How to Be Inhuman Reply

reason.com
Ronald Bailey

Biotechnology holds the promise of some day allowing people to enhance themselves and their children using pharmaceuticals or genetic interventions. This prospect is welcomed by some, but causes a great deal of anxiety in many people: Are there enhancements whose benefits would come at the price of our humanity?

The President’s Council on Bioethics worries that people who choose to use biotech enhancements would somehow lose themselves: The Council’s report “Beyond Therapy” warns “we risk ‘turning into someone else,’ confounding the identity we have acquired through natural gift cultivated by genuinely lived experiences, alone and with others.” Liberal bioethicist George Annas from Boston University is pushing for a global treaty that would ban all inheritable modifications to any person’s genetic makeup. He favors such a treaty because he believes that “species-altering genetic engineering [is] a potential weapon of mass destruction, and [that] makes the unaccountable genetic engineer a potential bioterrorist.”

More…

Updated News Digest September 28, 2008 3

Quote of the Week:

“Ass usual, the election is a popularity contest run for dimwits. And to elect a dimwit, which is worse. We’ve got this woman Palin, an angry Betty Crocker, absolutely unqualified for the presidency in case McCain goes tits up. She’s ignorant of foreign affairs, at best moderately bright, a whackjob Christian, and a “pit bull.” This is said admiringly.

Oh good. An aggressive ignorant dull-witted-pit bull. How is that better than a passive ignorant torpid pit bull?

Oh god, McCain. A senescent replica of Bush who says he wants to stay in Iraq a hundred years. Actually, the idea has its appeal. Why doesn’t he go there and get a start? A perfect match for Palin, another pugnacious dunce, bottom of his class in boat school – the Naval Academy, I mean. He says he plans to “confront Russia.” Now there’s a plan. It seems that American policy is to make enemies of everyone who has oil or nuclear weapons. Or doesn’t.

Meanwhile the Pentagon prepares for war with China. Is it something in the water?

Next we have Obama, whose only qualification is that he’s maybe a tad less bellicose than the rest of these Oprah Neanderthals. His veep, Biden, is a grey nonentity, a cipher with no characteristics. Well, that’s better than the other three. I mean, he’s as close to no candidate as we can come.

What are we doing? The country has gone nuts. If a giant squirrel began collecting us and storing us for winter, I’d understand. Three hundred million people, and these factory rejects the best we can do?”

                                                                                                                                  -Fred Reed

The Cause of Gasoline Shortages by Gary North

Winston Churchill: Stalin-Loving Tyrant 

Militarized Cops William Norman Grigg interviewed by Lew Rockwell

China Wants a New World Currency

Banksters Mug America by Jim Quinn

It’s Time for Cold War Revisionism by Dan Spielberg

The Meaning of the Historic Ron Paul Press Conference by David Barsallis

Anarchy in Our Heads by Manuel Lora

The Public Schools Have An Agenda (and it’s not education) by Jim Fedako

Should the U.S. Really Murder Persians? by William Norman Grigg

The Murdering FDA Bill Sardi interviewed by Lew Rockwell

Ron Paul Takes Bob Barr’s Advice (Barr Shoots Himself in the Ass)

The American Empire: Too Big To Fail? by Justin Raimondo

Ashes of Empire by Philip Giraldi

The American Left Is Also Claimed by AIPCA by Philip Weiss

Whose Iraq Predictions Have Come True? by Ron Paul

Calling Gitmo What It Is by Aaron Glantz

Downhill in Afghanistan by Jonathan Power

Bill Clinton’s Imperialist Legacy by Stephen Chapman

Lesser of Two Evils? No Thanks. by Daniel Bein

Amnesty for the Stupid? by Pat Buchanan

GOP Turkeys by Paul Gottfried

Where the WASP’s Aren’t by Austin Bramwell

Best Satire Ever   from Social Memory Complex

Served and Protected Once More by Rad Geek

A Death Row Visit with Troy A. Davis by Patrick Dyer

Hezbollah and the Palestinians by Franklin Lamb

Oppose Barack Obama? How Dare Thee! by Joshua Frank

The Bailout Will Kill the Dollar by Dave Lindorff

The Twin Terrors of the Holy Land by Robert Weitzel

A New Cold War Comes to Latin America by John Ross

The Yippie Show by Jesse Walker

Russia Is Back by Thomas N. Naylor

The Bad Boy of the Philadelphia Constitutional Convention by Thomas N. Naylor

No Child Left Behind by Sid S. Glassner

Economic 9-11 Hits Wall Street

Decline and Fall: It’s the Autumn of Our Old Republic by Justin Raimondo

Impeachable Offenses by Bruce Fein

The Pakistan Dilemma by Charles Pena

The Election Means Almost Nothing by Lew Rockwell

Intellectual “Property” by Stephan Kinsella

The Blood of Dresden by Kurt Vonnegut

Terrified Oligarchs: A Renewal of Class Struggle?

Has Deregulation Sired Fascism? by Paul Craig Roberts

Libertarianism Shrugged by Kevin DeAnna

Who Is Vladimir Putin? by Matthew Roberts

Bosses Beware! by Larry Gambone

Welcome to the Occupied States of America

Palestinians Under the Occupation by Khalil Nakhleh

Man Arrested for Farting on Cop

Bush, the Destroyer by Lew Rockwell

The First Fascist President by Ralph Raico

The Bailout Reader

Iran: And the Beat Goes On by Justin Raimondo

Banking, Bailouts and War in US History Lew Rockwell interviewed by Scott Horton

A Landmark Torture Trial by Joanne Mariner

Truth and War Mean Nothing at the Party Conferences by John Pilger

Why is a US Army Brigade Being Assigned to the “Homeland”? by Glenn Greenwald

Joseph Biden: Profile in Cowardice by Gene Healy

We Will Berry You by David Gordon

Day of Reckoning by Pat Buchanan

Sadomasochist Nation by John Zmirak

Ron Paul Vs the Bailout Lobby by Richard Spencer

The End of the Ric Flair Era by Jack Hunter

Metropolitan Secession by Rad Geek

The Brawl in St. Paul by William Gillis

For the People of Pakistan by Niccolo Adami

Who Will Show Some Backbone Against the Bailout? by Ralph Nader

Democrats and Corporate Bailouts by Sharon Smith

D.C. Heist-Wall Street Gang Hijacks Washington by Gerald Celente

Credit Crunch: The Return of Depression?

Has Our Revolutionary Moment Arrived

A Comment on the Brawl in St. Paul by Niccolo Adami

How McCain Blew It by Alexander Cockburn

Call for Papers: Anarchism, Labor Unions and Working People

How Major U.S. Neo-Imperialist Wars End lecture by Robert Higgs

Updated News Digest September 21, 2008 1

Quotes of the Week:

“Us, and them.
And after all we’re only ordinary men.
Me, and you.
God only knows it’s not what we would choose to do.
Forward he cried from the rear
and the front rank died.
And the general sat and the lines on the map
moved from side to side.”

                                  -“Us and Them”, Dark Side of the Moon, Pink Floyd, Richard Wright-R.I.P.

