The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewIlana Mercer Archive
Making America Great Means Exposing ‘W’
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Making America great again, the theme of Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign, depends on dispelling the myths and myth-making that made America bad.

Beginning with George W. Bush.

Said Saint Augustine: “The confession of evil works is the first beginning of good works.”

The Republican Party under Bush did the devil’s work. Bar the sainted Ron Paul, not a dog of a Republican lifted his leg in protest of the unjust war on Iraq.

To embark on the good, the GOP must come clean about the bad. To that end, Donald Trump has begun a vital process of expiation.

The 43rd president is categorized as “bad” and ranked 37th by Ivan Eland, author of “Recarving Rushmore: Ranking the Presidents on Peace, Prosperity, and Liberty.” Having undermined the republic at home and peace abroad, “Bush’s presidency,” avers Eland, “was one of the worst of all time.”

Coming to terms with the Bush legacy, moreover, ought to prevent the rise of another Bush. For the bogus Bush Doctrine is alive and well-exploited in the words and promises of each of the Republican candidates, bar Donald Trump.

The Bush dictum of fighting them over there so they don’t come here —as if Islamic State can’t, won’t and hasn’t attacked there and here—is alive and well-exploited by almost every fork-tongued politician in the Republican and Democratic races.

Other than Trump and Bernie Sanders, there’s a potatoes vs. spuds quality to the foreign policy articulated by both sides.

Each time the interchangeable John Kasich or Marco Rubio or Jeb Bush are asked about death by Muslim in the United States; they whip out that dumb “W” Doctrine, tethering attacks like San Bernardino in the US to wars the US should be waging over in the Middle East, and will be waging if these candidates have their way.

If you liked Bush’s willful and criminal war on Iraq; if you enjoyed watching aw-shucks “W” “Shock and Awe” Iraq to kingdom come with BLU-82s—boy, do you have a treat in store.

If you took pleasure in Bush unseating and executing law-and-order leader Saddam Hussein; you’ll love the plans Rubio, Kasich and Brother Jeb have for Bashar Assad and his family. As for Vladimir Putin, the not-so-comical three stooges have practically diarized conflagration with Russia.

I almost forgot: If you licked your chops when Bush disarmed dem little Iraqi boys by littering their playgrounds with cluster bomblets; your vampiric urges will be sated. In Bush’s Baghdad, hospitals teamed with limbless kids successfully disarmed. The Rubio-Kasich-Bush bandidos will similarly oblige their supporters. Happy times are ahead for their acolytes.

In brother Jeb, promised George Bush in South Carolina, on February 16, the country will be getting a “steady hand” to steer the ship of state.

Yes, in his many addresses to the nation, during the crises into which he plunged America, Bush used to bang on about the joys of bringing about “the triumph of democracy and tolerance in Iraq, in Afghanistan and beyond.”


Plenty of that poppycock awaits America should Bush III or his other three foreign-policy clones materialize in the White House. Hawk Hillary must be added to present company, as nation building at the point of a bayonet makes her barking happy. (The rabid Mrs. Clinton has taken to barking at her rallies. Check it out.)

Laudably and mercilessly did Trump taunt Jeb Bush at the CBS News Republican debate, in South Carolina, February 13. Jeb had brought out Big Brother to fight his battles for him:

Said Trump: “The war in Iraq was a big, fat mistake. All right? Now, you can take it any way you want … George Bush made a mistake. We can make mistakes. But that one was a beauty. We should have never been in Iraq. We have destabilized the Middle East.”

Why would the guy, Donald J. Trump, take up Rand Paul’s libertarian foreign policy stance when he leads among Republican voters? So asked a Republican strategist on “Hardball,” Chris Matthews’ MSNBC show.

The special-needs media was abuzz, questioning Trump’s anti-G. Bush “tactics.”

But badmouthing G. Bush to a South Carolina electorate, apparently still partial to the man, is no tactic; it’s a higher calling. The reason Trump has no qualms about repudiating Bush II’s colossal war crime—the invasion of Iraq—is because he speaks the truth.

Trump is not a politician. To hear Ted Cruz tell it, Trump’s past support of this or the other position was done in a political capacity. Cruz forgets that Trump was a civilian.

And unlike Hillary Clinton and every single Republican and their media mouths—Trump is not ankle deep in the blood of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and other Middle Easterners, Muslim and Christian. He didn’t cast a deciding vote to prosecute their war and he had the good sense to question it in his limited capacity as a civilian.

That Trump is accused of sounding like the ladies of Code Pink isn’t an argument; it’s an ad hominem attack. For it is quite possible, even likely, that Code Pink, a restraining influence on jingoism and imperialism, is correct about Bush.

So white-hot is the hate for Donald Trump; that it has united The Machine in defense of the indefensible, George W. Bush

This, too, is understandable considering Mr. Trump’s accomplishments:

So far, Trump has upended the Media Complex, the Republican Party Complex (in the form of the Republican National Committee), and the phony Conservatism Complex. It’s time for the War Party faction within to take its last gasp.

Hide 85 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. KA says:
    -Five years ago, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s personal adviser Sidney Blumenthal urged her to apologize to former Army officer (and ex-CIA analyst) Ray McGovern after he was roughly arrested when he stood silently with his back turned in protest against a Clinton speech, ironically condemning foreign leaders who show intolerance of dissent–
    -Instead, Clinton, who has declared that “supporting veterans is a sacred responsibility,” denied any responsibility for McGovern’s brutal arrest, which left the 71-year-old who was wearing a “Veterans for Peace” T-shirt, bloodied and bruised. She also offered no explanation for why she failed to stop the police when the arrest was occurring right in front of her; instead she just continued on with her speech about the need for leaders to respect the rights of dissidents.”

    American wage wars on other ountries over freedom of speech,freedom from torture and persecution , it’s leaders get rousing applause from them for standing up to tyranny and express wonders at the readiness of the candidate to take the call at 2 am. Robot Rubio adds to the daymares masquerading as sweet dream of American revival by claiming to enjoy readiness than the all other combined .

    Big ” W” taught America to think big – spreading god given freedom to every damned country . But those deprived childlike abused foreigners need a little bit of periodic spanking to prevent apostasy or reversal . So the country wants a Robot Rubio or an eternal victim of illiberalism in the shape of a female to protect the turf .

    Nation building at home is not permitted , personal responsibility doesn’t allow those regressive behaviors
    . Foreigners don’t have any sense of personal responsibility . So US needs to step in .
    Personal responsibility was so lacking and is so glaringly obvious ,all we have to do to find that out is to look at the influence of the bad guys like Saddam ,Ghaddafi or Assad hold or held over the citizen who should have been personally responsible and thrown out the regime. They failed .

    So America came to help . That’s the story goes.

    Now newly found freedom could give rise to unacceptable behaviors . To prevent that possibility sanctions and return to wars have to be considered so that they don’t ” fight here ” . ” W “wins again .

    But” W “is so much evocative of pain, he can’t be seen alone or in company or in group and never as a reincarnation through another Bush. But again W ‘s ideas can be safely used . America seems to buck all trends . Bus Jr should have been put on a pedestal as martyr or victims( of Arab Islam or left wing or of antiwar or of media) and worshipped while the ideas of the martyr should have been ignored the way we have done over the history of humankind . In his case we decided to declare him a persona non grata but honor ,worship love and continue his ideologies .

