Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditEarlier this week, I lambasted Robert Morgenthau for his alarmist, fear-mongering speech at the Brookings Institution and op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, in which he suggested darkly that Iran and Venezuela were engaged in cooperation on nuclear weapons and that the two countries were secretly building ominous factories in remote areas of Venezuela. He seemed to imply a 2009 version of the Cuban missile crisis is in the works, and like some modern-day Paul Revere, he's riding to the rescue.
In the blog entry, I mentioned that Morgenthau's thesis was transmitted, in even more simplistic and alarmist form, over WTOP radio in Washington, D.C., by J.J. Green, the station's national security correspondent. After seeing my blog posting, Green helpfully sent me an audio of the broadcast, which I've transcribed below. In my mind, it's a stunning example of bad journalism. As you will see, if you bother to read it, not once do Green or the WTOP anchors express an ounce of skepticism about Morgenthau's thesis, nor do they raise an single question about it. They simply regurgitate what Morgenthau said, as if the Manhattan D.A.'s tendentious and ideologically driven analysis is the Word of God. The transcript, in italics, follows below, along with my comments:
ANCHOR 1: There's an East-West connection that's raising alarm bells in the US because of who the players are and what they might be up to. It's about Iran and Venezuela, two countries with half a century of diplomatic ties, but now those ties appear to be morphing into something more cohesive, more directed, and more threatening.
Notice how the anchor says, right up front, that the Iran-Venezuela ties are "threatening," not even bothering to mention that it's Morgenthau's opinion, not fact.
ANCHOR 2: And joining us with insights into Iran's connections in Latin America, WTOP's National Security Correspondent, J.J. Green. And J.J., this issue got a lot of attention because yesterday, Manhattan's legendary district attorney, Robert Morgenthau, talked about it in a speech at the Brookings Institution. What is he suggesting here?
A nice touch, that "legendary." Meaning, don't question what he says.
JJ GREEN: He's suggesting that we should not sleep on Iran and Venezuela. We shouldn't think that they're just exercising their geopolitical rights to get together and talk business and make business and make deals. What he's saying is, that Iran and Venezuela hate the U.S., the U.S. needs to look very carefully at their financial connections, and even more carefully at what's going on out in the remote areas of Venezuela, where there've been construction projects that no one seems to really know what's going on, and he's also saying that we need to keep an eye on what's happening between Iran and Venezuela when it comes to nuclear weapons technology and things that are used to facilitate that.
Amazing. All innuendo. They "hate" the US, there are construction projects where no one knows what's going on, and it could involve "nuclear weapons technology"! Green ignores the fact that neither Iran nor Venezuela have nuclear "weapons" technology, although Iran does have a carefully monitored nuclear enrichment program that produced low-enriched uranium fuel.
ANCHOR 1: Well, in fact, Morgenthau says that he thinks that Venezuela is helping to finance and bankroll Iran secretly to help them get the money to help them continue develop nuclear weapons.
This point is especially absurd. Iran has lots of oil revenue, more than Venezuela in fact, and it certainly doesn't need Caracas' money to "develop nuclear weapons," if indeed it wanted to. Worse, the anchor says that Iran is building nuclear weapons as if it's a fact, when even the US intelligence community said that Iran halted its weapons program in 2003. Responding to this assertion, Green answers, inexplicably, with an utter non sequitur about "narco-trafficking.".
JJGREEN: Narco-trafficking is the key. Within the next couple of weeks I can guarantee that you will hear a lot more about this whole problem in Latin America. Now the big problem in Latin America is its connection to the FARC, Colombia's, uh, guerrilla movement. Uh, and there is evidence in a number of places, and Mr. Morgenthau points this out in his speech, including evidence in the GAO, that Venezuela has pretty close relations with the FARC, including giving them weapons, etc. This money is being used in part, is being laundered by banks that Iran has set up in that country, banks that can't be monitored, banks that we know have had suspicious ties to other financial dealings around the world, but it all goes back to Tehran. So what he's saying, very clearly, is that this is no time to pretend that Iran and Venezuela are not haters of the U.S.
A pastiche of complete nonsense. Green implies that laundered drug money is helping Iran build a nuclear bomb? That is so stupid and wrong that it boggles the mind.
ANCHOR 2: Do we have any indication of what the U.S. is doing to perhaps monitor the situation and try to stop some of this stuff from going on?
JJ GREEN Well, the Israelis are doing a lot. And as you can almost imagine, there's been a lot of angst and anxiety in Israel because of Iran's nuclear weapons program. And they are talking regularly about what to do about Iran. Let's make no mistake about it: Venezuela does not want a confrontation with the United States. Iran does not want one with the U.S. But together they feel like there's strength in numbers and maybe they'll find a way to beat up on the U.S. The bottom line on this is, the U.S. and its allies showing these countries that, look, we're watching you, we're keeping our eyes on you, and we have options that may include attacks, options that may include some of your neighbors turning a cold shoulder to you, and the world financial community shutting you out. And don't discount these possibilities.
Where to begin? Yes, we know there is "angst and anxiety" in Israel over Iran's nuclear program. But Green seems to relish delivering his dark warning that the US might "attack" Iran and Venezuela ("options that may include attacks") while simultaneously suggesting that Israel may take care of it for us. All of this without a shred of evidence that there is anything to this story at all! Does Green bother to call any experts on Iran or Venezuela or the nuclear issue to get a qualified or contrary or dissenting view about Morgenthau's evidence-free assertions? No. Does he raise any doubts about any of this? No--he treats it as gospel. Does Green bother to note the catastrophic consequences of an attack on Iran, involving the US in a third war in between the ones in Iraq and Afghanistan? Of course not.
ANCHOR 1: All right, J.J. I'm sure we'll be checking in on you again on this.
God forbid.
Walter Cronkite must be spinning in his grave. Unless, that is, he is secretly buried in some remote area of Venezuela's rain forest.
Share this article
Robert Dreyfuss
A chronicle of America's adventures in foreign policy and national security.
RSS
posted by ROBERT DREYFUSS on 09/11/2009 @ 2:45pm
I have to agree with you. The transcript of that broadcast is just breathtaking - that was one of the most over-the-top naked propaganda pieces I've seen outside of books on the history of propaganda and PR. The broadcast could probably serve as a case study.
Things I note:
1) Notice how Iran's energy program is identified only as a "nuclear weapons program"? Notice how the determinations even of the combined US intelligence agencies are left out of the picture?