 

“Fuck the System.”- Abbie Hoffman

Inside “The Family”: Secret Cult with Access to the Reins of Power by Robert Christgau

John McCain: War Criminal by Laurence Vance

End the Futile Afghan War by Eric Margolis

Change? From the System? Spare US! by Paul Armentano

John McCain=Nuclear War? by Charles Davenport

It’s the Creepy Plotters Who Rule US We Should Really Be Scared Of by Peter Hitchens

A True Hero of the Vietnam War

Sarah Palin: Neocon Pod Person by Justin Raimondo

A Star Is Born by David R. Henderson

Stormtroopin’ by William Norman Grigg

Islamic Sharia Courts in Britain Are Now Legally Binding by Matthew Hickley

The Neocons’ Palin Project by Pat Buchanan

US Economy: Rudderless and Reeling From Direct Hits by Paul Craig Roberts

What Puzzling Palin Does Not Know by Daniel Koffler

The Coming Financial Meltdown by John Robb

America Is Now Rome by Stan Goff

A Chronicle of the Battle of St. Paul

Marijuana Arrests at an All-Time High by Paul Armentano

Has the U.S. Invasion of Pakistan Begun? by Tom Engelhardt

From Out of a Rotting Log by Fred Reed

The Evolution of Corporate Socialism by William Norman Grigg

Obama is a Warmonger by Bill Lind

Sarah Palin Doesn’t Know What She’s Talking About by Fred Kaplan

The Mess on Wall Street: Four Trillion Dollars Down the Drain by Erick Schonfeld

A Tale Told By An Idiot Review of Obama Nation by Dylan Hales

What’s the Matter with (Ar) Kansas? The Perils of Palin and Conservative Myopia by Dylan Hales

Against the Oligarchy in Bolivia by Larry Gambone

Proudhon, Satan, Liberty and the Ladies’ Repository by Shawn Wilbur

Taste the Difference by Jeremy Weiland

Self-Ownership is a Meaningless Concept by Francois Tremblay

The Lobby Has Spoken: Biden and Israel by Susan Abulhawa

How the U.S. Auto Industry Wrecked Itself by Ralph Nader

Inside North Korea by Gregory Elich

Cocaine is a Hell of a Drug by Jennifer Abel

Rolled By A Hooker

The Excluded Elitist Middle by Jonathan Rauch

Fashion Before Function by Jack Hunter

Empire of Nothing by Doug Bandow

The Transparent Cabal by Paul Gottfried

The Spitting Image of Rudy Giuliani by Rad Geek

Wall Street Socialists by Amy Goodman

Petition for the Investigation of Police Misconduct at Republican National Convention

“The Intermingling of Domestic Police and Military is Well Beyond the Point of No Return”

The Party’s Over by Pat Buchanan

Margaret Cho on Sarah Palin (Literally)

Those Who Control the Past Control the Future by Roderick T. Long

Imprisoned Voters and the Elections by Anthony Papa

America’s Owns Kleptocracy by Michael Hudson

Who Killed the Constitution? Thomas Woods interviewed by Scott Horton

Understanding the Crisis by Lew Rockwell

Updated News Digest September 14, 2008 Reply

“We can expect as little from society as from the state. Salvation lies in the individual.”

-Ernst Junger

Wonder Drug Outlawed

Kill a Polar Bear for Heaven by Eric Margolis

U.S. of Kleptocracy by William Norman Grigg

U.S. “More Communist Than China”

Corporate Beggars

That “Country First” Philosophy by Tom DiLorenzo

Pakistan: The War Party’s New Frontier by Justin Raimondo

Feeding on Fear by Philip Giraldi

Back in the USSR by Peter Hitchens

Neocons Dictate MSNBC’s Programming Decisions by Glenn Greenwald

The Worsening Debt Crisis by Mike Whitney

How Far from a Police State? by Howard Lisnoff

Kevin Carson, Public Enemy

Slavery in Florida’s Tomato Fields by Rad Geek

And No Good Police State is Complete Without Its Propaganda Wing by Jeremy Weiland

On Blaming the Victim by Rad Geek

U.S. Economy-Temporary Respite, Permanent Decline by Paul Craig Roberts

Is the Ron Paul Revolution Over? by Richard Spencer

The Return of U.S. Death Squads by Conn Hallinan

Worshiping the Indispensible Nation by Andrew Bacevich

AIDS Heretic Peter Duesberg Presents His Case

Ron Paul and Ralph Nader on CNN

The Ron Paul Unity Agreement

Bob Barr Is An Asshole

The American Secessionist Streak by Christopher Ketcham

Bush’s National Socialism by Lew Rockwell

Secession, Sarah and the State by Andy Murphy

Interview with Alaskan Independence Party Chairwoman Lynette Clark by David Talbot

The Ten Most Decadent Dictators

Empire of Insanity Eric Margolis interviewed by Scott Horton

The St. Paul Police State Glenn Greenwald interviewed by Scott Horton

A Murderous Theater of the Absurd by John Pilger

Let Them Eat Cake by Karen Kwiatkowski

Reasserting the Constitution by Bruce Fein

Does AIPAC Represent the Government of Israel?

The U.S. Shoots Its Dog by Gary Hart

McCain’s Self-Righteous Fakery by Sheldon Richman

Populism and Its Discontents by Kevin DeAnna

The GOP’s “Big Tent”-Antiwar Conservatives Need Not Apply by Jack Hunter

Sam Francis and Me by R.J. Stove

Big Brother vs. Big Business by Libby Spencer

Thomas Frank’s The Wrecking Crew Review by Dylan Waco

Bob Barr Sucks by Dylan Waco

PIGS Attack the Fourth Amendment by Rad Geek

Pondering Surrender by Anthony Gregory

Towards a Second Cold War? by Noam Chomsky

Horrendous by Joanne Mariner

Sarah Palin: America’s Evita by Thomas Naylor

This Is What a Police State Looks Like, Part 3 of ??? by Rad Geek

The Real Meaning of 9-11 by Roderick T. Long

Palin and Alaskan Natives and Tribes: A Dismal Record by Lloyd Miller

Afghanistan: You Call This a Good War? by Sharon Smith

No Prisons-No State: International Anti-Prisons Gathering

Rape in American Prisons

The Single-Issue GOP Puts Conservatism Last by Jack Hunter

Bin Laden Laughs…And His Predictions of Impending American Bankruptcy Come True by Justin Raimondo

The Beginning of the Realignment of American Politics by John V. Walsh

The Resurrection of the Culture Wars by Bill Anderson

American Intellectual Culture Reaches New Heights of Crazy by TGGP

Antiwar.Com’s Scott Horton Takes Down Neocon in Debate

Is George W. Bush the Worst President in U.S. History? by Ivan Eland

The Government, the Media and Afghanistan by Glenn Greenwald

Perhaps World War Three? Four? Five? by Daniel Koffler

Undivided Loyalties, Undivided Jerusalem by Daniel Koffler

Are Third Parties Our Only Hope? by Daniel Bein

Panic! by Alexander Cockburn

Liberalism and Its Bounds by Joshua Frank

Greek Anarchists Attack Police

Are Towns Really Safer Without Traffic Lights?