    • Replies: @tbraton
  2. JackOH says:

    Ilana, I don’t know how you persuade Americans that America’s military interventions need examined on a cold-blooded, non-ideological basis to see if they’ve been worth it.

    There may be close to a billion people in the world today who have direct experience of their home countries being bombed by American warplanes, or anecdotally derived impressions from family and neighbors of their home countries being bombed by American warplanes. My hunch is that this datum underlies a big chunk of anti-Americanism, and, to the extent that Western Europe is regarded as a lap dog of American policy, anti-Westernism.

    Maybe someone with more skills than I have could propose a massive hypothetical: what if the United States had militarily intervened nowhere in the past century? How much better or worse would the world be? How much better or worse would America be?

    BTW-Vincent Bugliosi wrote a book proposing the prosecution of George W. Bush, but the idea gained no traction.

    • Replies: @rod1963
  3. The Republican Party and the Supreme Court gave us the Cheney regime which gave us 9/11 and the Iraq war. I’m an old guy. I served under Johnson and briefly under Nixon. As war crimes go Vietnam has to rank above Iraq at least in terms of the number of dead people. The Anglo/Zio Empire is in steep decline. When it is finally dead and gone and the U.S. is just another big country in the Americas, nobody will admit to having been a Democrat or a Republican. Bernie is the un-Democrat. Trump is the un-Republican. Their combined popularity is the first hopeful sign that “everyday Americans” are emerging from the Matrix.

    • Agree: Realist
  4. Renoman says:

    The truth is something that Republicans badly need to hear, it is Trumps Ace card. It’s hard to argue with the truth, getting people to vote for a ridiculous war Plus flushing the stock market down the toilet again will be a tough sell. I hope for Bernie but Trump is my second choice. He may be an arse but he’s his own arse not somebody elses.

  5. @WorkingClass


    Reading your comment just now caused something to occur to me. It’s a bit off topic but not drastically so.

    For a long time now there has been a prevailing mood among the vaguely alt-right leaning commentariat that 7 years’ worth of the GOP’s failure to oppose Obama has resulted in the rise of the populist Trump candidacy. A similar populist uprising probably explains the advent of the Tea Party after Obama’s first election.

    But now I recall the midterm congressional elections of 2006, and how the American populace turned out in droves to vote for conservative ballot measures (e.g. many gay marriage legalization proposals were cut down in 2006) but for Democratic candidates (the Democrats retook the HoR and the Senate).

    Looking back, I think that election cycle adumbrates the rise of the Tea Party and was a nascent form of the Trump-Sanders insurgency avant la lettre. It was all in opposition to W and his neocon nation-building. This has been brewing for a long time and hopefully will come to the fore this time around.

    As a side note, I’m beginning to really like Ilana Mercer.

  6. Excellent article! Well worth reading.

    I’ll probably link to it.

    • Replies: @ilana mercer
  7. Ilana likened Trump’s takedown of GWB to a confession of evil works. I liken it to a stomach full of Jagerbombs, Macanudo cigar ash and a jar of Cheez Whiz. It won’t sit right and must be purged if you’re gonna feel better in the morning. Republicans need to purge GWB’s toxic legacy if they’re to move on. They should thank Trump for getting this process started, but they won’t, because they’d rather lose the election and feel like total shit than admit Trump is right.

  8. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    It seems the rank and file Republicans still want to hold on to the belief that going to war against Iraq in 2003 was justified. Draft-dodging drugies like Rush Limbaugh are so offended. If these idiots will be so offended by the truth-telling of Trump then vote for Marco. Then they can bitch about Hillary for the next 8 years and they can also gladly send their patriotic progeny off to get TBI or worse in the next clusterfuck foreign adventure. And when they get back they can re-adapt to being second-class citizens to non-citizens while their values are further mocked and attacked.

    • Replies: @Dingo
  9. Dave37 says:

    Attacking a zealous Republican War Party is fine and well but demonizing or criminalizing them and “W” for going to war after the Twin Towers debacle with a country we had already fought once before because of invading Kuwait, is not going to be a home run with the electorate in my opinion.

    • Disagree: Realist, tbraton
  10. KA says:

    While some rabid unhinged lunatic are crying hoarse in visceral hatred against Trump for saying that Bush lied and Bush ignored some supposedly more sophisticated than those unhinged radio shock jock are using their mouthpiece of islamophobia to portray Trump as anti Islam or anti Muslim. One wonders at the reversal of fate of the neocon at the hand of Trump. One hopes that they e continue to migrate down to the black hole of no escape.

    This is the pathetic attempt by weekly standard –

    Who says time always heals ?Time can cause PTSD . The nightmares of the neocon is waking the neighbourhood .

    Islamophobia was introduced by the neocons not by Phillipine war not by Bush or by war or by ISIS and not Christians.

    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
  11. geokat62 says:

    For it is quite possible, even likely, that Code Pink, a restraining influence on jingoism and imperialism, is correct about Bush.

    This language is quite revealing about the author’s true mindset. In the words of Marcellous, “something is rotten in the state of Denmark.”

  12. Only just this evening I was told by a…uh…er…”conservative” at a website called “The Right Scoop” that I don’t belong in America if I hate Israel.

    An interesting criterium for what entitles me to be in my homeland, I think.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
  13. I enjoy Mercer’s articles, including this one, but throwing a bone to Code Pink is just wrong.

    They are the type of people who may be right about one thing, but for the wrong reason.

  14. @Dave37

    Iraq didn’t have a thing to do with 911.

    • Replies: @Epaminondas
  15. @Unapologetic White Man

    Absolutely true. The Bush neocons simply used it as an excuse to funnel American fury into their favorite project, bringing down Saddam. We know how that worked out.

  16. Biff says:

    Best thing to happen to Kuwait was Saddam.

  17. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Anyone with access to a computer at the time and the inclination to click around in search of the actual facts could have established that it was extremely unlikely that Iraq had any WMD, had no connection to 9-11 and posed no threat to the US. If I could find that out with just a small amount of effort then these highly placed leaders of ours certainly should have known. Clinton claims she simply went on what the prevailing available information was at the time and that’s why she voted for it. This is a cover story to deflect blame. They were lying then, they’re lying now. They were simply lying to the American people. The Iraq invasion was more than just a mere ‘mistake’, it was a crime that’s led to unending disaster the results of which haven’t been beneficial to the US at all. Then there’s the humanitarian aspect; we’ve caused hundreds of thousands of people to die or become cripples and millions have been thrown out onto the road as pauperized refugees. Will someone ever answer for the millions of lives ruined or, as in the words of Madeline Albright, it was ‘worth it’? Even if someone doesn’t care much about the ‘lesser’ people’s lives then what about the thousands of US servicemen who’ve been killed or now use a prosthesis? They were just exploited expendables, a faceless resource to be used at will by those who adopt a solemn visage when giving them medals but who in fact live high on the hog. And let’s not forget about the billions expended, money that could have been spent on ourselves rather than wasted on foreign adventures.
    There’s an undercurrent of anger in this country and Trump seems to have tapped into it. He’s pointed out the elephant in the room that people have been reluctant to bring up. The dam seems to have broken with this one. Let’s hope this leads to a real, candid national discussion of what’s taken place instead of the usual megaphone of lies and spin.

    • Replies: @geokat62
  18. KA says:

    16 articles that shows Bush was lying

    But the knucklehead would like to when exactly Bush was lying . There are evidences that he also repeated the same false assertions. But suppose there were none from him that could be directly attributed to him as example of lying, then what.? Does it mean he can be let go off the hook?
    Obviously no.
    It is like saying Hitler couldn’t be accused of killing Jews ,Catholics,Roma because no one could show the evidence of him killing or gassing any body .

