Neocon Imperialism, 9/11, & After-Attacks

Politics International Politics
61

Lets start with your first question. [quote=“fred smith”]"…the elected leadership of Iran had at that time already taken over power for itself in a most unconstitutional fashion, no?.[/quote]Have I recently cared to read the 1953 version of the Iranian constitution? Of course you purport to have studied this extensively, so tell us, in what unconstitutional fashions did its leadership take power? And if you truly are educated in some constitutional history, you’ll be sure to share with us all why you believe the Neocon Bush/Cheney Administration has served America well in protecting the US Constitution.

But don’t just stop there, please go on to tell us why the Nuremberg Tribunal Charters should NOT apply to the Bush/Cheney/Rove/PNAC Neocon horde of imperialists.

BTW, do you really think you need help wallowing in humiliation?

thememoryhole.org/pol/kissinger-nose.htm

62

This is how Pollack puts it in the Persian Puzzle…

“By subverting Iran’s election process and rallying popular support to depose the shah’s prime minister, Mohammad Mosaddeq, the lifelong constitutional democrat had effectively made himself dictator of Iran. Mosaddeq himself did seem to realize what had transpired and moved quickly to consolidate his power. Mosaddeq’s gambit was to try to make it possible for him to rely soly on the support of the one group that still backed him with some degree of vigor: the Iranian people. Many of his closest advisors warned him against the referendum and a number deserted him when he ignored their advice. But even in calling for a referendum, Mosaddeq seems to have lost some of his faith in his support among the people. There were separate ballot boxes for “yes” and “no” votes, and they were generally set up on opposite sides of the room so a person’s vote was hardly secret. There were other charges of deliberate tampering. Not surprisingly on Aug. 3, Mosaddeq “won” the referendum with more than 99 percent of the vote. Mosaddeq disbanded the Majles and lifted the prosecutorial immunity of Majles deputies. At that moment, Mohammad Mosaddeq was the undisputed, unconsitutional ruler of Iran.”

Back to you…

63

When there is time to look up the source to consider the valididity of the opinions, I will. Fair enough? But simply quoting an opinion is hardly a point of victory.[quote=“I”]And if you truly are educated in some constitutional history, you’ll be sure to share with us all why you believe the Neocon Bush/Cheney Administration has served America well in protecting the US Constitution.

But don’t just stop there, please go on to tell us why the Nuremberg Tribunal Charters should NOT apply to the Bush/Cheney/Rove/PNAC Neocon horde of imperialists.[/quote]What are you waiting for? No one seems to be stepping up to answer these for you.

64

Take your time. I will be waiting and I have every confidence that you will find Kenneth Pollack a credible source if not the authoritative voice on the matter.

Anyway, as to your other “constitutional concerns,” what do they really boil down to? IF they are as serious as you claim, why have the Democrats who NOW control two houses not done something? AND IF they are so serious, I imagine that the next president will have plenty of time to do something about it. In the meantime, I see nothing but hyperbolic hysteria. Guantanamo? Close it down. Where, however, are you going to send those 500 terrorists? I propose Canada. Let the courts there decide what do do with them. Maybe Canada can even grant them political asylum. Why not? OR let us return each of the individuals to his respective country of origin with no comment. Back they go. Case closed. Agreed?

65

Pathetically evasive.

To the question, Why do you believe the Neocon Bush/Cheney Administration has served America well in protecting the US Constitution?[quote=“fred smith”]Anyway, as to your other “constitutional concerns,” what do they really boil down to?[/quote]Despite avoiding answering the question, the “constitutional concerns” you’re running away discussing boils down to justifying prison terms for your chickenhawk idols. Surely your heros will plan to set down before facing prosecution.

Do you care to elaborate on the validity of oathes taken to protect the Constitution? Probably not, because…[quote]I see nothing but hyperbolic hysteria. Guantanamo? Close it down.[/quote]Are you agreeing that Kissinger should be in Guantanamo?

When will you explain why the Nuremberg Tribunal Charters should NOT apply to the Bush/Cheney/Rove/PNAC Neocon horde of imperialists?

Your pocket thesaurus and neocon websites don’t have an answer for you, so you’ll need to think for yourself. :noway:

66

I do not believe that Bush and Cheney are destroying the Constitution. You do. Why should I prove that they are not when it is your assertion that they are? Prove your own point. I don’t see it. So if I do not see cause for concern, why do I need to prove that there is no cause for concern?

67

fred smith -

Well, its already clear you’ve become quite faintheated when it comes to arguing on behalf of the US Bush/Cheney/PNAC/Rove Administration.

Is it not in your opinion that if the rights guaranteed by the Constitution are violated by the very sworn protectors without justice being served to strenghten their legitimacy, those rights become unreliable? Of course you are invited to argue how the Constitution has been protected by the NeoCON’s Administration (anticipating anti-Carter spill to cover tail tracks). BUT - If ANY rights become unreliable, what Constitution do Americans have to live under?[quote=“I”]
The Neocon adminstration hasn’t destroyed the Constitution, Bill of Rights or rule of law?
 By virtue of violating any or all of the Constitution without consequences, YES it has. If any rights granted and protected by the Bill of Rights are violated by the very Branch of government who’s duty it is to execute the protection thereof, those rights become unreliable.

Will Americans cross their hearts to pledge allegiance to the stars and stripes if they don’t believe their Constitutional rights should be guaranteed? This national pride stems from believing in the Declaration of Independance and Constitutionally afforded rights. When these rights are violated by the “protectors”, something incredibly horrible has occurred. And the real shame is on Neocon supporters for embracing the lies and fascism. Here are just some examples.

Some select examples from 14 Good Reasons to Impeach Bush AND Cheney

Extraordinary Renditions.

George Bush and Dick Cheney’s Neocon adminstration authorized the arrest and transporting of prisoners to secret jails in Morocco, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, and Eastern Europe for detention and torture without trial.
Law violated:[quote=“US Constitution’s 6th Amendment”]In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.[/quote]

Detentions without Trial.

George Bush and Dick Cheney’s Neocon administration detained thousands of people at Guantanamo Bay without the possibility of trial and without access to effective counsel.
Law violated:[quote=“US Constitution’s 6th Amendment”](see above).[/quote]

Torture.

George Bush and Dick Cheney’s Neocon administration has endoresed and argued the justification of performing torture on suspects illegally detained.
Law violated:[quote=“US Constitution’s 8th Amendment”]Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.[/quote]

Illegal wiretaps.

George Bush and Dick Cheney repeatedly bypassed the court system by ordering wiretaps without authorization from judges and without obtaining a warrant.
Law violated:[quote=“US Constitution’s 4th Amendment”]The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[/quote]

Lying to congress
– passing false information about Iraq’s WMD capacities.
George Bush and Dick Cheney passed false information to Congress about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction capabilities, to wit, their possession of chemical weapons, biological weapons, and delivery systems. Furthermore, George Bush and Dick Cheney passed false information to Congress by falsely stating that Iraq was an imminent threat to the United States and that military action was therefore necessary.
Law violated:[quote=“18 USC 1001”]Whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact, or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations, or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.[/quote]See “14 Good Reason to Impeach Bush AND Cheney” for more examples.[/quote]
You previously inferred that Renditions (specifically Kidnapping, Illegal Imprisonment & Immoral Torture) are OK as long as the victims aren’t holding a US citizenship. Remembering this paints an interesting segue for you to explain how the US Constitution and US federal laws haven’t been violated by your heros. Of course for you to actually admit it would force you to react to the quicksand you spout from.

68

Fine. I am faint-hearted. Like I said, IF we have in fact suffered major assaults on our Constitution, no doubt the Democrat-controlled Congress can soon remedy that EVEN BEFORE Bush is out of office. Or is there something stopping them from doing so? Rove maybe? haha

69

“To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.”

  • Abraham Lincoln

My soon-to-be-non-chickenhawk-loving friend, what are you suggesting? Wait and see?

70

J. Scholl:

No offense but how old are you? 21? 22?

71

Don’t want to offend? Maybe someone borrowed your login password or a temporary glaucoma condition backfired. Rather than appeasing ageist swills, I will say yes I enjoy being 20ish when possible.

Let me guess why you’re asking this… because so few middle-aged or senior Americans in your sphere of influence have ventured out of the safety net of self-deception to voice their concerns about the health and future of America’s integrity and its responsibility to protect liberty?

Take a radical neocon right-winger (:runaway:) who now balks at arguing in favor of the Bush/Cheney/Rove/PNAC horde. A couple years ago such a notion was improbable, laughable. Maybe it was because petroleum and/or ‘defense’ shares were exploding, and the scandalous nature of their neocon heroes hadn’t yet hit mainstream. But now, truth is amazingly efficient to shake the very cores of deception. We just help it grow in intensity and frequency.

You maybe weren’t directly or otherwise negatively affected by 9/11, the lies of 9/11 or the WoT scam, so you’ve not had to personally weigh the values of life and truth versus greed, deceit and murder. Most rational people want to leave behind an honorable legacy, so supporting the very opposite naturally becomes gut-wrenching for neocon supporters.

9/11 impacts every generation. And continued murder and an endless false war on terror only serve to multiply the pain and suffering. If someone only looses their pride having supported the chickenhawk administration, they should be grateful. Some of us have lost far too much to entertain bloats about how good murder for money is.

While you may hope that only the young have passion to protest against and share grievances about your treasonous neocon heroes, all generations of patriotic Americans are represented. So let me put a halt to any further ageist suggestions.

[quote=“David L. Griscom, PhD”]"… I implore my fellow physicists and engineers who may have the time, expertise, and (ideally) supercomputer access to get to work on the physics of the World Trade Center collapses and publish their findings in refereed journals like, say, the Journal of Applied Physics.