Beyond Conservatism and Leftism 2

What does it mean that the Vice-Presidential candidate for the ostensibly “conservative” party is a female from a working class background who has the flag of a foreign state associated with a domestic ethnic minority hanging in her governor’s office? What does it mean that the Presidential candidate of the opposition party is a black man with an Islamic name? Essentially, such phenomena demonstrate that the political Left has become entirely status quo and that the core values of the historic Left-cosmopolitanism, internationalism, universalism, liberalism, proletarianism, feminism, anti-racism, anti-anti-Semitism, religious ecumenicalism and anti-xenophobia are more or less mainstream and “normal”. Indeed, such values are very much those of the elite. As Joe Bageant recently observed:

http://www.joebageant.com/joe/2008/08/moving-to-the-c.html

“Elite consensus on the issues of race, sex and role of faith in public life are to the left of public opinion, the only area in which this is the case. Elite opinion is overwhelmingly secular, pro-choice, supportive of gay rights and hostile to overt displays of racism.

Tolerance and liberalism on this front is a very useful tool, since it buys political space to be more conservative on the more important money issues. It also enjoys the advantage of making the right enemies, after all who wants to be on Pat Robertson’s side during weekend dinner parties at the Hamptons.

When social conservative complain about the “Liberal Media” they are not wrong, but only in regard to their issues. The contempt of the American elite for the religious right is quite real. What social conservatives misunderstand is that the hostility against them is not because the threat their ideas represent but only a display of the traditional contempt that the merciless strong have for people they consider to be the feeble minded weak.

The significance of the religious right in our politics is only in the wonderful diversions their issues create. Issues that feed a war between urban educated middle classes against the more numerous, the ever more frustrated lower income fundamentalists on issues that are unsolvable in nature.”

This fact provides a great deal of insight as to why the radical Left is now utterly impotent in resisting the forces of U.S. imperialism, state-capitalism and the expanding police state. Beginning in the 1960s, the Left abandoned its historic position as the party of class struggle, first of the middle classes against the Ancien’ Regime, and then of the proletariat against the old bourgeoisie order. Instead, the Left reinvented itself as the party of cultural politics, shifting its focus to such matters as race, gender, homosexualism, environmentalism, abortion, secularism and so forth. Consequently, we now have a situation where the ostensible “radical Left” maintains essentially the same basic set of cultural values as the “liberal elite”. The more socially conservative poor and working class have subsequently been abandoned to be colonized by the Right.

But what is the Right? If we are to judge by the actions of the Republican Party leadership, we might realize that the so-called “conservatives” really care about only three things. The first of these is the perpetual expansion of the American empire internationally. There must not be a square mile of territory on Earth that the U.S. does not control, or so the policy makers and the jingoist propagandists who dominate the more rightward leaning sectors of the media would have us believe. The second of these is the perpetual advancement of the expansionist interests of Israel. The third is the advancement of the economic interests of those narrow economic sectors that dominate the Republican Party, primarily banking, “Big Oil”, armaments and so forth.

Of course, the Republican leadership has to pretend to be social conservatives so that all of the yahoos, jingos, flag-wavers, Bible-thumpers, “homophobes”, money-grubbers and amateur cops who fill the ranks of their most enthusiastic supporters will still come out and vote for them.  But do they take their social conservatism seriously? Of course not. American society is now more liberal than ever before. Do they care one iota about the right-to-life cause, countering the influence of the gay movement, or restoring prayers in schools? No, they have made zero progress on these matters, while making much progress on the things that really mean something to them, like enriching the corporate fatcats, building a police state and conquering the world. Do they take their rhetoric of fiscal conservatism seriously? Not if the federal deficit and the national debt are any indication.

As contemptible a lot as the Republicans are, the Democrats are equally if not more pathetic. The Demos are struggling with a very thin and narrowing lead in this year’s election in spite of the dismal performance and unpopularity of the incumbent party and President. Ultimately, the Democrats represent the same set of interests as the Republicans. The Demos are beholden to the same kinds of banking, petroleum, armaments, pharmaceutical and communications interests as their rival party. The Demos are likewise firmly in the grip of the Israel Lobby. They are just as committed to the expansion of the empire, though they may prefer slightly more covert methods. Consequently, they have no real alternative to offer. Additionally, the Demos are much more reflective of the social and cultural values of the elite classes than the Republicans, hence their intransigence on these matters and their impotence on virtually everything else. Their best hope is to rally the array of left of center constituents group who share their cultural outlook and anyone else who wants to vote for “Anybody but a Republican”. Meanwhile, the Left will continue crying “racism, sexism, homophobia” (as if these were the most pressing matters in politically correct twenty-first century North America) while the ruling class drives things further down the tubes on matters of political economy, law and foreign policy.

The creation of a new radicalism capable of resisting the forces of State, Capital and Empire requires the development of a genuine “third way” beyond Left’s habit of appealing to traditional outgroups or the Right’s habit of appealing to “traditional values”. Instead, the new dichotomy pits those who are against the system versus those who are for the system. Enemies of the system may come from the extreme Right or the extreme Left, with a common denominator being a desire to attack the system! Pan-secessionism is our methodology, and perhaps some sort of lumpenproletarian-oriented anarcho-pluralist populism is our ideology. Our natural constituents are neither cultural conservatives or cultural leftists per se but enemies of the states wherever and whoever they may be.

Palin, Protests, Leftism, Lumpenism and Why "Nihlistic Strasserite Keith Preston-Style Thuggery" is Necessary 5

It is becoming much clearer why the Neoconservative-led Republican Party establishment chose Sarah Palin as its VP candidate. There seems to be four primary reasons for this. First, the female factor. Palin may well be appealing to Hillary fans who had their heart set on a female candidate. Second, the social conservatism/Republican base issue. Sarah appeals to all of the core Republican rank-and-file political interest groups: pro-lifers, pro-gunners, evangelical Christians, fiscal conservatives, “free market libertarians”, paleocons, and other such milieus. Third, Sarah Palin comes from outside the ranks of the elite. Rumor has it Mitt Romney was originally scheduled to be McCain’s VP until all the brouhaha about his seven houses came along: http://www.takimag.com/sniperstower/article/how_palin_got_picked/

Lastly, the Washington Times has reported that Mrs. Palin has an Israeli flag on the wall of her governor’s office:

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/sep/04/palins-evangelical-faith-drives-pro-israel-view/

No wonder the Neocons, who are essentially nothing more than the “Israel First Party”, found her to be such an appealing VP prospect. Here’s uber-neocon Bill Kristol, son of Neconservative godfather Irving Kristol, offering his endorsement of Palin two months before she was selected:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSy8sNiH9-0

So the fix is in. Palin is indeed the Neocons’ dream, a political outsider capable of appealing to the Republican base, crossing over to Democratic and Independent women, and willing to function as a useful idiot for the “Zion Uber Alles” agenda of the Neocons. It fits perfectly. The day Palin was named as McCain’s running mate I saw her on television praising McCain for his supposedly prescient warnings of the supposedly renewed Russian threat which are supposedly legitimated by the Russo-Georgian conflict. What a crock. A serious foreign policy thinker would at least consider the irreducible minimum of serious international questions to be dealt with. These include:

1. The need to reverse the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations’ efforts to encircle Russia by incorporating former Warsaw Pact nations and Russian border states into NATO. What is the current need for NATO, anyway? The original purpose of the alliance was to prevent Soviet incursion into Western Europe by taking advantage of the military weakness of these nations following WW2. The European countries are wealthy enough to provide for their own military defense. If they refuse to do so, that is their problem.

