Jump to navigation
Still Not Understanding What Cheney Is And Represents
One's expecations for American political discourse are by necessity low. But after 7 years, it still surprises us a bit that even now, after all that has unfolded, how few realize the true nature, imperative and direction of the Cheney era.
Forget those silly WaPo articles about Cheney that everyone found so “revealing”. Talking to long departed second tier staff about vague generalities regarding peripheral events and minor details constitutes a new hot issue of “Tiger Beat” for the Tweety Class.
Much like most American Sovietologists never really understood the Soviet Union at its most fundamental level. And believe me, if you have heard of a Sovietologist of any stature in the post-war era, the Stiftung likely has heard them out one way or another. Or argued them out.
Amerikanskie Chekisty
John Dziak, a Soviet and Soviet intelligence specialist over at DIA “back in the day” got it right in our opinion — far better than 90.9 percent of our American “specialists”. (Although the woefully wrong (and pompous) Stephen Cohen at Princeton at least got to play hanky panky with a young Katrina and ride the Ferrari so ya gotta give him something). The following is merely our intepretation of Dziak's thesis, so keep that in mind.
What John said in his publications and analysis of the Soviet Union and the KGB was to understand the Soviet Union, you had to understand the KGB. Walking that path, one upon careful study realizes that the Soviet Union first and foremost was the world's first and foremost “Counterintelligence State”. From its very inception until its death. This frame of mind, thinking, ideology, social organization and mobilization was far more important than the mere militarization of Soviet society.
A “Counterintelligence State” begins with the assumptions of enemies, penetration, subversion, threats to national survival and the elevation of resources to thwarting those hostile and malignant forces and suburdination of
all else towards that end. Now, believe me, the Stiftung has sat down with world famous so-and-sos you've seen on television etc. and discussed all the other notions of Soviet Union policy motivation and “behavior” as extension of Great Russian Chauvanism, Marxist-Leninst World Revolution, and on and on — with all the alleged predictions of impact on Soviet policy if this happened or that happened. But in the end, without understanding the implications of Dziak's analaysis, all such analysis are in the end more or less wrong or merely foggy glimpses of the underlying phenomenon.
Finally, the Neocons do have a point about CIA dropping the ball. It hurts us to say this — and we naturally prefer a non-perfect CIA to a bunch of Likudist lunatics. But don't believe a word of what CIA, Gates , Mel Goodman, Cher Condi and everyone else says now about their understanding of the end of the Soviet Union.
NONE of them in 1985 understood Gorbachev and his impact, none of them understood the “official reforms” such as
perestroika and
glasnost' (how's that for a blast from the past?) and none of them understood what these policies would do to a Counterintelligence State. Which is to destroy it. (In all fairness, Gorbachev didn't either as far as that goes).
Let's just say the Stiftung has reason to have a good understanding what Gates et al. were saying as late as late July/ early August 1991 before the Soviet Union really collapsed. No surprise. No relation to what Gates claims now he said or in his memoirs. Believe me. Same for that twit Cher Condi.
Cheney, Addington, Scooter, et al. were in the end assembling an American Counterintelligence State. This is related to authoritarianism and needs it to succeed, hence the implict Schmittean ideology in much that came out of EOVP from 2001-2007. But it is far more. Vastly more than anything the blowhards on cable can comprehend or the fatuous reporting from the WaPo.
The GULAGs, secret prisons, suspension of habeus corpus, wiretaps, eviscerating FISA and the FISA Court, the unleashing of uncontrolled FBI powers and abusive NSLs, the fear, castrating Congress and the courts, these are all the components of — the necessary components — for literally re-creating the American version of a Counterintelligence State that Dziak diagnosed. You may laugh, but this is deadly serious and explains
precisely why Cheney's people stamped TOP SECRET/SCI on Talking Points to be given to the press. And the proliferation of new “classes” of information “Sensitive but not Classified”, etc. The American CI Community and Threat Merchant Contractors have not had it this good EVER. And not surprisingly, the policies that emerged from this embryonic American Counterintelligence State also paralleled its predecessor. Not all the fault, dear Brutus, lies at AEI.
