► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘Daniel Greenfield’

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Obama and Putin – two petty tyrants living in a house of mirrors

by Mojambo ( 125 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Russia at March 28th, 2012 - 12:00 pm

The Knish gives the real lowdown between the Obama-Medvedev open mic incident of the other day. This is the second open mic incident that Obama has been involved in this year (previously he and Nicolas Sarkozy engaged in some Netanyahu bashing) and each time he has displayed his incredible arrogance and condescension. If he wins reelection – we have nobody to blame but ourselves. Give him a second term, and you will not recognize this country in 2016.

by Daniel Greenfield

For a man so in love with the technology of image, the camera, the microphone and the teleprompter, the leader of the increasingly less free world has a natural tendency to put a little too much faith in it. This is the second time that an open microphone has let Obama down, the first time it recorded him stabbing an ally in the back, the second time it recorded him stabbing a few dozen more in the back.

Medvedev, whose bosom buddy just managed to cling to power with a stolen election and brutal suppression of protests, surely understands how O feels. Photo ops with tigers and sunken treasures, not to mention skiing, martial arts, and even rap, did not keep the Big P in smooth with the Russian public when the economy headed south.

Vladimir Putin didn’t have any racial guilt to ladle on the voters that might get them to overlook the mansions, the corruption and the abuses of power. But the average American voter, like the Russian voter, is more interested in the meat and potatoes, not to mention the gasoline, than in mystical allusions to the power of history. If Putin at times seemed bent on passing himself off as a new czar and Obama as a new savior, the crown and halo were shattered by the economy.

Putin’s had tightened control over Russia to an extent that the Obamas and the Warrens could only fondly dream of in their fondest federalist fantasies. And it’s easier to steal elections when you don’t have to kowtow to a bunch of provincial interests and take the complaints of bible and gun owners seriously. But much like Putin and Ahmadinejad, Obama enjoys dim prospects in a straight election. And unlike them, he doesn’t have a military force that will turn up a few million ballots and send the protesters straight to the hospital, if not to the morgue.

Obama likes being a democrat, it’s just the democracy part that he doesn’t much care for

Obama likes being a democrat, it’s just the democracy part that he doesn’t much care for. And while his diplomacy is generally underwhelming, a mutual dislike of elections proved to be a popular bonding topic with Medvedev, the human face of the regime. But if Medvedev really thought that Obama was serious about needing more space because of an election, he hasn’t been paying much attention to American politics.

[…..]

If Obama is jettisoning Eastern Europe, it’s because he thinks it doesn’t matter. The sage wisdom is that the future is in the Middle East and the Pacific Rim. Russia is full of pale men and so is Eastern Europe. A man who thinks that there’s a language known as “Austrian” can’t exactly be expected to tell them apart or to care. Not when there are more exciting places to be, like Beijing or Dubai.

When it comes to Russia, Obama can’t see the point. When the Berlin Wall fell, Obama was busy completing the final leg of his prolonged education and adolescence while minoring in racial careerism. If he was even busy paying attention to people with funny names like Yeltsin or Gorbachev, it was while smoking blunts and laughing at how funny the syllables of their names sounded in his mouth.

Obama cares about as much as Russia, as he does about the UK

Obama cares about as much as Russia, as he does about the UK. If their leaders meet up with him, he’ll shake hands, nod intently while thinking of what to order for lunch, and make the same vague statements that he makes on every occasion. So long as they, unlike a certain impertinent Jew from Jerusalem, don’t call him out on his arrogance or stupidity, his handlers will be able to chalk it up as another successful bit of international diplomacy.

There’s a reason that Obama gets along reasonably well with Sarkozy and Cameron, they’re all vain, shallow men who imagine themselves standing at the wheel of history. When Sark and Cam want to drag Obama into a war, all they have to do is appeal to his ego. That’s how we wound up bombing Libya, and if we ever get around to bombing Syria, it will be because our allies come equipped with the same weapon with which Perseus slew the Gordon Medusa. A mirror.

[…….]

Signaling to Medvedev that he’s willing to give away the country store if Russia just flies under the radar until after the election would be contemptible, but it’s actually worse than that. Obama would give away the country store now if Putin just asked. What’s even worse is that Putin sees no need to ask. This administration has made it painfully clear that its only foreign policy is reactive and that its spheres of interest lie nowhere near the former Warsaw Pact. Moscow does not see itself tussling with Washington D.C. When Putin grinds his teeth in the night and the boys in uniforms draw up their plans, it isn’t the American capital they worry about, it’s London.