2. The domination of American Middle East policy by a handful of narrow special interests, primarily the Israel Lobby, the armaments industry and “Big Oil”.

3. The need to end the war in Iraq, which was initiated under fraudulent pretenses.

4. The impending loss of the war in Afghanistan.

5. Efforts by the Bush administration to destabilize nuclear-armed Pakistan.

6. Efforts by the Neocons to provoke war with Iran under the pretense of combatting Iran’s grossly exaggerated nuclear capabilities.

7. The need to recognize Palestinian independence.

8. The financial dependence of the US on Russian, Chinese and Japanese banks.

9. The dramatic fall of the value of the dollar, now known as the peso north of the Rio Grande.

These are just the beginnners. There is no evidence that Sarah Palin knows anything or cares anything about any of these matters, but then neither does her running mate or her competitors. Therefore, the accusations made that she is “unqualified” are true but irrelevant.

ARV associate and ATS webmaster Jeremy Weiland of Social Memory Complex http://blog.6thdensity.net/ has done a very good job keeping the rest of us informed concerning the protests at the Republican convention and the incidents of police brutality, harrassment and arbitary arrest that are taking place there. While these unfortunate people no doubt deserve our support, e.g., contributing to bail funds, writing letters of protest to newspaper, jamming phone lines, etc., these incidents also remind me of why I generally look askance at such protests. Forty years ago, anti-Vietnam War protestors staged a rally at the Democratic convention in Chicago that turned into a streetfight between protestors and cops. This was in the days before SWAT teams and paramilitary policing. I have long predicted that the present US ruling class/regime-the product of Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Bush-would never again allow civil unrest of the kind that transpired in the 1960s to take place. Today, the likes of Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin and Tom Hayden would suffer the fate of the folks at Waco in 1993. The only exceptions are those situations like the L.A. riots of 1992 and the New Orleans hurricanes of 2005 where the state simply loses control. As Jeremy as written:http://richmond.leftlibertarian.org/2008/9/3/goodbye-to-protest

“there are important lessons being learned on site about how the Seattle model has been rendered ineffective by the Miami model. Essentially, as I argue at my blog, we need to realize that protest is dead:

So if we’re in a police state now, what do we do? Obviously, there was a point at which the citizens of Germany in the ’30s gave up on speaking out. There was a point at which the Soviet citizens stopped protesting the Bolshevik treachery. Throughout history, people who found themselves under a totalitarian government had to face a terrible fact: that the modes of democratic society were no longer tenable.

But to admit to yourself the horrible truth, that we have lost our country, that is the truly difficult thing. Keep in mind, however, that it has always been through denial, self-deception, and lack of honesty on the part of the people that totalitarianism has gained a foothold. We must be courageous, pragmatic, and most of all careful. The rules have changed, and if we’re going to play this game we do well to use our time-outs to strategize, not simply to feel sorry for ourselves. In other words, as much as I hate to say it, we’re going to have to unlearn the bad habits of citizenship in a democratic republic.

It’s time for the activist movement to modify their tactics to reflect the new environment. Flaunting our outrage in the hopes of media attention and citizen backlash has failed. Throwing our bodies on the gears of the machine has not slowed it, let alone stopped it. Protesting every violation of our rights just demonstrates in spades how vulnerable and dependent we are. Demonstrating and organizing just provide easy targets for agent provocateurs, infiltration, and extralegal, preemptive harassment.”

I actually gave up on protest demonstrations years ago, viewing them primarily as theatrical events and social gatherings rather than serious political actions. Most of the participants in such efforts typically come from the Left, which serves as yet another powerful bit of evidence that the Left has not progressed intellectually or tactically in forty years. More than ever, we are in need of a “third way” beyond the Neoconservative/Zionist/Trotskyite/Jacobin jingoism of what passes for the Right and the cultural Marxism/60s nostalgism of what passes for the Left. The Right maintains its position by offering jingoistic nationalism and pandering to right-wing political interest groups and presenting itself as the party of “hard-working, tax-paying, decent, real Americans” versus all of those hippie and Hollywood weirdos and homos. The Left maintains its position by pretending to be the party of all of the oppressed or allegedly oppressed-the poor, the elderly, workers, women, racial minorities, gays and others. Of course, both factions are really just the different sides of the coin of state-capitalism who disagree slightly on the best way to go about managing the global corporate empire. From where will a “third force” arise?

The American Right is not really a “right” at all but a kind of neo-Jacobinism. The American Left is a hopelessly archaic relic from past times with no sense of direction whatsoever, and with all of its core constituent groups being solidly integrated into the ranks of the middle to upper middle classes. It is time to look beyond the “conservative” paradigm of nationalism, economic conservatism and “traditional values” and the “liberal” orientation towards the welfare state and 1960s-style cultural politics. I have in the past suggested the need for a “revolutionary right that out-lefts the left” or perhaps a “revolutionary left that is so far left it is on the right.” I have long believed that the key to the development of a revolutionary outlook that bridges the radical right with the radical left is to appeal to the lumpenproletarian classes across conventional cultural and ideological boundaries. With this idea in mind, my attention was recently called to the following description of my own approach:

http://radgeek.com/gt/2008/06/16/all_i/#comment-20080618004609

“Forget smashing the state- if you could just get together a visible left-libertarian movement which really does have participation from women, people of colour, etc., which really does care about actual individualism and being able to live as you desire, which can gain respect from the left and force recognition from the vulgar and reactionary libertarian right, which distinguishes itself clearly from nihilistic Strasserist Keith Preston-style thuggery, and which really has something to offer as a social and mutual aid network for people who care about their lives being their own…”

For those who don’t know, a “Strasserite” is more or less a follower of the Strasser brothers, Otto and Gregor, who were left-wing rivals to Hitler in the early days of the National Socialist movement in Germany. No, I’m not really a Strasserite, but from the above comments one gets a good idea of where the Left’s cultural politics eventually lead. “Forget smashing the state”, indeed. Forget smashing the empire that has slaughtered millions worldwide and threatens nuclear war. Forget smashing the police state that has become a modern slavocracy. Forget the Third Worldization of the American economy. Who cares about all of that so long as we can chase butterflies in the park, just so long as a more than proportional number of the butterfly-chasers originate from all of the Officially Oppressed demographic groupings?

No, my friends, it is time for war. We have two highly successful models to draw upon-Lebanon’s Hezbollah and Nepal’s Peoples’ War Group, two factions as ideologically different as they could be but providing shining examples of what real revolutionary politics actually looks like. Of course, this does not mean that we simply go out and start shooting. We’ll leave that to students and postal workers. The pan-secessionist movement is growing. Dozens of separatist organizations have appeared and more are no doubt on the horizon. Our natural constituencies are the lumpen masses ignored by the Right and Left of the establishment. Our role models are our friends from Lebanon, Nepal and elsewhere. The fourth generation forces are on the rise worldwide. Rot in Hell, Neocons and Leftoids, we’re done with you.