  19. AndrewR says:

    I’ve been thinking about W a lot lately. Leaving aside the question of whether he knowingly lied or if he was simply too credulous about the “horrrs” of Saddam, the war never would have gotten off the ground had it not been for the support of the ethnic backbone of the GOP. Tens of millions of Americans love waging violence and don’t need a good excuse to do so. While they’re generally content to go out drinking and picking fights on Saturday night, if the government tells them that there are big bad terrorists that need killing in the middle east then they’ll run off in droves to the recruiter’s office.

    We can criticize Bush all we want but he was just giving many folks what they wanted.

    For better or worse these people make up the bulk of people who don’t want to see the US turn into a Muslim Mexico. Trump should tread more carefully when it comes to discussing W and US foreign policy. I don’t think his savage attack on W bought him any fans, although obviously it didn’t hurt him too bad, given yesterday’s results. But I guarantee not a single SWPL horrified by his overt nativism decided to start supporting him after his repudiation of the Dubya Doctrine.

    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
    , @rod1963
  20. AndrewR says:
    @Unapologetic White Man

    Zionists have done an amazing job of brainwashing Americans into thinking that American national interests are inextricably tied to defending Israel’s national interests. The idea that Israel’s interests arent 100% aligned with our own is a nonstarter, and the idea that US interests are largely in opposition to Israeli interests is high heresy.

    • Replies: @KA
    , @anon
  21. Wally says: • Website

    As if the Democrats didn’t go along with the entire fraud.

    • Replies: @Biff
  22. dfnslblty says:

    Current potus invites indictment and impeachment.

  23. geokat62 says:

    I agreed with almost everything you’ve written, except for this bit:

    … rather than wasted on foreign adventures.

    Rather than using a generic term, such as “foreign adventures,” it is of paramount importance that we hammer home the real culprits behind these so-called “foreign adventures” and the goals they were trying to achieve. As professors Mearsheimer and Walt have demonstrated in their book, The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy, it was the neocons/Israel firsters who pushed the US to launch the GWOT (aka The War on Islam) to remake the ME by regime changing those countries deemed hostile to the Zionist project, all in an effort to enhance the security of the villa in the jungle.

    The American people need to come to the realization that the exorbitant price tag they have paid in terms of lives and treasure in fighting the GWOT was not meant to keep them safe, it was meant to keep the people of Israel safe:

    Israel’s enthusiasm for war eventually led some of its allies in America to tell Israeli officials to damp down their hawkish rhetoric, lest the war look like it was being fought for Israel. In the fall of 2002, for example, a group of American political consultants known as the Israel Project circulated a six-page memorandum to key Israelis and pro-Israel leaders in the United States. The memo was titled “Talking about Iraq” and was intended as a guide for public statements about the war. “If your goal is regime change, you must be much more careful with your language because of the potential backlash. You do not want Americans to believe that the war on Iraq is being waged to protect Israel rather than to protect America.” – Chapter 8, “Iraq and Dreams of Transforming The Middle East”

    This needs to be repeated, over and over again.

  24. dfnslblty says:

    GOP and dubyuh Criminalized themselves in their imperialistique pursuits;
    Esaay’s exposure stance makes readers aware of demonic and criminal actions.

  25. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    Dubya’s been a naked emperor all along to anyone who has bothered to follow the news with care and has the slightest capacity for critical thought.

    But making the criminality of the Bush/Clinton/Obama imperialism the focus of the presidential campaign is not such a great idea. America needs a new direction, not a civil war.

    Trump challenged the Iraq war mythology only because JEB and Rubio attempted to use it as a foundation for their own anticipated criminal foreign policy. Trump is not suicidal, therefore he will not make the truth about the Iraq war a central issue of his campaign.

  26. @KA

    “Islamophobia was introduced by the neocons not by Phillipine war not by Bush or by war or by ISIS and not Christians.”

    “Islamophobia” – fear of Islam – is well justified by the experience of 1400 years of Muslim aggression towards the West. Islam is not a “religion of peace.”

    Between supine acceptance of it, as we see in some European countries today, and a policy of taking the fight to Muslim lands, as Bush et al. did, there is a sensible middle ground, which follows the successful policy pursued by past champions of Christendom from Charles Martel to Prince Eugene of Savoy – that of expelling and excluding Muslims from the West.

    There is no reason to have anything to do with the Islamic world except in connection with oil, the only product they have to sell. They must sell it to someone. Western relations with Islamic countries should be strictly limited to commerce in petroleum. Their nationals should not be admitted into Western countries except as needed to facilitate trade, and then only in limited numbers, for limited periods of time, and to tightly restricted areas, with most of the country off-limits to them. This was the policy this country followed with respect to nationals of the Soviet Union during most of the Cold War, with the exception of a relatively small number of defectors.

    Pat Buchanan has made this point for years. We shouldn’t engage in “nation building” half-way around the world, or assume that American-style “democracy” can or ought to be imported into such places. As John Quincy Adams said, we should go not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. Let the Muslims and the West each live as they will, separated by and secure behind robustly defended borders. Good fences make good neighbors.

    • Replies: @KA
    , @Avery
    , @FLgeezer
    , @Max Payne
  27. Trump upset the neo-cons by openly saying Bush lied, instead of the accepted spin that “we were all fooled by bad intelligence.” Allow me to post facts from my essay “Oil From Irak”:

    “Invading Iraq had nothing to do with “Weapons of Mass Destruction” (WMDs). One of President Bush’s more outrageous lies is that he did not deceive the American people to justify the invasion of Iraq. “We were fooled by bad intelligence” is the excuse accepted by most Americans. They cannot recall that in 2003, as U.S. forces prepared to invade Iraq, President Bush demanded that Saddam Hussein permit UN inspectors “free and unfettered access” to search Iraq for WMDs. Saddam Hussein surprised everyone by agreeing, and UN inspectors were allowed to roam Iraq at will and check all the locations that Colin Powell had recently told the UN Assembly were actively producing illegal weapons.

    After several weeks, the dozens of UN inspector teams had found nothing, and the dirty, rusty conditions of the suspect sites showed nothing had been made there for years. The
    Bush administration insisted they had other proof that WMDs were in Iraq. Chief UN inspector Hans Blix publicly stated that if they would send him a clue, he would have UN teams inspect the next day. Iraq even proposed that U.S. military officers join the UN inspectors. As a result, President Bush had perfect intelligence that Iraq had no WMDs. The US military had complete freedom to fly anywhere in Iraq to observe activity. UN inspectors were on the ground to check any suspect site, and were permitted to stay in Iraq as long as they liked to pursue new leads.

    This confirmed what General Hussein Kamel, Iraq’s weapons chief who defected from the regime in 1995, told UN inspectors and the CIA, that Iraq had destroyed its entire stockpile of chemical and biological weapons and banned missiles.”

    • Replies: @geokat62
  28. KA says:

    1 “But, it turns out, two days before the president told Powell,[ he would attack Iraq ] Cheney and Rumsfeld had already briefed Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador[ 2002 Dec or Jan 2003 ]

    “But this wasn’t enough for Prince Bandar, who Woodward says wanted confirmation from the president. “Then, two days later, Bandar is called to meet with the president and the president says, ‘Their message is my message,’” says Woodward. CBS news

    Yes Mr President . Those messages coming from anybody within the administration were your messages They were your decisions l. You need to tell your brother and those conservatives who now claim that people around you were responsible for bad intelligence and for bad decisions and for wrong assertions .

