.. or just feckless[1]? All three?
-=*=-
One can use words like the above on various 'targets.'
What started this particular round was an article cited by Bob Wall (g'day) in a comment on my 'You must be Joe King!' - Sy Hersh on the bombing of a Syrian facility by Israel last year.
The story is once again in the news[2,3] - but by someone's choice; my suspicion is: it's a psyop. (What else, and add the usual qualifiers: filthy, lying etc.)
The title of the Hersh article is "An Act Of War." Which is correct, an aggressive act of war by Israel (possibly, most probably, with US assistance) against Syria.
The first thing to note about 'aggressive acts of war' is that they should be punished by hanging all perpetrators by the neck until dead. And yes, that means GWBush&CO, along with any poodles and lap-dogs. Note also that the US armed forces, aka the Pentagon, are not innocent order-followers, they are in it right up to their dishonourable necks. Actually, lower lips: "Don't make a wave!"
The next thing to note about 'aggressive acts of war' is that they are forbidden by the UN charter. Q: Where's the UN on this? A: Missing in action. (As Bob also points out someone from the UN did complain, about possible 'destruction of evidence.') Back to the 'mainline' UN, it was said by some smart-arse in the run-up to Iraq (illegal invasion thereof): "The UN is as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike." (Possibly paraphrased, or as a chocolate teapot.) Q: Why is this? A: Because the UN has been corrupted - mainly by USrael.
As I said in my 'You must be Joe King,' USrael is the combined entity formed from the US and its M/I/C-plex plus Israel and its I/J/Z-plex, 'melded' by the neoCon cabal, say, and M-W's Israel Lobby etc., and is the worst criminal/terrorist entity the world has ever seen, and is ever likely to see.
The individual components of USrael have been more or less (criminally!) rampaging across the world since before, from and after a) the (illegal!) A-bombing of Japan and b) the (illegal!) establishment of Israel. One says 'illegal' vis-à-vis the A-bombing since a) it simply was not necessary (despite any such claim) and b) the 'targets' were overwhelmingly civilian. Again as still, the (ugly) 'collaterals.' 'Ugly,' because were talking about mass-murdering largely innocent civilians, and 'illegal' vis-à-vis Israel because the UN cannot simultaneously be a) the source of legality and b) corrupted by directly, repeatedly contravening its authority - as Israel does, both. 60 years long, with no end in sight.
In case it needs another mention, both the US and Israel are conducting wars of aggression, the US in Iraq (murder for oil) and Israel against the former legal owner/occupiers of (now sadly mostly ex-)Palestine, murder for land and water. In case it needs yet another, separate mention, the reason why all this has largely been disguised is that the 'news' we get via the venal MSM is polluted, heavily polluted, by propaganda. (What else, and add the usual qualifiers: filthy, lying etc.)
-=*=-
Q: Does any of this matter? A: IMHO, yes. US claims to be 'the land of the free (etc)' and Israel claims to be 'the only ME democracy.' Both are, effectively, lies, when one considers that even if their elections were 'fair and free' (demonstrably not, see discussion elsewhere with special attention to venal MSM), no matter who gets elected, the wars of aggression do and will continue. (Unless we finally stop them, that is.)
Then, many other 'indicators' have moved 'into the red:'
1. The most obvious/contentious is the oil-price, Murdoch 'promised' us that invading Iraq would keep the oil-price low, this claim is itself remarkable as it's the same form of argument that Howard used vis-à-vis interest rates. The oil-price has gone from mid- to high-20s in 2002/3 to well over $100 now. Both claims were/are hubristic, as were "slam-dunk" and "cake-walk," etc. What was not hubristic but rather outright criminal was "Shockin' Whore," a truly precedent-setting infamy.
2. House-prices (across the Anglo-world) have doubled, if not redoubled since the mid-90s, say.
3. Food prices are now sky-rocketing, grains etc. Japan has run out'a butter(!), and in NZ the price for some dairy is up 50%(!) Last night on AusBC TV news, they showed film of food riots.
4. Oil continues to be burnt as if there's no tomorrow (keep it up, there won't be.)
5. Ditto coal.
6. Ice is melting. The Arctic sea is now navigable, Antarctic ice-shelfs are disintegrating, most glaciers are in retreat.
All this screams at me: "No more of the same!" We need a new plan; we need urgent and effective action. Yet, when I try to point this out (at some other place, say) I'm assaulted by nay-sayers whose basic premise must be "No change needed. Just stay tuned to your TV-soma, relaxed and comfortable."
Oh, yeah; relaxed and comfortable, while our once jewel-like planet burns up - or down, or wherever (the hell!) the excess CO2-caused greedastrophe® is dragging us.
-=*end*=-
PS To the antidestinationists: I only hope some agent (your (mythical!) g*d[4], say) will help you, save you; you're obviously too stupid to help yourselves.
Ref(s):
[1] feckless adj. 1 feeble, ineffective. 2 unthinking, irresponsible. [Scots feck from effeck var. of *effect] [POD]
[2] Also cited by Bob: Cheney camp 'behind Syrian reactor claim'
[3] AusBC justin: N Korea helped Syria build bombed reactor: US
[4] myth n. 1 traditional story usu. involving supernatural or imaginary persons and embodying popular ideas on natural or social phenomena etc. 2 such narratives collectively. 3 widely held but false notion. 4 fictitious person, thing, or idea. 5 allegory (Platonic myth). mythical adj. mythically adv. [Greek muthos] [POD]
mythology n. (pl. -ies) 1 body of myths. 2 the study of myths. mythological adj. mythologize v. (also -ise) (-zing or -sing). [Greek: related to *myth] [ibid.]
As is often the case, a bit'a 'dictionary roulette:'
myxomatosis n. viral disease of rabbits. [Greek muxa mucus] [ibid.]
Comment: As in a pox on criminals everywhere - and add the usual qualifiers: filthy, lying etc.
2008/04/27
hapless, helpless ...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
G'day Phil, Scott Ritter on the illegality of the Israeli attack against the Syrian facility and the Bush administration's abandoning of international law. Even if they were building a reactor.
"Zionism’s propaganda weapon of last resort".
For the sake of discussion, let’s suppose that sometime in the foreseable future Iran does have nuclear weapons. Would it then go for a nuclear first strike against Israel? The answer, I assert, is no. Never! So what really is all the Zionist and American neo-con fuss about?
Perhaps without realising that he has let a great, big cat out of the bag, Joel Gilbert has provided the answer. He says (my empasis added): “Even without attacking Israel, the mere capabilty of Iranian missiles to lay waste to Tel Aviv would create a ‘strategic umbrella,’ preventing Israel from using its superior strategic assets in a conventional war. With Israeli missiles neutralised, Muslim countries could overwhelm Israel with their superior numbers, conventional armor and short range missiles.”
And that’s the real point. Israel’s military leaders and their political yes-men don’t believe, and never have believed, that Iran, if it possessed nuclear weapons, would unleash them in a first strike against the Zionist state. The real problem for its leaders is that the moment Israel ceased to be the only nuclear-armed power in the region, would be the moment it lost its ability to impose its will on the region. And actually the world.
I'll be a spoiler and post the concluding paras:
On the subject of Joel Gilbert’s vision of Israel one day being overwhelmed, I recall the words spoken to me many years ago by Golda Meir, Mother Israel, when she was prime minister. At a point during an interview I did with her for the BBC’s Panorama programme, I interrupted her to say: “Prime Minister, I want to be sure I understand what you’re saying… You are saying that if ever Israel was in danger of being defeated on the battlefield, it would be prepared to take the region and the whole world down with it?”
As stated on the second page of Waiting for the Apocalypse, the Prologue to Volume One of my book Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, Golda replied, without the shortest of pauses for reflection, and in the gravel voice that could charm or intimidate American Presidents according to need, “Yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying.”
Within an hour of that interview being transmitted at eight o’clock on a Monday evening, The Times (pre-Murdoch and not then a cheer leader for Zionism) had changed its lead editorial. Its new one quoted what Golda had said to me and then added its own opinion - “We had better believe her.”
I did and still do.
Not forgetting those of influence in and on the GOP and the Bush administration who believe that the best of times is the end of times.
Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die!
Humans are too stupid and greedy to make a peaceful world.
Cheers.
distracted ...
.. to the point of distraught (looping.)
-=*=-
G'day Bob,
I quote from your comment material:
...I interrupted her to say: "Prime Minister, I want to be sure I understand what you’re saying... You are saying that if ever Israel was in danger of being defeated on the battlefield, it would be prepared to take the region and the whole world down with it?"