What If the Israeli Lobby was the Islamic Lobby? Reply

Weekend Edition
August 30 / 31, 2008

Part One

What If the Israeli Lobby was the Islamic Lobby?

By B. R. GOWANI

What if:

Abu Faisal was White House press secretary (instead of Ari Fleischer)

Altaf Adham was deputy national security advisor
(instead of Elliott Abrams)

Sofian Bishr was Supreme Court Justice instead of Stephen Breyer

Tarf Kaukab was Nightline host (instead of Ted Koppel)

Dawud Bushr was New York Times columnist (instead of David
Brooks)

Rukan Badar Ghiyath was Supreme Court Justice
(instead of Ruth Bader Ginsburg)

Thamer Furud was New York Times columnist (instead of Thomas Friedman)

Laith Keid was host of Larry King show (instead of Larry King)

Yousuf “Yo” Luqman was US Senator from
Connecticut (instead of Joseph “Joe” Lieberman)

Zuhaa Midlaj was New York Times reporter (instead of Judith Miller)

Dawud Fouad was Bush’s speechwriter (instead of David Frum)

Lu’ay Labib was Cheney’s Chief of Staff (instead of Lewis Libby)

Polat Walif-Rizk was Rumsfeld’s Deputy Secretary
of Defense (instead of Paul Wolfowitz)

Mahdi Parvez was editor of The New Republic
magazine (instead of Martin Peretz)

Basil Kishwar was the editor of The Weekly
Standard instead of (Bill Kristol)

Ali Wisam was the famous Nobel Peace laureate (instead of Elie Wiesel)

Jaafer Ghawth-Badr was a staff writer at New
Yorker (instead of Jeffrey Goldberg)

Rifat Pir was the Chairman of the Defense Policy
Board AdvisoryCommittee (instead of Richard Perle)

Yaman Sikandar was the famous filmmaker (instead of Steven Spielberg)

Ibrahim Faqih-Ma’n was the head of the
Anti-Defamation League (instead of Abraham Foxman)

Alam Daoud-Vida was the famous lawyer (instead of Alan Dershowitz)

Imagine the above Muslims in key positions. There are 2 per cent Jews in the US and the same percentage of Muslims. Now consider for a moment that both communities have exchanged places as it happens on that TV show “Wife Swap.” Here not only wives but the entire community exchanges places. Or a still better example would be the 1970 film “Watermelon Man” in which a white man wakes up in the morning and discovers he has turned into a black person. Blackness becomes his fate.

However, first let us check out the power Jews have in the United States in order to imagine how things would have been different if the Muslims had exactly the same power.

This article, however, realizes that Jews are not a monolithic group. For instance: 75 per cent of Americans supported the war in 2003 in US, whereas the Jewish support was at 50 per cent.

Like many other Jews, the billionaire George Soros favors a dialogue between the Hamas (the elected government in the Palestinian territories) and the Israelis:

“… Israel, with the strong backing of the United States, refused to recognize the democratically elected Hamas government and withheld payment of the millions in taxes collected by the Israelis on its behalf. This caused great economic hardship and undermined the ability of the government to function. But it did
not reduce popular support for Hamas among Palestinians, and it reinforced the position of Islamic and other extremists who oppose negotiations with Israel….”

There have always been Jewish people and institutions who have tried to work for some peaceful solution of the Palestinian/Israeli problem but the Jewish Lobby and pro Israel individuals have always succeeded in silencing or marginalizing those voices.

Bill and Kathleen Christison explain how the word “anti-Semite” is abused:

“Anyone who has the temerity to suggest any Israeli instigation of, or even involvement in, Bush administration war planning is inevitably labeled somewhere along the way as an anti-Semite. Just whisper the word `domination’ anywhere in the vicinity of the word `Israel,’ as in `U.S.-Israeli domination of the Middle East’ or `the U.S. drive to assure global domination and guarantee security for Israel,’ and some leftist who otherwise opposes going to war against Iraq will trot out charges of promoting the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the old czarist forgery that asserted a Jewish plan for world domination.”

A Few Clarifications

Before proceeding any further, it is important to remember the historic injustices suffered by the Jewish people. The past has not been especially nice to the Jews; rather it has been extremely cruel­, mainly, in the form of European Christianity. The atrocious climax reached between 1939 and 1945 under Nazi Germany. Between five to six million Jews were murdered. But since then, although there have been some instances of
targeting Jewish people and desecrating their cemeteries in Europe and elsewhere, these have not in any way affected their survival and growth as a distinct religious and cultural entity. And economically they are one of the few most powerful groups in the world.

In addition: There are many interest groups or lobbies in the United States who are doing immense harm to people within and without, and the dominant corporate press is one of those groups. People who want to register their protest or recommend changes are at the mercy of the media managers. So, the Jewish Lobby is not the only one exerting influence. Nevertheless, the Lobby’s power is enormous and it has wielded it
in such a devastating way that the whole of Middle East has been burning for quite a long time now ­ and in turn it affects the entire world.

There is, of course, a convergence of the US interest to control the oil; and, the Israeli interest to be the sole regional power. If one thinks from that perspective, then without doubt the US would have been in a better shape if it would have avoided the 2003 complete destruction of the almost-destroyed Iraq of 1991 and if it had left Saddam Hussein pitted against Iran. Not only would this have saved the US billions of
dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives but would have preserved its hegemony a little longer.

Anti-Arab, anti-Palestine, anti-Iran, anti-Muslim?

When a corporation exploits its workers it is
called an exploiter. When a member of the
majority discriminates against a member of the
minority then she/he is called a racist. When a
male discriminates against a woman he is called a
sexist. When one person discriminates another on
the basis of religion then that person is called
a communalist. When anyone hates or kills a Jew
(simply because he is a Jew), that person is
called an anti-Semite. When a Muslim kills
someone in the name of Islam, he is called a
Muslim fundamentalist/militant/fanatic/etc.

What would you call those influential Jews,
individuals and those belonging to the Lobby, in
the US who played an important role in the war to
destroy an Arab country of Iraq without any
reason or are now pushing for a war against Iran?

They are beardless, suited, booted. They are not
overtly religious like Taliban and so we can’t
call them Jewsratics or Jews who are Israel
Fanatics. However, their religion is Israel and
so the appropriate word (for their world
devastating pro Israel stand) should be “Israel
Fanatics” or “Isratics.” These Isratics are on a
revenge path for past injustices.

The victims are now the victimizers. Their
victims are not the white Europeans but the Palestinians and other Arabs.

And the Isratics are equipped with a WMD or word
of mass destruction, and so the moment anyone
points out their control over the US Congress,
government, news media, etc. she/he will be labeled an “anti-Semite.”

Holocaust

Auschwitz, located in Poland, (then under German
control) was the largest of the many
concentration camps where the Jews were
transported and were murdered using all sorts of
inhuman methods. Other communities suffered too.

For the organized Jewry, the “Holocaust” has
become a profitable enterprise, as Norman
Finkelstein’s insightful study, “The Holocaust
Industry,” makes clear. Just one example: The
Swiss banks’ offer of $600 million was rejected
by the Jewish leaders and so in August 1998, they
agreed to pay $1.25 billion. A press release by
Swiss banks explained “the aim of the additional
payment” “is to avert the threat of [US]
sanctions as well as long and costly court
proceedings.” Back in March, Edgar Bronfman,
president of World Jewish Congress had warned the
Swiss banks: “If the Swiss are going to keep
digging their heels in, then I’ll have to ask all
US shareholders to suspend their dealings with
the Swiss [emphasis mine].” Finkelstein reminds
us that the United States is equally guilty of
the three categories (Swiss denial of asylum to
refugees, claimants to inactive Swiss bank
accounts, and victims of slave labor which proved
advantageous to the Swiss) for which the Swiss
had to pay; whereas, the US has not even been
threatened, let alone charged.

“Many” lawyers were charging $600 an hour for
filing claims, and one lawyer wanted $2,400 for
reading Tom Bower’s book “Nazi Gold.”

Many other European governments, including
Germany, have also paid huge sums of money to organized Jewry.

The US itself has never paid any money to the
Native Indians, the blacks, and many others. One
may wonder as to why the US government threatens
other governments or their institutions to pay reparations to the Jews!

(In 1986, the World Court ordered the US to pay
$17 billion to Nicaragua for multiple crimes. The US ignored the verdict.)

Most interesting to note: Finkelstein says, “The
Holocaust’s mystery, Wiesel avows, is
`noncommunicable;’ `we cannot even talk about
it.’ Thus, for his standard fee of $25,000 (plus
chauffeured limousine), Wiesel lectures that the
`secret of Auschwitz’s `truth lies in silence.'”

Daniel McGowan provides a good portrait of this peace laureate.

“He is a multi-millionaire, but carefully
cultivates the image of a perpetually disheveled
professor. Although he has won the Nobel Peace
Prize, the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the
Guardian of Zion Medal, and the Oprah Book Award,
many people in Israel resent the way he has used
the Holocaust to make his living. Some Israelis
refer to him as a `sho’an.’ The word `sho’a’ is
Hebrew for Holocaust; with the suffix it
indicates a professional specializing in the
subject. So it is both funny and derogatory, not
unlike Norman Finkelstein referring to Wiesel as
the `resident clown’ of the Holocaust circus.”

Wiesel was awarded a Noble Peace Prize in 1986.
In 1983, according to the Norwegian Nobel
Committee’s secretary, his name was recommended
by half of the US Congress.

Noam Chomsky says that in the US, Wiesel is
respected as a “secular saint” and is considered a “critic of fascism.”

However, the saint keeps his mouth shut where Israel’s crimes are involved:

“I support Israel, period. I identify with
Israel, period. I never attack; never criticize
Israel when I am not in Israel.”

This so called harbinger of peace was in the
White House on February 27, 2003 to see the
National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice.
President George Bush was also there. Wiesel
echoed the same old nonsense of comparing Germany
of the late 1930s with 2003’s Iraq. In simple
words he wanted Bush to start a war. He said:
“It’s a moral issue. In the name of morality how
can we not intervene.” “I’m against silence.” So
he wanted Bush to scream out loud with weapons.

Further, there are people like the late Nahum
Goldmann, President of the World Jewish Congress,
who have criticized those who exploited the Jewish tragedy:

“We will have to understand that Jewish suffering
during the Holocaust no longer will serve as a
protection, and we certainly must refrain from
using the argument of the Holocaust to justify
whatever we may do. To use the Holocaust as an
excuse for the bombing of Lebanon, for instance,
as Menachem Begin does, is a kind of “Hillul
Hashem” [sacrilege], a banalization of the sacred
tragedy of the Shoah [Holocaust], which must not
be misused to justify politically doubtful and
morally indefensible policies.”

The letter H in the word “Holocaust” is in
capital letter because many influential Jewish
leaders firmly believe that theirs is the unique
tragedy. In other words, they have a copyright
over the word “Holocaust” and thus the millions
of Native Indians, African slaves, Armenians
(victims of Turks), the Congolese (victims of
Belgium), the Bengalis of East Pakistan, later
Bangladesh, (victims of West Pakistan, now
Pakistan), Roma and Sinti people or gypsies
(victims of Nazi Germany), and others can’t claim
their tragedies as holocaust.

Robert Fisk tells us that the word holocaust has
been in currency since the 18th century. The
British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, as a
matter fact, used it for the Armenians:

“In 1915 the Turkish Government began and
ruthlessly carried out the infamous general
massacre and deportation of Armenians in Asia
Minor.” The “war criminals,” that is the Turks,
massacred “uncounted thousands of helpless
Armenians – men, women and children together;
whole districts blotted out in one administrative
holocaust – these were beyond human redress.”

Money Talks, Politicians Walk

It is the power of the influential Isratics. And
they are everywhere in the US. The third richest
man in the US (and the richest Jew in the world)
and the owner of two of Las Vegas’s huge casino
resorts, the Palazzo and the Venetian, Sheldon
Adelson, opposes the two-state (Israel/Palestine)
solution. In October 2007, during Republican
donors’ visit to the White House, he warned
President George Bush that the policy which
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is pursuing
in the Middle East would ruin him.

His both arms around Adelson and his wife’s
shoulders, Bush replied: “You tell your Prime
Minister [Israel’s Ehud Olmert] that I need to
know what’s right for your people­because at the
end of the day it’s going to be my policy, not
Condi’s. But I can’t be more Catholic than the Pope.”

AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee)

The Jewish Lobby is made up of several Jewish
groups. The Israel Lobby includes some pro Israel
Evangelical Christians and Christian Zionists.
AIPAC is one of the most important of the Jewish groups.

Jeffrey Goldberg wrote in 2005 that AIPAC’s
“leaders can be immoderately frank about the
group’s influence.” Years back, while dining with
AIPAC’s Steve Rosen, Goldberg asked if the 1992
incident involving the then AIPAC President David
Steiner had hurt the AIPAC’s influence. “A half
smile appeared on his face, and he pushed a
napkin across the table. `You see this napkin?’
he said. `In twenty-four hours, we could have the
signatures of seventy senators on this napkin.'”

The above conversation is not an isolated incident.

On October 22, 1992, New York businessman Haim
(Harry) Katz [HK] recorded his conversation with
AIPAC President David Steiner [DS] without his
knowledge. Later, when the conversation became
public, Steiner resigned. Excerpts of that conversation:

DS: Besides the $10 billion in loan guarantees
which a fabulous thing, $3 billion was in
foreign, in military aid, and I got almost a
billion dollars in other goodies that people don’t even know about.

DS: … I said look Jim [Baker, Papa Bush’s
Secretary of State], “You don’t want a fight
before the election. It’s going to hurt Bush….

HK: … But you met with Baker. . .

DS: Personally.

HK: Personally. Because you know, he’s the one
who cursed, who cursed the Jews.

(When the Jewish influence in the US was
mentioned at a government meeting on Middle East,
Baker supposedly said, “Fuck the Jews. They don’t
vote for us [Republicans] anyway.”)

DS: Of course, do you think I’m ever going to forgive him for that?

DS: Do you think I could ever forgive Bush for
what he did September 12th [1991] a year ago?
What he said about the Jews for lobbying in Washington?

(Bush Sr. had said: I was “up against some
powerful political forces . . . I heard today
there was something like 1,000 lobbyists on the
Hill working on the other side of the question.
We’ve got one lonely little guy down here doing it.”)

HK: … I thought [presidential candidate Rose]
Perot did marvelous in the debates.

DS: He doesn’t know how to govern. He’s not going
to make it. And there was an incident where his
daughter was going out with a Jewish professor at
school and he said, “I wouldn’t have my daughter marry a Jew.”

DS: … you ought to think about coming to some
of these things. I’ll have a dinner this fall.
I’ll have 18-20 senators there. I run programs in
Washington. We just had a, I had at Ted Kennedy’s
house last month kosher dinner. I brought
foremost caterers down. I had 60 people on the
couch for dinner. Last year, I did it in Al Gore’s house.

DS: I personally am not allowed, as president of
AIPAC, to get involved in the presidential
campaign, because I have to deal with whoever wins.

HK: … what will he [Bill Clinton] do for Israel, better than Bush…

DS: … Gore is very committed to us.
(Gore once said: “I have a 100 percent voting
record for Israel, even though there wasn’t one
synagogue in my congressional district.” And this
person had lectured Jesse Jackson for meeting Yasser Arafat.)

DS: I’ve known Bill for seven, eight years …
One of my friends is Hillary Clinton’s scheduler,
one of my officer’s daughters works there. We
gave two employees from AIPAC leave of absences
to work on the campaign. I mean, we have a dozen
people in that campaign, in the headquarters.

DS: Let me tell you the problem with the $10
billion in loan guarantees, right? We only have
the first year. We have authorization from
Congress, but it’s at the discretion of the
president every year thereafter, so if Bush is
there, he could say, you know, use it as a club,
you know. `If you don’t give up Syria, I won’t
give you the money. If you don’t give up the Golan Heights.’

DS: … A girl who worked for me at AIPAC stood
up for them [Clintons] at their wedding. Hillary
lived with her…. We have never had that with Bush…

DS: … He’s got something in his heart for the
Jews, he has Jewish friends. Bush has no Jewish friends.

DS: Reagan had something . . . He knew Jews from
the film industry; he was one of the best guys
for us. He had an emotional thing for the Jews.
Bush doesn’t have it…. Bush is, there’s a man
with no principles. Absolutely no principles.

HK: … I wish we had a Jewish candidate for president.

DS: I don’t think the country’s ready.

HK: … I think Joe Lieberman would have, uh,
would have, if he wasn’t Jewish….
(Lieberman was Albert Gore’s running mate in the
2000 presidential elections.)

DS: I’d like to see him on the Supreme Court.

HK: If Clinton is elected, has he told you who
he’s going to put on the Supreme Court?

DS: We’re talking now…. We’re more interested
right now, in the secretary of state and the
secretary of National Security Agency. That’s more important to us.

HK: If Clinton is elected, who do you think will be secretary of state?

DS: I’ve got a list…. I’m not allowed to talk about it.

John Mersheimer and Steven Walt point out the use
of pro-Israel congressional staffers as one more
source for the Lobby. They quote former AIPAC chief Morris Amitay:

“There are a lot of guys at the working level up
here” – on Capitol Hill – “who happen to be
Jewish, who are willing . . . to look at certain
issues in terms of their Jewishness . . . These
are all guys who are in a position to make the
decision in these areas for those senators . . .
You can get an awful lot done just at the staff level.”

A former AIPAC staff member Douglas Bloomfield
sheds light on how the congresspersons conduct their research:

“It is common for members of Congress and their
staffs to turn to AIPAC first when they need
information, before calling the Library of
Congress, the Congressional Research Service,
committee staff or administration experts.”

“[AIPAC is] often called on to draft speeches,
work on legislation, advise on tactics, perform
research, collect co-sponsors and marshal votes.”

A senior congressional staffer, writing under the
pen name George Sunderland, here on the
CounterPunch site, explains how the politicians
attending the annual AIPAC meetings act:

“Command performances before AIPAC have become
standard features in the life of a Washington
elected official, like filing FEC reports and
hitting on interns. The stylized panegyrics
delivered at the annual AIPAC meeting have all
the probative value of the Dniepropetrovsk
Soviet’s birthday greeting to [the Soviet leader,
Joseph] Stalin, because the actual content is
unimportant; what is crucial is that the
politician in question be seen to be genuflecting
before the AIPAC board. In fact, to make things
easier, the speeches are sometimes written by an
AIPAC employee, with cosmetic changes inserted by
a member of the Senator’s or Congressman’s own staff.”

Talking to the New York Sun in January 2003,
Howard Kohr said, “Quietly lobbying Congress to
approve the use of force in Iraq was one of
AIPAC’s successes over the past year.”

Occasionally AIPAC is not successful. In 1981, it
vehemently opposed the US sale of AWACS (Airborne
Warning and Control System) to Saudi Arabia but
failed to block the sale. Former President Gerald
Ford was infuriated at the AIPAC antics and
called a Republican senator and fumed: “Are we
going to let the fucking Jews run American foreign policy?”

Reagan announced the AWACS sale on national
television with these words: “It is not the
business of other nations to make American foreign policy.”

But Edward Tivnan sees this sale as not much of a victory:

“… AIPAC had taken on the President of the
United States, and almost, as Ronald Reagan
himself had claimed, embarrassed him in front of
the whole world. (What kind of President couldn’t
sale five airplanes to a small Arab country,
particularly one sitting on billions of dollars
of oil crucial to American prosperity?) … ”

Abraham Foxman

In March 2003, Collin Powell had said: “It is not
driven by any small cabal that is buried away
somewhere, that is telling President Bush or me
or Vice President Cheney or [National Security
Adviser Condoleezza] Rice or other members of the
administration what our policies should be.”

But the reality is exactly opposite.

Foxman, National Director of Anti-Defamation
League, is a very important figure; his power can
be gauged by the meeting he had with Colin
Powell, the US Secretary of State, i.e., foreign minister,

“`In his [Powell’s] own State Department there
was a keen awareness of the strength of the
Jewish lobbyists. Secretaries of State did not
usually meet with lobbyists, but both Jewish
officials and Jews that did not officially
represent specific groups from Abe Foxman of the
Anti-Defamation League to Ronald Lauder, could
meet with Powell on short notice…. At the State
Department, Foxman had an aura of omnipotence. He
was held responsible for the appointment of
[Martin S.] Indyk as Undersecretary of State
under Clinton, and was thought to have played a
role in the appointments of Secretaries of State
[Warren] Christopher and [Madeline] Albright.
Powell related to Foxman almost as if he were
someone to whom he must capitulate. Once Foxman
told one of his deputies that Powell was the weak
link. When the Secretary of State heard this he
began to worry. He knew that in Washington a
confrontation with the Jewish lobby would make
his life difficult. Once he arranged a meeting
with Foxman, but the busy Foxman postponed the
meeting three times. When they eventually met,
the head of the Anti-Defamation League apologized
to the Secretary of State [for the
postponements]. “You call, we come,” replied
Powell, paraphrasing a well known advertisement
for a freight company. That statement had much
more meaning than just a humorous polite reply.'”
(from Raviv Drucker and Ofer Shelah, Boomerang…).