    2 “says Woodward. “He chastised me at one point because I said people were concerned about the failure to find weapons of mass destruction. And he said, ‘Well you travel in elite circles.’
    ” CBS News 60 minutes

    Did Bush lie ? Or did he give a damn whether he was lying or saying the truth ? To him truth and lies are same. It does not sound that it even ever crossed his mind

  29. @AndrewR

    ” Tens of millions of Americans love waging violence and don’t need a good excuse to do so. While they’re generally content to go out drinking and picking fights on Saturday night, if the government tells them that there are big bad terrorists that need killing in the middle east then they’ll run off in droves to the recruiter’s office.”

    I don’t buy the notion that there is a vast number of roistering rednecks out there “picking fights on Saturday night…” Statistical studies have shown that if we exclude criminal violence committed by blacks and mestizos, and consider only the white population, it exhibits a propensity for mayhem approximately equivalent to that of the Belgians.

    If large numbers of Americans “run off in droves to the recruiter’s office” after events like those of 9/11/2001, it’s not out of a love for waging violence, but rather for the same reason they ran off in droves to the recruiter’s office after the Japanese raid on Pearl Harbor or the sinking of the USS Maine. The instinct to retaliate when attacked is immediate – doubts, including the suspicion (whether justified or not) that our own leaders have manipulated us into war, come later.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
  30. KA says:

    I wanted here to remain focused on the trend from the Weekly Standard . This is the magazine whose rational for existence is in provoking wars .This neocon mouthpiece is suddenly trying to blame Trump for something that might or might not have been an issue in 1900 in Phillipine .while it is conveniently ignoring their own exclusive contribution toward introducing 21 st century Islamophobia in the defense, law enforcement ,politics and in the media .

    Fear of Islam is understood from your perspective . I can live with that . Fear of Christianity ??- Let’s see- ” having given the order, the president walked alone around the circle behind the White House. Months later, he told Woodward: “As I walked around the circle, I prayed that our troops be safe, be protected by the Almighty. Going into this period, I was praying for strength to do the Lord’s will. I’m surely not going to justify war based upon God. Understand that. Nevertheless, in my case, I pray that I be as good a messenger of his will as possible. And then, of course, I pray for forgiveness.”

    Did Mr. Bush ask his father for any advice? “I asked the president about this. And President Bush said, ‘Well, no,’ and then he got defensive about it,” says Woodward. “Then he said something that really struck me. He said of his father, ‘He is the wrong father to appeal to for advice. The wrong father to go to, to appeal to in terms of strength.’ And then he said, ‘There’s a higher Father that I appeal to.’-

    And I have not mentioned yet of Graham and Falwell or of Southern Baptist or of Korean Missionary – they claimed to have found a new and a great opportunity in converting the defeated and terrorized Iraqis and Afghanistanis. You can tell me more about the creation of ISIS and of Al Quida . Money can buy a lot . It bought the Evangelics who label Aramgeddon as god’s wish and then use it t lend support for war against Arabs. They have been doing it for a long time way before 911 .

    The wall separate and make good neighbors It does . Muslim have not managed to get to US ,Canad,Australia or NZ illegally .They have come legally . I agree that Americans have every right to deny that .

    • Replies: @Avery
  31. Biff says:

    They did, and in that regard there really is only one party – the war party.

  32. Avery says:

    Well said.

    Turkophile and Islamophile mouthpieces living in Christian West, safe and secure, while constantly proselytizing for Islam, are to be countered and debunked, as you did.

    They’d be too afraid to say the wrong thing living in a Muslim country, because they’d lose their head. But they see nothing wrong spreading their anti-Christian Islamophile hate while living amongst Christians.

    btw: all those “Muslim” lands that Muslims now inhabit, particularly the Middle East, were non-Muslim. Until (Sunni) Muslims left Mecca and started spreading their faith at the point of the sword. Christians and others inhabiting Middle East were forcibly converted: those that did not want to convert were slaughtered.

  33. AndrewR says:

    a) not all “whites” are the same

    b) violent acts are not always prosecuted, especially mutually consenting combat aka fights. I am talking about the propensity to engage in violence not the number of prosecutions for violent acts.

    The 2003 invasion of Iraq was hardly “immediately” after 9/11, and to this day millions of people still want our military to kill people “over there” so that “they don’t kill us here”

    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
  34. FLgeezer says:

    ‘ Their nationals should not be admitted into Western countries except as needed to facilitate trade, and then only in limited numbers, for limited periods of time, and to tightly restricted areas, with most of the country off-limits to them. This was the policy this country followed with respect to nationals of the Soviet Union during most of the Cold War, with the exception of a relatively small number of defectors.’

    This assertion applies equally well to the Zionist world. For as guilty as GWB is, we must never forget that those who mislead him were largely dual-citizenship, Israel-First cretins. A convincing argument can also be made that they are also responsible for the destruction of Europe. Their Iraq War advocacy created the refugee tsunami. And now they are pulling the strings of Marco Rubio to commit to more death and destruction in Iran. The persons named in Joe Sobran’s article deserve to swing.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  35. geokat62 says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    As a result, President Bush had perfect intelligence that Iraq had no WMDs.

    Excellent point. There is more convincing evidence, however, that the US knew there were no WMDs. And that’s the fact that they went ahead with the invasion. Do you recall that North Korea was also included in the Axis of Evil? I wonder why it’s taking so long to invade that country?

  36. FLgeezer says:

    ‘The central message Petraeus sent to Mullen, according to Perry, was that ‘Israeli intransigence on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was jeopardising US standing in the region… and could cost American lives.’ Apparently, Mullen took this message to the White House, where it had a significant impact on the president and his chief advisers. Biden’s comments to Netanyahu appear to reflect that view.’

    And look what befell Petraeus? Honey-potted by an Israeli spy.

  37. Max Payne says:

    False. What would make America great is exposing Israel.

    • Replies: @Minnesota Mary
  38. Max Payne says:

    “Islamophobia” – fear of Islam – is well justified by the experience of 1400 years of Muslim aggression towards the West. Islam is not a “religion of peace.”

    Wow I didn’t know Muslims fought a Crusade in Europe for 1400 years. That’s very impressive of them.

    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
  39. Realist says:

    “The Republican Party under Bush did the devil’s work. Bar the sainted Ron Paul, not a dog of a Republican lifted his leg in protest of the unjust war on Iraq.”

    The impetuous for US action in the middle east, for at least 30 years, has been the aiding and abetting of aggressive Zionism.

  40. Truth says:

    Ilana, now come on, Boy George is a CONSERVATIVE that means, you do not insult him.

    You know how to march in lockstep:

    Regan and Conservatives, God-fearing, white, prudent, normal — “good”

    Barry and Democrats wierdoes, socialists, nigros, limp-wristes swishers –“bad”.

    Now, in the past, you have doubtlessly proven that you understand the second half of the paradigm, please work on the first. We do not deviate from the plan.

    Please do not make this mistake again.