In the Post-American World ruled by the teleprompter and the trending topic, nothing that Obama says actually matters

In the Post-American World ruled by the teleprompter and the trending topic, nothing that Obama says actually matters. His only power is over American allies, and only those allies who are willing to endure him and listen to him. And that is a diminishing number. The reset button has been pushed, but ‘reset button’ was misspelled to read overload, a misspelling that seems altogether accurate these days when American influence and the free world have been overloaded by the burden of their own follies.

Obama’s hush hush chat with Medvedev wasn’t just about promising to give the bear Eastern Europe on a platter if the beast would just hold his appetite until after election day, it was about a conniving liar who was using us as a pretext in whatever game he was playing. Maybe the American public should care more about the missile shield, but Obama knows they don’t. An administration which is still clinging to the wildly unpopular skunk of ObamaCare while sneering at the hoi polloi who drive, instead of get driven about, is not too worried what Des Moines will think of the missile shield.

[……]

The only thing that Obama really needs from Russia is for the reformed reds to avoid causing him any problems. The last thing he wants while boasting about the road that we traveled with him is a 3 AM phone call. As far as he’s concerned, the bear can do what it wants, so long as it doesn’t bite at an inconvenient time. That makes the tradeoff a fairly simple one. Russia avoids creating a crisis until after election day and in return they will get the same charming fellow in the Oval Office who won’t care what happens afterward to all the small country with funny names.

Ever since the Caliph of Chicago made it to the White House, the old game has gone from the backlots of Oz park to the world stage

It’s the Chicago way. You scratch my back and I won’t look too closely into those shady land deals or the suspicious deaths. Ever since the Caliph of Chicago made it to the White House, the old game has gone from the backlots of Oz park to the world stage, but it hasn’t really changed much, just gotten bigger. Moscow, which is the Chicago of Russia, where payoffs and legbreaking are the only form of law that matters, understands how to play the game. They also know a punk when they see one.

It’s a sad testament to the Republic that these days our political system has converged with the Russian one. Some twenty years after the Soviet Union fell, the American and Russian leaders have a good deal in common. They both oversee mafia states that spend money wildly for their 1 percent who are in power or close to those who are, while playing class warfare games with business titans when they aren’t hitting them up for cash.

[……]

Obama and Putin are both petty tyrants living in a house of mirrors, czars of their own egos, corrupt and corrupting forces that hang around the necks of two great nations. They don’t quite understand each other, though both are lawyers and bag men for their respective syndicates, neither do they respect each other. But they both know how to play the game.

Read the rest –  All the Pravda

Tags: ,
Posted in Barack Obama, Russia | 125 Comments »

The politics of racial guilt and Trayvon Martin

by Mojambo ( 138 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Crime at March 27th, 2012 - 8:00 am

The Knish points the finger at the hypocrisy of Obama, Sharpton, Jackson – and all the other race hustlers who only seem to show outrage when something happens to someone who “looks like my son”.  But then again Sharpton has been rewarded by having a show on MSNBC, Jackson gets treated like royalty,  Eric Holder does not have to answer for the dead people in Mexico that can be laid at his door step, and Obama is on the verge of being reelected.

by Daniel Greenfield

When at the beginning of March, Allen Coon, a thirteen-year-old boy, was set on fireby two black teenagers who told him, “You get what you deserve, white boy,” this did not prove to be an occasion for national soul-searching. But the shooting death of Trayvon Martin by a Hispanic neighborhood watch captain after a scuffle between the two men has led to hysterical media coverage, state and federal investigations, civil rights marches, lynching threats from the Black Panthers and a statement from Obama urging Americans to search their souls for some unspecified reason.

The latter took time out from the trivial business of nominating a World Bank president to interfere in a local law enforcement matter and join his good friend Al Sharpton, who specializes in racist rhetoric, in throwing some racebaiting gasoline on the flames.

To Obama, the significance of the whole event was that Trayvon Martin looked like his hypothetical son, which presumably Allen Coon did not. The insufferable egotism of that statement suggests that shooting victims only matter if they look anything like the head cheese. It’s racial feudalism and personal politics at its ugliest even as it once again confronts us with Obama’s inability to talk about anything without shining it through the narcissistic lens of the self.