Nevertheless, one has to accept the fact that
even though Powell had been a part of governments
during the 1991 Iraq War and the 2003 Iraq War,
he was not in favor of war. One can argue that in
that case he should have quit his position and
thus boosting the morale of the anti-war movement.

Once on a visit to Jerusalem, he stood his
ground, when he refused to comply with Sharon’s order.

Sharon: I don’t want you to go to Damascus
[Syria]. I don’t think it serves the interests of
peace, and we don’t like it here in Israel when you go to Damascus.

Powell: Ariel, thank you very much but I am going
anyway. I am Secretary of State of the United
States of America and not the foreign minister of Israel.

Powell was fed up with the neo-cons pushing for
war and called them the “fucking crazies.”

It is obvious that it is the Israel Lobby’s power
that enabled Sharon to order Powell; otherwise,
in reality, he was just a premier of a tiny
country ­ although in military means, the fourth
most powerful country in the world.

To be continued Monday

Updated News Digest September 7, 2008 1

Quotes of the Week:

“You guys want a simple way to make distinct the real ‘working man’ socialists from the “liberal” nanny statists?

It’s simple really. Ask them how they want to tax labor income. If they want to tax it (especially if they want to tax it at a high rate), they’re not for the working man at all.

See, here in Denmark, we have a kind of socialists called “social democrats”, who on one hand say that they are “a worker party”, and on the other, want to maintain a 40+% marginal taxation on low to medium incomes.

A workers party that does all in its power to eradicate the economic autonomy of the actual workers?”

                                                                                         -Peter Bjorn Perls

 “Cops may look back fondly on the days when we conveniently gathered in one place to peacefully oppose the establishment. The alternative – insurgency – is a lot messier for cops. Iraq is a great example. It’s in THEIR interests to respect proportionality.”

                                                                                         -Jeremy Weiland

“Why do men go to zoos?”-H.L. Mencken, when asked why he took so keen an interest in politics when he despised most politicians

American Police State is Not Even Controversial  by Glenn Greenwald

Neocon Party A Versus Neocon Party B   by Karen Kwiatkowski

The Georgia Crisis Turns Dangerous by Eric Margolis

We Who Dared to Say No to War by Tom Woods and Murray Polner

Pot versus The Superbug by Paul Armentano

Palin Was a Member of the Alaskan Independence Party

Smash the Warfare State Lew Rockwell interviewed by Scott Horton

A Chinese View of Human Rights in Britain

America: Zionist Colony

That’s How You Do It! by Jeremy Weiland

They’re Not Going to Stop Pushing the Envelope by Jeremy Weiland

Libertarianism Through Thick and Thin by Charles Johnson

The RNC Protests, as told by the mainstream and alternative media by Thus Spoke Bellinsky

Agorists at the Front by Brad Spangler

“The Limits of Power” and Conservative Realism by Dylan Waco

The Militarized Police State Continues Apace by Mona

A Prisoner’s Tale of Abuse by Stanley Howard

Police Terrorists Trained to Hate Anarchists

The Calamity of Bush’s Conservatism by Lew Rockwell

The Alliance Between the Government, the Power Elite and Organized Crime by Charles A. Harris

The Federal Reserve: Lifeblood of the Empire by Tom Woods

Recessions and Career Opportunities by Gary North

September Surprise? by Justin Raimondo

Bush Pushes for More Police Power by Nat Hentoff

Tortured in Egypt, Rendered to Guantanamo: Innocent Pakistani Heads Home After Six Years

Hezbollah Military Video

Anarchist Traffic Guru

The Real Wrecking Crew-Neoconservatives, Not “Conservatives” by Paul Craig Roberts

Bill Kauffman at the Ron Paul Convention

What Liberals and Libertarians Share by Cernig

Someone Should Tell Rudy… by Dylan Waco

Romney: China is “Adam Smith on Steroids” from Sheldon Richman

How to Implement Mutual Aid for Tax Resistance by Francois Tremblay

Country First, John McCain, USA, USA, USA by Jeremy Weiland

Bail Money Urgently Needed by Jeremy Weiland

Cops May Yet Come to Regret Their Hostility by Jeremy Weiland

This Is What a Police State Looks Like by Rad Geek

Goodbye to Protest by Jeremy Weiland/Richmond Left Libertarian Alliance

Some Humor Among the Fuming by Jeremy Weiland

Responding to Totalitarianism on Demand by Jeremy Weiland

The Real Problem With Palin by James LeRoy Wilson

Technology and the Future of Liberty

Thank God, She Has No Foreign Policy Experience! Sarah Palin’s Clean Slate by Mike Gravel

The Victims of the Israel Lobby by B.R. Gowani

What If the Israel Lobby Was the African-American Lobby? by B.R. Gowani

RNC 8 Charged as Terrorists Under State Patriot Act

America, Support Your Patriot Youth  by Brad Spangler

Populist Conservatism Needs a Home by Jeremy Weiland

East-West: Origins of a Crisis by Nikolas Gvosdev

More on Palin by Paul Gottfried

Palin, Buchanan and Israel by Matthew Roberts

Sarah Palin Has an Israeli Flag in Her Office (Now We Know Why the Neocons Handpicked Her!)

Join the Middlebury Institute Discussion List

The Senator Most Likely to Start a Nuclear War by Jeffrey St. Clair

What If the Israeli Lobby was the Islamic Lobby? by B.R. Gowani

Amy Goodman: Why We Were Falsely Arrested

Anarchists: We aren’t the terrorists, cops and Republicans are

L.A. Times Interview with Alexander Dugin

Don’t Talk to the Cops, Part 2,522

Beyond Distributism-new book from Tom Woods

Reform or Else!-The Cultural Revolution in Sixteenth Century England by Murray Rothbard

Czarist America by Mike Rozeff

The Fictional Crime of “Money-Laundering” by Gary Barnett

Today is Jury Rights Day: Do You Know Yours? by Vin Suprynowicz

Sarah Palin: The Xena of the War Party by Justin Raimondo

The Hothead and the Finger on the Button by Doug Bandow

Palin Meets with AIPAC-Expresses “Heartfelt Support for Israel”

Distant Drums Mar Palin’s Party by Pat Buchanan

Chomsky’s Augustinian Anarchism by Roderick T. Long

No Matter How Cynical I Get, It’s Just Never Enough to Keep Up by Libby Spencer

This Is What a Police State Looks Like, Part 2 by Rad Geek

Emergency Action to Free All Political Prisoners by Rad Geek

William Gillis at the RNC Welcoming Committee Press Conference

In Defense of Vermont’s Secession from the Union by Keith Brunner

It’s Time for a Declaration of Independence from Israel by Chris Hedges

Democrats Determined to Lose by Bill Anderson

Terrorist SWAT PIGS Let Off the Hook

Where Have I Seen Sarah Palin Before? by Arash Kamangeer

Murray Bookchin and Bugs Bunny: Found at Last by Joel Schlosberg

Anarcho-Primitivism Explained

Our Dear Leader by Rad Geek

Permission to Correct the Mistakes of Government Denied by Jeremy Weiland

Learning Our Lessons by Shawn Wilbur

Don’t Worry, She Supports Israel by Sheldon Richman

Free All Political Prisoners by Rad Geek

Agorism and the Revolutionary Redistribution of Property by Brad Spangler