  41. Terry says:

    From my entry on Crazy Guy on a Bike I wrote. On this day 30 September 2002 I feel a need to say something or make a statement. It was about this time, in fact the day after the 30 September 1899, which was the day my father was born, that my grandfather left his family and Ixopo on horseback, and took up arms to fight the Boers.He had to ride some 50 kms to Richmond where the Border Mounted Rifles entrained for Ladysmith only to be besieged by the Boers.It’s funny how history looks at events so differently a hundred years on. Milner and Chamberlain had for a long time wanted to spill Boer’s blood. In fact Milner was determined to war with the Transvaal Boers no matter what, and so stirred up British sentiments that he was able to get the British Government to send troops from all over the world and to get volunteers from Canada, Australia and New Zealand to fight a war the Boers did not want and did their best to avoid. But Milner had his way. Thirty thousand Boer lives later and thousands of British troops dead, the scorched earth policy left farms, crops and cattle destroyed and the two Republics devastated before that Great Boer War ended. Early commentators including Churchill of course blamed the Boers entirely, but a hundred years on all writer/historians with better research and documents available, put the full blame for the war on Milner, Chamberlain and Britain. Now Bush and Blair are spoiling for war and are determined to have their war no matter what, I wonder in one hundred years where historians will put the blame for the war against Iraq that seems sure to come.

  42. rod1963 says:

    A great portion of the blame for this global misery rests upon the shoulders of the MSM that had promoted both Iraq wars. The American people didn’t want either war, they had to be manipulated into supporting them.

    Think back to the torrent of lies that came out of the NYT and every other major paper in regards to Iraq after 9/11 or even prior to Desert Storm. The latter was a considered a master class on how to manipulate the public. Remember the story of Iraqi soldiers bayoneting Kuwaiti babies in their nurseries that got massive air time here in the U.S.? It was all made up. Kuwait hired the PR firm Hill & Knowlton to generate a massive propaganda campaign to mobilize the American people against Iraq. They came up with this lie and had the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador testify before Congress this was all true – she wasn’t even in Kuwait when the invasion happened BTW.

    Not only should the Bush White House staffers and Pentagon brass face long jail times, so should their enablers in the MSM that turned themselves into stenographers for the establishment. They acted no better than those old Soviet rags – Pravda and Tass.

    • Replies: @JackOH
  43. rod1963 says:

    “tens of millions of Americans love waging violence and don’t need a good excuse to do so. While they’re generally content to go out drinking and picking fights on Saturday night, if the government tells them that there are big bad terrorists that need killing in the middle east then they’ll run off in droves to the recruiter’s office. ”


    The only folks with a propensity to violence are Blacks and Hispanics. Not whites. If Blacks did not exist in the U.S. our crime rate would be that of Switzerland.

    In regards to recruitment. Very few men joined the military after 9/11. After the Iraq war started, the military was forced recall men who already served and keep others from leaving after their terms of enlistment were up. Others in critical MOS’s were given large monetary incentives to stay in. Recruiting wise, they were forced to intake gang members along with large numbers of low IQ types because anyone with a brain knew to stay away from the military.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
  44. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Haaretz Feb 21 2016 —

    Israel Is Changing Its Approach to Syria War Amid Assad’s Battleground Advances
    Russian intervention has tilted the scales, and Jerusalem is concerned of a regime victory, which would be victory for Iran as well. To prevent that, Israeli officials believe West must intervene in favor of moderate rebels.

    Amos Harel Feb 21, 2016 9:42 PM

    Throughout most of the civil war in Syria, Israel has maintained a more or less consistent policy. Now, in light of the Assad…
    read more:



    Michael O’Hanlon of Brookings, an institution that used to be one of DC’s finest until Haim Saban bought into it, on C Span Washington Journal this morning pretty much echoed the Israeli line.

    O’Hanlon insisted that Assad must go, that the fighting should continue until the battlefield is more favorable to the “moderate” rebels.

    O’Hanlon acknowledged that Assad’s major support is from Alawites and Christians, therefore that USA is supporting those who are harming and will continue to harm Christians in Syria.

    O’Hanlon megaphones these talking points and prescriptions for American action — and ‘information’ to the American people — that are in Israel’s best interest, if not indeed straight from scripts from Netanyahu’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but diametrically oppose the best interests of the American people, of Christians, and that hypocritically and outrageously prescribe even more suffering for the Syrian people.

    USA policy that “demands that Assad must go” are in direct contravention of United Nations Charter that proscribes involvement in the internal affairs of any sovereign nation.

    The USA has the ability to stop this fighting. Instead, US sustains it, deliberately, by continuing to arm “moderate rebels.” USA does this in subservience to AIPAC and Jews & Christian zionists in USA.
    May they rot in hell.

    PS Disagree w/ #6, “S1lverlock” — “Exposing W”, the latest meme pushed by outfits like Applied Memetics, is a classic diversion tactic influenced by scapegoating.

    #24 @ geokat62 had a more intellectually honest assessment:

    it was the neocons/Israel firsters who pushed the US to launch the GWOT (aka The War on Islam) to remake the ME by regime changing those countries deemed hostile to the Zionist project, all in an effort to enhance the security of the villa in the jungle.

    The American people need to come to the realization that the exorbitant price tag they have paid in terms of lives and treasure in fighting the GWOT was not meant to keep them safe, it was meant to keep the people of Israel safe

    geokat62 referenced Walt & Mearsheimer to support the assertion.

    There’s more proof and more powerful proof:

    Netanyahu indicts himself — and Israel, and Jews everywhere —

    Moreover, Netanyahu and his father, the psychotic basket case (now deceased) drew the blueprint for GWOT in Jerusalem in July 1979

    George H W Bush spoke at the Conference.

  45. Dingo says:

    Americans forget too easily that we have completely ruined three countries since 9/11- Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, and have now almost ruined Syria. In all three ruined countries, radical jihadists have gained power over previously secular states, so the trillions of dollars and thousands of lives have been worse than wasted. Our “allies” like KSA ,and the unaccountable CIA in fact are still secretly funding and arming ISIS. This is insanity on a grand scale!

    Add to this the fact that most independent evidence points to 9/11 being synthetic terror, a very successful version of Operation Northwoods or Gladio, perpetrated by the deep state apparatchiks in both the US and Israel, to catapult the plan of Zionists to take over a far larger chunk of the Middle East.

    Unfortunately, Trump has fallen for the fake. He proved this when he started talking about Arabs in New Jersey celebrating on Sept 11.01. But the reality is that 5 Israelis from Urban Moving (a Mossad front) were celebrating enough to get arrested. They were later released and actually went on TV in Tel Aviv to state they were there ahead of time to document the WTC demolition. What does that tell us about the official Big Lie?

  46. @Max Payne

    “Wow I didn’t know Muslims fought a Crusade in Europe for 1400 years. That’s very impressive of them.”

    Perhaps you should read some history, beginning with the Moorish conquest of Spain, and including such high points as the battle of Tours, the setting up of a Muslim emirate in Sicily and its subsequent expulsion, the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople, the siege of Malta, the battle of Lepanto, John Sobieski’s deliverance of Vienna, Eugene of Savoy’s campaigns in the Balkans, and the American war with the Barbary pirates. Islam has been a durable enemy of the West, which it has, however, failed to conquer as it did the ancient civilizations of Egypt, the Levant, Asia Minor, Mesopotamia, and Persia.

    The Christian crusades in the Levant lasted only a short while compared to the long history of Muslim belligerence toward Christendom, which considerably antedated the crusades and has long outlasted them.

    By the way, the crusades were, although poorly managed, the result of ample provocation on the part of Muslim potentates. What they illustrate is not that the West is guilty of being nasty to the poor innocent Muslims, but rather that it is a folly for the West to bring the fight to Islamic strongholds. We’ve had far better success defending our turf against them than in taking theirs. The same logistical reasons account for this today, despite our present much greater resources and faster mobility, that did in the time of Richard Cœur-de-Lion and Saladin. It is hard to fight a war in a theatre that is half a world away.

    • Replies: @Avery
    , @Max Payne
  47. @AndrewR

    “violent acts are not always prosecuted, especially mutually consenting combat aka fights. I am talking about the propensity to engage in violence not the number of prosecutions for violent acts.”

    The statistics regarding violent crime do not refer only to those that are prosecuted. For example, 3/4 of the homicides in Chicago are never cleared, but quite frequently the race of the perpetrator and even his motives are known. Crime reports and victim statements as well as prosecutions clearly tell us that a vastly disproportionate amount of violence is perpetrated in this country by non-Asian minorities.

    “The 2003 invasion of Iraq was hardly ‘immediately’ after 9/11, and to this day millions of people still want our military to kill people ‘over there’ so that ‘they don’t kill us here’.”

    American forces were deployed rather shortly after 9/11 in Afghanistan, and military recruitment burgeoned at that time. Bush et al. diverted large numbers of them into Iraq, whether with deliberate duplicity or out of willful blindness, I cannot tell. It was easy to feel that this was a justified step at the time, based on the propaganda; look at how many Democrats were “for it before they were against it.” It took courage to oppose it. Pat Buchanan and Bob Novak were pilloried by the reliably neocon National Review as “unpatriotic conservatives” for doing so.

    We’ve been stampeded into war on many occasions. The fault lies not with some alleged propensity to violence on the part of the average American, but rather with their manipulators in the press and amongst the political class. This has been so since W. R. Hearst’s famous pronouncement to one of his stringers – “you provide the story, and I’ll provide the war.”

    • Replies: @AndrewR
  48. @Max Payne

    Yeah, well we aren’t going to get that from Trump.

  49. AndrewR says:

    Your comment is dishonest. You know full well many people were completely opposed to the Iraq war. It only took courage to oppose it on the right. Most liberals were vehemently against it from the start. It only was able to proceed due to the enthusiastic support of a large segment of the US who, whether you care to admit it or not, tended to share certain regional and ethnic similarities: the same people who make up a hugely disproportionate part of the military. They didn’t need much convincing that Iraq needed invading.

    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
  50. JackOH says:

    Agree 100%. The unsubstantiated propaganda allegation that enemy forces bayonet babies dates back to at least WWI, if my memory’s okay, spearheaded by British elites disparaging German troops for the purpose of motivating their own troops and mobilizing American opinion against Germany.

    Valerie Plame Wilson’s memoir pretty much states what many of us already know or reasonably guess at. Washington-area journalists pretty much have to give up the notion of incisive questioning if they are to retain access to sources within the governing administration.

    I have nothing personal against George W. Bush. I actually know two people at my local Community Health Center who attended a White House Christmas upon Bush’s invitation. They speak of him favorably. I believe their good reports.

    Nonetheless, why is this man not held responsible for a horrific and terrifically expensive war whose consequences are being felt to this day in America and Europe?

  51. Avery says:

    Despite IslamoFascist propaganda, taken up and regurgitated by some self-loathing Western “elites”, the Crusades were a response to Islamist hordes invading formerly Christian lands, slaughtering Christians and taking their lands.

    Christianity is 600 years older than Islam.
    And yes, Christianity was spread largely, but not exclusively, through peaceful proselytizing.
    Islam was spread largely, but not exclusively, through violence and force.

    • Replies: @Max Payne
    , @Druid
    , @Wally
    , @bunga
  52. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    W is just one loose end of a tangled ball of men and women who acted against the interests of the USA..

    If the W string gets pulled, many more plots will unravel.

    On Sept 9 2002 Defense Intelligence Agency produced a report requested by Donald Rumsfeld, informing him of What Donald Rumsfeld Knew We Didn’t Know About Iraq

    Rumsfeld did not pass the report along to other key decision-makers.

    The document reveals gaps of intelligence on WMD. Why didn’t the Pentagon chief share it?

  53. Avery says:

    Get out of Christian lands, you Turkophile anti-Christian Uyguroglar IslamoFascists.
    Go back to Uyguristan, your ancestral homeland, you Turkic nomads.

    Get OUT.

  54. The entire neocon crowd should be in put in jail where they can, one by one, be questioned as to their knowledge and involvement with the events of 9 /11. If he’s serious about turning this country around for the better, Trump needs to understand and make clear that the cancer that’s eating away at the soul of this nation will never be brought under control until the criminals in our own government who planned and participated in 9/11 are tried and hung for their crimes.

  55. AndrewR says:

    “The only folks with a propensity to violence are Blacks and Hispanics. Not whites. If Blacks did not exist in the U.S. our crime rate would be that of Switzerland.”


  56. annamaria says:

    “In Bush’s Baghdad, hospitals teamed with limbless kids….”
    The images of limbless kids cannot be disassociated with the main pushers for the Middle East wars, such as the PNAC team of subhumans and a recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom Natan Sharansky.
    Natan Sharansky’ plans for destabilization of the Middle East had enjoyed special attentions from Bush the lesser. “Bush told the Washington Times in 2005 that Sharansky’s book offered “a glimpse of how I think about foreign policy.”
    Incredulously, Sharansky continues presenting himself as a defender of human rights and freedom, oblivious to the fact that his proselytizing of “forced democracy” in the Middle East made his life indivisible from the images of limbless kids in Iraq, Libya, and Syria and from the rise of fanatical Islam. (The latter is in no way a pro-democracy force). “President Bush already recognizes in public that his foreign policy speeches are inspired on Nathan Sharansky’s ideas. Sharansky, the former Vice Premier of Israel, former United States spy in the USSR, present leader of the extreme right in Israeli party Likud and multifaceted man, who invented the rhetoric of modern colonialism: from Palestine and Iraq to Russia, all must be forcedly democratized.”
    The malignant transformation of Sharansky from a fighter for human rights to an ethnocentric gangster can serve as an illustration to Fifth column in today’s Russia. The same people that castigate Putin for Crimea (while forgetting the inconvenient results of several Crimean referendums that all produced pro-Russian leaning), are completely blind to the role of neo-Nazism in the Kiev putsch of 2013. The Fifth column has a stupidity of comparing situation in Crimea with the Hungarian Uprising, while failing to understand that “the most blatant coup d’etat” in Kiev in 2013 was actually the modern-day remake of what had happened in Hungary in 1956. In 2013, Kiev (Ukraine) has become occupied by the Empire that has no interest in improving the lives of the ordinary Ukrainians but has instead the geopolitical goals of using Ukraine’s location and resources for the Empire’s gains.

  57. Max Payne says:

    Wow, I also didn’t know that inquisitions were peaceful ways of converting people.

  58. Dubya was just the public face behind the string pullers and architects, Cheney and the NeoCons. Dubya was a patsy.

    • Replies: @mick
  59. Druid says:

    Total balderdash! Christianity was spread peacefully? You’re an ignorant idiot!

  60. Shafiq says:

    Recall that the US set a trap for Saddam in Kuwait. He tested the waters with US Ambassador April Glaspie and she gave him the green light, when a stern warning would likely have deterred him. Yes, the US public was baying for blood after 9/11, but the Saudis, whom Bush protected, had a lot to do with it and Iraq had no role. The case you make is rooted in vindictiveness and jingoism and has no basis in fact or under international law.