Even Trayvon Martin only matters because he is in some hypothetical sense linked to Obama, and every trending topic from Jeremy Lin to the million hoodie march must be commented on by him in some way to demonstrate his own relevance in the mobius strip of fame. There can be no 2012 election without the race card, and so Martin was posthumously drafted into the Obama family portrait that appears on campaign ads to remind the rest of the country that they still need to feel guilty and vote the left’s ticket.

[…….]

If Obama had enough time to spare in between playing golf, campaigning, wasting money and race-baiting, he might have taken a seat by the window, put his famous abbreviated chin on one skinny fist and searched his soul for all the people killed in Mexico by his own Attorney General’s plot to wreck the Second Amendment. But the soul-searching never seems to happen on the right side of the Oval Office window. It is a duty handed down to us from our betters, like schoolmarms urging us to “think about what you’ve done” until eventually you decide that you must have done something.

[…….]

The Trayvon Martin case was far from the worst shooting death this year. Or even the worst shooting death involving an African-American victim. That honor might belong to Delric Waymon Miller IV, a nine-month-old boy killed in Detroit when his house was peppered with an AK-47 assault rifle just last month. The investigation on that one is still ongoing and could presumably benefit from federal assistance, which it won’t receive because there is no political payday from highlighting black on black violence. Or from helping to solve a crime instead of stirring up racial hate.

There is a major payday in playing up white on black violence, and though George Zimmerman proved to be Hispanic with African-American relatives, the media which clings to a racial narrative like a hungry bulldog to a dead rat, is still forging ahead hoping that no one will notice.

[……..]

Like the lynch mobs of old, the facts are already known. All that is needed is a fig leaf of judicial procedure to give them what they want. A lynching.

To read the media is to witness the inerrant and inescapable conviction of George Zimmerman in the press. Every article cries out that he is guilty and strongly suggests that racism is the only possible explanation why he isn’t on death row. From the White House on down, the baying hounds are determined to put him there, not based on the evidence, but on the narrative.

It’s not really about a Hispanic neighborhood watch captain, who may have been overzealous, but whose vigilance had likely saved lives and certainly prevented crimes in the past. It’s about the narrative in which we are all George Zimmerman. We are Zimmerman and he is us. We are all guilty of racism, and the only way to atone for it is with Two Minute Hates by morality mobs that find a deserving victim, drag him out and lynch him to exonerate ourselves of the charges.

The original sin of racism can never be shaken. We can only buy a temporary stay of execution by voting for Obama or indicting George Zimmerman. The consequences of the act don’t really matter, only the abnegation, the temporary easing of the burden of racial conscience with a moment of peace, a brief glow of Hope and Change that promises things will be different, only to point its finger at us again and demand that we search our souls and scourge ourselves to atone for the slave ships and plantations.

Obama knows better than most how the game is played. As a descendant of privileged Africans and American whites, he has no skin in the game; he is an outside observer of the dysfunction of Americans of both colors and an expert at manipulating their tensions for his own benefit. Having played out hope, he has fastened on guilt, a primal emotion that promises nothing, but takes everything. Much as he has done. To complete the great work, he will work the power of guilt and promise once again to lift the sin of racism from us, if we only shut down our minds, forget about our jobs and business, and blindly push the lever once more.

Read the rest – Trayvon Martin and the  politics of racial guilt

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Barack Obama, Crime | 138 Comments »

Today’s Nazis

by Mojambo ( 40 Comments › )
Filed under Anti-semitism, France, Islamic Invasion, Islamic Terrorism at March 23rd, 2012 - 2:00 pm

The new Nazis are the Muslims (Jazzy X please take note). Anyone who is honest with himself has to admit that it is Islam which has the imperialist ideology of conquer, convert and slaughter if conversion is not possible. The same genocidal lust that was unleashed on Europe in 1939 has returned.  And yes, as the Kinsh points out – France today is as much occupied as it was  from 1940 -44, except the Nazis today go to Mosques instead of rallies at Nuremberg. Britain too is finally getting to see what she missed out on by evacuating the B.E.F. at Dunkirk and winning the Battle of Britain (1940) as she too is now occupied.

by Daniel Greenfield

There was a time when Jewish children were hunted down and killed in France. Their killers believed themselves to be members of a superior group that was destined to rule the world and enslave or exterminate members of inferior groups. The cowardice and appeasement of the French authorities allowed them to operate freely, to kill Jews and launch attacks on other countries.