2) Notice how the Israelis are lionized and inserted into the dialog rapidly? The timing of this broadcast was peculiar in that it corresponded to the New York Times report on public conclusions being made by US intelligence agencies and officials that essentially Iran is at a point where it could do a sprint for a bomb, and it does not appear that Iran is going in that direction. While the NYT report by Sanger was very bent and tried to bury that fundamental conclusion under a mountain of sotto voce insinuations against Iran, the NYT report presented a conclusion and at the same time, out came Morgenthau's publication in the WSJ, along with what appears to be a radio media push. It's almost as if some party of interest in the scenario has an agenda that included trying to bury in the mass media the conclusion that Iran was not going for a bomb right now.
Posted by syfriendly at 09/11/2009 @ 4:34pm
Mr Dreyfuss, I have corrected you on multiple occasions now that you are guilty of ignoring the facts in your attacks on those who warn of the Iranian/Venezuelan activities and their coordination with global terrorism.
It is a fact that Chavez supplies FARC.
It is a fact that Chavez, Zelaya of Honduras have been coordinating with Hezbollah and others in drug operations in the Caribbean. There have been several major busts in the Caribbean this year involving members of this cabal.
The fact that you not only are not concerned about this, but seem to be an apologist for their cabal only further discredits you as an honest journalist.
Posted by antisocialist at 09/11/2009 @ 5:44pm
It is a fact that Chavez, Zelaya of Honduras have been coordinating with Hezbollah and others in drug operations in the Caribbean. There have been several major busts in the Caribbean this year involving members of this cabal.
Posted by raving_lunatic at 09/11/2009 @ 5:44pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Yes! Exactly! But you're only wrong about the drugs. The traffic hasn't been drugs - its the bodies of little green men being smuggled into Roswell New Mexico to keep
Oh GOD do you understand just how ludicrous you sound trying to talk about "credibility"? You are raving religious maniac who thinks that the Arabs need to be chased from Israel so that the second coming of Jesus can occur, the Jews can be converted, and the Rapture can arrive at last. You think any change away from Bush era policies in the US is the institution of a creeping socialist tyranny in league with Arab terrorists. In short, you are an absolute raving nutcase whose only surplus in life appears to be a surplus of time on your hands.
And the only question is: how long do you plan to keep exposing your personal mental fantasyland on this web site?
Posted by syfriendly at 09/11/2009 @ 6:24pm
Posted by syfriendly at 09/11/2009 @ 6:24pm
I guess you only read what Hamas tells you to read?
<Mystery continues to surround Hezbollah's alleged links to the seventeen suspects arrested on drug trafficking charges on the Dutch Caribbean island of Curacao on April 28. According to Curacaon authorities, approximately 250 law enforcement officials took down a major drug trafficking and money laundering ring led by a criminal network that shipped and sold cocaine and other contraband from Latin America and the Caribbean to Europe and the Middle East.
Four Lebanese nationals were among those arrested in addition to an unspecified number of Colombians, Venezuelans, Cubans, Curacaons, and Surinamese (St. Maarten Island Times, May 2; NIS News, April 30)
http://tinyurl.com/no4bn2
<Evidence has surfaced showing the connection between the supporters of deposed President of Honduras Manuel Zelaya and the largest South American supplier of illegal drugs to North America: the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). This is the missing link that directly explains why Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has been openly working on Zelaya being reinstated into power. It is known that the strongman of Venezuela actively supports the FARC in South America.>
http://tinyurl.com/krxr67
<Too bad the Colombian ministry of defense will not also be on hand. It could show them evidence of the connection between the Honduran supporters of deposed Honduran president Manuel Zelaya and the most important South American supplier of illegal drugs to North America--the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). I know this because recently that evidence landed on my desk.>
http://tinyurl.com/mlrzs9
Posted by antisocialist at 09/11/2009 @ 7:11pm
Last year, Salim Boughader Mucharrafille was sentenced to 60 years in prison by Mexican authorities on charges of organized crime and immigrant smuggling. Mucharrafille, a Mexican of Lebanese descent, owned a cafe in the city of Tijuana, across the border from San Diego. He was arrested in 2002 for smuggling 200 people, said to include Hezbollah supporters, into the U.S.
In 2001, Mahmoud Youssef Kourani crossed the border from Mexico in a car and traveled to Dearborn, Mich. Kourani was later charged with and convicted of providing "material support and resources ... to Hezbollah," according to a 2003 indictment.
Adm. James G. Stavridis, commander of U.S. Southern Command and the nominee to head NATO troops as Supreme Allied Commander-Europe, testified before the House Armed Services Committee last week that the nexus between illicit drug trafficking - "including routes, profits, and corruptive influence" and "Islamic radical terrorism" is a growing threat to the U.S.
He noted that in August, "U.S. Southern Command supported a Drug Enforcement Administration operation, in coordination with host countries, which targeted a Hezbollah-connected drug trafficking organization in the Tri-Border Area."
http://tinyurl.com/cty69l
Posted by antisocialist at 09/11/2009 @ 7:19pm
More for you Sy,
Michael Braun, who just retired as assistant administrator and chief of operations at the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
Mr. Braun, who spent 33 years with the DEA and still works with the organization as a consultant, said that members of the elite Quds, or Jerusalem, force of Iran's Revolutionary Guards also are showing up in Latin America. "Quite frankly, I'm not opposed to the belief that they could be commanding and controlling Hezbollah's criminal enterprises from there," Mr. Braun said. The DEA thinks that 60 percent of terrorist organizations have some ties with the illegal narcotics trade, said agency spokesman Garrison Courtney.
http://tinyurl.com/cty69l
<the Honduran government claimed today that former President Manuel Zelaya is being funded by FARC:
[P]olice seized a notebook and receipts showing that "Zelaya's government officials and supporters, leftist leaders, farmers, union members, and at least one mayor and one governor" were paid between $2,500 to $100,000 for the "transportation of people and supplies" to the border region.
The information was gathered from a computer seized from a FARC leader. No money was seized since the funds had already been distributed.>
http://faustasblog.com/?p=14378
Posted by antisocialist at 09/11/2009 @ 7:23pm
More Sy,
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has defied the United States unlike any other leader in the Western Hemisphere since Cuba's Fidel Castro. Chavez has strong ties with state sponsors of terror, suppresses democracy at home, and has worked to destabilize his neighbors. Recently, Chavez has also helped the Lebanese terrorist group Hezbollah establish a base in the Western hemisphere.
http://tinyurl.com/np2ouf
Yes, Iran, Venezuela, their lackey Zelaya, and the Iranian terrorist organizations like Hezbollah and FARC are all working together
Posted by antisocialist at 09/11/2009 @ 7:29pm
Great column, Mr. Dreyfuss. The break-down of this WSJ broadcast paragraph by paragraph highlights all the usual techniques of propaganda, spin and misinformation so commonly used these days. Well done.