  61. anon • Disclaimer says:

    Great points. Actually the interests of the USA and Israel are not synonymous in the least. Israel is to America what Serbia was to Czarist Russia. Without Serbia making trouble in the Balkans, Russia could have lived in peace with the Central Powers. Likewise without Israel and the all-powerful Jewish lobby in the USA, America would have few problems in the middle east and no quarrel with the Arab world.

  62. @AndrewR

    “It only took courage to oppose it on the right. Most liberals were vehemently against it from the start.”

    Really? A majority of Democrats in the Senate voted for the Iraq Resolution (29 of 50, or 58%); a substantial minority of House Democrats voted for it (82 of 209, or 39.2%). Had all Democrats voted against it, it would have failed in the Senate.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
  63. mick says:

    Agreed that Bush was a patsy in the Iraq war. While Bush never gets credit, he resisted intense pressure from Cheney and the neocons to attack Iran in his second term. That leads me to believe that he was duped on Iraq and wasn’t going to make the same mistake again.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    , @DJFJr
  64. AndrewR says:

    I said liberals not Democrat politicians. You don’t think politicians ever go against the wishes of their base?

  65. Strictly speaking it was not “unjust”.

    From the point of view of US interests, it was a “mistake”. Probably would have been even if done properly. Done the way it was actually done, with all-in nation-building and no forethought to what the occupation would look like and how to do it more quickly, it was a catastrophic mistake. That raises it from merely “mistake” to also “stupid”.

    From the point of view of post-1945 international law it was arguably “illegal” in that it lacked a specific new UNSC resolution. Although the argument that it was a valid enforcement act of prior UNSC resolutions dating back to 1990-91 is not an unreasonable argument. And more generally, Iraqi sovereignty was limited by ceasefire conditions imposed by the UN with which it was massively noncompliant.

    These terms were the conditions for the end of active hostilities in 1991. As Iraq was noncompliant through almost all of the next 12 years, resumption of those hostilities would have been “just” at any time.

    All of which may amount to nothing now, save to note that “stupid” or even “wasteful” does not equal “unjust”.

    Besides. Who could try Bush?

    Three of the five permanent UNSC members participated in the war. And so did many other member states.

    The Russians have committed comparable breaches of the sovereignty of nations whose sovereignty and borders were recognized in international law. [Their intervention in Georgia could be considered potentially justified when the Georgians chose to reopen the Abkhaz frozen conflict. On the other hand that requires assuming the Russians’ position on Abkhaz sovereignty and the presence of Russian troops as a tripwire was a legitimate product of earlier events. Iraq’s violations of its own international conditions were at least as bad as Georgia’s. Similarly, I remain open to Russian justification for their involvement with Crimea and Donbass, but that was based wholly on their analysis of domestic Ukrainian politics. Imagine if the entire US justification for the 2003 invasion had been that Saddam had been overthrown by one of his sons, who was thought to be embarking on a new persecution of the Kurds or Shia to shore up his rule. And then the US had sent in Blackwater backed up by special ops forces to seize the oil region and foment Shia rebellion as far as Baghdad.]

    • Replies: @anonymous
  66. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @random observer

    And more generally, Iraqi sovereignty was limited by ceasefire conditions imposed by the UN with which it was massively noncompliant.

    can you provide more information about the ceasefire conditions and Iraq’s “massive noncompliance,” please?

  67. Both parties seem to have no clue about the most fundamental question: What is government for?

    I suspect that if you put that question to any of the candidates including Mr. Trump, the answers would be their own form of shock and awe.

  68. DaveE says:

    Yeah, Ok, Bush was bad. Let’s stop playing dumb. The zionists, Jews, Israelis, neocons, whatever you want to call them, did 9/11, planned it for years, to lead America into The Greater Israel Project, the latest phase of which we’re currently seeing in Syria.

    Bush was just a small cog (with no cogs of his own) in a VERY big wheel.

    I wish Trump would stop playing dumb, too. He knows EXACTLY who did 9/11. Whether he’s got the decency and/or guts to SAY so remains to be seen.

  69. bunga says:

    On the Jews and Their Lies, Luther called for practicing “sharp mercy, to see whether we might save at least a few from the glowing flames.” (

    The “sharp mercy” toward the Jews Martin Luther proposed to Germany’s rulers was anything but merciful. “First, to set fire to their synagogues or schools.” He “advise[d]that their houses also be razed and destroyed,” that “all their prayer books and Talmudic writings,” which contain “idolatry, lies, cursing, and blasphemy . . . be taken from them,” and “that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb.” He also “advise[d] that safe conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews,” and “that usury be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them.” Luther ended his suggested treatment of the Jews with this advice: “In brief, dear princes and lords, those of you who have Jews under your rule: if my counsel does not please you, find better advice, so that you and we all can be rid of the unbearable, devilish burden of the Jews.” (“Martin Luther ‘On the Jews and their Lies’ Chapter 15,”

    “Such a desperate, thoroughly evil, poisonous and devilish lot are these Jews, who for these fourteen hundred years have been and still are our plague, our pestilence, and our misfortune.” (“Extracts from Martin Luther booklet: ‘THE JEWS AND THEIR LIES,’” That sounds like Adolf Hitler, but it was Martin Luther.

    • Replies: @DaveE
  70. tbraton says:

    “the readiness of the candidate to take the call at 2 am.”

    Hillary bragged about her ability to take that 2 a.m. phone call as President in a 2008 debate with Obama, but she demonstrated as SOS that she was not prepared to take a phone call at 2 p.m. I’m referring to Benghazi, of course, but Benghazi has served as a mask for a deeper incompetence of Ms. Hillary. She was one of three “harpies” who persuaded Obama to wage war against Libya and overthrow Qaddafi, after SOD Robert Gates declared that the U.S. had no “vital national interests” in Libya. It was that horrendous decision which produced chaos in Libya and neighboring countries (e.g. Mali), unleashed a wave of refugees toward Europe and created a safe haven for ISIS, which we now regard as a dire threat to the West. That brainless decision of Ms. Hillary alone should disqualify her as a President.

  71. gwynedd1 says:

    Glad someone else has noticed the positive feedback loop they are tying to create. It was very transparent to me that importing refugees will result in tensions. Even our native frat boys would cause tensions, let alone 3rd world men who do have a rape culture. They are attempting to use these tensions and sublimate it into attacking Muslims “over there “, which will of course result in more refugees and more tension. Great plan to whip up a firestorm if people fall for it. It also creates a nice excuse to crack down on freedom and accept more surveillance. They would love to protect us from the Muslims we are importing. Think we might get some angry ones after bombing their country?

    Halting Muslim immigration will reduce the perceived threat and it will be safer for Muslims here because they will no longer be seen as invaders. This will then take the oxygen out of the the Middle East crusades…sparing the Muslims there. That’s a pretty bad argument that such a policy is even anti_Muslim.

    However what seems obvious to me may not be to others….

    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
  72. DaveE says:

    I wish American Christians had one PPM (part per million) of the common sense and courage Dr. Luther had. He spent a good part of his life in jail, was hounded and persecuted for the rest, all for simply telling the truth.

    At least he died with his honor intact, not the sniveling, grovelling weasels that call themselves “Christians” these days.