In a Counterintelligence State, the annointed few (however defined) elevate and use the intelligence and security organizations above traditional social entities and civil society. Rule of Law by necessity must be ignored. All is justified by the threat - whether of Western imperialism or alleged elite Albanian pizza delivery commandos ready to strike here. Ironically, however, by their very bellicose, furtive and aggressive nature, Counterintelligence States eventually will summon into place all the threats and more that they perceive — or at least facsimiles thereof.
-------
ONLY in our opinion if you understand this essential truism about EOVP, then will all else fall into place. This is another reason for my deep contempt for that blowhard Larry Wilkerson, the Benchpresser and General Jello, and all those think tanks and others that trot them out as great “catches” and fund raising icons. (As you may be tired of us repeating, Wilkerson looked the Stiftung in the eye and declared his confidence that “Cheney is not an ideological man ” ).
These Small Men of Process (who loom large in their self regard) deservedly and totally were outgunned by the Neocons. The Neocons at least were armed with an agenda and a philosophy (which everyone managed to ignore)-- both which always gives them the political initiative re the Small Men of Process. Even so, these Small Men of Process were shadowboxing against the lesser threat to them — none of them understood that the Neocons were merely one strand of the Movement, and a secondary one to the rising American Counterintelligence State.
The question still remains: even with Dubya and Cheney gone, who has the vision, will and capacity to clean house, shut down operational cells, purge first, second through fifth tier personnel -
while rectifying our decaying international position.
Here's a hint: it won't be Wilkerson, General Jello, the Benchpresser or any of that crowd.
Tags:
Cheney,
Counterintelligence,
Counterintelligence State,
John Dziak,
KGB,
NSA wiretaps,
Colin Powell,
Larry Wilkerson,
David Addington,
GULAG,
Soviet Union,
Gorbachev,
Bob Gates
Posted in General Aktion
at 17:43 on Thursday 05 July
by DrLeoStrauss
Comments
Do you believe the American experiment is recoverable at this point or has it been fatally and irrecoverably damaged?
One of the things that seems to intrigue is that countries that host an American secret prison (on old KGB or Sov Army bases?) has entered into an agreement with implicit reciprocity - There is no real reason why one of those nations cannot have a secret prison in the US now or in the future.
If you ever move into a trendy new loft development - say in a converted Greenpoint factory - and you hear screaming in the basement = That may just be a new Romanian secret jail -
re The Benchpresser - We hate to belabor this point - But Tweety was hammering a woman who's a Plame lawyer tonight about him (Interesting how Tweety's bias seems to shift depending on personalities — He did not approve of Melanie Sloan) -
Casually Tweety said Armitage was opposed to the war - as if this is a known fact.
Rivkin then gave a huzzah to this - But it's all BS.
It's only by Oriental Code that Armitage can be said to been against the war - Publicly he was for the war and he actually WORKED for Bush at the time he leaked - He was part of the “plot against Wilson” (see Judge Tatel's opinion).
How can people say he was against the war - How can Tweety excuse Armitage from this basic fact? - Armitage may have leaked against the war and a designated dissident - But he was as pro war as Powell and Powell gave the most important pro war speech in modern history.
Armitage - for what it's worth - signed that dumb PNAC letter too — So let's just cut the crap about Armitage as designated dissident.