Posted by DejaVu at 09/11/2009 @ 8:42pm
We'll find those WMDs in our lifetime, yessiree
Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 09/11/2009 @ 8:48pm
Dreyfuss writes:
>> Notice how the anchor says, right up front, that the Iran-Venezuela ties are "threatening," not even bothering to mention that it's Morgenthau's opinion, not fact. <<
Dreyfuss hasn't noticed that Hugo Chavez was again in Iran visiting Ahmedinejad this week, and said, in a press conference that he had a strategic alliance with Iran and that both countries supported one another against the US and Israel, which he called a genocidal state. Chavez often uses the phrase"the evil empire" to characterize the US.
He also announced that his government would begin supplying Iran with 20,000 barrels of gasoline a day, to undercut a possible U.S. effort to sanction Iran's gasoline imports.
Moreover, Iran provides training and support to the Venezuelan military, and has since 2006 embedded its officers with Venezuelan units which have adopted asymmetric warfare as official doctrine.
That is fact and if Iranians training Venezuelan in asymmetric warfare and building factories in remote jungle locations is a bagatelle, that was how many radicals dismissed Cuba's Soviet missiles in October 1962.
Moreover, Dreyfuss, who for years wrote for Lyndon LaRauche, whose edicts he considered the Word of God, should be the last to give lessons on good journalism. When he calls Morgenthau's analysis "ideologically driven" he is talking about probably the most non partisan man in the country. What is his ideology? He has invariably run with the endorsement of all the political parties.
Mogenthau made it to 85 in good mental health. Dreyfuss, also no youngster, has had a scrambled brain since youth.
Posted by Pirovano at 09/11/2009 @ 9:58pm
ah chavez - the latest overblown, hyperbolized third world bugaboo...
considering the fact that we engineered an illegal coup against chavez, i gotta say - if iwere him, i'd feel more comfy with some nukes...
the US has used our nuclear umbrella for years to assure our meddling would result in minimal repercussions. why do we find it so insane that countries we regularly threaten or in whose internal affairs we meddle...
want a few nukes. we NEVER invade REALLY nucleaerly armed countries...
wonder why?
but considering the rank and racist idea we have that latin america is OUR sphere of influence and that any serious attempt in latin america to chart any course other than our neo-liberal notions of leaving the elites to exloit their own to their hearts' content must be a threat to us...
wow. do we REALLY need these bugaboo blackguards to feel like the good guys all the time? funny how we pick bugaboos we can at least contain, could crush should we choose...
uncanny how we manufacture these tin pot antichrists on such a regular basis - especially ever time we begin to take a second look at our imperialistic military budget and far flung heavy handed, EXPENSIVE, PROFITABLE FOR SOME, never-ebding world beat cop bullshit...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 09/12/2009 @ 09:49am
mR. Dryfuss has the unique ability to understate that which is obvious to any actually intelligent thinking person. There are thousands of articles and much intelligence that undermine his premeses which he chooses to ignore. Not really a jounalistic coup here!
Posted by BigPasture at 09/12/2009 @ 09:49am
if even a sizable minority of us gringos had even a reasonable understanding of the history of latin america, most would find it remarkable more chavez's and morales's arent sitting in power in latin america, espousing policies a lot more radical than those they already are espousing...
but since ayn rand's evil satanic verses have been recognizsed by right wing spinmasters as aqn adjunct to the constitution and they have been quite adept at peddling this myth...and since the a-political marching moron here can barely list thw countries and major bodies of water tyhat border their own country...
look for even reasonable moderates and the occasional progressive looking to score points with the internal and real enemy (a fool's pursuit to be sure) to vomit up such rank misinformation from time to time.
like every other human being on this planet, including my worship worthy hero, the magical, charismatic, mulatto anti-christ in charge - i don't agree with everything chavez says or does. i DO however admire his toughness, his willingness and relish at fliping the bird to the colosus to the north...as well as the remarkable restraint in dealing with his own vicious regressive elites...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 09/12/2009 @ 10:03am
so, with some reservations i say...
VIVA DON HUGO!!!!
he's certainly no less morally bankrupt than we...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 09/12/2009 @ 10:04am
Posted by BigPasture at 09/12/2009 @ 09:49am | ignore this person | warn this person
when it comes to chavez, its actually VERY HARD to find good journalism dealing with the subject. its either hysteric monster making on the right, or knee-jerk lionizing from many on the left.
the vast majority seems to me to fall into the first catagory, above, though, with even some progressives buying into the bugaboo hysteria.
people - read some efffing history about the place, the region...its sure hard enough to find good journalism on the topic - listen to the cacaphony and become further confused.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 09/12/2009 @ 10:12am
Posted by ibbleblibble at 09/12/2009 @ 10:12am |
That's the problem...both sides have grains of truth because Chavez is such a mixed bag.
Part vicious thug, part popular hero; he's done good for the lower strata in Venezuela, but made an ass of himself outside his borders.
Like a little dog, Chavez barks alot, but is about as dangerous as Castro (down poodle! por favor!).
Zelaya appears to be poorly operated franchise operation.
I can see how someone who has one and only one finite commodity might be interested in diversifying into other, renewable-ish power generation methods to free up more oil to be sold to the thirsty, thirsty liberal gringos of the frigid northeast.
Posted by snowball777 at 09/12/2009 @ 11:56am
Posted by ibbleblibble at 09/12/2009 @ 10:03am
You surprise me Ibb given your own disdain for the Islamic jihadists and their terrorist operations.
Why would you have any praise for a gangster thug like Chavez who not only is drug dealer, but funds and arms terrorists who have sworn to kill us?
Posted by antisocialist at 09/12/2009 @ 12:07pm
It is amazing to me that any Nation writer continues to write web log entries on this web site. The tiny, obsessive group of about four silly loony-right fools who put have collectively now authored presumably thousands and thousands of repetitive, vacuous raving posts essentially ruin the web site for anyone who is a) not in(s)ane, and b) interested in actually thinking about serious things in general.
I mean, god damn, where do these asses find the time, anyway?!
Posted by syfriendly at 09/12/2009 @ 12:20pm
I mean, god damn, where do these asses find the time, anyway?!
Posted by syfriendly at 09/12/2009 @ 12:20pm
By being willing to sacrifice for the greater good of confronting the lies, distortions and hate of the left against America, against Israel, against people of faith.
Posted by antisocialist at 09/12/2009 @ 12:46pm
Lets take this bugaboo scenario one step at a time. The moneyed interests will pursue this Iran/Venezuela dual pronged collaboration to destroy Israel, harpoon capitalism in the western hemisphere, export revolution, etc. as far they possibly can.
The MIC with all its appendages including the defoliant, aerial snooping, & related contractors must be quite excited. Even the hardwood timber people must have glimmers of hope that somewhere down line a surrogate can bargain for the "spoils" that remain from "action" oriented foreign policy.
What a shame that Hugo doesn't buy into the sanctity of contractual obligation, Apparently he doesn't believe that the sins of the fathers are visited upon the sons.
