The mistake that O’Hanlon makes is assuming that there are clear-minded Pakistanis in their military who would cede control of the one thing that feeds their machismo and gives “worth” to 60 years of abject failure. Especially when it comes to their deeply held jealousy, fear and loathing of their Hindu neighbors to the East. In this regard the Pakistanis are no different from the schizoid and delusional North Koreans vis-a-vis the South.

When it comes to the security and self-preservation of our global civilization, the national interests of a paranoid, rogue state should not count for much. The civilized world needs to have a contingency plan to eliminate all Pakistani WMDs should the need arise. O’Hanlon and his ilk have to stop trying to appease the Pakistani military, which has been the greatest proliferator of WMDs that the world has known (and a major exporter of terrorism too). There is no need for an invasion; just a surgical attack like what the Israelis recently did to Syria should suffice.

After the 2006 elections I said that the press would do anything to prevent a Democrat from winning the White House. Sadly it’s now become all too apparent.

If one listens closely to neo-fascist speak, it isn’t long before one realizes that whatever is said the opposite is true or exists entirely in the imagination.

Reform = destroy
Old school definition = improve antiquated

Defend = offense
Protect = disrespect

National interest = commercial interests

Republic = authoritarian regime

Democracy = capitalism’s enemy

Freedom = delusional

Altruism = Insanity

Self-sacrifice = count to ten and ask yourself
if you really want to do this

Agape = impossibility, how can anyone stand to
be around people?

Capitalism in its current form = fascism

Representative = a lawyer who works for
special interests

Senator = deal maker, it’s all about money

Constitution = indefinite obtuse outline

Rule of law = something those “other” people
have to obey

Torture = advanced interrogation techniques
replaces the old school: an act by
the criminally insane

It’s easy after one gets the hang of it.

Here’s a truism, though…

Frank Luntz=dickhead

Reform = destroy
Old school definition = improve antiquated

Defend = offense
Protect = disrespect

National interest = commercial interests

Republic = authoritarian regime

Democracy = capitalism’s enemy

Freedom = delusional

Altruism = Insanity

Self-sacrifice = count to ten and ask yourself
if you really want to do this

Agape = impossibility, how can anyone stand to
be around people?

Capitalism in its current form = fascism

Representative = a lawyer who works for
special interests

Senator = deal maker, it’s all about money

Constitution = indefinite obtuse outline

Rule of law = something those “other” people
have to obey

Torture = advanced interrogation techniques
replaces the old school: an act by
the criminally insane

It’s easy after one gets the hang of it.

The French also say that no country invades another, expending its resources, for the sake of another country. A nation invades another to benefit itself.

Those crazy French, always the realists.

If any country believed that Iraq had WMDs it was because the U.S., Israel, or Iran, (enemies of Iraq,) led them to believe that it was true.

Scott Ritter stated unequivocally that his and other teams destroyed all the remaining WMDs following the Gulf War.

The reason that Saddam Hussein resisted inspections was that the teams had C.I.A. among them, and whenever the teams inspected a site it “magically” became a target.

The International Red Cross said that Iraq had one of the most sophisticated food distribution systems in the world until most of its infrastructure was destroyed.

Iraq was so crippled by economic sanctions that it had a difficult enough time feeding its people let alone buying or building WMDs. It wasn’t capable of a war of aggression. Sanctions only allowed Iraq defensive weapons.

Iraq was not capable of fighting the U.S. in a war; this was the reason that it capitualated to all U.S. and U.N. demands a few days prior to the attack. Dick Cheney said that the Iraqi leaders could not be trusted, (no kidding Dick, as if anyone needed him to say that.) On the other hand, Iraq’s capitulation did not make the war necessary. There was time to handle the situation in a different manner, but then all the profit opportunities would have been lost. The above realities are what made the invasion of Iraq, and the subsequent killing of Iraqi civilians war crimes.

It is illegal for any nation to pick out a relatively small economically crippled nation that is barely able to defend itself, and attack it for its resources.

Everyone but the administration, apparently, knew that Operation Iraqi Freedom and the creation of a democratic Iraq were smoke screens to disguise avarice and greed. In other words, crimes against humanity.

Fortunately, enough Americans believe that their leaders have the right to break international laws and treaties; otherwise, the leaders would be up that famous creek without a paddle.

eCAHNomics @ 236

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2007/10/14/955/00431

O’Hanlon is an affiliate of the Saban Center and a signatory of at least one PNAC letter. For reasons I can never understand, he is being fobbed off as a liberal. Both he and his buddy Kevin Pollack, Research Director of the Saban Center, are neocon hawks.

So, why exactly hasn’t Hillary been questioned about having a PNACer on her team?

TeddySanFran @ 210

The female arsonist is a rare breed, iirc. This may prove interesting.

Capital Biiiatch!!!

a Capital punishment case?

a Capital idea?

burnin’ down the House?

They say she’s really hot!

LOL

Musharraf’s opposition has no interest in that happening. Real terrorists must not be much of a threat; Musharraf has ignored them. The principal opponents Musharraf fears are lawyers, supreme court justices, a Harvard and Oxbridge trained opposition politician, an ex-cricket player superstar, and ordinary students, civilians and professionals. (Except for the cricketer, the same “enemies” list Cheney has.)

Musharraf seems to be playing the Cheney Scare ‘Em to Hell card. Cheney uses it here all the time, first on Dubya, then on us. It still works on Dubya.

What would Jesus do????

Didn’t they do that before?????

Haven’t we been to this rodeo before????

Is this Groundhog Century or what???? Oh, yeah…it’s a new century…it doesn’t matter then. Sorry, I have to watch the teevee to catch up on current events.

The sky is falling

Now where DID I leave that umbrella?

John McLaughlin of The McLaughlin Group asked, “Should we run to the ledge now?”