What was then is now again. The occupying army doesn’t wear uniforms, it wears keffiyahs. It doesn’t speak German, it speaks Arabic. It doesn’t believe that it is superior for reasons of race as much as for reasons of religion. It does not view all others as Untermenschen, but as infidels. It looks forward not to a thousand year Reich, but to a thousand year Caliphate.

Mohammed Merah did not chase down a French-Jewish seven-year-old girl, put a gun to her head and pull the trigger because he came from an economically depressed area or any of the other media spin. He was only doing what Muslims had been doing to non-Muslims for over a thousand years. He didn’t do what he did because he was “radicalized”, he did it because he became a fully committed Muslim.

It won’t end with taking down one man and it won’t end with Jewish children. When your ideology believes that it is in a zero-sum struggle with the rest of the world and that membership means that you are a superior breed of human being because you worship the Fuhrer or Allah, then it won’t stop. It won’t ever stop. Not until the figurehead is toppled, the creed is humiliated and the supermen are shown to be cowards, neurotics, pedophiles, insecure men dressing up their weaknesses in power fantasies.

Between all the non-stop coverage, the expressions of grief, the political pandering, no one is stating the obvious. France has been occupied all over again. Once again, the occupation has been carried out with the consent of the authorities who have decided that cowardice is the only way. Vichy France has become Vichy Europe, Vichy America, Vichy Australia, where the blatant appeasement is disguised as honor, treason is portrayed as responsible leadership, and collaboration in the mass murder of your own people is never acknowledged as such.

It’s not Neo-Nazis that are the threat to Jews today

It’s not Neo-Nazis that are the threat to Jews today. It’s the new Nazis and the old Nazis who were rounding up Jews into ghettos and murdering their children long before a thousand years before Hitler. The Neos are pathetically longing for the return of a genocidal state that isn’t coming back, while the Muslims are actually working to bring back their genocidal state. They are doing it in Egypt, in Libya, in Pakistan and in England, France and Spain.

Muslims have hated Jews before the telephone, the telegraph, the steam engine, gunpowder, movable type and paper currency. And now, surrounded by smartphones, credit cards and jet planes, they still hate them. That simple undeniable fact is denied by government, in every university and in every center of culture. And every one of those deniers has blood on his hands.

[…..]

The names of Chamberlain, Petain and Quisling have become eternally infamous because they stand for appeasement and collaboration. But, then, what do we make of the names Blair, Sarkozy and Stoltenberg? What have the latter done differently from their predecessors? The left likes to pretend that its collaboration with Islam is moral, while the collaboration with Nazism was immoral. It’s a distinction without a difference.

Does it really matter whether the men murdering children in the name of their Fuhrer call him Adolf or Mohammed? Does it matter whether they call themselves Hans or Mohammed? Does it matter whether their fantasies of superiority are based on bad science or bad religion? What matters is the end result. A foreign enemy controls your cities, murders at will, and takes your future for his own.

The Tolouse Massacre did not come out of the blue, it follows decades of Muslim violence in France

The Tolouse Massacre did not come out of the blue, it follows decades of Muslim violence in France—a Kristalnacht that has been going on year after year. It will not stop here. Not while there are five million Muslim in France, some of whom are bound to pick up the Koran and take it seriously. The “radical” clerics that Mohammed Merah listened to did not innovate a new religion, there has never been any basis to the teachings of the so-called radicals other than the Koran. The only book more popular in the Muslim world than Mein Kampf.

[……].

The question, as always, after every act of Muslim terror is how many more must die? How many? Because the killing will continue. It has gone on for over a thousand years. It is not about to stop now. Muslim leaders who condemn these acts do it for tactical reasons, not moral ones. They don’t believe it’s wrong to kill rebellious non-Muslims… unless the act rebounds against non-Muslims.

The difference between the “radicals” and the “moderates” is that the radicals want to engage in genocide even while they are a minority, while the moderates want to wait until they are a majority. The radicals are satisfied with killing a few Hindus, Christians, Jews, here and there. The moderates want to wait and kill millions. Neither are our allies. Both are our murderers.

There is no peaceful way forward here. Carving up Czechoslovakia, Cyprus or Israel will not sate the blood lust of people whose egos are fed by hate

There is no peaceful way forward here. Carving up Czechoslovakia, Cyprus or Israel will not sate the blood lust of people whose egos are fed by hate, who treat every concession as proof of their own superiority, who love nothing so much as for others to fear them. There is no peace to be had with a creed that defines peace exclusively in terms of its own dominance over others.