Posted by Sorelish at 09/12/2009 @ 12:49pm
antisocialist-Hopefully,you do not really believe that you and these others are sacrificing your time for the greater good by posting an opinion on here..You guys spend too much time stroking your own egos to believe that you are sacrificing for the greater good by spending so much time on here..My wife is a lefty who loves America,supports Israel,and is a person of faith.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/12/2009 @ 1:11pm
antisocialist-Hopefully,you do not really believe that you and these others are sacrificing your time for the greater good by posting an opinion on here..You guys spend too much time stroking your own egos to believe that you are sacrificing for the greater good by spending so much time on here..My wife is a lefty who loves America,supports Israel,and is a person of faith.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/12/2009 @ 1:11pm
Guilty of a generalization.
My post should have read "many on the left".
However in my defense, I was not aware that your wife posts here. My comments are directed at the bloggers here.
Posted by antisocialist at 09/12/2009 @ 1:22pm
antisocialist-Not all lefties on here hate America,Israel,or people of faith.One can be critical of something,but not hate it.I only see a minority spewing what seems to be hate,but you,also,spew what seems to be hate,but you assure us that you do not hate.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/12/2009 @ 1:28pm
antisocialist-Not all lefties on here hate America,Israel,or people of faith.One can be critical of something,but not hate it.I only see a minority spewing what seems to be hate,but you,also,spew what seems to be hate,but you assure us that you do not hate.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/12/2009 @ 1:28pm
You have stated that before and I still challenge you to cite anyone that I have said that I hate or that I have written hate speech about.
Posted by antisocialist at 09/12/2009 @ 2:05pm
Venezuela, just announced they are to recieve a delivery of missiles from Russia. They will have have a range of 185 miles, enough to reach their neighbor Columbia. Of course, we only have their word for that. Russia could also easily send along missiles with a longer range at the same time, under the cover of the shorter range missiles. Russia is, under the leadership of , KGB thug Putin, remarkably like the former USSR, in its dictatorial ambitions. Chazez fashions himself the new Central and South American dictator in the mold of Fidel Castro. So the comparison with the Cuban missile crisis, at least the beginnings fo one, is a good one.
Posted by newsbrowser at 09/12/2009 @ 2:25pm
antisocialist-Your constant put downs of what you call the left can easily be seen as spewing hate.One does not have to use the word hate in order to be seen as spewing hate.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/12/2009 @ 3:54pm
I'm quite fine with spewing hate myself, since I don't believe in loving my enermies. Trying to love an Islamic jihadist is pathalogical. Yes, I think it would be absolutely beautiful and wonderful if every Islamic jihadist (and rapist and murderer and child molester and war criminal and genocidal dictator and tyrant and predator and torturer and sadist) died a brutal painful death right now all at once. That is spewing hate. Nothing wrong with that.
Propagating hatred can actually be a very good and natural and just thing to do, contrary to liberal delusions. A few days ago the Nation linked to an article on AlterNet titled "How Do We Pass Rational Sex-Offender Laws With Psychos Like Phillip Garrido on the Loose?". The following is an ACTUAL response by one of the left liberals who read that article and responded:
"Can't the authors/editors find a better word to use--in the headline, no less--than "psycho"? Such loaded language is disrespectful and unnecessary... In this instance, it propagates hatred, violence, and rage against individuals."
Got that? The author of the piece should have been more "respectful" to Garrido!
Propagating hatred for such an evil man is not just acceptable, but a morally normal response to his unbelieveable crimes.
Don't love evil. Hate speech is not always a bad thing.
This may not be relevant to the discussion about "spewing hate" with regard to the kind of hate that you accused antisocialist of spewing, but I just wanted to say this.
BTW, antisocialist only condemns liberals who he explicitly categorizes as being deserving of such contempt on the basis of if they "hate America, Israel, AND people of faith". Only people on the left meet all three of those conditions, though not all leftists do.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/12/2009 @ 4:23pm
You have stated that before and I still challenge you to cite anyone that I have said that I hate or that I have written hate speech about.
Posted by antisocialist at 09/12/2009 @ 2:05pm
Dude, your thing is to PROJECT your venom on to others. But take heart, 1-you are superb at this, and 2- your denial's impenetrable so there's virtually no possibility you'll ever face the consequences of your self-delusions. Plus, 3 - you can always deflect with the gadget: I hate behavior not people (a defense you don't allow 'I'm nobody' and others you with confidence hate their fellow Americans). Finally, 4- no doubt the same (projection of hate on to others) informs many a colorful sermon.
Posted by winyahn at 09/12/2009 @ 4:40pm
BTW, antisocialist only condemns liberals who he explicitly categorizes as being deserving of such contempt on the basis of if they "hate America, Israel, AND people of faith". Only people on the left meet all three of those conditions, though not all leftists do.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/12/2009 @ 4:23pm
You are wrong and I have an example of a post I made just today on another thread where I condemned the remarks of a conservative .
<Posted by Happy at 09/12/2009 @ 12:52pm
Sorry Happy, but you are truly talking in a bigoted manner.
I am a Christian pastor and I am commanded by G-d to extend help to the stranger, remembering that I was also a stranger once. (Deuteronomy 10:18,19). I've always said that my submission to my govt's laws is total, unless they call me to disobey G-d.
Posted by antisocialist at 09/12/2009 @ 1:18pm>
http://tinyurl.com/m4eamf
Posted by antisocialist at 09/12/2009 @ 5:21pm
Dude, your thing is to PROJECT your venom on to others. But take heart, 1-you are superb at this, and 2- your denial's impenetrable so there's virtually no possibility you'll ever face the consequences of your self-delusions. Plus, 3 - you can always deflect with the gadget: I hate behavior not people (a defense you don't allow 'I'm nobody' and others you with confidence hate their fellow Americans). Finally, 4- no doubt the same (projection of hate on to others) informs many a colorful sermon.
Posted by winyahn at 09/12/2009 @ 4:40pm
you don't have a clue about me.
And where have I said that I'm Nobody hates his fellow Americans?
Posted by antisocialist at 09/12/2009 @ 5:23pm
"You are wrong and I have an example of a post I made just today on another thread where I condemned the remarks of a conservative ."
I didn't accuse you of only condemning liberals and never conservatives. I defended you (or so I thought) by pointing out that rather than stereotyping all liberals as inherently "hating America, Israel, AND people of faith," you usually only condemn the specific liberals who really do feel that way, and who sane liberals should join you in denouncing.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/12/2009 @ 5:35pm
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/12/2009 @ 5:35pm
Ok, my misunderstanding
Posted by antisocialist at 09/12/2009 @ 6:36pm
you don't have a clue about me.
Posted by antisocialist at 09/12/2009 @ 5:23pm
Yeah, and neither do about four others who've called you out similarly.
Posted by winyahn at 09/12/2009 @ 6:49pm
you don't have a clue about me.
Posted by antisocialist at 09/12/2009 @ 5:23pm
Yeah, and neither do about four others who've called you out similarly.
Posted by winyahn at 09/12/2009 @ 6:49pm
No, you really don't have a clue.
The life is live is nothing like what many leftists try and portray of me.
Let's take your last little zinger as an example
<Finally, 4- no doubt the same (projection of hate on to others) informs many a colorful sermon.
Posted by winyahn at 09/12/2009 @ 4:40pm>
I don't do fire and brimstone messages. I don't do political commentary. In my church services, I simply do expository teaching on the Bible and minister to the needs of those who request it.
No one is ever shunned or turned away. We try and help every person who asks for help.
In my personal life, I am known by friends and family as the person who is always laughing. I live a laid back life. My friends are from virtually the entire globe (likewise, much of my family).
I don't have and don't seek material wealth. I don't have the adult toys that so many men pursue. My life is very simple. I live a green friendly life as much as possible. I am mostly vegetarian.
If you met me and we didn't talk politics or religion, you might think I was a liberal.
Blogs don't really reveal who any of us are here. I'm just as guilty at times of the sweeping generalizations, but it's just hype.
Posted by antisocialist at 09/12/2009 @ 7:02pm
Reverend Projection Anti asks: "And where have I said that I'm Nobody hates his fellow Americans?" (Posted by antisocialist at 09/12/2009 @ 5:23pm )
Your words:
Don't worry Ms Savan, I'm sure you leftists will find something new to HATE about your fellow Americans.
(to chaoszen ) You are truly filled with HATE for your fellow countrymen
different "Leftist" same projection -
exemplifying what I said: your thing is to PROJECT your own hate HATE on to others. But take heart, 1-you are superb at this, and 2- your denial's impenetrable (see your previous and subsequent post) so there's virtually no possibility you'll ever face the consequences of your self-delusions. Plus, 3 - you can always deflect with the gadget: I hate behavior not people (a defense you don't allow 'chaoszen' and others (about 4 per week?). Finally, 4- no doubt the same (projection of hate on to others) informs many a colorful sermon (roughly every other one?).
Posted by winyahn at 09/12/2009 @ 7:04pm
I don't do fire and brimstone messages. I don't do political commentary. In my church services, I simply do expository teaching on the Bible and minister to the needs of those who request it.
No one is ever shunned or turned away. We try and help every person who asks for help.
In my personal life, I am known by friends and family as the person who is always laughing. I live a laid back life. My friends are from virtually the entire globe (likewise, much of my family).
I don't have and don't seek material wealth. I don't have the adult toys that so many men pursue. My life is very simple. I live a green friendly life as much as possible. I am mostly vegetarian.
If you met me and we didn't talk politics or religion, you might think I was a liberal.
Blogs don't really reveal who any of us are here. I'm just as guilty at times of the sweeping generalizations, but it's just hype.
Posted by antisocialist at 09/12/2009 @ 7:02pm
Me too. Same here. Same difference. Peace.
Posted by winyahn at 09/12/2009 @ 7:10pm
(to chaoszen ) You are truly filled with HATE for your fellow countrymen
different "Leftist" same projection -
Posted by winyahn at 09/12/2009 @ 7:04pm
In the case of Chaoszen, I was responding to him calling millions of Americans assholes and other names.
<We live in a sick country. Very, Very Sick. Look at all those moronic teabaggers that are are protesting in Washington. What are they protesting? They don't know. All they know is that they hate black people, and fear that people of color are taking their country away.
Stupid and Ignorant. They are protesting against their own best interests for the sake of bigotry. A bunch of brainwashed idiotic white people who are afraid.
Silly little people..
Posted by chaoszen at 09/12/2009 @ 3:20pm
You assholes can have this forsaken place. Meanwhile, I will adopt my own new country.
To Hell with this wasteland of ignorance and stupidity.
Posted by chaoszen at 09/12/2009 @ 3:25pm>
That kind of talk is not hateful?
And what I said in response wasn't hateful.
<1.You are truly filled with hate for your fellow countrymen if you have those kinds of attitudes that are entirely without basis.
But I guess Chaozen, you love protesting, but only if the protesters agree with your own views.
In other words, you hate democracy so it is probably best if you follow your advice and hasten your departure from this country.
We welcome protest in this country from all points of view, not just those we agree with.
Posted by antisocialist at 09/12/2009 @ 3:34pm>
So, tell me what I said in response to his comments that suggested hate towards him and was not appropriate?
Posted by antisocialist at 09/12/2009 @ 7:23pm
Peace.
Posted by winyahn at 09/12/2009 @ 7:10pm
peace!
Posted by antisocialist at 09/12/2009 @ 7:23pm
The atomic weapon connection between Iran and Venezuela is absurd. I think it is only a "enemy's enemy is my friend" policy.Both are oil rich and they could co-operate on that. Before going after Iran, if the US has the obligations about atomic weapons , go after Israel,Pakistan and India all non-signatories with IAEA.And of course North Korea.
Posted by Dastu11 at 09/13/2009 @ 05:46am
rightwingnutcase-I'm not a liberal and try not to spew hate because I try to follow the Spiritual teachings of God and Jesus.Actually,there are right wingers who can be seen as hating America,Israel,and,people of faith since most people of faith are not Christians nor do Christians all have the same beliefs.There anti America and anti Israel right wingers.Hate speech is always wrong and is evil and makes you no different than the jihadists.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/13/2009 @ 09:55am
I believe Chaoszen has to be a fine person, and that his posts, sometimes vitriolic but always full of heart hold a mirror in which some readers see something of themselves they may be ashamed? of?
But not the Cartmans of the world
BTW re: Posted by snowball777 at 09/12/2009 @ 11:56am Part vicious thug
What makes you call him this? The only thing I heard about him is that he gave oil to poor people in Vermont or something - and not from TN, MSM I believe
Just asking
Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 09/13/2009 @ 11:50am
"makes you no different than the jihadists."
Thanks for that insight into my soul.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 2:08pm
Coming from the right-wing, all these stories are PROBABLY exagerated, but there just might be SOME truth here. You know, I have never understood why a left-wing government like Venezuela`s has any relation whatever with a reactionary traditionalist Islamo Fascist government like Iran's.I consider myself of the Left, but most of the Left , unlike myself, just obsessively harps against the US and Israel`s fight against the probable Iranian nuclear programme, while saying virtually nothing against the Iranian regime. Considering the theocratic, sexist and homophobic attitudes of this odious regime, I can't understand why the Left is not more vehement in its denunciation of the regime, if it ever denounces it (it seems to be more important to just reign in the US and Israeli responses). Virulent anti- Americanism brings these regimes together, from opposite sides of the spectrum, a truly weird alliance.Why needlessly antagonise the US? There is a fine, noble, and important Left-Wing experiment going on in Venezuela, why jeopardise it with alliances with Iran?And considering that the Iranian regime wiped out the Left at the beginning of their Revolution, one really must wonder about the wisdom of associating in the longterm with those mad mullahs.
Posted by Marco22 at 09/13/2009 @ 4:45pm
Posted by Marco22 at 09/13/2009 @ 4:45pm
One wonders, for someone who considers himself on the left, why these are such a mystery to you?
For example, those on the left rarely adopt the right wing concept of Islamo Fascism.
Those on the left do not deny that Iran has a tarred human rights record, but never conflate that with a justification for attacking Iran, the way the right wing does.
Those on the left have no problem understanding that being estranged from the US forces you into the hands of others who are estranged by the US.
Those on the left don't place much regard for whether the US is antagonized by what other countries choose to do in their own interests. The left does not regard the entire plant as the domain of the US.
Those on the left also remember that in 2002, the US supported a failed to to overthrow the Venezuelan leader, while the right still believe Chavez should be pandering to US wishes.
Posted by Shingo at 09/13/2009 @ 8:59pm
Posted by Shingo at 09/13/2009 @ 8:59pm
You're wrong. I've been a vocal opponent of war with Iran on these forums, yet I've consistently been accused by left liberals who post here of calling for a bombing of that country. Why? Because I've critisized its human rights record. Leftists from George Galloway to Nation thread poster IlyaKuryakin openly praise and express support and admiration for the Iranian regime. You yourself have said that you personally believe Iran is "essentially" a democracy in the same way the US is "essentially" a democracy.
"Those on the left have no problem understanding that being estranged from the US forces you into the hands of others who are estranged by the US."
So you do admit that radical feminists, atheists, and secularists on the left do ally themselves with the Taliban, and do dislike (at the very least) America, and you consider this sequentially logical and defensible?
"the right still believe Chavez should be pandering to US wishes."
The right only asks Chavez to "pander" to rather reasonable wishes; namely, to hold free elections, allow free speech, end torture, stop funding global jihad and terrorism, stop censoring and repressing and brutally murdering and torturing and massacaring the oppressed people of Venezuela.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 9:52pm
just more propaganda and lies by the right wingnuts, Chavez is a dictator, deals drugs, terrorist blah blah blah. I live in Venezuela and here's an example of what your govt. is up to. Before the last referendum the students from the wealthy colleges were protesting all over Caracas, I was across the street from one, near INTTT the car registration building. I noticed 4 white guys amongst the 100 odd students who seemed to be orchestrating it. After observing them for about 10 minutes I crossed the street further up walked behind the protestors, then tapped one of the gringos on the back, and in my best British accent said "do you know where the Metro Station is mate" "Yeah just down the street bud" he replied "American eh, what are you doing here" "yep, American just doing my job" "what are you CIA, NSA or some other bullshit, fucking interferring piece of shit US govt. agency" I replied He turned his back and walked over to the other 3, where they had a mini conference, with a couple of the older students and legged it down to the Metro station. Just another example of US Inteferring Foreign Policy, and you wonder why small countries feel threathened by the bully to the north, and have to arm themselves. A word of warning the barrios around Caracas will make your soldiers wish they were back in Iraq if it comes down to it. Finally the US and Israel have more blood on their hands than any country in South America, and it is a disgrace UN resolutions are blocked by the bully and its lackey.
Posted by veneztiger at 09/13/2009 @ 9:58pm
The right only asks Chavez to "pander" to rather reasonable wishes; namely, to hold free elections, allow free speech, end torture, stop funding global jihad and terrorism, stop censoring and repressing and brutally murdering and torturing and massacaring the oppressed people of Venezuela.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 9:52pm
utterly clueless, no evidence lies and innuendos, the only oppressed people in Venezuela are the mega wealthy who ran the country like their own little fiefdom, and now have to pay taxes and obey the law, since the majority took control.
That's the thing with the US, you only like democracy if your lackeys are "elected" and if not you instigate and support coups against them.
Posted by veneztiger at 09/13/2009 @ 10:05pm
So America should have backed the elections of Adolf Hitler and Hamas as well as supported Lenin and Stalin and Castro and Kim Il-Sung because a majority of Russians and Cubans and North Koreans wanted them to be their leaders in the name of democracy? The bromide of "a right to self-determination" for a people is nonsense. The meaning of that phrase is that a people have a right to choose a dictatorial form of government, and that free countries must recognize and respect it. One fallacious premise to this claim is that the majority within a country is always right, and that the minority's opinion is always wrong.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:10pm
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 9:52pm
"You're wrong. I've been a vocal opponent of war with Iran on these forums, yet I've consistently been accused by left liberals who post here of calling for a bombing of that country."
Perhaps, but those who are in favor of bombing Iran, will always use human rights as further justification for attacking Iran, as though bombing Iran and killing civilians will somehow solve the problem.
" Leftists from George Galloway to Nation thread poster IlyaKuryakin openly praise and express support and admiration for the Iranian regime."
Wrong. They support Iran's right to stand up to the US and exercise their right to self determination.
"So you do admit that radical feminists, atheists, and secularists on the left do ally themselves with the Taliban"
No becasue there is no evidence that they do.
"The right only asks Chavez to "pander" to rather reasonable wishes; namely, to hold free elections, allow free speech, end torture, stop funding global jihad and terrorism, stop censoring and repressing and brutally murdering and torturing and massacaring the oppressed people of Venezuela."
Just listen to the arrogance of this statement. The right demands that Venezuela hold free elections, yet the US supported a coup to overthrow the democratically elected leader. Are coups part of democracy?
There is free speech in Venezuela. Most news papers re owned by critics of Chavez. There is no toture in Venezuela. Venezuela has no connection whatsoever with global jihad and terrorism. There is no brutally murdering and torturing and massacring the oppressed people of Venezuela.
This is all right wing BS.
Posted by Shingo at 09/13/2009 @ 10:20pm
"Wrong. They support Iran's right to stand up to the US and exercise their right to self determination."
Actually George Galloway really has exprssed admiration for Iran, saying "Iran is a democracy!" and "I'm standing WITH the Ayatollah!" (he's also said "Saddam Hussein will live in history long after these dogs are forgotten!" on Syrian TV, which destroys his attempts to say his 1994 salute of Saddam was misunderstood).