...Golda replied, without the shortest of pauses for reflection, and in the gravel voice that could charm or intimidate American Presidents according to need, "Yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying."
[Me, note:] Not so much a threat, more like a promise.
...NYT: "We had better believe her."
[Me:] If that's all true - and, of course, I've no doubts whatsoever on that score, then that potentially makes Israel THE BIGGEST, MOST DANGEROUS SUICIDE-BOMBER threat of *all* time.
Which rather destroys Israel's (and Lobby's) snooty insouciance, I would'a thunk. Plus a whole lot'a other ramifications...
"Y'dunno what you've got 'till it's gone..."
Bring back the cold war!
(President Putin's replacement Medvedev, Hu Jintao - & Ahmadinejad better believe it.)
G'day Phil and David, close to the mark David - but we must keep trying to part the curtains and hope people can escape from their tribal prejudices (us good, them bad) and see the possibilities. Only through a determined search for the truth behind the curtains of spin is there hope.
Phil has highlighted Golda Meir's comments and rightly so as they illustrate a frightening arrogance. Recalling this article from an earlier thread their is likely to be more myth (to put it politely) than truth underlying Israel's claims to Palestine (or parts thereof). Yet, what could eventuate from believing the myth?
¡no peace please ...
.. we're Israelis.
.. Make mine a double! - a typical Yank.
-=*=-
G'day Bob,
Two things:
1) Syria, the raid. (Don't you just hate that word? I mean, raid? Really bad vibes, that.) Here's an interesting report by Daniel Levy over at TPM Cafe, an extract:
«... and "low confidence" that plutonium from it was for nuclear weapons... Because other elements of a weapons program, such as a plutonium reprocessing plant, had not been detected, ...»
[5 Comments on the Syria-Israel-North Korea Revelations]
There seems little doubt now, that the (illegal!) Israeli strike on Syria, in truth an act of war, did take place, but what was hit remains a mystery. On the one hand, it beggars belief that someone would build a reactor to produce Plutonium - for which there is no known further processing-plant. On the other hand, say Syria built a bomb, and used it? Instant retaliatory annihilation, see next item. But one needn't accept my word, see the whole article.
But (again), before we get to the next item, another quote:
«... But the current administration has no vision and no will to support a peace process... perhaps with a future administration ...»
[ibid]
In other words, peace - perhaps - someday - but not at this time.
2) As a follow up to the above, and to Ms Meir's threat of Armageddon[1] quoted in your "last resort" citation, I'd like to allude to the (shameful!) sham which is foisted upon us - essentially by criminals, relayed to us Oh, so uncritically by the (venal!) MSM, namely the supposed, so-called ME 'peace process' itself. It occurred to me that any 'process' which has run now for the best (actually, worst) part of 60 years can't be much of a process at all - either that, or it is being 'run' by totally inept idiots. This quote from a article also earlier cited by you:
«The real Zionist vision does not recognize any maps. It is a vision of a state without borders - a state that expands at all times according to its demographic, military and political power.»
[Uri Avnery/Hidden Agenda]
Hmmm. They did not teach me about this at school, and I do not recall ever hearing even a hint about it on the AusBC. Funny, eh? Then:
«Clearly, the settlements, too, are in reality only a pretext. Something more profound is causing the government - and the entire political system - to reject peace.
That is the hidden agenda.»
[ibid.]
Ah! That explains it, then. Secret Israeli business = reject peace!
No wonder I didn't hear about it on the AusBC.
What we are eternally bombarded with via the AusBC however, is some Fred or other "trying to kick-start the ME 'peace process.'"
Did I mention AusBC bias? As a part of a lying, venal MSM?
-=*end=-
Ref(s):
[1] An oldie, but still a goodie:
Knock, knock!
Who's there?
Armageddon
Armageddon who?
Armageddon out'a here...
"Shockin' Wh... " - err, who? Perhaps better here: "Shocked, but hardly awed."
G'day Phil, webs of deceit are spun, aided and abetted, either willingly or through pressure and threats. But we are staring into an abyss.
I have, as you are aware, made a lot of material available elsewhere and could the Zionist apparatchiks beat me face to face and make their case openly and honestly? No. So they operate behind the scenes. Too many cave in. Courage and honesty are urgently required but is, sadly, too often lacking. Perhaps some people think they have something to lose. But do they realise what can be lost?
We do what we can.
Post a Comment