HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Sept. 12, 2006 Reference Brooks watch part 2. Thomas Keyes is at it again, trying to cloud the issue with legalisms. The Iraqi President Chalabi although an Iraqi citizen, according to Keyes, is some how less fit to hold public office than one who had gained experience under Sadam Hussein. He goes on to state that Chalabi is currently under investigation for bank fraud in Jordan by several US agencies which itself is kind of a nebulous statement. Which agencies? The UCLA, the Democrat national committee, maybe one that Keyes or some of his friends head. Wasn't Carl Rove also under investigation for leaking CIA documents regarding the status of a covert agent? And how many times has Bush himself come under investigation, all of which turned out to be bogus, which, like the charges levelled at Chalibi, were very damaging as his poll numbers now suggest. And here we go again, another bout of anti -Semitism. 'Chalabi provided information to under Secretary Douglas Feith , a Jewish Zionist and partner in an Israeli law firm'(My italics)states Keyes. He describes William Kristol of the Weekly Standard and Judith Miller of the New York Times as also being ' Jewish Zionists'. Zionist is a term commonly used to describe those wishing for a Jewish homeland, this desire reaching hysterical proportions following WWII; perverted by the government controlled Arab press and by Arab governments needing an external enemy in order to distract its own people from the miserable conditions under which they live. He then goes on to imply that those of Jewish extraction are somehow tainted. He uses the term 'Zionist' in much the same of way as liberals use the term' neo con', and 'the so called war on terror ' in order to denigrate conservatives. Maybe their were no al Qaeda in Iraq prior to the invasion, (which in light of present events seems hard to believe) but regardless, military intelligence is privy to information off limits to the press and no doubt after weighty discussion regarding intelligence ,strategy, operations, logistics etc and taking into account the geopolitical situation, they made their decision. It may not have been a perfect decision and the plan may not have been perfect but as Bismarck stated 'no plan survives contact with the enemy'. When grand strategy is decided such things as proof of WMD being beyond a reasonable doubt, or even the within the realm of the overwhelming evidentiary burden, is not a factor. Military law operates under different criteria to that of criminal and civil law. The war can be criticized but surely if you are going to criticize something shouldn’t you have more to offer than a store front lawyer's nit picking regarding procedure? Most liberals refuse to even open any work on military matters, never mind to familiarize themselves with their subject. They seem to have an automatic aversion to all things military. Their attitude seems to be 'violence is okay so long as it is perpetrated by the likes of Che Guevara or by Fidel Castro, you know you have to wear a slanted black beret, your hair long, and oh yeah don’t shave too much'.
Does Thomas suffer from anti Semitism, a disease of
the mind where one blames ones own problems upon those
of Jewish extraction. It is an illness almost as old
as civilization on a par with confusion regarding
sexual identity, mystism, and the blaming of 'the
system 'for ones own failings. Thomas states that he
is a writer, the author of two books (unpublished). I
confess that I would not be one of his customers even
if he did get published. He writes in a shallow
vindictive style displaying a sad lack of intellectual
depth. I get the impression that at any moment he is
going to wax poetical as he describes the cute
racoons tumbling along his back yard fence and then
take a swing at the military. I suspect that his
efforts are directed at those who do not share his
political beliefs which funnily enough seem to
coincide with those of the Democrats, from whom of
course he distances himself as any good liberal
practitioner of obfuscation would. Thomas seems to
spend a lot of time writing for Useless Knowledge
Mag. If he is a writer doesn’t he have other
commitments? According to a rough estimate I figure
that he supplies almost 25% of their material which
at this time is non paying. What are you Thomas a
devils advocate hired by Useless Knowledge? or is this
the first time you have seen yourself in print?
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