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:24pm
"Perhaps, but those who are in favor of bombing Iran, will always use human rights as further justification for attacking Iran, as though bombing Iran and killing civilians will somehow solve the problem. "
Actually it would solve the problem, but would also create many other new problems.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:26pm
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:10pm
"So America should have backed the elections of Adolf Hitler and Hamas as well as supported Lenin and Stalin and Castro and Kim Il-Sung because a majority of Russians and Cubans and North Koreans wanted them to be their leaders in the name of democracy?"
Talk about conflation and hyperbole. Isn't it funny how the right demand free and open elections, but when the result isn't what they want, then elections are suddenly meaningless becasue even Hitler got elected?
"The bromide of "a right to self-determination" for a people is nonsense."
Only to fascists who believe that the right to self-determination only belongs to Western government and our allies.
"The meaning of that phrase is that a people have a right to choose a dictatorial form of government, and that free countries must recognize and respect it."
The same thing exists here to some extent. After all, we don't have free choice. We get to elect leaders from 2 parties, who have both formed a secretive pact as to how debates and elections are to be held. Challengers from other parties are shut out of the process entirely and denied any voice.
"One fallacious premise to this claim is that the majority within a country is always right, and that the minority's opinion is always wrong."
Wrong. The premise is that the majority get to choose their leader.
A hard concept for a wing nut to get their head around, I know.
Posted by Shingo at 09/13/2009 @ 10:27pm
Actually it would solve the problem, but would also create many other new problems.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:26pm
How does killing people who are subject to human rights abuses solve the problem?
This logic makes as much sense as destroying a village in order to save it.
Posted by Shingo at 09/13/2009 @ 10:30pm
"Wrong. They support Iran's right to stand up to the US and exercise their right to self determination."
"Their"? You mean the theocracy, not the Iranian people who despise it. Even if we accepted that the Iranian regime had co-equivalent legitimacy with other regimes (it doesn't), its "self-determination" does not and can not possibly include the right to fund suicide bombing in Israel, to try and assassinate novelists in OTHER PEOPLE'S COUNTRIES for "blasphemy" (like Salman Rushdie), and to orchestrate attacks such as the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:31pm
Actually George Galloway really has exprssed admiration for Iran, saying "Iran is a democracy!" and "I'm standing WITH the Ayatollah!" (he's also said "Saddam Hussein will live in history long after these dogs are forgotten!" on Syrian TV, which destroys his attempts to say his 1994 salute of Saddam was misunderstood).
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:24pm
False. He never said he stood with the Ayatollah.
Bush expressed admiration for Iran. So did Obama. Both stated that Iran was a great country.
Donald Rumsfeld also kissed the ass of Saddam on Reagan's behalf, and unlike Galloway, gave weapons to Saddam.
Posted by Shingo at 09/13/2009 @ 10:32pm
"Wrong. The premise is that the majority get to choose their leader."
But pure democracy is collectivist, anarchistic mob rule. If the majority choose to take away the rights of the minority, that IS democracy, but not freedom, which is why the US is a republic.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:35pm
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:31pm
"You mean the theocracy, not the Iranian people who despise it. "
The Iranian regime was put in place by a population movement, so they rule becasue the Iranian people have chosen them to lead.
"Even if we accepted that the Iranian regime had co-equivalent legitimacy with other regimes (it doesn't)"
By what measure have tou come to that conclusion?
"its "self-determination" does not and can not possibly include the right to fund suicide bombing in Israel"
Does the US have the right to fund terrorist attacks in Tehran?
"to try and assassinate novelists in OTHER PEOPLE'S COUNTRIES for "blasphemy" (like Salman Rushdie)"
But we and Israel do reserve the right to assassinate who ever we want. The Israelis tried to assassinate the Turkish leader because he yelled at Peres.
"and to orchestrate attacks such as the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia"
They didn't. I do love how the right wing keep changing who they feel like blaming on the bombing of the Khobar Towers. One day it's OBL, then it's Bin Laden, then it's Iran, then it's Bin Laden again.
How many buildings in Iraq do you think we bombed?
Posted by Shingo at 09/13/2009 @ 10:38pm
"Bush expressed admiration for Iran."
Not for the Iranian GOVERNMENT. Technically, Obama did defend the Iranian regime by continually referring to "THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC of Iran" when he complimented it, but Bush only praised the Iranian people for their long list of contributions to technology and civilization and society, such as the first-ever declaration of inalienable human rights, which originated long ago in Ancient Persia.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:39pm
But pure democracy is collectivist, anarchistic mob rule. If the majority choose to take away the rights of the minority, that IS democracy, but not freedom, which is why the US is a republic.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:35pm
How can majority rule be anarchistic?
Talk about a contradiction!! Winguttia has set in again.
You just said the right want open election in Venezuela, but you think elections are bad. Confused boy.
Posted by Shingo at 09/13/2009 @ 10:41pm
"The Iranian regime was put in place by a population movement, so they rule becasue the Iranian people have chosen them to lead."
But they don't want them to lead ANYMORE, so why don't they give up power in the face of widespread protest and dissent as the Shah did when faced with the same?
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:41pm
"How can majority rule be anarchistic?"
Anarchy is mob rule.
Elections in which a slim majority can vote to take away the rights of the minority is mob rule, and a collectivist, leftist perversion of liberty.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:43pm
But they don't want them to lead ANYMORE, so why don't they give up power in the face of widespread protest and dissent as the Shah did when faced with the same?
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:41pm
There are millions of Americans who want Congress to be cleaned out and started from scratch too. Why don't Congress give up power in the face of widespread protest and dissent?
Simple. They have power and want to keep it.
The Shah fled for his life. He didn't give up power, he had it taken from him.
Posted by Shingo at 09/13/2009 @ 10:46pm
"There are millions of Americans who want Congress to be cleaned out and started from scratch too. Why don't Congress give up power in the face of widespread protest and dissent?"
Americans could vote out every single member of Congress in power now if they wanted to come next election.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:48pm
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:43pm
"Anarchy is mob rule."
Anarchy is resistance to the majority.
"Elections in which a slim majority can vote to take away the rights of the minority is mob rule, and a collectivist, leftist perversion of liberty"
Yeah, just like the 2000 elections where black people were denied the right to vote.
Posted by Shingo at 09/13/2009 @ 10:49pm
"Anarchy is resistance to the majority."
What?
You are either extraordinarily stupid, or a Nazi fascist totalitarian.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:51pm
Americans could vote out every single member of Congress in power now if they wanted to come next election.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:48pm
Not really.
Lobbyists might be able to, but the incumbency in Congress is higher than even the communist party in the Soviet Union.
Posted by Shingo at 09/13/2009 @ 10:51pm
You are either extraordinarily stupid, or a Nazi fascist totalitarian.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:51pm
We already established that you are the fascist.
As for stupidity, that's an easy one to prove.
Anarchy is defines by lawlessness and disorder. Laws are created and established by a majority, and order is based on the laws established by the majority.
Anarchy is defined by the absence of any form of political authority. 2. Political disorder and confusion. 3. Absence of any cohesive principle, such as a common standard or purpose.
1. Political authority comes with majority approval. 2. There is no confusion when a majority elect a leadership. 3. Majority rule means there is an abundance of cohesion, standard and purpose.
Looks like you are not only a fascist, but extraordinarily stupid as well.
As though we didn't already know.
Posted by Shingo at 09/13/2009 @ 11:00pm
Not for the Iranian GOVERNMENT. Technically, Obama did defend the Iranian regime by continually referring to "THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC of Iran" when he complimented it, but Bush only praised the Iranian people for their long list of contributions to technology and civilization and society, such as the first-ever declaration of inalienable human rights, which originated long ago in Ancient Persia.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:39pm
The Islamic republic of Iran, is a term that the Iranian people decided on.
Posted by Shingo at 09/13/2009 @ 11:03pm
The government should have a monopoly on the use of physical force and should only use it to retaliate against citizens who directly or indirectly (say, through fraud) initiate its use in violation of the rights of others. Anyone else who employs it has no right to do so save for in self-defense in order to defend their own rights and liberties.
In an anarchy, anyone and everyone can use any kind of physical force at any time against any one for any reason at whim without any retallitaion save for extrajudicial attacks by vigilantes. Anarchy inherently leads to despotism. It means that whoever can physically overpower another person through violent force can legally take away that person's rights. If a majority can physically use force to combat and enslave a minority, it is the right and moral obligation of the minority to resist by any means neccessary. You just said that they should accept domination by the slim majority if it overpowers them. You are a fascist and a Nazi and a collectivist and a barbarian and a tribalist and an idiot and a lunatic and a fool.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 11:12pm
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 11:12pm
"The government should have a monopoly on the use of physical force and should only use it to retaliate against citizens who directly or indirectly (say, through fraud) initiate its use in violation of the rights of others. "
True. Saddam used this as a rationale to BTW.
"In an anarchy, anyone and everyone can use any kind of physical force at any time against any one for any reason at whim without any retallitaion save for extrajudicial attacks by vigilantes."
This is not the case however in the case of a majority rule, because a majority government is empowered by the electoral process to assume exclusive rights to the use of force.
In an anarchy, there is no need or desire for an election or regard for majority rule.
What you are confusing is anarchy with democracy without liberty, which I agree is just as necessary, however democracy itself is a anathema to anarchy.
I never said that anyone should accept domination by anyone, and this lie of your can easily be demonstrated by the fact that I have never used the word domination.
However, the minority do have to respect and abide by the laws created by a majority government. That's the way it is here and throughout the world.
Seeign as tyou are the onel who would bomb Iran because of their human rights record, it's clear you are the fascist.
Youare also an anti Semite, calling someone you know to be Jewish, a Nazi.
Right wingers are the most prone to tribalism, so again, you are projecting.
And seeing as you belong to a fringe minority, it also stands to reason that you are the idiot, lunatic, fool.
Posted by Shingo at 09/13/2009 @ 11:23pm
"However, the minority do have to respect and abide by the laws created by a majority government."
Not always. That is why the US is a republic, not a democracy.
If the law of the majority is that the minority has no rights at all, the minority should resist.
You are a self-hating Jew.
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 11:28pm
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 11:28pm
"Not always. That is why the US is a republic, not a democracy."
Being a Republic is no guarantee of anything either. Look at the wingnut tea baggers and their derangement over the fact that there is a black Democrat in the White House. They simply can't get their heads around it, and they're calling for armed revolt and secession.
"If the law of the majority is that the minority has no rights at all, the minority should resist."
Agreed.
"You are a self-hating Jew."
And you are an anti Semitic Islamophobe.
Posted by Shingo at 09/13/2009 @ 11:34pm
The media was biased against Iran in almost all matters, especially on nuclear matters and election.The same media forget that Iran is a signatory with IAEA , and they have the right to use the nuclear energy for energy needs.They avoid the news about the Israeli nukes.Same same type of biased news on the elections also.The right wing media keep mum about the election fraud in Afghanistan.
Posted by Dastu11 at 09/14/2009 @ 09:12am
News today is that Russia is going to help Venezuela develop nuclear, "energy," the new euphemism or orwellian newspeak for nuclear weapons. Chazez and Putin are both dictators who share a lot of interests including hatred of the United States and all it stands for. Chavez is a revolution exporting dictator in the the manner of Fidel Castro and in the same way a represser of freedom in his own country. These are not good guys and their alliance is not good for America or for freedom speech, freedom of assembly, or any freedom around the world.
Posted by newsbrowser at 09/14/2009 @ 11:42am
So America should have backed the elections of Adolf Hitler and Hamas as well as supported Lenin and Stalin and Castro and Kim Il-Sung because a majority of Russians and Cubans and North Koreans wanted them to be their leaders in the name of democracy?
what right do the US have to interfere ? None, and as soon as your Govt. gets that then the world will be a safer, better place. But as long as corporations run your Govt. for their benefit it wont change.
The bromide of "a right to self-determination" for a people is nonsense.
wow what arrogance but not surprising reading the rest of the nonsense you post
The meaning of that phrase is that a people have a right to choose a dictatorial form of government, and that free countries must recognize and respect it.
Countries have the right to select whatever Govts they want
One fallacious premise to this claim is that the majority within a country is always right, and that the minority's opinion is always wrong.
only in your sad mind because you are the minority
Posted by rightwingnutcase at 09/13/2009 @ 10:10pm
I pity your shortsightedness and narrow mindedness, I hope you don't have children and are filling their heads full of your hate !
Posted by veneztiger at 09/14/2009 @ 3:17pm
News today is that Russia is going to help Venezuela develop nuclear, "energy," the new euphemism or orwellian newspeak for nuclear weapons.
Posted by newsbrowser at 09/14/2009 @ 11:42am
Russia has never helped any country develop nuclear weapons.
Chazez and Putin are no mor dictators that Bush or Obama. Wingnuts like to call them dictators becasue they don't kiss our ass and take orders from Washington.
America ceased to have anything to do with freedom a century ago.
Posted by Shingo at 09/15/2009 @ 03:10am
America ceased to have anything to do with freedom a century ago
Posted by Shingo at 09/15/2009 @ 03:10am
the only free people in the US are ones with money, money is freedom there, tell someone struggling to put food on their table or pay for medications how free they are.
I used to laugh when I'd see those lame bumper stickers
"Freedom isn't Free"
Yeah that's so right, if you can afford it you can have freedom there.
Finally when you refer to the USA don't call it America as people in the rest of the Americas take offence at your pomposity !
Posted by veneztiger at 09/15/2009 @ 12:12pm