Islam, like Nazism, is a disease of the soul, a twin sense of superiority and victimhood possessed by the angry corner dwellers of the world, who are certain that they would rule if only it wasn’t for all the others holding them back. To understand a Nazi or a Muslim, you don’t need to learn their creeds, just stare into the eyes of a wife beater, a pedophile or any bully, and you will see that same smirk which easily transforms into outrage, the arrogant tone that turns unctuous when it is set back on its heels, the flickering eyes that are always looking at what they can’t have.

You don’t need to read the Koran to understand Mohammed Merah, you can just as easily understand the Koran by reading about what Mohammed Merah did. Nothing much has changed in all the centuries, except that Mohammed Merah didn’t get to rape the girl he murdered, because the French state was still functional enough to keep him on the run. The day will, however, come when it won’t be, and then the peoples of the free world will learn what true Muslim terror really is, as the peoples of Africa and Asia, as the many other religions of the Middle East, including the Jews learned, in the day of the original Mohammed.

[……]

Killing children is not a shocking act in the Middle East, except when CNN points its cameras the right way. Parents routinely kill their own children for minor offenses that would hardly get an American child grounded. When they move to America or Canada, they kill their children there too, and we considerately look away. If they do that to their children, why do you think they will have any more mercy on yours?

There is no point in holding Mohammed Merah accountable for what he did, just as there was no point in bringing Nazi leaders to trial for crimes against humanity. Mohammed recognizes no form of law other than the law of Islam, just as the Nazis recognized no other form of humanity than their own. There is no common moral or legal system that we share with Islam. Equality before the law, the cornerstone of our system, is so much noise in the windy corridors of the mosque. How can the Subhuman be equal to the Aryan, how can the Infidel be equal to the Muslim?

[…..]

Read the rest – The new Nazis

 

Tags: ,
Posted in Anti-semitism, France, Islamic Invasion, Islamic Terrorism | 40 Comments »

Altruistic warmongering, or ‘War is Peace’

by Mojambo ( 45 Comments › )
Filed under Balkans, History, Iran, Israel, Kosovo, Serbia, Syria at March 20th, 2012 - 8:30 am

The Knish brings up an interesting point – the Democrats love wars, except they do not like calling them wars.  Since Korea, the Democrats have masked their wars as  “humanitarian crises”  such as in Kosovo, Mogadishu, and Libya. The same folks who through their “leading from behind” brought you al-Qaeda in Libya would love nothing better then to bring Islamists to power in Damascus.

by Daniel Greenfield

A day after Barack Hussein Obama met with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, he gave a press conference and responded to a question of what would happen if sanctions on Iran fail (more than they have already) by denouncing “those who are suggesting, or proposing, or beating the drums of war”.

On cue, the Pravda press rushed to their iPads to begin tapping out the appropriate denunciations of Republican candidates, Netanyahu and American Jews for their warmongering. However, at that same press conference, Obama was careful to draw a distinction between Syria and Iran.

When asked whether his “window of diplomatic opportunity” and serious face remarks about the “costs of war” applied to Syria as well as Iran, the peacemonger suddenly became the warmonger, asserting that, “What’s happening in Syria is heartbreaking and outrageous, and what you’ve seen is the international community mobilize against the Assad regime. And it’s not a question of when Assad leaves—or if Assad leaves—it’s a question of when.”

In Iran, Ahmadinejad and Khamenei get an endless window to repress their own people and build their nukes, while in Syria, Assad is told that it’s only a question of when he leaves. That’s not the kind of talk you use unless you mean to make him leave, one way or another, using the fig leaf of the international community, which can’t get a war vote through the UN, but can organize yet another Coalition of the Willing.

To the untrained ear this may sound a lot like the beating of war drums, but sophisticated types know that it’s actually the cowbell of peace jangling with the groovy beat of humanitarian vibes. Sure it may all end in bombs falling on Damascus, but they’ll be peace bombs painted rainbow colors by marines who have married each other in a special commitment ceremony.

Republicans make war, while Democrats make explosive peace, just like they did in Kosovo where there are still more American troops than there are in Iraq, a legacy of the Clinton Administration’s humanitarian bombmaking peace.

Now after years of sneering at Republicans, the Democrats have their own Axis of Evil list, they just refuse to admit that they have it. Bombing countries on the list is a friendly act, which is why the current name for the Coalition of the Willing in Syria, is “Friends of Syria”, a name that would have given Orwell a fit. Bombing countries that aren’t on the list is irresponsible warmongering.