The issue of knowing who was really behind the 9/11 attacks is of paramount importance to the future of our country, because the “official” assumption that it was the work of 19 Arab amateurs (1) does not match the available facts and (2) has led directly to the deplorable Patriot Act, the illegal Iraq war, NSA spying on ordinary Americans, repudiation of the Geneva Conventions, and the repeal of habeas corpus (a fundamental point of law that has been with us since the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215).

Surely these Orwellian consequences of public ignorance constitute more than sufficient motivation for any patriotic American physicist or engineer to join the search for 9/11 Truth!"

– David L. Griscom, PhD, Research physicist, retired in 2001 from Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) in Washington, DC, after 33 years service. Bio/blog
[/quote]
What really do we have to gain by demanding the truth?
Only our country and the values our flag represents… courage, independence, and justice (others would add to courage: blood shed, hardiness; to independence: purity, innocence; and to justice: vigilance, perseverance).

What do we have to loose by pursuing truth?
I guess this answer depends on the thickness of one’s attachment to the 9/11 WoT propaganda. http://www.forumosa.com/p/?deny911. Of course you are entitled to your opinion, but I hope you one day choose to honor America and those who have served, bled and died to protect her. Research the truth, because really…

What does one gain by protecting or even promoting lies, greed and murder?
Does anyone think the rewards could include integrity or an honorable legacy?

72

Sigh…

And I am resolute in my defense of Bush and Cheney and the whole Neocon dream, get it DREAM, but it is not one of soaring oil prices and lucrative defense contracts. It is one where I hope to someday see a Middle East and Muslim world that once again contribute greatly to civilization. This is to be much preferred to the current bout of whining, narcissistic, irresponsible, blame-mongering coupled with a propensity toward violent destruction of anything and everything that cannot be understood, dominated or manipulated. Time to free the women of the Middle East. Time to reform the message of Islam. Time to stop the intolerance and violence against the Other. (ironic to put it that way n’est ce pas?)

73

Tears come to my eyes. almost.

Fredereich cares about the infidels of the Book of the Third Prophet. He wishes to rebuild the Library at Alexandria, the palaces at Ctesiphon and Persepolis, the Gardens of Babylon, the pyramids of Ur and Sumer, restore the poetry of the Sufis, the math and science institutions, the great trading routes, the glory of the Caliphs, and on and on.

What compassion.

And yet, this is the guy that didn’t care to save the great riches of antiquity housed at the Iraqi History Musuem which was ransacked by profiteers, thieves, and looters when the Americans came to Baghdad.

74

Now, you know how I feel having to read so much of what you post…

Something like that… What is there now obviously ain’t working and you forget that I have lived in, studied in and traveled throughout almost every nation in the region. Extensively. I see what is there. I particularly admire the Persian culture and civilization. Iran could be so much more.

Better to understand it then the way it is? That is the more compassionate route to you? Or better to demand more of it with a respect for the historical accomplishments that once were possible?

Much was recovered. The event was overplayed by the media. I think that you are still swallowing someone’s “message” perhaps that British writer… George Monbiot about the destruction of Baghdad’s culture unequalled since Ghenghis Khan or some other such hyperbolic nonsense.

75

Now, you know how I feel having to read so much of what you post…

Something like that… What is there now obviously ain’t working and you forget that I have lived in, studied in and traveled throughout almost every nation in the region. Extensively. I see what is there. I particularly admire the Persian culture and civilization. Iran could be so much more.

Better to understand it then the way it is? That is the more compassionate route to you? Or better to demand more of it with a respect for the historical accomplishments that once were possible?

Much was recovered. The event was overplayed by the media. I think that you are still swallowing someone’s “message” perhaps that British writer… George Monbiot about the destruction of Baghdad’s culture unequalled since Ghenghis Khan or some other such hyperbolic nonsense.[/quote]

Without going into whether the media overplayed it or not, the point was that you previously wrote that the musuem should not have been protected by US forces who were nearby.

76

[quote=“fred smith”]Sigh…
Time to free the women of the Middle East. [/quote]

That went so well in Afghanistan and lasted about as long as the media coverage of all the ‘progress’ made.

But, go on, spin the big wheel of justifications, you can’t win if you don’t play!

77

I would like to see that quote in its entirety. Get it please. Challenge.

78

Actually, conditions for women in Afghanistan are much better now than under the Taliban. Would you like to dispute that? Also, 4 million Afghan refugees have returned to their nation. Why? Because conditions are worse? Also, given that we understand the crucial role of educating women to be able to educate children to be able to foster economic development, what part of this effort do you think requires quotation marks around the word “progress?”

Given that I am a neoconservative Republican, my “justification” for invading Afghanistan was to get rid of the Taliban and end the sanctuary given al Qaeda. That was accomplished. For those on the left, who are endlessly discussing the need for social justice, I would have imagined the potential followon benefits of this action would have gotten them all firmly on board the effort, that is assuming that they actually mean what they say or have an understanding of what they mean when they say it.

79

Is that a direct quote from your neocon How To Conduct U.S. Foreign Policy manual?

BroonAsks

80

Conversely, a couple of million have left Iraq because things are so much better.

BroonAsylum