At the begining of the Jazz Age (Fitzgerald) Scott Fitzgerald iluustrates a Small Man of Process (Stiftung):
From “This Side of Paradise”
------------------------
THE BIG MAN WITH GOGGLES
On the day that Amory started on his walk to Princeton the sky was a colorless vault, cool, high and barren of the threat of rain. It was a gray day, that least fleshly of all weathers; a day of dreams and far hopes and clear visions. It was a day easily associated with those abstract truths and purities that dissolve in the sunshine or fade out in mocking laughter by the light of the moon. The trees and clouds were carved in classical severity; the sounds of the countryside had harmonized to a monotone, metallic as a trumpet, breathless as the Grecian urn. The day had put Amory in such a contemplative mood that he caused much annoyance to several motorists who were forced to slow up considerably or else run him down. So engrossed in his thoughts was he that he was scarcely surprised at that strange phenomenoncordiality manifested within fifty miles of Manhattan-when a passing car slowed down beside him and a voice hailed him. He looked up and saw a magnificent Locomobile in which sat two middle-aged men, one of them small and anxious looking, apparently an artificial growth on the other who was large and begoggled and imposing.
“Do you want a lift?” asked the apparently artificial growth, glancing from the corner of his eye at the imposing man as if for some habitual, silent corroboration.
“You bet I do. Thanks.”
The chauffeur swung open the door, and, climbing in, Amory settled himself in the middle of the back seat. He took in his companions curiously. The chief characteristic of the big man seemed to be a great confidence in himself set off against a tremendous boredom with everything around him. That part of his face which protruded under the goggles was what is generally termed “strong”; rolls of not undignified fat had collected near his chin; somewhere above was a wide thin mouth and the rough model for a Roman nose, and, below, his shoulders collapsed without a struggle into the powerful bulk of his chest and belly. He was excellently and quietly dressed. Amory noticed that he was inclined to stare straight at the back of the chauffeur's head as if speculating steadily but hopelessly some baffling hirsute problem.
The smaller man was remarkable only for his complete submersion in the personality of the other. He was of that lower secretarial type who at forty have engraved upon their business cards: “Assistant to the President,” and without a sigh consecrate the rest of their lives to second-hand mannerisms.
“Going far?” asked the smaller man in a pleasant disinterested way.
“Quite a stretch.”
“Hiking for exercise?”
“No,” responded Amory succinctly, “I'm walking because I can't afford to ride.”
“Oh.”
Then again:
“Are you looking for work? Because there's lots of work,” he continued rather testily. “All this talk of lack of work. The West is especially short of labor.” He expressed the West with a sweeping, lateral gesture. Amory nodded politely.
“Have you a trade?”
No-Amory had no trade.
“Clerk, eh?”
No-Amory was not a clerk.
“Whatever your line is,” said the little man, seeming to agree wisely with something Amory had said, “now is the time of opportunity and business openings.” He glanced again toward the big man, as a lawyer grilling a witness glances involuntarily at the jury.
Amory decided that he must say something and for the life of him could think of only one thing to say.
“Of course I want a great lot of money”
---- Cont -----
The little man laughed mirthlessly but conscientiously. “That's what every one wants nowadays, but they don't want to work for it.”
“A very natural, healthy desire. Almost all normal people want to be rich without great effortexcept the financiers in problem plays, who want to 'crash their way through.' Don't you want easy money?”
“Of course not,” said the secretary indignantly.
“But,” continued Amory disregarding him, “being very poor at present I am contemplating socialism as possibly my forte.” Both men glanced at him curiously.
“These bomb throwers” The little man ceased as words lurched ponderously from the big man's chest.
“If I thought you were a bomb thrower I'd run you over to the Newark jail. That's what I think of Socialists.”
Amory laughed.
“What are you,” asked the big man, “one of these parlor Bolsheviks, one of these idealists? I must say I fail to see the difference. The idealists loaf around and write the stuff that stirs up the poor immigrants.”
“Well,” said Amory, “if being an idealist is both safe and lucrative, I might try it.”
“What's your difficulty? Lost your job?”
“Not exactly, but-well, call it that.”
“What was it?”
“Writing copy for an advertising agency.”
“Lots of money in advertising.”
Amory smiled discreetly.
“Oh, I'll admit there's money in it eventually. Talent doesn't starve any more. Even art gets enough to eat these days. Artists draw your magazine covers, write your advertisements, hash out rag-time for your theatres. By the great commercializing of printing you've found a harmless, polite occupation for every genius who might have carved his own niche. But beware the artist who's an intellectual also. The artist who doesn't fit the Rousseau, the Tolstoi, the Samuel Butler, the Amory Blaine” “Who's he?” demanded the little man suspiciously.
“Well,” said Amory, “he's ahe's an intellectual personage not very well known at present.”
The little man laughed his conscientious laugh, and stopped rather suddenly as Amory's burning eyes turned on him.
“What are you laughing at?”
“These intellectual people”
“Do you know what it means?”
The little man's eyes twitched nervously.
“Why, it usually means”
“It always means brainy and well-educated,” interrupted Amory. “It means having an active knowledge of the race's experience.” Amory decided to be very rude. He turned to the big man. “The young man,” he indicated the secretary with his thumb, and said young man as one says bell-boy, with no implication of youth, “has the usual muddled connotation of all popular words.” “You object to the fact that capital controls printing?” said the big man, fixing him with his goggles.
“Yes-and I object to doing their mental work for them. It seemed to me that the root of all the business I saw around me consisted in overworking and underpaying a bunch of dubs who submitted to it.”
“Here now,” said the big man, “you'll have to admit that the laboring man is certainly highly paidfive and six hour daysit's ridiculous. You can't buy an honest day's work from a man in the trades-unions.”
“You've brought it on yourselves,” insisted Amory. “You people never make concessions until they're wrung out of you.” “What people?”
“Your class; the class I belonged to until recently; those who by inheritance or industry or brains or dishonesty have become the moneyed class.”
“Do you imagine that if that road-mender over there had the money he'd be any more willing to give it up?”
“No, but what's that got to do with it?”
The older man considered.
--cont. ---
----cont ----
“No, I'll admit it hasn't. It rather sounds as if it had though.”
“In fact,” continued Amory, “he'd be worse. The lower classes are narrower, less pleasant and personally more selfishcertainly more stupid. But all that has nothing to do with the question.” “Just exactly what is the question?”
Here Amory had to pause to consider exactly what the question was.
AMORY COINS A PHRASE
“When life gets hold of a brainy man of fair education,” began Amory slowly, “that is, when he marries he becomes, nine times out of ten, a conservative as far as existing social conditions are concerned. He may be unselfish, kind-hearted, even just in his own way, but his first job is to provide and to hold fast. His wife shoos him on, from ten thousand a year to twenty thousand a year, on and on, in an enclosed treadmill that hasn't any windows. He's done! Life's got him! He's no help! He's a spiritually married man.”
Amory paused and decided that it wasn't such a bad phrase. “Some men,” he continued, “escape the grip. Maybe their wives have no social ambitions; maybe they've hit a sentence or two in a 'dangerous book' that pleased them; maybe they started on the treadmill as I did and were knocked off. Anyway, they're the congressmen you can't bribe, the Presidents who aren't politicians, the writers, speakers, scientists, statesmen who aren't just popular grab-bags for a half-dozen women and children.”
“He's the natural radical?”
“Yes,” said Amory. “He may vary from the disillusioned critic like old Thornton Hancock, all the way to Trotsky. Now this spiritually unmarried man hasn't direct power, for unfortunately the spiritually married man, as a by-product of his money chase, has garnered in the great newspaper, the popular magazine, the influential weeklyso that Mrs. Newspaper, Mrs. Magazine, Mrs. Weekly can have a better limousine than those oil people across the street or those cement people 'round the corner.”
“Why not?”
“It makes wealthy men the keepers of the world's intellectual conscience and, of course, a man who has money under one set of social institutions quite naturally can't risk his family's happiness by letting the clamor for another appear in his newspaper.”
“But it appears,” said the big man.
“Where?-in the discredited mediums. Rotten cheap-papered weeklies.”
“All right-go on.”
--cont.---
--cont---
skipping a few parts ...
----------
THE LITTLE MAN GETS HIS
“If you took all the money in the world,” said the little man with much profundity, “and divided it up in equ-”
“Oh, shut up!” said Amory briskly and, paying no attention to the little man's enraged stare, he went on with his argument. “The human stomach-” he began; but the big man interrupted rather impatiently.
“I'm letting you talk, you know,” he said, “but please avoid stomachs. I've been feeling mine all day. Anyway, I don't agree with one-half you've said. Government ownership is the basis of your whole argument, and it's invariably a beehive of corruption. Men won't work for blue ribbons, that's all rot.”
When he ceased the little man spoke up with a determined nod, as if resolved this time to have his say out.
“There are certain things which are human nature,” he asserted with an owl-like look, “which always have been and always will be, which can't be changed.”
Amory looked from the small man to the big man helplessly. “Listen to that! That's what makes me discouraged with progress. Listen to that! I can name offhand over one hundred natural phenomena that have been changed by the will of mana hundred instincts in man that have been wiped out or are now held in check by civilization. What this man here just said has been for thousands of years the last refuge of the associated mutton-heads of the world. It negates the efforts of every scientist, statesman, moralist, reformer, doctor, and philosopher that ever gave his life to humanity's service. It's a flat impeachment of all that's worth while in human nature. Every person over twenty-five years old who makes that statement in cold blood ought to be deprived of the franchise.”
The little man leaned back against the seat, his face purple with rage. Amory continued, addressing his remarks to the big man. “These quarter-educated, stale-minded men such as your friend here, who think they think, every question that comes up, you'll find his type in the usual ghastly muddle. One minute it's 'the brutality and inhumanity of these Prussians'the next it's 'we ought to exterminate the whole German people.' They always believe that 'things are in a bad way now,' but they 'haven't any faith in these idealists.' One minute they call Wilson 'just a dreamer, not practical'a year later they rail at him for making his dreams realities. They haven't clear logical ideas on one single subject except a sturdy, stolid opposition to all change. They don't think uneducated people should be highly paid, but they won't see that if they don't pay the uneducated people their children are going to be uneducated too, and we're going round and round in a circle. Thatis the great middle class!”
The big man with a broad grin on his face leaned over and smiled at the little man.
“You're catching it pretty heavy, Garvin; how do you feel?” The little man made an attempt to smile and act as if the whole matter were so ridiculous as to be beneath notice. But Amory was not through.
------
--cont---
skipping a few parts ...
----------
THE LITTLE MAN GETS HIS
“If you took all the money in the world,” said the little man with much profundity, “and divided it up in equ-”
“Oh, shut up!” said Amory briskly and, paying no attention to the little man's enraged stare, he went on with his argument. “The human stomach-” he began; but the big man interrupted rather impatiently.
“I'm letting you talk, you know,” he said, “but please avoid stomachs. I've been feeling mine all day. Anyway, I don't agree with one-half you've said. Government ownership is the basis of your whole argument, and it's invariably a beehive of corruption. Men won't work for blue ribbons, that's all rot.”
When he ceased the little man spoke up with a determined nod, as if resolved this time to have his say out.
“There are certain things which are human nature,” he asserted with an owl-like look, “which always have been and always will be, which can't be changed.”
Amory looked from the small man to the big man helplessly. “Listen to that! That's what makes me discouraged with progress. Listen to that! I can name offhand over one hundred natural phenomena that have been changed by the will of mana hundred instincts in man that have been wiped out or are now held in check by civilization. What this man here just said has been for thousands of years the last refuge of the associated mutton-heads of the world. It negates the efforts of every scientist, statesman, moralist, reformer, doctor, and philosopher that ever gave his life to humanity's service. It's a flat impeachment of all that's worth while in human nature. Every person over twenty-five years old who makes that statement in cold blood ought to be deprived of the franchise.”
The little man leaned back against the seat, his face purple with rage. Amory continued, addressing his remarks to the big man. “These quarter-educated, stale-minded men such as your friend here, who think they think, every question that comes up, you'll find his type in the usual ghastly muddle. One minute it's 'the brutality and inhumanity of these Prussians'the next it's 'we ought to exterminate the whole German people.' They always believe that 'things are in a bad way now,' but they 'haven't any faith in these idealists.' One minute they call Wilson 'just a dreamer, not practical'a year later they rail at him for making his dreams realities. They haven't clear logical ideas on one single subject except a sturdy, stolid opposition to all change. They don't think uneducated people should be highly paid, but they won't see that if they don't pay the uneducated people their children are going to be uneducated too, and we're going round and round in a circle. Thatis the great middle class!” ....cont
Had some problem posting the excerpt - so it's broken up a bit, but F. Scot's portrayal of a little man in 1920 is a portrait akin in spirit to the little men of today. The little men - even the big little men, like Eyebrow, stand for nothing save their reps and resumes. The are hollow - cracked vessels.
“The Neocons at least were armed with an agenda and a philosophy”
“Nihilism? Say what you will about the tenets of National Socialism, at least it's an ethos.”
--Walter, “The Big Lebowski”
Dude: Just, just take it easy, Walter.
Walter: That's your answer to everything, Dude. And let me point out--pacifism is not--look at our current situation with that camelfucker in Iraq-- pacifism is not something to hide behind.
Dude: Well, just take 't easy, man.
Walter: I'm perfectly calm, Dude.
Dude: Yeah! Wavin' a gun around?!
Walter: [smugly] Calmer than you are.
Dude: Just take it easy, man!
Walter: Calmer than you are.
“ Still, it is hard for me to believe that anyone who knew anything about Vietnam, or for that matter the Algerian war, which directly followed Indochina for the French, couldn't see that going into Iraq was, in effect, punching our fist into the largest hornet's nest in the world. As in Vietnam, our military superiority is neutralized by political vulnerabilities. The borders are wide open. We operate quite predictably on marginal military intelligence. The adversary knows exactly where we are at all times, as we do not know where he is. Their weaponry fits an asymmetrical war, and they have the capacity to blend into the daily flow of Iraqi life, as we cannot. Our allies - the good Iraqi people the president likes to talk about - appear to be more and more ambivalent about the idea of a Christian, Caucasian liberation, and they do not seem to share many of our geopolitical goals. ...”
Halberstam has a posthumous article in VF comparing Truman and Bush - That excerpt above is interesting because Halberstam never entertains the cynical idea that Cheney and Co wanted to invade Iraq for precisely the downside reasons Halberstam listed - The very failures that were so predictable will be politically useful for generating rightist backlash and revanchist spirits - Plus - Cheney and Co. know the very vulnerability of US troops all but assures they will be killed - thus providing future pretexts for future wars that will be politically and financially promising to them.
In short - they knew it would be bad (if it was good =- that would been a pleasant surprise) - and that's why they launchedd.
They don't really know any soldiers who die - Nor do they really care. It's sad to say that, but let's be realistic.
So it's a roll of the dice.
Walter: Shut the f--k up Donny.
Does Cheney simply serve Cheney, or does he have some bigger ambition that goes beyond his own power and fortune?
Has he created something that will continue to grow when he leaves office, or will it implode upon itself?
I realize that the deep errors in our relationship with the world will continue, and the paranoia that came into its own on 9/11 will continue to infect the public. However, the concentration of power that he has worked to create could easily implode in the next adminstration, if the Congress decides that it doesn't feel like playing ball with the next President, and if the next President doesn't feel like taking orders from the VP. So the relationship between the executive branch and the Congress, and between the White House and the executive departments, could change.
It would seem to me that Cheney's more enduring legacy will be the armies of contractors that he has brought into the security apparatus, since their executives constitute an enduring interest group that will continue to influence Congresses and administrations. They will form a feedback loop with the way we relate to the world and the paranoia that the public feels.
Is this a naive assessment?
“I tried to avoid this war...”
~Colin Powell
Aspen Ideas Festival
Thoreau is correct - Cheney has helped to create a new reality - new facts with the District. Those new realities, new variables, will forever alter the calculus.
Right now Members of Congress think its normal to wage wars of aggression and conduct sneak attacks. They do not whisper these war fantasies among themselves - No - they discuss them in the open, as if it were normal. This will increase.
Tomorrow Kagan will assess the “surge” at AEI - Basically, he will try to simultaneously embrace the surge and take some steps to deny authorship in the future. But ultimately he will try to kick the can down the road.
Colin Powell is more responsible for selling the Iraq war than all the neocons assembled at AEI tomorrow.
Powell's “eyebrows” and “moderation” and “credibility” were critical to raising support for the war plans at a time when it was being contested due to its association with the globally distrusted neocons and the bellicose Bush.
Powell's speech (along with pitchmen like Pollack) allowed people to arbitrage his reputation for moderation gainst the Bush-Cheney-Neocon reputation, in purchase of the same policy.
Now that Powell's hands are thicker than themselves with the blood of US soldiers, Marines, and Iraqi civilians, he has gone to Aspen to wipe them clean with the mountain water and the cheers of swells on panel discussions. Damm!
Agree re Powell. Time after time, the media talking heads, pundits, journalists all say that “after Colin Powell said we need to do this . . .”
As Carl Levin lamented, Powell never understood that he had enormous power and could have used it if he was willing to accept the price, which was political engagement. But the narcissist in Powell would never risk his porcelain public approval rating.
That Feb 2003 UN speech about alleged Iraq wmd is wrapped like a toilet seat around Colin Powell's neck - Stinking up his real reputation from now until Kingdom Come.
Too bad the media can't smell such stank s*** when it is right in their face.
“The question still remains: even with Dubya and Cheney gone, who has the vision, will and capacity to clean house, shut down operational cells, purge first, second through fifth tier personnel - while rectifying our decaying international position.”
With her firsthand knowledge of the machinations of White House politics, I think Hillary could at least hit the ground running.
Remember when Hillary hugged Mrs. Arafat?
re HRC/Arafat - Yes, FOX dubbed it “The Suha Kiss” and soon enough Dick Morris was intimating HRC was an anti-semite. It didn't stick. If we recall HRC kissed Suha before or just after Arafat made some speech saying that the Israelis had been doing something nasty but we forget the details.11
“An Arab country with the second largest proven oil reserves, a fierce revolutionary ideology, a large and recently-blooded army, and a leadership composed almost entirely of men in their thirties is obviously a force to be reckoned with. Iraq, which has this dynamic combination and much else besides, has not until recently been very much regarded as a power. But with the new discussions in Opec, the ending of the Kurdistan war and the new round of fighting in Lebanon, its political voice is being heard more and more. The Baghdad regime is the first oil-producing government to opt for 100-per-cent nationalisation, a process completed with the acquisition of foreign assets in Basrah last December. It was the first to call for the use of oil as a political weapon against Israel and her backers. It gives strong economic and political support to the ‘Rejection Front’ Palestinians who oppose Arafat’s conciliation and are currently trying to outface the Syrians in Beirut. And it has a leader — Saddam Hussain — who has sprung from being an underground revolutionary gunman to perhaps the first visionary Arab statesman since Nasser.”
~Christopher Hitchens
The New Statesmen, 1976
Who will demand access to the Warren Commission's hidden Kennedy assasination findings before the 75 years are up. (Gerald Ford and Arlen
Specter were on the Warren Commission. I
guess it won't be them.)
Who will demand access to the hidden Warren Commission Report on the Kennedy assassination before the 75 years are up. (Gerald Ford and Arlen Specter were on the Warren Commission. I guess it won't be Specter.)
Who will demand access to the Warren Commission's hidden Kennedy assasination findings before the 75 years are up. (Gerald Ford and Arlen
Specter were on the Warren Commission. I
guess it won't be them.)
DISALLOWED (TrackBack)
Add Comments
Do you believe the American experiment is recoverable at this point or has it been fatally and irrecoverably damaged?