  73. @gwynedd1

    Undercover agents record the threat posed to Germans by foreign invaders

  74. Max Payne says:

    Their both shit religions. That’s the point I’m trying to make.

    Believing otherwise is just asinine.

    Islam is terribad but I also read about the massive purge Christiandom took upon itself killing all free-thinking women during the dark ages (‘witches’ as Christians call them).

    Two sides of the same coin really… somehow though people can convince themselves that stoning women to death is worse then drowning them to death. It’s all the same shit. Touch your head to the floor, eat this cookie….gimmicks for plebs.

    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
  75. @Max Payne

    You are wrong about the “Dark Ages.” That term usually refers to the period from the 5th through 10th centuries A.D. The emperor Charlemagne (742-814), one of the few outstanding personages of that era, promulgated a law providing that anyone who slew a person on the grounds that he or she was a witch was guilty of murder and should be executed. Charlemagne thought that a belief in witches was pagan superstition.

    Witch-hunting did not become commonplace in Europe until the late middle ages, and peaked during the 16th and 17th centuries – what we call the Renaissance, Reformation, and Counter-Reformation. See High Trevor-Roper’s essay, “The European Witch-Craze of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries,” in The Crisis of the Seventeenth Century

    Trevor-Roper makes the point that persecution of alleged witches went hand-in-hand not with Christianity, but rather with the revival of Roman law, particularly its procedural aspects, which included torture.

    In any event, your assertion of moral equivalency falls flat. Christians have not killed anyone for supposed witchcraft in several centuries. On the other hand, it’s still current practice in the citadel of Wahhabism, Saudi Arabia:

    “Saudi Arabia continues to use the death penalty for sorcery and witchcraft.[135] In 2006 Fawza Falih Muhammad Ali was condemned to death for practicing witchcraft.[136] There is no legal definition of sorcery in Saudi, but in 2007 an Egyptian pharmacist working there was accused, convicted, and executed. Saudi authorities also pronounced the death penalty on a Lebanese television presenter, Ali Hussain Sibat, while he was performing the hajj (Islamic pilgrimage) in the country.[137]

    “In 2009 the Saudi authorities set up the Anti-Witchcraft Unit of their Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice police.[138]

    “In April 2009, a Saudi woman Amina Bint Abdulhalim Nassar was arrested and later sentenced to death for practicing witchcraft and sorcery. In December 2011, she was beheaded.[139] A Saudi man has been beheaded on charges of sorcery and witchcraft in June 2012.[140] A beheading for sorcery occurred in 2014.”

    • Replies: @Max Payne
  76. rhsper says:

    Making america great again would require effing up and getting rid of racist and zionist \$cum such as mercer. Will that happen?

  77. Max Payne says:

    That’s not a Muslim problem, that’s a Saudi Arabian problem.
    Does Lebanon have this problem? Does Jordan have this problem? Egypt? Assad’s Syria? Saddam’s Iraq? Qaddafi’s Libya? (the last two may have it now sure but that’s just freedom & democracy in action).

    ISIL has this problem, but that too is a product of Saudi Arabia.

    Pakistan, a retardedly Islamic country, accepted a female president twice (I’ll admit she got assassinated when running in 2008, but was in office from ’88-’90 and ’92-’96). (Benazir Bhutto) I can’t recall the last witch hunt I read about in Pakistan. Indonesia has also had a female head of state. While Wikipedia says there was a witch hunt in the immediate aftermath of Suharto deposition (with 400 dead), more digging find they were a series of murders, many politically inspired or taking advantage of the temporary lawlessness, the vast majority in East Java.

    I highlight these two nations as they are pretty backward Muslim states (in terms of societal rules that allow barbaric laws to be enforced), maybe even the most backwards and yet they seem to try to be a bit more civilized then the KSA. So perhaps its not Islam but Saudi Arabia? (truly ‘the citadel of Wahhabism’).

    If one blames Islam for Saudi Arabia’s bullshit, can I blame Christianity for the terror and chaos that the United States seems to spread since its inception?

    Saudi Arabia may behead people (because they’re infidels) but United States has nearly wiped out entire peoples off the planet (because they’re heathens; the indigenous population comes to mind).

    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
  78. “In brother Jeb, promised George Bush in South Carolina, on February 16, the country will be getting a ‘steady hand’ to steer the ship of state.”

    Staying the course, one hand on the tiller and the other in the till, unsteady as she goes, while the rudderless ship of state sinks.

  79. @Max Payne

    “If one blames Islam for Saudi Arabia’s bullshit, can I blame Christianity for the terror and chaos that the United States seems to spread since its inception?”

    Do you believe the United States to be a Christian nation? Not in the sense that most of its inhabitants are at least nominally Christian, but in the same sense that Saudi Arabia is Muslim – i.e., officially so?

    The raison-d’être of Saudi Arabia is Wahhabist Islam. Its rulers style themselves the guardians of Islam’s holy places; it is governed by religious law (Sharia); it has special “morality police” to enforce explicitly Islamic standards of public demeanor; it funds the construction of mosques all around the world, and their staffing by Wahhabist or Salafist imams.

    No parallel to this exists with Christianity and the United States. Indeed, for most of our lifetimes the United States government has conducted itself in an anti-religious and in most cases specifically anti-Christian fashion. The most recent examples of this are the persecution of Christian bakers or photographers who refuse to take part in the celebration of “gay marriages” and the effort to force the Little Sisters of the Poor to pay for employee health insurance that covers abortifacients. There’s a long history of such litigation, going back beyond Engel v. Vitale (1962) and Abington School District v. Schempp (1963). The “free exercise” clause of the First Amendment appears to be the only obstacle to an official policy of laïcité like that of the French Third, Fourth, and Fifth Republics.

    So, whatever you care to blame for the “terror and chaos” you attribute to the United States, it shouldn’t be Christianity. Uncle Sam doesn’t claim to act in the name of Christ; however, Saudi Arabia, ISIS, the Taleban, Boko Haram, al Qaeda, and other recognized or de facto governing authorities in the Islamic world do claim to act in the name of Allah.

    • Replies: @Max Payne
  80. Max Payne says:

    When a head of state says “This Crusade takes a while…”

    One can easily claim that the US is a Christian nation… is there a president who denounced religion in the US except for Trump and Islam?

    When you have “In God We Trust” on your currency… what is that? Just for shits and giggles? When you pledge the allegiance everyday with the words “…one nation under God…” is that secretly one nation under Allah? Or is this some other god I’m unaware of?

    And since when was Boko Harem, Al Qaeda, and ISIL de facto governing authorities? Just because a 100 guys with rifles go into an area doesn’t make them an authority, it’s just a bunch of thugs. Just because MS-13 made a couple of streets “no go zones” for police in California doesn’t make them a ‘de facto governing authority’. Just a bunch of thugs with guns.

    Again you’re ONLY talking about Saudi Arabia and Saudi Arabian supported Islamists.

    Still sounds like a Saudi Arabian problem to me.

    And I would like to note I have not disagreed with you on the idiocy that is the KSA.

    You know who Saudi Arabia’s biggest allies are? The United States of America and the United Kingdom. True story.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  81. DJFJr says:

    “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, well, we won’t be fooled again!”


  82. @Max Payne

    Our aerial firebombing of women and children in the Second World War pretty much ended any claims to being a Christian nation. A Christian nation would have imprisoned, not reelected, its leaders.

Current Commenter

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 have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ilana Mercer Comments via RSS
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism