JackRiddler
JackRiddler's JournalNice work everybody!
I mean it.
You were an infinitessimal part of a general revulsion against Summers that has now forced his self-withdrawal.
It's a minor victory - the banksters still rule, nothing will change. The same policies will be put forth no matter which anonymous technocrats sit in the key portfolios. That will be so until we put together a much bigger uprising than making fun of Summers. But it shows that infinitessimals can accumulate into a real effect.
This week, the power elite don't get to glorify a walking representation of their absolute contempt for the people.
Too bad the same response didn't hit Kissinger.
Yay! Let's make shit up!
Any evidence that Snowden provided "China" anything that he didn't provide to all of us by making NSA files available to all? No, you don't.
"All of us" includes the US taxpayers, who are paying for this massive violation of the rights of every human on the planet. They should know what they are paying for, and the one who tells them should be seen as the good guy.
How about I don't give a fuck what Snowden supposedly provided to "China"? (I expect China would already know. This discussion reminds me a bit of the Rosenberg case, by the way.)
How about I just look at how the NSA and its corporate contractors are in inexcusable violation of the Constitution and all basics of human rights? How about I acknowledge that without Snowden, I'd know this (since it's obvious), but with Snowden, I can actually show this?
Post your preemptive Summers defense here.
Why wait for the sophistry until after the fact? Somewhere, someone's preparing talking points to rationalize the nomination of Larry Summers. Why can't we?!
I think he's pretty much the lone human* on the planet with the experience required to run the Federal Reserve, don't you? Any other choice would be irresponsible.
===
* or whatever he is.
Cliches about the French Revolution...
Also Milgram. Showed nothing of the sort. 2/3 obeyed authority figures to commit horrific acts if manipulated into doing so, but they did not become tyrants as you have it. And more than 1/3 refused to obey - enough to stop any system if it's actually applicable to real world.
The "terror" is largely in the imagination of the reaction that eventually took hold. There were worse years under the reaction, actually. In the year of the "terror," as it was labeled later, France was under attack. It was under the Jacobins that the war was turned around.
Also, people are not wolves. Wolves are not typical of all mammals, let alone the primates to whom we are closer, which also vary greatly and are not always driven by hard male alpha figures as you suggest.
So excuse me if I don't think the rest of your reasoning is any better grounded.
Why doesn't Kerry meet with Assad?
Reasons Kerry Should Meet With Assad1) Assad is less of a criminal than Kissinger. That would be true even if Assad personally ordered the sarin gas bombing of August 21st, a hundred times over. Not that the junior realpolitik fanatics around here care about such mushy considersations, god no. But surely there's PR value in meeting someone who is less of a criminal than Kissinger?
2) Assad has decades of experience in international politics! Not quite as many as Kissinger, but Assad has demonstrated he is worthy of Master Henry by playing the game better than any other dictator who has found himself on the U.S. regime change list. I'm sure he's got a lot to teach.
3) Assad is close to Putin! He's closer to Putin than even Kissinger, I hear. In fact, he's closer to the Syrian government than anyone! A deal with him fixes the works.
So, now that Kerry has met Kissinger -- on September 11th, 40th anniversary of the Pinochet coup, and a little more than 40 years after Nixon/Kissinger ordered the Christmastime destruction of Hanoi -- why not meet Assad face to face?
It can't be that saving face is any kind of consideration? After meeting Kissinger, is there any face left to save?
Curious. Anyone care to defend Kissinger?
Meaning, the part where Kerry met with the fugitive war criminal.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023649956
Because I'm curious if there's an argument in favor, and if so, why not? Is this to be an ignored reality?
The Serial Killer of Nations
Why? Why? On September 11th? On the 40th anniversary of the U.S.-engineered coup in Chile under the aegis of the war criminal Kissinger? The same Kissinger who with Nixon extended the U.S. invasion of Indochina by five years, meaning millions of deaths more -- alongside the same Kerry who opposed that war, the man who didn't want to ask anyone to "be the last one to die for a lie"?
Why?
Are we seriously expected to be so blind to the messaging, to the history, that we see none of this? Really, is there anyone here who wants to claim these two men and their handlers and packagers don't understand the significance of any meeting with Kissinger, don't know it's September 11th, don't know it's the same beast from the Vietnam and Pinochet era?
What does this monster among history's greatest monsters have to offer today? Who here cares to argue this man is less of a war criminal than Assad, less deserving of the tribunal and the noose reserved for the worst humanity has to offer?
And are we not supposed to see continuity here? This has nothing to do with the present office-holder as anyone exceptional in the progress of the U.S. military empire. This is business as usual for the Serial Killer of Nations.
Shame on you! Shame on you!
Kerry seeks Kissinger's advice before historic Syria talks with Russia
www.dailymail.co.uk
"Kissinger, who took on the Russians in the late 60s and early 70s, has previously slammed Obama for asking Congress to okay military" action...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2417703/John-Kerry-seeks-advice-Henry-Kissinger-historic-Syria-talks-Russia-aging-Cold-Warrior-wants-Assads-country-broken-pieces.html
At the risk of sounding like...
those assholes who say stuff like "Go to Russia," "Go to Iran," etc.
Like most flag-waving Americans, clearly you could have stood a few tours of service... as a Vietnamese or Chilean or Salvadoran or Cuban or Iraqi civilian on the receiving end of the international serial killer's perpetual wars for peace.
Of course the truth can't hurt if you take the U.S. provincial view that of all nations on earth, only yours has shit that doesn't stink and bombs that don't murder.
"The greatest purveyor of violence on earth today is my government." Who said it? How convenient that he's dead, so that everyone can celebrate him. If he were alive today do you think he'd be saying anything different?
Completely and utterly delusional!
My friend Jenna Pope puts it thusly on Facebook. There's more to it - a lot of complexity to the situation - but the relevant truth is incredibly simple. If you've watched the serial killer of nations at work, are you really going to make excuses for its latest proposal of murder?
A small amount of people have been saying they agree with the possibility of a US military strike in Syria. Perhaps intervention in some way is needed, but do you really want the US - a country that is known for beginning wars based off of lies, and committing atrocities during these "wars" - to get in the middle of this with a military strike? There has already been enough suffering and death in Syria... I do not wish for them to now have to deal with another government who looks to wage war and kill for their own benefit.
The relevant truth is often naive...
My friend Jenna Pope puts it thusly on Facebook. There's more to it - a lot of complexity to the situation - but the relevant truth is incredibly simple. If you've watched the serial killer of nations at work, are you really going to make excuses for its latest proposal of murder?
Anybody who thinks the US attacks other countries in order to help the people living there is completely and utterly delusional. The US government doesn't give a fuck about it's own people, many of whom are living in poverty while just a few control the majority of the wealth... so what makes you think they would care about people living overseas?
A small amount of people have been saying they agree with the possibility of a US military strike in Syria. Perhaps intervention in some way is needed, but do you really want the US - a country that is known for beginning wars based off of lies, and committing atrocities during these "wars" - to get in the middle of this with a military strike? There has already been enough suffering and death in Syria... I do not wish for them to now have to deal with another government who looks to wage war and kill for their own benefit.
Profile Information
Member since: 2002Number of posts: 24,979