[……]

Democrats don’t like the military, but they like their wars

Democrats don’t like the military, but they like their wars. Until the Gulf War, every significant war in the previous century had been begun by Democratic presidents. They just didn’t like calling them wars. Korea was a “police action” and in Vietnam we were just there as advisers. No wars to see here. Libya officially wasn’t a war, it was just one of things where we bombed a country for several months until we tracked down and crippled the convoy of its leader. If we go into Syria, it certainly won’t be as a war, we’ll be keeping the peace through a war, bombing the village to save the village.

In the 20th century, there has hardly been a single Democratic president who didn’t bring America into a war. Woodrow Wilson had WW1, Franklin Roosevelt had WW2, Truman had Korea, JFK and LBJ had Vietnam, Bill Clinton had Yugoslavia and Obama has Libya. Only Carter was the odd man out, though he did begin supplying the Afghan Mujahideen with weapons which helped bring us into the current conflict.

[……]

These days the Dems love intervening in what they call “humanitarian crises”

These days the Dems love intervening in what they call “humanitarian crises”, which is usually code for intervening on one side of a civil war where both sides are dubious. They don’t tend to intervene in genuinely one-sided conflicts. Sudan and Rwanda never saw bombers overhead. Actual genocide doesn’t interest them except when bemoaning the general fallen state of man without international law. Fake genocide, whether it’s in Yugoslavia or Libya draws them like flies to a D.C. banquet in summer.

These wars are usually billed as “interventions” to stop the killing. And that part doesn’t work too well. There’s still killing going on in Yugoslavia, it just doesn’t make the evening news. Libya has more killing than ever now that we liberated it. We can probably count on the Syrians for the same. But while the killing doesn’t stop, that was never really the point. If the Dems wanted to save lives, there would have jets over Sudan and peacekeeping forces gunning down Janjaweed rape squads like mad dogs.

What these peaceful wars are really about is glorying in the majesty of international law and sending soldiers off to die

What these peaceful wars are really about is glorying in the majesty of international law and sending soldiers off to die so that people in other countries will live the way you want them to. The Arab Spring isn’t about overthrowing dictators, it’s about putting the right kind of dictators in power.

No wonder then that the “international community” in all its majesty sneers at the kind of limited existential conflict that Israel would like to fight. There’s no mention of a democratic Iran and the stuff about international law is just unserious. Stopping madmen from getting their hands on nuclear weapons is fine for the plot of a Tom Cruise movie, but serious diplomats can’t be expected to take it seriously as a basis for intervention. Why if they intervened every time some lunatic got his hands on nuclear weapons, they would have to go into North Korea and Pakistan. And why do that when it’s much more fun to lay out the plans of what kind of government Syria should have after its liberation from Shiite totalitarian rule to Sunni totalitarian rule, as if the latter won’t handle that themselves.

[…….]

In times past we sacrificed soldiers to win wars, in our days we sacrifice them to lose wars. The more soldiers die unnecessarily to protect and take care of the vital infrastructure of the local democratic junta when they could have been saved with an air strike or two, the more we show how unselfish we are, how humanitarian and altruistic our foreign policy is.

Some countries pride themselves on having a foreign policy that serves their interests. We pride ourselves on having a foreign policy that doesn’t serve our interests at all. The more our foreign policy doesn’t serve our interests, the nobler we know that we are. Take the Arab Spring. We would have been well served to protect ourselves by keeping allied governments in place. Instead we sacrificed those governments and turned the place over to the Muslim Brotherhood, thereby showing how unselfish we truly are.

[…….]

The rest of the world naturally thinks that we are always throwing our weight around, no matter what we do. But the peacemongers live in the blissful knowledge that nothing they do serves our own interests. And being certain of having a truly selfless foreign policy, they feel entitled to bomb anyone they want since no one can accuse them of bombing out of self-interest.

The altruistic warmonger becomes a peacemonger through his altruism achieving the satori of selflessness.. By submitting to the tin god of international law as a Muslim submits to Allah, he gains freedom from conscience and the perceived right to do anything he pleases for the humanitarian cause. Warmongering becomes peacemongering. Invasions become interventions. Bombings become acts of friendship. And as in 1984, war becomes peace.

Read the rest – The Tao of warmongering

Tags: ,
Posted in Balkans, History, Iran, Israel, Kosovo, Serbia, Syria | 45 Comments »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »