the secret program is similar to previous support of pro-democracy movements in Georgia and Ukraine, which also led to peaceful demonstrations.” (3/8/05).

    http://www.counterpunch.org/2005/11/18/faking-the-case-against-syria/

    It seems when these did not work , gloves came off , and IS was born.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KA
    from the same article -

    "The Jerusalem Post wrote; "Rumsfeld considers striking Hizbullah to provoke Syria," and the Pentagon assessed that "the time is coming to oust Assad and the ruling generals by targeting Syria via Lebanon…" Former National Security Council/CIA analyst Flynt Leverett confirmed Rumsfeld’s belief that by instigating the right crisis in Lebanon, regime change could be executed in Syria. One Rumsfeld project, P20G, or the Proactive Pre-emptive Operations Group, existed specifically to provoke terrorist attacks that would then justify "counter-attacks". Neocons such as Douglas Feith and David Wurmser envisioned this graduated destablization as the "constructive instability" of "total war".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. KA says:
    @KA
    "US diplomats coached a vanguard of unwitting Lebanese youth in CIA "Triple U" techniques (uncontrollable urban unrest). Opposition sources revealed that a downtown rally of 3000 mostly Christian student activists protesting "Syrians Out!" had been organized by the US Embassy in Beirut. The Associated Press reported on November 19, 2004, "One demonstrator appealed to the US president, holding a placard that read: ‘Bush help us save Lebanon.’

    When the stage show opened for real after Rafiq Hariri’s death, America’s Wag the Flag performance was camera-ready. Janes.com exposed that the flashy demonstrations and rallies were being engineered by one of Lebanon’s top advertising agencies and the London-based Saatchi & Saatchi. Michael Nakfour of the corporate events management company, Independence 05 – Civil Society, helped manage the Freedom Square tent city by distributing food, flags, supplies and theatrical effects, prompting American Enterprise Institute scholar Hedieh Mirahmadi to marvel; "Who would imagine one could find posters, in downtown Beirut, with the picture of President Bush in between American and Lebanese flags?" (NY Sun, 3/18/05)

    The New York Post: "US intelligence sources told The Post that the CIA and European intelligence services are quietly giving money and logistical support to organizers of the anti-Syrian protests to ramp up pressure on Syrian President Bashar Al Assad to completely quit Lebanon. Sources said the secret program is similar to previous support of pro-democracy movements in Georgia and Ukraine, which also led to peaceful demonstrations." (3/8/05).

    http://www.counterpunch.org/2005/11/18/faking-the-case-against-syria/


    It seems when these did not work , gloves came off , and IS was born.

    from the same article -

    “The Jerusalem Post wrote; “Rumsfeld considers striking Hizbullah to provoke Syria,” and the Pentagon assessed that “the time is coming to oust Assad and the ruling generals by targeting Syria via Lebanon…” Former National Security Council/CIA analyst Flynt Leverett confirmed Rumsfeld’s belief that by instigating the right crisis in Lebanon, regime change could be executed in Syria. One Rumsfeld project, P20G, or the Proactive Pre-emptive Operations Group, existed specifically to provoke terrorist attacks that would then justify “counter-attacks”. Neocons such as Douglas Feith and David Wurmser envisioned this graduated destablization as the “constructive instability” of “total war”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. @another fred

    Man is rotten to the core,
     
    We're just animals, so overly successful that things are about to go "crazy Eddie", but just animals. BTW, we are not so much rational animals as animals that rationalize our actions. We act on feelings and then invent explanations.

    From Ambrose Bierce:
    MAN, n.
    An animal so lost in rapturous contemplation of what he thinks he is as to overlook what he indubitably ought to be. His chief occupation is extermination of other animals and his own species, which, however, multiplies with such insistent rapidity as to infest the whole habitable earth and Canada.
     

    Certainly agree with that.

    Most people are just humpers and thumpers, like animals.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. @Fred Reed
    Zinn of course is exactly right. I wonder how many of the bow-wow-woof commenters have been in a war? Covered one? Spent a year on a casualty ward because of it? Lost friends in one? Seen dead villagers dead for no reason?

    Too many guys who warmonger are armchair commandos, the kind who’ll fight to the last drop of YOUR blood.

    If you’re a bellicose bastard, if you advocate war, fine. Of course, you should ask yourself this question: Would I be willing to do it myself? You don’t want to be like “Five Deferments Dick” Cheney, that armchair commando of renown.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KA
    Yes , that is the reality


    "" n a recent press release, PNAC called on the U.S. government to institute the military draft, and induct U.S. servicemen and women directly into the Israeli Defense Force"

    "In National Review, editor Rich Lowry condemned these “voices of hesitation and appeasement,” warning that he “smelled some, er, Jewish self-hatred” on the wind.

    Writing in the New York Sun, Commentary editor Norman Podhoretz described the plan as “bold, candid, and Churchillian,” and urged President Bush to consider adopting it before “Islamo-fascist appeasers, isolationists, and anti-Semites” could rally their opposition. “These nativists will raise once again the tired old cry of ‘dual loyalty’, impugning our patriotism,” warned Podhoretz.

    Christian Right leaders quickly got behind the proposal. Televangelist Pat Robertson described the plan as “the single best way to assure that the blessing of Almighty GOD will descend upon this country,”

    http://www.talkdemocrat.com/showthread.php?122-The-U-S-Israeli-Draft
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. geokat62 says:
    @another fred
    The claim to rule the earth is not that they will do so, but that they have a right to and should fight against disbelievers and slay them wherever they find them. Muslim doctrine does not just come from the Quran but from the ahadith. Examples are too numerous and I am not going to do your home work for you. I have two copies of the Quran but they are stored away in a ten x ten rental space and I am not going to dig them out.

    The simple fact is that Islam claims to rule its adherents as a sovereign government because Muhammad did so and it claims the "right" to rule wherever it can gain power.

    The references to "peoples of the book" are varied, but cannot be interpreted (nor can the whole Quran) without understanding the doctrine of abrogation and the history of Muhammad and the Quran.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naskh_%28tafsir%29

    Muhammad did start out very friendly to both Christianity and Judaism, but when he was rejected by them he gradually turned against them. There is no doubt that he draws on the same "Abrahamic" history, and cites the familiar characters ("prophets"), but it is made clear in the ahadith and Quran that Jews and Christians are considered to have falsified scriptures. By example Muhammad taught that if Jews resisted his authority they died.

    Christian and Jews are granted dhimmi status, but only if they accept subjugation, i.e. rule by Islamic authority. If they do not accept subjugation the Muslim is commanded to fight them until they do so. There is no limit to where they are to extend their authority except the limit of their ability to conquer.

    http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=9&verse=29

    The claim to rule the earth is not that they will do so, but that they have a right to…

    A very important distinction… I’m glad you made it.

    Examples are too numerous and I am not going to do your home work for you.

    Interesting logic. Now I know how Saddam must have felt. How would you like me to prove a negative – i.e., that the Koran makes no references that Islam should rule the earth? Would you like me to append every single page of the Koran?

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred

    Interesting logic. Now I know how Saddam must have felt. How would you like me to prove a negative – i.e., that the Koran makes no references that Islam should rule the earth? Would you like me to append every single page of the Koran?
     
    Ok, I've got a little more time this morning. How about Sura 9 (peacefully named "The Sword") part of which I linked above:

    9:29 "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."
     
    That says the Muslims to fight people who 1. Do not believe in Allah, 2. "hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden" - that means agree with and follow the Sharia. And that is "People of the Book". This fight is to go on "until they pay the Jizya" (this is a tax). How many people do you know who pay a tax except to someone who rules over them?

    And this is for people "of the Book". Polytheists are to be slain - I'm not going to look that up for you - it is there. Do you know what "Hindu Kush" means? It means "death of the Hindus". Estimates are that 80,000,000 died in the Mogul conquest of India. The killing stopped when there was a fatwa that since the Hindus had a written scripture they could be treated like "people of the Book" and just subdued and ruled over.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. KA says:
    @The Plutonium Kid
    Ah, yes. We are a nation of thieves and murderers, and yet Zinn didn't mind having a share of the spoils. Typical lefty.

    This is as good an argument as is the basis for the reprimand of his the son or daughter by a pedophile following the exposure of the dastardly act .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. KA says:
    @Fred Reed
    Zinn of course is exactly right. I wonder how many of the bow-wow-woof commenters have been in a war? Covered one? Spent a year on a casualty ward because of it? Lost friends in one? Seen dead villagers dead for no reason?

    This has proved to be recurrent theme missing in the writings of the warmongers Neocons They would not shed their blood or their close cousins .

    “The most recent proposal from the Project for a New American Century has certainly struck a nerve among Americans—although that shouldn’t make us think it won’t sail through successfully, like the invasion of Iraq. In a recent press release, PNAC called on the U.S. government to institute the military draft, and induct U.S. servicemen and women directly into the Israeli Defense Force.

    “We decided it would be easier simply to cut out the middleman,” said William Kristol, chairman of PNAC and editor of The Weekly Standard. “We’re pretty sure that in the next few weeks Bush will finally greenlight our attack on Iran, and we’ve let him know through ‘channels’ that air strikes simply aren’t going to be enough. We want Army divisions in Teheran, Navy carriers all along the Straits of Hormuz, and National Guard units patrolling the length of the Iranian border with Syria. And the Israeli border with Syria. Nothing else will preserve the security of the UnitedstatesandIsrael,” Kristol said, using the new, contracted form of the two political entities which has become common in the news media, particularly in discussions of the Iranian threat.

    “The political party that gets on board with our patriotic plan will receive our concerted support. The party which argues for a less proactive policy will pay an electoral price for its extremism,” said Kristol.”

    http://www.talkdemocrat.com/showthread.php?122-The-U-S-Israeli-Draft

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. KA says:
    @Orville H. Larson
    Too many guys who warmonger are armchair commandos, the kind who'll fight to the last drop of YOUR blood.

    If you're a bellicose bastard, if you advocate war, fine. Of course, you should ask yourself this question: Would I be willing to do it myself? You don't want to be like "Five Deferments Dick" Cheney, that armchair commando of renown.

    Yes , that is the reality

    “” n a recent press release, PNAC called on the U.S. government to institute the military draft, and induct U.S. servicemen and women directly into the Israeli Defense Force”

    “In National Review, editor Rich Lowry condemned these “voices of hesitation and appeasement,” warning that he “smelled some, er, Jewish self-hatred” on the wind.

    Writing in the New York Sun, Commentary editor Norman Podhoretz described the plan as “bold, candid, and Churchillian,” and urged President Bush to consider adopting it before “Islamo-fascist appeasers, isolationists, and anti-Semites” could rally their opposition. “These nativists will raise once again the tired old cry of ‘dual loyalty’, impugning our patriotism,” warned Podhoretz.

    Christian Right leaders quickly got behind the proposal. Televangelist Pat Robertson described the plan as “the single best way to assure that the blessing of Almighty GOD will descend upon this country,”

    http://www.talkdemocrat.com/showthread.php?122-The-U-S-Israeli-Draft

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. @geokat62

    The claim to rule the earth is not that they will do so, but that they have a right to...
     
    A very important distinction... I'm glad you made it.

    Examples are too numerous and I am not going to do your home work for you.
     
    Interesting logic. Now I know how Saddam must have felt. How would you like me to prove a negative - i.e., that the Koran makes no references that Islam should rule the earth? Would you like me to append every single page of the Koran?

    Interesting logic. Now I know how Saddam must have felt. How would you like me to prove a negative – i.e., that the Koran makes no references that Islam should rule the earth? Would you like me to append every single page of the Koran?

    Ok, I’ve got a little more time this morning. How about Sura 9 (peacefully named “The Sword”) part of which I linked above:

    9:29 “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”

    That says the Muslims to fight people who 1. Do not believe in Allah, 2. “hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden” – that means agree with and follow the Sharia. And that is “People of the Book”. This fight is to go on “until they pay the Jizya” (this is a tax). How many people do you know who pay a tax except to someone who rules over them?

    And this is for people “of the Book”. Polytheists are to be slain – I’m not going to look that up for you – it is there. Do you know what “Hindu Kush” means? It means “death of the Hindus”. Estimates are that 80,000,000 died in the Mogul conquest of India. The killing stopped when there was a fatwa that since the Hindus had a written scripture they could be treated like “people of the Book” and just subdued and ruled over.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KA
    "9:29 “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”

    This did not arise in a vacuum It arose when Jews were promising truce and violating peace,when Jews were trying to kill Prophet of Islam and when Jews were converting to sabotage from within
    . History is a little more complex that your imagination .
    Jizya was imposed on non Muslim because they were excluded from military but allowed protection . Jizya was imposed on Jews while regular taxes and Zakat were imposed on Muslim.

    Pulsation of India during any period of Mughal was never 800,00000.
    Famine in India killed more . WW1 killed more Indian soldiers .
    Indian Hindus embraced Islam just as Sri Lanka did and Indonesia , S Vietnam in varying numbers .
    , @geokat62
    Here's how my copy of the Koran (translated by NJ Dawood) translates Sura 9 (innocuously named "Repentance"):

    9:29 "Fight against such of those to whom the Scriptures were given as believe neither in Allah nor the Last Day, who do not forbid what Allah and His apostle have forbidden, and do not embrace the true faith, until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued. (emphasis mine)
     
    When I read this before responding, I must admit I struggled a bit with how exactly it should be interpreted. You seem convinced it says that all the People of the Book should be subdued. I'm not so sure this is the correct interpretation, especially as the qualifier "such as those" is used. I read that as indicating what followed applies to a subset of the People of the Book, not to all of them.

    That said, it would be nice if we could get others to give their interpretations of this verse, especially if they are well versed in the Koran in general.
    , @KA
    The origins of the name Hindu Kush are uncertain, with multiple theories being propounded by different scholars and writers. In the time of Alexander the Great, the Hindu Kush range was referred to as the Caucasus Indicus or the "Caucasus of the Indus River" (as opposed to the Greater Caucasus range between the Caspian and Black Seas), and some past authors have considered this as a possible derivation of the name Hindu Kush. Hindū Kūh (ھندوکوه) and Kūh-e Hind (کوهِ ھند) are usually applied to the entire range separating the basins of the Kabul and Helmand Rivers from that of the Amu Darya, or, more specifically, to that part of the range lying northwest of Kabul. Sanskrit documents refer to the Hindu Kush as Pāriyātra Parvata.[6]

    The mountain range was called "Paropamisadae" by Hellenic Greeks in the late first millennium BC.[7]



    Other sources state that the term Hindu Kush originally applied only to the peak in the area of the Kushan Pass, which had become a center of the Kushan Empire by the first century.





    The Persian-English dictionary[8] indicates that the word 'koš' [kʰoʃ] is derived from the verb ('koštan' کشتن [kʰoʃˈt̪ʰæn]), meaning to kill. Although the derivation is only a possible one, some authors have proposed the meaning "Kills the Hindu" for "Hindu Kush", a derivation that is reproduced in Encyclopedia Americana which says that the name Hindu Kush means "kills the Hindu" and is a reminder of the days when Indian slaves from the Indian subcontinent died in the harsh weather typical of the Afghan mountains while being transported to Central Asia.[9] The World Book Encyclopedia states that "the name Kush ... means Death",[10] while Encyclopædia Britannica says "The name Hindu Kush first appears in 1333 AD in the writings of Ibn Battutah, the medieval Berber traveller, who said the name meant 'Hindu Killer', a meaning still given by Afghan mountain dwellers who are traditional enemies of Indian plainsmen."[11]

    The word Koh or Kuh means "mountain" in some local language Khowar. According to Nigel Allan, Hindu Kush meant both "mountains of India" and "sparkling snows of India", as he notes, from a Central Asian perspective.[12]

    ( google search - Wikipedia)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. KA says:
    @another fred

    Interesting logic. Now I know how Saddam must have felt. How would you like me to prove a negative – i.e., that the Koran makes no references that Islam should rule the earth? Would you like me to append every single page of the Koran?
     
    Ok, I've got a little more time this morning. How about Sura 9 (peacefully named "The Sword") part of which I linked above:

    9:29 "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."
     
    That says the Muslims to fight people who 1. Do not believe in Allah, 2. "hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden" - that means agree with and follow the Sharia. And that is "People of the Book". This fight is to go on "until they pay the Jizya" (this is a tax). How many people do you know who pay a tax except to someone who rules over them?

    And this is for people "of the Book". Polytheists are to be slain - I'm not going to look that up for you - it is there. Do you know what "Hindu Kush" means? It means "death of the Hindus". Estimates are that 80,000,000 died in the Mogul conquest of India. The killing stopped when there was a fatwa that since the Hindus had a written scripture they could be treated like "people of the Book" and just subdued and ruled over.

    “9:29 “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”

    This did not arise in a vacuum It arose when Jews were promising truce and violating peace,when Jews were trying to kill Prophet of Islam and when Jews were converting to sabotage from within
    . History is a little more complex that your imagination .
    Jizya was imposed on non Muslim because they were excluded from military but allowed protection . Jizya was imposed on Jews while regular taxes and Zakat were imposed on Muslim.

    Pulsation of India during any period of Mughal was never 800,00000.
    Famine in India killed more . WW1 killed more Indian soldiers .
    Indian Hindus embraced Islam just as Sri Lanka did and Indonesia , S Vietnam in varying numbers .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. geokat62 says:
    @another fred

    Interesting logic. Now I know how Saddam must have felt. How would you like me to prove a negative – i.e., that the Koran makes no references that Islam should rule the earth? Would you like me to append every single page of the Koran?
     
    Ok, I've got a little more time this morning. How about Sura 9 (peacefully named "The Sword") part of which I linked above:

    9:29 "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."
     
    That says the Muslims to fight people who 1. Do not believe in Allah, 2. "hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden" - that means agree with and follow the Sharia. And that is "People of the Book". This fight is to go on "until they pay the Jizya" (this is a tax). How many people do you know who pay a tax except to someone who rules over them?

    And this is for people "of the Book". Polytheists are to be slain - I'm not going to look that up for you - it is there. Do you know what "Hindu Kush" means? It means "death of the Hindus". Estimates are that 80,000,000 died in the Mogul conquest of India. The killing stopped when there was a fatwa that since the Hindus had a written scripture they could be treated like "people of the Book" and just subdued and ruled over.

    Here’s how my copy of the Koran (translated by NJ Dawood) translates Sura 9 (innocuously named “Repentance”):

    9:29 “Fight against such of those to whom the Scriptures were given as believe neither in Allah nor the Last Day, who do not forbid what Allah and His apostle have forbidden, and do not embrace the true faith, until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued. (emphasis mine)

    When I read this before responding, I must admit I struggled a bit with how exactly it should be interpreted. You seem convinced it says that all the People of the Book should be subdued. I’m not so sure this is the correct interpretation, especially as the qualifier “such as those” is used. I read that as indicating what followed applies to a subset of the People of the Book, not to all of them.

    That said, it would be nice if we could get others to give their interpretations of this verse, especially if they are well versed in the Koran in general.

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred
    & @ KA

    Lots of people argue about what those words mean, but the fact is that there are 10s of millions who make the more aggressive interpretation and have all through history. No doubt there are some peaceable Muslims who interpret it otherwise and also some are probably practicing taqiyah, but that still leaves us with a horde of warriors bent on conquest.

    Convince them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. KA says:
    @another fred

    Interesting logic. Now I know how Saddam must have felt. How would you like me to prove a negative – i.e., that the Koran makes no references that Islam should rule the earth? Would you like me to append every single page of the Koran?
     
    Ok, I've got a little more time this morning. How about Sura 9 (peacefully named "The Sword") part of which I linked above:

    9:29 "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."
     
    That says the Muslims to fight people who 1. Do not believe in Allah, 2. "hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden" - that means agree with and follow the Sharia. And that is "People of the Book". This fight is to go on "until they pay the Jizya" (this is a tax). How many people do you know who pay a tax except to someone who rules over them?

    And this is for people "of the Book". Polytheists are to be slain - I'm not going to look that up for you - it is there. Do you know what "Hindu Kush" means? It means "death of the Hindus". Estimates are that 80,000,000 died in the Mogul conquest of India. The killing stopped when there was a fatwa that since the Hindus had a written scripture they could be treated like "people of the Book" and just subdued and ruled over.

    The origins of the name Hindu Kush are uncertain, with multiple theories being propounded by different scholars and writers. In the time of Alexander the Great, the Hindu Kush range was referred to as the Caucasus Indicus or the “Caucasus of the Indus River” (as opposed to the Greater Caucasus range between the Caspian and Black Seas), and some past authors have considered this as a possible derivation of the name Hindu Kush. Hindū Kūh (ھندوکوه) and Kūh-e Hind (کوهِ ھند) are usually applied to the entire range separating the basins of the Kabul and Helmand Rivers from that of the Amu Darya, or, more specifically, to that part of the range lying northwest of Kabul. Sanskrit documents refer to the Hindu Kush as Pāriyātra Parvata.[6]

    The mountain range was called “Paropamisadae” by Hellenic Greeks in the late first millennium BC.[7]

    Other sources state that the term Hindu Kush originally applied only to the peak in the area of the Kushan Pass, which had become a center of the Kushan Empire by the first century.

    The Persian-English dictionary[8] indicates that the word ‘koš’ [kʰoʃ] is derived from the verb (‘koštan’ کشتن [kʰoʃˈt̪ʰæn]), meaning to kill. Although the derivation is only a possible one, some authors have proposed the meaning “Kills the Hindu” for “Hindu Kush”, a derivation that is reproduced in Encyclopedia Americana which says that the name Hindu Kush means “kills the Hindu” and is a reminder of the days when Indian slaves from the Indian subcontinent died in the harsh weather typical of the Afghan mountains while being transported to Central Asia.[9] The World Book Encyclopedia states that “the name Kush … means Death”,[10] while Encyclopædia Britannica says “The name Hindu Kush first appears in 1333 AD in the writings of Ibn Battutah, the medieval Berber traveller, who said the name meant ‘Hindu Killer’, a meaning still given by Afghan mountain dwellers who are traditional enemies of Indian plainsmen.”[11]

    The word Koh or Kuh means “mountain” in some local language Khowar. According to Nigel Allan, Hindu Kush meant both “mountains of India” and “sparkling snows of India”, as he notes, from a Central Asian perspective.[12]

    ( google search – Wikipedia)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. @geokat62
    Here's how my copy of the Koran (translated by NJ Dawood) translates Sura 9 (innocuously named "Repentance"):

    9:29 "Fight against such of those to whom the Scriptures were given as believe neither in Allah nor the Last Day, who do not forbid what Allah and His apostle have forbidden, and do not embrace the true faith, until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued. (emphasis mine)
     
    When I read this before responding, I must admit I struggled a bit with how exactly it should be interpreted. You seem convinced it says that all the People of the Book should be subdued. I'm not so sure this is the correct interpretation, especially as the qualifier "such as those" is used. I read that as indicating what followed applies to a subset of the People of the Book, not to all of them.

    That said, it would be nice if we could get others to give their interpretations of this verse, especially if they are well versed in the Koran in general.

    & @ KA

    Lots of people argue about what those words mean, but the fact is that there are 10s of millions who make the more aggressive interpretation and have all through history. No doubt there are some peaceable Muslims who interpret it otherwise and also some are probably practicing taqiyah, but that still leaves us with a horde of warriors bent on conquest.

    Convince them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @geokat62

    ... but that still leaves us with a horde of warriors bent on conquest
     
    .

    Fair enough. But as others have rightly pointed out, it is the Anglozionists who started these wars in the ME, and it is driven by the ideology of Zionists (both Christian and Jewish) who point to their scriptures for inspiration. Doesn't the OT contain verses that equally incite war/violence (e.g., to smite one's enemy) as the verse in the Koran you chose to cite? So why not condemn all three religions on that basis, instead of just one?
    , @KA
    Yes You are correct. Some do on the basis of scriptures . Some on the fake threats, some on false history, some simply create old history in present tense , some insert in their scriptures , some make God appear overnight in rival religious structures .
    But you fight where you are at that particular time and space and don't sit down thinking someone aomng,your coreligionist thousand yrs ago hurt your neighbors relatives 1000 yrs ago.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. geokat62 says:
    @another fred
    & @ KA

    Lots of people argue about what those words mean, but the fact is that there are 10s of millions who make the more aggressive interpretation and have all through history. No doubt there are some peaceable Muslims who interpret it otherwise and also some are probably practicing taqiyah, but that still leaves us with a horde of warriors bent on conquest.

    Convince them.

    … but that still leaves us with a horde of warriors bent on conquest

    .

    Fair enough. But as others have rightly pointed out, it is the Anglozionists who started these wars in the ME, and it is driven by the ideology of Zionists (both Christian and Jewish) who point to their scriptures for inspiration. Doesn’t the OT contain verses that equally incite war/violence (e.g., to smite one’s enemy) as the verse in the Koran you chose to cite? So why not condemn all three religions on that basis, instead of just one?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art
    A mainstream article on rightwing Israeli Zionists and US Christian Zionists.

    Netanyahu and Christian Zionists have long enjoyed a mutually beneficial relationship. But with a new, more radical sect ascending within the movement, the marriage may be in trouble.
     
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/22/meet-bibi-s-new-tribulation-courting-jew-converting-demon-exorcising-american-allies.html

    Scary – very scary Christians!
    , @another fred

    Fair enough. But as others have rightly pointed out, it is the Anglozionists who started these wars in the ME, and it is driven by the ideology of Zionists (both Christian and Jewish) who point to their scriptures for inspiration. Doesn’t the OT contain verses that equally incite war/violence (e.g., to smite one’s enemy) as the verse in the Koran you chose to cite? So why not condemn all three religions on that basis, instead of just one?
     
    First and foremost, I am not trying to "condemn" anything. I am trying to state objective conclusions I have reached by investigating the matter. I believe any person who objectively researches the matter will come to the conclusion (among others) that there is a qualitative difference between Islam and every other significant religion with regard to the right or obligation to rule over others, all others. This difference is rooted in the fact that Muhammad assumed political power in Medina and set the example for his followers.

    While I took courses in religion in college 50 years ago, the treatment of Islam in my text was quite respectful. I had also read a couple of other books on the Middle East conflict. I did not begin digging deeper into Islam or the history of Israel until after the second intifada began and I began to fear that the differences were irreconcilable.

    Jewish texts do indeed countenance Jewish rule over Israel, but I know of no significant tradition among them that anticipates the extension of political rule beyond those borders. The prophetic expectation that the nations will bring tribute to them are only after God has performed a deed that brings nations to understand the truth of their beliefs as do Christian prophecies. The key is that God must first act.

    An interesting book with regard to this is "The Rise and Fall of the Roman Church" by Malachi Martin, a Jesuit Priest. Martin's central theme is the corruption that was introduced into the Roman church by the fact that it accepted secular power. I recommend a couple of other good books in my reply to Annamarina, above.

    Yesterday I was Googling about on the subject and came across:
    http://www.jihadwatch.org/islam-101
    I have not studied it all, but it looks pretty accurate. Spencer seems scrupulous in his use of authoritative texts.

    From Bierce:


    WAR, n.
    A by-product of the arts of peace. The most menacing political condition is a period of international amity. The student of history who has not been taught to expect the unexpected may justly boast himself inaccessible to the light. "In time of peace prepare for war" has a deeper meaning than is commonly discerned; it means, not merely that all things earthly have an end -- that change is the one immutable and eternal law -- but that the soil of peace is thickly sown with the seeds of war and singularly suited to their germination and growth. It was when Kubla Khan had decreed his "stately pleasure dome" -- when, that is to say, there were peace and fat feasting in Xanadu -- that he

    heard from afar
    Ancestral voices prophesying war.

    One of the greatest of poets, Coleridge was one of the wisest of men, and it was not for nothing that he read us this parable. Let us have a little less of "hands across the sea," and a little more of that elemental distrust that is the security of nations. War loves to come like a thief in the night; professions of eternal amity provide the night.
     

    Having read a fair amount about history and prehistory the whole argument about who started a certain war is pretty meaningless.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. KA says:
    @another fred
    & @ KA

    Lots of people argue about what those words mean, but the fact is that there are 10s of millions who make the more aggressive interpretation and have all through history. No doubt there are some peaceable Muslims who interpret it otherwise and also some are probably practicing taqiyah, but that still leaves us with a horde of warriors bent on conquest.

    Convince them.

    Yes You are correct. Some do on the basis of scriptures . Some on the fake threats, some on false history, some simply create old history in present tense , some insert in their scriptures , some make God appear overnight in rival religious structures .
    But you fight where you are at that particular time and space and don’t sit down thinking someone aomng,your coreligionist thousand yrs ago hurt your neighbors relatives 1000 yrs ago.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. SAW says:

    In wars, there is always a difference between the motives of the soldiers and the motives of the political leaders who send them into battle. My motive, like that of so many, was innocent of imperial ambition. It was to help defeat fascism and create a more decent world, free of aggression, militarism, and racism.

    Sure. I am actually inclined to believe this somewhat naive statement. However, what the author sees as a righteous and selfless struggle of a morally superior army against the evil forces of fascism, is simply a narrative constructed to justify a war and at the same time make sense of the death of a large number of its own citizens in the process. Similarly convincing narratives where used by the governments of Russia, Japan, and Germany. This is normal. Why would this be different for the US? The key dynamic here is that politics are by their very nature and goals amoral; this general rule (as with all rules, there are exceptions) becomes more stringent the more a political entity is engaged in geopolitical power plays and armed conflicts. Politicians then use morals, ideals, symbols etc. as powerful tools to exert social control and contain dissent; in other words, to construct meaningful narratives for those who have to bear the consequences of their decisions.

    This is by no means different from today’s US interventions and geopolitical schemes of bombing democracy into people and countries whose political, religious, and social situation is highly complicated and often does not require the help of the US military, resulting in chaos, decade-long civil wars, human misery, and not to forget the current European immigrant crisis. The only difference (which gave birth to the myth that it is as simple as good vs. evil) is that the implementation of democracy actually worked after WW2 in Germany and Japan. Yet, these countries are culturally much closer aligned with American values than, say, Vietnam or Afghanistan.

    Conversely, the author’s outrage and wonderment (which is commonly heard from a large number of commentators from more left-leaning media outlets) over the fact the ‘even’ the US are engaged in this kind of ‘dirty’ imperialistic endeavor sheds light on another and much more revealing aspect of this subject. In very broad terms, this is the concept of American exceptionalism, i.e. the US as a country that somehow stands outside the usual constraints and corrupting forces of history, in which for instance the British or Spanish empires where so deeply entangled.

    But it is a (sad) reality and historical constant that if a country has emerged as the dominant power in a global political constellation, it will make use of its combined means to expand or at least keep intact a beneficial status quo, which in its sum could be called an empire. While totalitarian regimes can openly proclaim and act on these intention (e.g., the Romans, Napoleon, Hitler, Stalin etc. did) it is not much more difficult for a democratic superpower—especially one who shapes important parts of its image as ‘the good guys’ through its differences from a dictatorship. It simply makes use of approved and simplistic historical binary that still refers chiefly to WW2: Democracy (good)/dictatorship (bad). This move still works just fine to justify military interventions, whose motives are found in the need to expand or uphold the geopolitical hegemony of the American empire.

    The superficial narrative that voters are fed to support these processes is always a combined and bipartisan effort: the moral appeal to free an oppressed people from those who are defined as tyrants or terrorists for the Democrats combined with powerful appeals to patriotism á la “support our troops!” for Republican voters. Hence, the truth is simply that, like the British in the 19th century or the Spanish before that period, a global power like the US necessarily has a number of economic and political interests in relations to other countries. It has thus to chose either to defend or surrender these spheres of interest (the most important, and complicated, of them of course being the Middle East) to other players, be it Russian, Chinese, or other countries with geopolitical ambitions.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  84. Junior [AKA "Jr."] says:
    @interesting
    you took the words right out of my mouth.

    But what is most telling is that poster not understanding this fact and in a way perfectly describing the brainwashing this article points to,

    Right on Interesting! Brainwashing and Kool-aid is EXACTLY right. But most of these commenters aren’t Kool-aid drinkers because they don’t believe the bullshit that they write. They are Kool-aid dispensers. Provocateurs.

    They know damn well that Mr. Zinn didn’t hate this country. He wrote the things that he did because he LOVED this country and didn’t want it to continue on the path to destruction that the MIC, Elite, and their sell-outs are leading us down. Criticism of American Policy and telling the REAL history of America is NOT un-patriotic. It’s the exact opposite when you care enough to call out the bullshit. Being un-patriotic is blindly accepting and staying silent when our true American ideals are not being followed. Howard Zinn’s patriotism is a call for change from the wrong path to the right path to make America the great nation that was intended from its beginning.

    Mr. Zinn spoke nothing but the truth. Anyone can look up ANY of his statements if they need proof of it. I beg everyone, don’t fall for these fake sabotaging liars that besmirch such a great man’s name for controversy. Controversy sells, but you have to be a sell-out to do it.

    Things ARE about to get “crazy Eddie” as that idiot another fred said. They are about to get unzbelievably crazy and so the reasons for it must be brought to light as Mr. Zinn and Gen. Butler did, and Chomsky is doing. The truth of what has brought us to this point MUST be remembered so as not to repeat them and to try to stop the crazy from happening. But if it’s too late, which I hope it’s not, we gotta stick together and make sure that we don’t allow humanity to get thrown out the window by lunatics when things DO start to go even more crazy as they are about to when their planned ponzi-dollar collapse happens. And to the people who are trying to stir the pot for WHATEVER your reasons, you need to stop because it corrupts the truth and you are NOT helping… unless that is your aim. It’z allz I can standz, and I can’t standz no more! Et tu, Blutoz?

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred
    Since I am mentioned in your reply (as an idiot) I will offer an observation (my opinion).

    Lord Acton observed that power corrupts. True enough, but I believe it ignores a greater truth, that power attracts to it certain personalities. Most of the people attracted to power are ambitious. Many are greedy and ruthless. History reveals that it is the greedy and ruthless who most often prevail in the struggle for power. Humanity is blessed by the fact the polities they establish eventually decay, but they do have their day.

    My first comment was directed towards the fact that all the dreams of the Left require power to achieve. I think history makes that need for power obvious to anyone capable of objective analysis. The theory of the Marxists is that this need for power is temporary and will dissolve once true justice is established. History testifies that this true justice has not yet been found. I believe human nature is the factor ignored in their analysis.

    In my near 70 years on this earth I have observed that Leftists can usually be categorized in one of three (overlapping) ways:

    1. Talented ambitious people who want to manipulate and rule over other men.
    2. Frightened, angry people whose fear of a dark future, or memories of a painful life, will lead them to buy into any promise that the world can be changed, no matter what the lesson of history tries to teach.
    3. Ambitious people of little talent who think they can get something for nothing by allying themselves with #1, above.

    Zinn was not a #3, maybe a mixture of 1 & 2, but definitely an extreme Leftist. I will let you look inwardly as to where you belong.

    BTW, my IQ was measured over 150 when I was approaching 60 years of age. I may be many things, but I am not an idiot.

    In my opinion I am both an epicurean and (by Ambrose Bierce's definition) a cynic. Look 'em up if you are curious.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. annamaria says:
    @another fred
    While never explicitly stated, this whole essay depends on a worldview that differs little from Rousseau's "noble savage", in other words, a fairy tale. It reads to me as just so much handwashing. The main takeaway is that Howard Zinn is among the bien pensant and wants to distance himself from all the savagery of the modern world.

    My motive, like that of so many, was innocent of imperial ambition. It was to help defeat fascism and create a more decent world, free of aggression, militarism, and racism.
     
    Like all leftists he wants us to believe that his motives are selfless, that his politics are free of that nasty personal ambition.

    How does professor Zinn propose to deal with the likes of ISIS, Boko Haram, Hindu "extremists" who burn Christians or eaters of beef, African witch doctors who dismember albinos for their magical body parts, etc.? If he, or someone, does not deal with them then how are we to "create a more decent world".

    No sale on the cop-out that all the world's ills flow from European "Imperialism". That opinion belongs with the naifs and nuts. Man has always been a wolf to man with "progress" being slow, bloody, and incremental.

    Mankind does seem to be moving in the direction of worldwide governance. How else to deal with "aggression, militarism, and racism"? Good luck on even getting everybody to agree on a definition of those terms. IF we do progress that way (and IF that is "progress") he may rest assured that it will be a bloody, destructive process and not one bit free of self interest on the part of the winners.

    The professor doth protest too much.

    But are not you interested in having a functioning Bill of Rights for yourself? The simplest ways to protect the Bill of Rights seem to be an enforcement of transparency on the top. The transparency would have certainly showed in whose exactly interests the US have been wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in the Middle East (and creating the rivers of blood). Without such transparency, the following story will remain an ordinary one for the republic (along with the most recent “enhanced interrogation” development): “.. Jesus de Galindez, a lecturer at Columbia University, was kidnapped in Manhattan by U.S. government cutouts and delivered to Dominican Republic dictator Rafael Trujillo. Trujillo then had Galindez, whose exposés of corruption Trujillo feared, boiled alive and fed to sharks, and ordered the murder of the American pilot who’d flown Galindez there. All under the beneficent gaze of CIA Director Allen Dulles.”

    https://theintercept.com/2015/11/02/the-deepest-state-the-safari-club-allen-dulles-and-the-devils-chessboard/?comments=1#comments

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred

    But are not you interested in having a functioning Bill of Rights for yourself?
     
    My arguments rarely have anything to do with what I want or what I think should happen. They are almost always about what I think is happening.

    I have tried to look at history and the world (including man as a species) objectively and have come to the conclusion that we are locked on a path that will lead to destructive, population reducing wars in the coming century, probably commencing in the next 20 years (or sooner).

    Who knows what "lessons" man will draw from the experience.

    Razib has a statement on his latest post that I think is relevant:

    Another way to state this is that the thuggish state which imposed a monopoly of violence on a chaotic world where small-scale conflict was becoming too expensive allowed for the emergence of patriarchy as we understand in its customary form.
     
    I would add that this same "patriarchy" allowed for the emergence of civilization. At least one would be hard put to get from hunter-gatherer to civilization without it. We are not the deranged animals that some think we are, but neither are we angels (The Archaeology of Mind by Jaak Panksepp and Lucy Biven is a good book on the subject, IMO the BEST).

    Another good book is War Before Civilization by Lawrence Keely. Not to say that any of these people agree with me, that is not what is in these books. My point is that most of the rationalizations and arguments one sees on this site and elsewhere are founded on sand. I am not what would normally fit the "conservative" label as it is used today, but I do believe that "do-gooders" often do more harm than good, certainly they do a lot of harm.

    I have no delusions that we can affect the future on any great scale other than (possibly) the hope that we can avoid a full scale nuclear launch by the great powers. I do think we have a good shot at missing that (hopefully I am objective in this), but I am not sure we can do anything about it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. Art says:
    @geokat62

    ... but that still leaves us with a horde of warriors bent on conquest
     
    .

    Fair enough. But as others have rightly pointed out, it is the Anglozionists who started these wars in the ME, and it is driven by the ideology of Zionists (both Christian and Jewish) who point to their scriptures for inspiration. Doesn't the OT contain verses that equally incite war/violence (e.g., to smite one's enemy) as the verse in the Koran you chose to cite? So why not condemn all three religions on that basis, instead of just one?

    A mainstream article on rightwing Israeli Zionists and US Christian Zionists.

    Netanyahu and Christian Zionists have long enjoyed a mutually beneficial relationship. But with a new, more radical sect ascending within the movement, the marriage may be in trouble.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/22/meet-bibi-s-new-tribulation-courting-jew-converting-demon-exorcising-american-allies.html

    Scary – very scary Christians!

    Read More
    • Replies: @geokat62
    Thanks for sharing that link, Art.

    Progressives have long complained that right-wing Israelis have made a “deal with the devil” in accepting support from messianic Christian Zionists.
     
    I remember Sam denying that this was an insult. Sam, can we infer from this that you're not a progressive?

    It looks like these CZ may have morphed into Frankenstein's monster:

    But that was, to coin a phrase, the devil they knew. The question now is whether right-wing Jews will continue to partner with a group that actively seeks their conversion, believes that politicians are possessed by demons, and is spending millions of dollars each year to create a theocracy in the United States. Netanyahu is still Prime Minister, but the game he is playing has changed.
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. geokat62 says:
    @Art
    A mainstream article on rightwing Israeli Zionists and US Christian Zionists.

    Netanyahu and Christian Zionists have long enjoyed a mutually beneficial relationship. But with a new, more radical sect ascending within the movement, the marriage may be in trouble.
     
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/22/meet-bibi-s-new-tribulation-courting-jew-converting-demon-exorcising-american-allies.html

    Scary – very scary Christians!

    Thanks for sharing that link, Art.

    Progressives have long complained that right-wing Israelis have made a “deal with the devil” in accepting support from messianic Christian Zionists.

    I remember Sam denying that this was an insult. Sam, can we infer from this that you’re not a progressive?

    It looks like these CZ may have morphed into Frankenstein’s monster:

    But that was, to coin a phrase, the devil they knew. The question now is whether right-wing Jews will continue to partner with a group that actively seeks their conversion, believes that politicians are possessed by demons, and is spending millions of dollars each year to create a theocracy in the United States. Netanyahu is still Prime Minister, but the game he is playing has changed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RobinG

    The question now is whether right-wing Jews will continue to partner with a group that actively seeks their conversion...
     
    Geo, they've continued the partnership for years, (as opportunistic and manipulative as Lenin). Whatever your opinion of Max Blumenthal, this expose is priceless, including (militant? ecstatic?) weird dancing.

    Rapture Ready: The Christians United for Israel Tour
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjMRgT5o-Ig

    PS you should put your questions directly to Sam when he gets back from Asia.
    , @Art
    “It looks like these CZ may have morphed into Frankenstein’s monster:”

    Exactly – I thought that Hagee was the bottom of the Christian barrel – apparently not.

    These Zionists, Wahhabists, and Christian crazies all deserve each other – too bad others get caught up in their evil. The only answer is to stand up against them all.
    , @Sam Shama
    Am I a Progressive? Not sure. I consider myself a realist, bit of an opportunistic iconoclast and on the whole a believer of the basic equality of all humans to pursue a life they choose.

    My CZ friends don't see themselves as CZs first, rather as scientist-modernists attempting to understand the Bible. The conversations are interesting and occasionally quite funny.

    I have tried to tell them that their coin is perpetuating the conditions in the WB and should therefore be stopped, only to be met with arguments which totally disavow the atrocities, as mostly propaganda by pro-Palestinian groups. I certainly find their positions far more unyielding than those of the median Israeli!

    My mission is to change the attitudes of Jews towards the Lobby. Changing the attitude of the CZs, I leave to my Christian bretheren!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. Junior [AKA "Jr."] says:
    @jivilov
    Ah yes, Howard Zinn, another hate-Amerika Lefty who, as the late historian John Diggins noted, "Live off of liberalism, but not for it."

    This essay is fine as far as it goes. Most of us would prefer to live in a world without war, with liberty, justice, and material plenty for all. Perhaps someday, when all human cultures, religions, tribes, nation-states, empires, etc. share the same values and belief systems we may eventually get there. Until then it's an unfortunate fact of life that some people will strive for advantage, and if they run a country they'll try to spread their influence as much as possible.

    And yeah, the occupation of Iraq was badly handled. Whether you agree (as I do) or not that invasion was justified, most of us were disgusted by the chaotic mismanagement which followed. (Whatever possessed Dubya to allow Bremer to disband the Iraqi army and almost totally de-Baathize the Iraqi civil service? That thoroughly alienated the Sunnis and provoked their insurrection.) No doubt if Iraq were a viable, prosperous state today a lot of the "No Blood for Oil" rhetoric would be simply water under the bridge. Didn't happen though, so the finger-pointing continues to this day.

    On a broader plane, the stuff Zinn does--like A People's History of the US--is one-sided and naive. The elite minority which supposedly runs the US government can do no right, and those who lost (indigenous Americans, blacks, labor unions, feminists, Mexicans, Filipinos, etc.) are virtuous innocents. The American people themselves have been "striving, against corporate robber barons and war makers, to make those ideals [of the Declaration of Independence] a reality — and all of us, of whatever age, can find immense satisfaction in becoming part of that."

    All very nice for those who like to believe in conspiracy theories and the intrinsic goodness of the American people. Unfortunately this fails to take into account the "common man's" (before women had the vote anyway) complicity in the dispossession of the "Indians," the enslavement of blacks and continued white supremacy under Jim Crow (along with its de facto assertion in the North), popular enthusiasm for wars against Spain, Imperial and Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, North Vietnam (don't forget Nixon won in 1972 by a landslide), Afghanistan and Iraq, along with his (or her) basic suspicion of any "radical" economic plan that would upset the economic applecart by killing the Golden Goose of capitalism.

    Yet the US must have been doing SOMETHING right all along. Otherwise tens of millions of immigrants wouldn't have picked up stakes to take their chances in "the land of opportunity" over the centuries. They're still doing it, in fact, including from countries that used to be the source of slave labor, were once colonized, or suffered the effects of US invasion. So let me pose this question to the Shade of Zinn (or his living supporters): Why have people from all over the planet voluntarily thronged to the shores (or nowadays, airports) of a country that's so presumably elitist, oppressive, war-mongering, racist, sexist, and so forth?

    Why have people from all over the planet voluntarily thronged to the shores (or nowadays, airports) of a country that’s so presumably elitist, oppressive, war-mongering, racist, sexist, and so forth?

    It’s quite obvious that you’re an Elitist lapdog that’s willing to give the Elite a free pass on all the damage that they’ve inflicted on this country. The Elite have been trying to take total control of this country from the People for MANY years and are coming very close nowadays. They are close but still haven’t. For all it’s faults America is STILL the land of opportunity and hope. The people that flock to our shores come for the American Dream. The ones that come legally come because, same as the many Americans that you put down in your post, they still have hope of turning America into the nation that it was intended to be. The American Dream. The American Dream which you and your Ayn Rand Elitist ilk are trying to turn into an Atlas Shrugged American Nightmare.

    Most of us would prefer to live in a world without war, with liberty, justice, and material plenty for all. Perhaps someday, when all human cultures, religions, tribes, nation-states, empires, etc. share the same values and belief systems we may eventually get there.

    And here is where you reveal yourself to be the Globalist that you are. Globalists like you who are willing to destroy America in your quest for a Global One-World-Government. Globalists who pretend to care about “humanity” as they disgustingly seek to slaughter humanity to reduce population by famine, disease, and war. Globalists who hide behind the facade of doing it for the betterment of “humanity, when it’s obvious that it’s all about making a smaller human population that is easier to control. It’s not about “humanity” to you Globalists, it’s about power. That’s all that you Ayn Rand Elitists care about. Being selfish. You say “for humanity”, but all you really mean is “screw everybody else, as long as I’m getting mine.”

    P.S. you never answered my question from your article Ilana, so ARE they related to Jacob Schiff?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. RobinG says:
    @geokat62
    Thanks for sharing that link, Art.

    Progressives have long complained that right-wing Israelis have made a “deal with the devil” in accepting support from messianic Christian Zionists.
     
    I remember Sam denying that this was an insult. Sam, can we infer from this that you're not a progressive?

    It looks like these CZ may have morphed into Frankenstein's monster:

    But that was, to coin a phrase, the devil they knew. The question now is whether right-wing Jews will continue to partner with a group that actively seeks their conversion, believes that politicians are possessed by demons, and is spending millions of dollars each year to create a theocracy in the United States. Netanyahu is still Prime Minister, but the game he is playing has changed.
     

    The question now is whether right-wing Jews will continue to partner with a group that actively seeks their conversion…

    Geo, they’ve continued the partnership for years, (as opportunistic and manipulative as Lenin). Whatever your opinion of Max Blumenthal, this expose is priceless, including (militant? ecstatic?) weird dancing.

    Rapture Ready: The Christians United for Israel Tour

    PS you should put your questions directly to Sam when he gets back from Asia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @geokat62

    Whatever your opinion of Max Blumenthal...
     
    I think this comment adequately describes my regard for MB:

    http://www.unz.com/article/israels-100-million-gamble/#comment-1038298

    PS you should put your questions directly to Sam when he gets back from Asia.
     
    One thing we can count on is SS will not shy away from any question, regardless of its difficulty.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. Art says:
    @geokat62
    Thanks for sharing that link, Art.

    Progressives have long complained that right-wing Israelis have made a “deal with the devil” in accepting support from messianic Christian Zionists.
     
    I remember Sam denying that this was an insult. Sam, can we infer from this that you're not a progressive?

    It looks like these CZ may have morphed into Frankenstein's monster:

    But that was, to coin a phrase, the devil they knew. The question now is whether right-wing Jews will continue to partner with a group that actively seeks their conversion, believes that politicians are possessed by demons, and is spending millions of dollars each year to create a theocracy in the United States. Netanyahu is still Prime Minister, but the game he is playing has changed.
     

    “It looks like these CZ may have morphed into Frankenstein’s monster:”

    Exactly – I thought that Hagee was the bottom of the Christian barrel – apparently not.

    These Zionists, Wahhabists, and Christian crazies all deserve each other – too bad others get caught up in their evil. The only answer is to stand up against them all.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. geokat62 says:
    @RobinG

    The question now is whether right-wing Jews will continue to partner with a group that actively seeks their conversion...
     
    Geo, they've continued the partnership for years, (as opportunistic and manipulative as Lenin). Whatever your opinion of Max Blumenthal, this expose is priceless, including (militant? ecstatic?) weird dancing.

    Rapture Ready: The Christians United for Israel Tour
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjMRgT5o-Ig

    PS you should put your questions directly to Sam when he gets back from Asia.

    Whatever your opinion of Max Blumenthal…

    I think this comment adequately describes my regard for MB:

    http://www.unz.com/article/israels-100-million-gamble/#comment-1038298

    PS you should put your questions directly to Sam when he gets back from Asia.

    One thing we can count on is SS will not shy away from any question, regardless of its difficulty.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. @annamaria
    But are not you interested in having a functioning Bill of Rights for yourself? The simplest ways to protect the Bill of Rights seem to be an enforcement of transparency on the top. The transparency would have certainly showed in whose exactly interests the US have been wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in the Middle East (and creating the rivers of blood). Without such transparency, the following story will remain an ordinary one for the republic (along with the most recent "enhanced interrogation" development): ".. Jesus de Galindez, a lecturer at Columbia University, was kidnapped in Manhattan by U.S. government cutouts and delivered to Dominican Republic dictator Rafael Trujillo. Trujillo then had Galindez, whose exposés of corruption Trujillo feared, boiled alive and fed to sharks, and ordered the murder of the American pilot who’d flown Galindez there. All under the beneficent gaze of CIA Director Allen Dulles."
    https://theintercept.com/2015/11/02/the-deepest-state-the-safari-club-allen-dulles-and-the-devils-chessboard/?comments=1#comments

    But are not you interested in having a functioning Bill of Rights for yourself?

    My arguments rarely have anything to do with what I want or what I think should happen. They are almost always about what I think is happening.

    I have tried to look at history and the world (including man as a species) objectively and have come to the conclusion that we are locked on a path that will lead to destructive, population reducing wars in the coming century, probably commencing in the next 20 years (or sooner).

    Who knows what “lessons” man will draw from the experience.

    Razib has a statement on his latest post that I think is relevant:

    Another way to state this is that the thuggish state which imposed a monopoly of violence on a chaotic world where small-scale conflict was becoming too expensive allowed for the emergence of patriarchy as we understand in its customary form.

    I would add that this same “patriarchy” allowed for the emergence of civilization. At least one would be hard put to get from hunter-gatherer to civilization without it. We are not the deranged animals that some think we are, but neither are we angels (The Archaeology of Mind by Jaak Panksepp and Lucy Biven is a good book on the subject, IMO the BEST).

    Another good book is War Before Civilization by Lawrence Keely. Not to say that any of these people agree with me, that is not what is in these books. My point is that most of the rationalizations and arguments one sees on this site and elsewhere are founded on sand. I am not what would normally fit the “conservative” label as it is used today, but I do believe that “do-gooders” often do more harm than good, certainly they do a lot of harm.

    I have no delusions that we can affect the future on any great scale other than (possibly) the hope that we can avoid a full scale nuclear launch by the great powers. I do think we have a good shot at missing that (hopefully I am objective in this), but I am not sure we can do anything about it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. @geokat62

    ... but that still leaves us with a horde of warriors bent on conquest
     
    .

    Fair enough. But as others have rightly pointed out, it is the Anglozionists who started these wars in the ME, and it is driven by the ideology of Zionists (both Christian and Jewish) who point to their scriptures for inspiration. Doesn't the OT contain verses that equally incite war/violence (e.g., to smite one's enemy) as the verse in the Koran you chose to cite? So why not condemn all three religions on that basis, instead of just one?

    Fair enough. But as others have rightly pointed out, it is the Anglozionists who started these wars in the ME, and it is driven by the ideology of Zionists (both Christian and Jewish) who point to their scriptures for inspiration. Doesn’t the OT contain verses that equally incite war/violence (e.g., to smite one’s enemy) as the verse in the Koran you chose to cite? So why not condemn all three religions on that basis, instead of just one?

    First and foremost, I am not trying to “condemn” anything. I am trying to state objective conclusions I have reached by investigating the matter. I believe any person who objectively researches the matter will come to the conclusion (among others) that there is a qualitative difference between Islam and every other significant religion with regard to the right or obligation to rule over others, all others. This difference is rooted in the fact that Muhammad assumed political power in Medina and set the example for his followers.

    While I took courses in religion in college 50 years ago, the treatment of Islam in my text was quite respectful. I had also read a couple of other books on the Middle East conflict. I did not begin digging deeper into Islam or the history of Israel until after the second intifada began and I began to fear that the differences were irreconcilable.

    Jewish texts do indeed countenance Jewish rule over Israel, but I know of no significant tradition among them that anticipates the extension of political rule beyond those borders. The prophetic expectation that the nations will bring tribute to them are only after God has performed a deed that brings nations to understand the truth of their beliefs as do Christian prophecies. The key is that God must first act.

    An interesting book with regard to this is “The Rise and Fall of the Roman Church” by Malachi Martin, a Jesuit Priest. Martin’s central theme is the corruption that was introduced into the Roman church by the fact that it accepted secular power. I recommend a couple of other good books in my reply to Annamarina, above.

    Yesterday I was Googling about on the subject and came across:

    http://www.jihadwatch.org/islam-101

    I have not studied it all, but it looks pretty accurate. Spencer seems scrupulous in his use of authoritative texts.

    From Bierce:

    WAR, n.
    A by-product of the arts of peace. The most menacing political condition is a period of international amity. The student of history who has not been taught to expect the unexpected may justly boast himself inaccessible to the light. “In time of peace prepare for war” has a deeper meaning than is commonly discerned; it means, not merely that all things earthly have an end — that change is the one immutable and eternal law — but that the soil of peace is thickly sown with the seeds of war and singularly suited to their germination and growth. It was when Kubla Khan had decreed his “stately pleasure dome” — when, that is to say, there were peace and fat feasting in Xanadu — that he

    heard from afar
    Ancestral voices prophesying war.

    One of the greatest of poets, Coleridge was one of the wisest of men, and it was not for nothing that he read us this parable. Let us have a little less of “hands across the sea,” and a little more of that elemental distrust that is the security of nations. War loves to come like a thief in the night; professions of eternal amity provide the night.

    Having read a fair amount about history and prehistory the whole argument about who started a certain war is pretty meaningless.

    Read More
    • Replies: @geokat62

    I am trying to state objective conclusions I have reached by investigating the matter.
     
    Sounds reasonable.

    I believe any person who objectively researches the matter will come to the conclusion (among others) that there is a qualitative difference between Islam and every other significant religion with regard to the right or obligation to rule over others, all others.
     
    Fred, I will not contest this point, as I do not have the expertise in these texts to confirm or deny it. So let's assume for the sake of argument that Islam gives Muslims the right to rule the world, as you say, and the other two religions don't.

    Would you not agree with me that for all practical purposes, this makes little difference? Because, while the Muslims may have the right to rule the world according to their scripture, if one takes an objective look at the world today (i.e., with over 900 military bases around the globe), is it not an established fact that the Judeo-Christians have de facto rule over this world, regardless of what their scriptures say?

    I have not studied it all, but it looks pretty accurate. Spencer seems scrupulous in his use of authoritative texts.
     
    You do realize you do yourself no favours by linking to Jihad Watch as Spencer is credited by Anders Breivik himself for inspiring him to carry out his mass slaughter of over 70 Norwegians?

    Here's what Benazir Bhutto, the late Pakistani Prime Minister, had to say about Spencer:

    [He] uses Jihad Watch to spread misinformation and hatred of Islam. She added that he presents a skewed, one-sided, and inflammatory story that only helps to sow the seed of civilizational conflict.
     
    Even members of the Israel Lobby (SPLC and ADL) had to admit Spencer is a "hate group leader."
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad_Watch
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. @Junior
    Right on Interesting! Brainwashing and Kool-aid is EXACTLY right. But most of these commenters aren't Kool-aid drinkers because they don't believe the bullshit that they write. They are Kool-aid dispensers. Provocateurs.

    They know damn well that Mr. Zinn didn't hate this country. He wrote the things that he did because he LOVED this country and didn't want it to continue on the path to destruction that the MIC, Elite, and their sell-outs are leading us down. Criticism of American Policy and telling the REAL history of America is NOT un-patriotic. It's the exact opposite when you care enough to call out the bullshit. Being un-patriotic is blindly accepting and staying silent when our true American ideals are not being followed. Howard Zinn's patriotism is a call for change from the wrong path to the right path to make America the great nation that was intended from its beginning.

    Mr. Zinn spoke nothing but the truth. Anyone can look up ANY of his statements if they need proof of it. I beg everyone, don't fall for these fake sabotaging liars that besmirch such a great man's name for controversy. Controversy sells, but you have to be a sell-out to do it.

    Things ARE about to get "crazy Eddie" as that idiot another fred said. They are about to get unzbelievably crazy and so the reasons for it must be brought to light as Mr. Zinn and Gen. Butler did, and Chomsky is doing. The truth of what has brought us to this point MUST be remembered so as not to repeat them and to try to stop the crazy from happening. But if it's too late, which I hope it's not, we gotta stick together and make sure that we don't allow humanity to get thrown out the window by lunatics when things DO start to go even more crazy as they are about to when their planned ponzi-dollar collapse happens. And to the people who are trying to stir the pot for WHATEVER your reasons, you need to stop because it corrupts the truth and you are NOT helping... unless that is your aim. It'z allz I can standz, and I can't standz no more! Et tu, Blutoz?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E86PG3CTSvk

    Since I am mentioned in your reply (as an idiot) I will offer an observation (my opinion).

    Lord Acton observed that power corrupts. True enough, but I believe it ignores a greater truth, that power attracts to it certain personalities. Most of the people attracted to power are ambitious. Many are greedy and ruthless. History reveals that it is the greedy and ruthless who most often prevail in the struggle for power. Humanity is blessed by the fact the polities they establish eventually decay, but they do have their day.

    My first comment was directed towards the fact that all the dreams of the Left require power to achieve. I think history makes that need for power obvious to anyone capable of objective analysis. The theory of the Marxists is that this need for power is temporary and will dissolve once true justice is established. History testifies that this true justice has not yet been found. I believe human nature is the factor ignored in their analysis.

    In my near 70 years on this earth I have observed that Leftists can usually be categorized in one of three (overlapping) ways:

    1. Talented ambitious people who want to manipulate and rule over other men.
    2. Frightened, angry people whose fear of a dark future, or memories of a painful life, will lead them to buy into any promise that the world can be changed, no matter what the lesson of history tries to teach.
    3. Ambitious people of little talent who think they can get something for nothing by allying themselves with #1, above.

    Zinn was not a #3, maybe a mixture of 1 & 2, but definitely an extreme Leftist. I will let you look inwardly as to where you belong.

    BTW, my IQ was measured over 150 when I was approaching 60 years of age. I may be many things, but I am not an idiot.

    In my opinion I am both an epicurean and (by Ambrose Bierce’s definition) a cynic. Look ‘em up if you are curious.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Junior

    Reading the footnotes I am reminded that Professor Zinn no longer plagues this world with his material presence.

     

    The above quote in which you seem to relish in the man's death is what I take offense with. And you're right, "idiot" IS the wrong descriptor. Heartless is the word I should have used. I apologize for using the wrong word. By all means, continue on with your jaded observations with no solutions if you want to.

    I agree with a fair amount of your observations and I am cynical at times as well. But unlike you, I don't take pride in the cynicism and I TRY to balance it out with hope when I can. I wish that you would give it a try because I think that you could use that "over 150 IQ" to really make a positive difference if you did.

    "Cynical Realism is the Intelligent Man's best excuse for doing nothing in an intolerable situation." - Aldous Huxley

    "What is a Cynic? A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing." - Oscar Wilde

    "Cynicism is intellectual treason." - Norman Cousins

    "Cynicism is nothing more than soul-rot. It's nothing more than a coward dressed up in a tweed blazer smoking a Peterson pipe. It is dismissive and disengaged while looking invested and astute." - Matthew Perryman Jones

    "We can destroy ourselves by cynicism and disillusion, just as effectively as by bombs." - Kenneth Clark

    "That's the hardest thing of all -- never to become cynical, never to lose faith, never to become indifferent." - Sergei Lukyanenko

    "It's better to light one candle than to curse the electric bill." - Jr. (A man who's still a work in progress) ;)

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. geokat62 says:
    @another fred

    Fair enough. But as others have rightly pointed out, it is the Anglozionists who started these wars in the ME, and it is driven by the ideology of Zionists (both Christian and Jewish) who point to their scriptures for inspiration. Doesn’t the OT contain verses that equally incite war/violence (e.g., to smite one’s enemy) as the verse in the Koran you chose to cite? So why not condemn all three religions on that basis, instead of just one?
     
    First and foremost, I am not trying to "condemn" anything. I am trying to state objective conclusions I have reached by investigating the matter. I believe any person who objectively researches the matter will come to the conclusion (among others) that there is a qualitative difference between Islam and every other significant religion with regard to the right or obligation to rule over others, all others. This difference is rooted in the fact that Muhammad assumed political power in Medina and set the example for his followers.

    While I took courses in religion in college 50 years ago, the treatment of Islam in my text was quite respectful. I had also read a couple of other books on the Middle East conflict. I did not begin digging deeper into Islam or the history of Israel until after the second intifada began and I began to fear that the differences were irreconcilable.

    Jewish texts do indeed countenance Jewish rule over Israel, but I know of no significant tradition among them that anticipates the extension of political rule beyond those borders. The prophetic expectation that the nations will bring tribute to them are only after God has performed a deed that brings nations to understand the truth of their beliefs as do Christian prophecies. The key is that God must first act.

    An interesting book with regard to this is "The Rise and Fall of the Roman Church" by Malachi Martin, a Jesuit Priest. Martin's central theme is the corruption that was introduced into the Roman church by the fact that it accepted secular power. I recommend a couple of other good books in my reply to Annamarina, above.

    Yesterday I was Googling about on the subject and came across:
    http://www.jihadwatch.org/islam-101
    I have not studied it all, but it looks pretty accurate. Spencer seems scrupulous in his use of authoritative texts.

    From Bierce:


    WAR, n.
    A by-product of the arts of peace. The most menacing political condition is a period of international amity. The student of history who has not been taught to expect the unexpected may justly boast himself inaccessible to the light. "In time of peace prepare for war" has a deeper meaning than is commonly discerned; it means, not merely that all things earthly have an end -- that change is the one immutable and eternal law -- but that the soil of peace is thickly sown with the seeds of war and singularly suited to their germination and growth. It was when Kubla Khan had decreed his "stately pleasure dome" -- when, that is to say, there were peace and fat feasting in Xanadu -- that he

    heard from afar
    Ancestral voices prophesying war.

    One of the greatest of poets, Coleridge was one of the wisest of men, and it was not for nothing that he read us this parable. Let us have a little less of "hands across the sea," and a little more of that elemental distrust that is the security of nations. War loves to come like a thief in the night; professions of eternal amity provide the night.
     

    Having read a fair amount about history and prehistory the whole argument about who started a certain war is pretty meaningless.

    I am trying to state objective conclusions I have reached by investigating the matter.

    Sounds reasonable.

    I believe any person who objectively researches the matter will come to the conclusion (among others) that there is a qualitative difference between Islam and every other significant religion with regard to the right or obligation to rule over others, all others.

    Fred, I will not contest this point, as I do not have the expertise in these texts to confirm or deny it. So let’s assume for the sake of argument that Islam gives Muslims the right to rule the world, as you say, and the other two religions don’t.

    Would you not agree with me that for all practical purposes, this makes little difference? Because, while the Muslims may have the right to rule the world according to their scripture, if one takes an objective look at the world today (i.e., with over 900 military bases around the globe), is it not an established fact that the Judeo-Christians have de facto rule over this world, regardless of what their scriptures say?

    I have not studied it all, but it looks pretty accurate. Spencer seems scrupulous in his use of authoritative texts.

    You do realize you do yourself no favours by linking to Jihad Watch as Spencer is credited by Anders Breivik himself for inspiring him to carry out his mass slaughter of over 70 Norwegians?

    Here’s what Benazir Bhutto, the late Pakistani Prime Minister, had to say about Spencer:

    [He] uses Jihad Watch to spread misinformation and hatred of Islam. She added that he presents a skewed, one-sided, and inflammatory story that only helps to sow the seed of civilizational conflict.

    Even members of the Israel Lobby (SPLC and ADL) had to admit Spencer is a “hate group leader.”

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad_Watch

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred

    Would you not agree with me that for all practical purposes, this makes little difference?
     
    My point regarding Islam (after the comments digressed) is that there is a qualitative difference between Islam and all other religions in the world. Note in #8:

    They are the natural product of the cycles of a tribal Muslim culture.
     
    As far as a "difference" is concerned, I believe that what is going on will lead to a war of annihilation that might expand to the world. It is also true that Jewish Zionism is part of the equation (and "never again"), but that has not been part of the argument as presented by others. I would not want to live under the Shariah or the strictures of the Hasidim, but the Hasidim make no claim to my obedience.

    You do realize you do yourself no favours by linking to Jihad Watch as Spencer is credited by Anders Breivik himself for inspiring him to carry out his mass slaughter of over 70 Norwegians?

     

    Much as I said in #59 above:

    Drawing conclusions because things are juxtaposed is a human trait that I recognize but don’t give much of a damn about. I find the practice of using the trick by political manipulators and the news media repugnant, but just don’t worry much about it as far as what conclusion others misapply to me. Maybe I should “desist”, but I won’t.
     
    What matters is whether or not the information is factual and accurate. If "associations" bother you or anyone that is your/their problem. I do not present my arguments with the expectation or swaying the opinions of the mass of men.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. @geokat62

    I am trying to state objective conclusions I have reached by investigating the matter.
     
    Sounds reasonable.

    I believe any person who objectively researches the matter will come to the conclusion (among others) that there is a qualitative difference between Islam and every other significant religion with regard to the right or obligation to rule over others, all others.
     
    Fred, I will not contest this point, as I do not have the expertise in these texts to confirm or deny it. So let's assume for the sake of argument that Islam gives Muslims the right to rule the world, as you say, and the other two religions don't.

    Would you not agree with me that for all practical purposes, this makes little difference? Because, while the Muslims may have the right to rule the world according to their scripture, if one takes an objective look at the world today (i.e., with over 900 military bases around the globe), is it not an established fact that the Judeo-Christians have de facto rule over this world, regardless of what their scriptures say?

    I have not studied it all, but it looks pretty accurate. Spencer seems scrupulous in his use of authoritative texts.
     
    You do realize you do yourself no favours by linking to Jihad Watch as Spencer is credited by Anders Breivik himself for inspiring him to carry out his mass slaughter of over 70 Norwegians?

    Here's what Benazir Bhutto, the late Pakistani Prime Minister, had to say about Spencer:

    [He] uses Jihad Watch to spread misinformation and hatred of Islam. She added that he presents a skewed, one-sided, and inflammatory story that only helps to sow the seed of civilizational conflict.
     
    Even members of the Israel Lobby (SPLC and ADL) had to admit Spencer is a "hate group leader."
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad_Watch

    Would you not agree with me that for all practical purposes, this makes little difference?

    My point regarding Islam (after the comments digressed) is that there is a qualitative difference between Islam and all other religions in the world. Note in #8:

    They are the natural product of the cycles of a tribal Muslim culture.

    As far as a “difference” is concerned, I believe that what is going on will lead to a war of annihilation that might expand to the world. It is also true that Jewish Zionism is part of the equation (and “never again”), but that has not been part of the argument as presented by others. I would not want to live under the Shariah or the strictures of the Hasidim, but the Hasidim make no claim to my obedience.

    You do realize you do yourself no favours by linking to Jihad Watch as Spencer is credited by Anders Breivik himself for inspiring him to carry out his mass slaughter of over 70 Norwegians?

    Much as I said in #59 above:

    Drawing conclusions because things are juxtaposed is a human trait that I recognize but don’t give much of a damn about. I find the practice of using the trick by political manipulators and the news media repugnant, but just don’t worry much about it as far as what conclusion others misapply to me. Maybe I should “desist”, but I won’t.

    What matters is whether or not the information is factual and accurate. If “associations” bother you or anyone that is your/their problem. I do not present my arguments with the expectation or swaying the opinions of the mass of men.

    Read More
    • Replies: @geokat62

    As far as a “difference” is concerned, I believe that what is going on will lead to a war of annihilation that might expand to the world. It is also true that Jewish Zionism is part of the equation (and “never again”), but that has not been part of the argument as presented by others.
     
    Fred, are you a nihilist by any chance?

    With regard to Jewish Zionism, who are these others to whom you refer? As far as I'm concerned, not only do Zionists play a part, they play the leading role in what's transpiring in the ME, if we are to believe what the two professors documented in their book, The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy.

    What matters is whether or not the information is factual and accurate.
     
    Agreed, but you failed to address the criticisms PM Bhutto brought against Spencer:

    [He] uses Jihad Watch to spread misinformation and hatred of Islam. She added that he presents a skewed, one-sided, and inflammatory story that only helps to sow the seed of civilizational conflict.
     
    Finally, you indicate you make no recommendations, but from what you write, it appears that you are convinced the end times are approaching and that Islam bears primary responsibility for this eventuality. Why not be a little more objective and lay blame where it truly belongs for all the strife in the ME.. at the doorstep of Zionism (both Jewish and Christian)?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. Junior [AKA "Jr."] says:
    @another fred
    Since I am mentioned in your reply (as an idiot) I will offer an observation (my opinion).

    Lord Acton observed that power corrupts. True enough, but I believe it ignores a greater truth, that power attracts to it certain personalities. Most of the people attracted to power are ambitious. Many are greedy and ruthless. History reveals that it is the greedy and ruthless who most often prevail in the struggle for power. Humanity is blessed by the fact the polities they establish eventually decay, but they do have their day.

    My first comment was directed towards the fact that all the dreams of the Left require power to achieve. I think history makes that need for power obvious to anyone capable of objective analysis. The theory of the Marxists is that this need for power is temporary and will dissolve once true justice is established. History testifies that this true justice has not yet been found. I believe human nature is the factor ignored in their analysis.

    In my near 70 years on this earth I have observed that Leftists can usually be categorized in one of three (overlapping) ways:

    1. Talented ambitious people who want to manipulate and rule over other men.
    2. Frightened, angry people whose fear of a dark future, or memories of a painful life, will lead them to buy into any promise that the world can be changed, no matter what the lesson of history tries to teach.
    3. Ambitious people of little talent who think they can get something for nothing by allying themselves with #1, above.

    Zinn was not a #3, maybe a mixture of 1 & 2, but definitely an extreme Leftist. I will let you look inwardly as to where you belong.

    BTW, my IQ was measured over 150 when I was approaching 60 years of age. I may be many things, but I am not an idiot.

    In my opinion I am both an epicurean and (by Ambrose Bierce's definition) a cynic. Look 'em up if you are curious.

    Reading the footnotes I am reminded that Professor Zinn no longer plagues this world with his material presence.

    The above quote in which you seem to relish in the man’s death is what I take offense with. And you’re right, “idiot” IS the wrong descriptor. Heartless is the word I should have used. I apologize for using the wrong word. By all means, continue on with your jaded observations with no solutions if you want to.

    I agree with a fair amount of your observations and I am cynical at times as well. But unlike you, I don’t take pride in the cynicism and I TRY to balance it out with hope when I can. I wish that you would give it a try because I think that you could use that “over 150 IQ” to really make a positive difference if you did.

    “Cynical Realism is the Intelligent Man’s best excuse for doing nothing in an intolerable situation.” – Aldous Huxley

    “What is a Cynic? A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.” – Oscar Wilde

    “Cynicism is intellectual treason.” – Norman Cousins

    “Cynicism is nothing more than soul-rot. It’s nothing more than a coward dressed up in a tweed blazer smoking a Peterson pipe. It is dismissive and disengaged while looking invested and astute.” – Matthew Perryman Jones

    “We can destroy ourselves by cynicism and disillusion, just as effectively as by bombs.” – Kenneth Clark

    “That’s the hardest thing of all — never to become cynical, never to lose faith, never to become indifferent.” – Sergei Lukyanenko

    “It’s better to light one candle than to curse the electric bill.” – Jr. (A man who’s still a work in progress) ;)

    Read More
    • Agree: Junior
    • Disagree: Junior
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. Osman says:
    @War for Blair Mountain
    Wrong...the book is from the point of view of a Leftist Jew who hates The Historic Native Born White American Working Class.

    “The Historic Native Born White American Working Class”

    In other words, gasp! ” illegal economic migrants and invaders” from Europe. Amazing these people think they have the god given right to invade and settle all of God`s green earth but the minute a few refugees (including Mexican and Central Americans fleeing decades of destabilization and looting of their countries by the US) come to their shores (refugees they helped to create in the first place btw) then all hell breaks loose and they start baring their collective teeth with calls for violence and in many cases actual violence against refugees even women and children http://sandiegofreepress.org/2014/07/ugly-americans-block-migrant-buses-in-murrieta/. They complain about being “swamped” but the reality is in comparison to countries like Pakistan, Iran, Kenya, Lebanon, Turkey, the refugee numbers in Europe is a drop in the bucket. And these countries are quite poor in comparison to Europe, North America, and Australia. Most importantly these countries did not cause the conflicts or economic dislocation that generated these refugees (Turkey and Pakistan maybe an exception here)which the West did. Yet you don`t here all the whining and moaning or God forbid calls for violence or expulsion against refugees that you here in the West. This is nothing but pure hypocrisy and shamelessness on the part of some Europeans and their settler colonialist descendants in North America and Australia. But I wouldn`t expect much better from the descendants of slavers and imperialist warmongers. Basic human decency and compassion is too much to expect from such people.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. geokat62 says:
    @another fred

    Would you not agree with me that for all practical purposes, this makes little difference?
     
    My point regarding Islam (after the comments digressed) is that there is a qualitative difference between Islam and all other religions in the world. Note in #8:

    They are the natural product of the cycles of a tribal Muslim culture.
     
    As far as a "difference" is concerned, I believe that what is going on will lead to a war of annihilation that might expand to the world. It is also true that Jewish Zionism is part of the equation (and "never again"), but that has not been part of the argument as presented by others. I would not want to live under the Shariah or the strictures of the Hasidim, but the Hasidim make no claim to my obedience.

    You do realize you do yourself no favours by linking to Jihad Watch as Spencer is credited by Anders Breivik himself for inspiring him to carry out his mass slaughter of over 70 Norwegians?

     

    Much as I said in #59 above:

    Drawing conclusions because things are juxtaposed is a human trait that I recognize but don’t give much of a damn about. I find the practice of using the trick by political manipulators and the news media repugnant, but just don’t worry much about it as far as what conclusion others misapply to me. Maybe I should “desist”, but I won’t.
     
    What matters is whether or not the information is factual and accurate. If "associations" bother you or anyone that is your/their problem. I do not present my arguments with the expectation or swaying the opinions of the mass of men.

    As far as a “difference” is concerned, I believe that what is going on will lead to a war of annihilation that might expand to the world. It is also true that Jewish Zionism is part of the equation (and “never again”), but that has not been part of the argument as presented by others.

    Fred, are you a nihilist by any chance?

    With regard to Jewish Zionism, who are these others to whom you refer? As far as I’m concerned, not only do Zionists play a part, they play the leading role in what’s transpiring in the ME, if we are to believe what the two professors documented in their book, The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy.

    What matters is whether or not the information is factual and accurate.

    Agreed, but you failed to address the criticisms PM Bhutto brought against Spencer:

    [He] uses Jihad Watch to spread misinformation and hatred of Islam. She added that he presents a skewed, one-sided, and inflammatory story that only helps to sow the seed of civilizational conflict.

    Finally, you indicate you make no recommendations, but from what you write, it appears that you are convinced the end times are approaching and that Islam bears primary responsibility for this eventuality. Why not be a little more objective and lay blame where it truly belongs for all the strife in the ME.. at the doorstep of Zionism (both Jewish and Christian)?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. Sam Shama says:
    @geokat62
    Thanks for sharing that link, Art.

    Progressives have long complained that right-wing Israelis have made a “deal with the devil” in accepting support from messianic Christian Zionists.
     
    I remember Sam denying that this was an insult. Sam, can we infer from this that you're not a progressive?

    It looks like these CZ may have morphed into Frankenstein's monster:

    But that was, to coin a phrase, the devil they knew. The question now is whether right-wing Jews will continue to partner with a group that actively seeks their conversion, believes that politicians are possessed by demons, and is spending millions of dollars each year to create a theocracy in the United States. Netanyahu is still Prime Minister, but the game he is playing has changed.
     

    Am I a Progressive? Not sure. I consider myself a realist, bit of an opportunistic iconoclast and on the whole a believer of the basic equality of all humans to pursue a life they choose.

    My CZ friends don’t see themselves as CZs first, rather as scientist-modernists attempting to understand the Bible. The conversations are interesting and occasionally quite funny.

    I have tried to tell them that their coin is perpetuating the conditions in the WB and should therefore be stopped, only to be met with arguments which totally disavow the atrocities, as mostly propaganda by pro-Palestinian groups. I certainly find their positions far more unyielding than those of the median Israeli!

    My mission is to change the attitudes of Jews towards the Lobby. Changing the attitude of the CZs, I leave to my Christian bretheren!

    Read More
    • Replies: @geokat62

    I have tried to tell them that their coin is perpetuating the conditions in the WB and should therefore be stopped, only to be met with arguments which totally disavow the atrocities, as mostly propaganda by pro-Palestinian groups.
     
    Sam, can I make a suggestion? Rather than continuing arguing with them, just tell them to read a few of Phil's articles here at UR. I'm sure the commenters here would be more than happy to provide them with all the hard evidence they require to convince them that the atrocities their "coin" helps to underwrite are as real as it gets, and not propaganda. We'll show them that it's the other side that is expert in the art of propaganda. Why they're so good at it, they even have there own word for it, Hasbara.

    You never know, they too may have a "Road to Damascus" moment, just like you.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. geokat62 says:
    @Sam Shama
    Am I a Progressive? Not sure. I consider myself a realist, bit of an opportunistic iconoclast and on the whole a believer of the basic equality of all humans to pursue a life they choose.

    My CZ friends don't see themselves as CZs first, rather as scientist-modernists attempting to understand the Bible. The conversations are interesting and occasionally quite funny.

    I have tried to tell them that their coin is perpetuating the conditions in the WB and should therefore be stopped, only to be met with arguments which totally disavow the atrocities, as mostly propaganda by pro-Palestinian groups. I certainly find their positions far more unyielding than those of the median Israeli!

    My mission is to change the attitudes of Jews towards the Lobby. Changing the attitude of the CZs, I leave to my Christian bretheren!

    I have tried to tell them that their coin is perpetuating the conditions in the WB and should therefore be stopped, only to be met with arguments which totally disavow the atrocities, as mostly propaganda by pro-Palestinian groups.

    Sam, can I make a suggestion? Rather than continuing arguing with them, just tell them to read a few of Phil’s articles here at UR. I’m sure the commenters here would be more than happy to provide them with all the hard evidence they require to convince them that the atrocities their “coin” helps to underwrite are as real as it gets, and not propaganda. We’ll show them that it’s the other side that is expert in the art of propaganda. Why they’re so good at it, they even have there own word for it, Hasbara.

    You never know, they too may have a “Road to Damascus” moment, just like you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. @Fred Reed
    Zinn of course is exactly right. I wonder how many of the bow-wow-woof commenters have been in a war? Covered one? Spent a year on a casualty ward because of it? Lost friends in one? Seen dead villagers dead for no reason?

    I’ve done my fair share of shooting, sir. Zinn is a cockroach.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?