Category Archives: Propaganda

UPDATED: Tea Party Must Go To War With The War Party (Abu Ghraib à la Afghanistan)

Debt, Economy, Foreign Policy, Neoconservatism, Propaganda, War

Ending the warfare state is the only ray of hope for down-and-out, indebted America. With laser-like precision, Pat Buchanan zeroes in on the tack the tea party must take if it is to tackle the federal-induced “deficit-debt crisis, a national debt nearing 100 percent of gross domestic product and a deficit of 10 percent of GDP.” There is only “one place where a bipartisan majority may be found for major spending cuts: defense and the empire, the warfare state.”

“After Iraq and Afghanistan,” writes Buchanan, in “Tea Party vs. War Party?”, “the American people are not going to give the establishment and War Party a free hand in foreign policy. Every patriot will do what is necessary and pay what is needed to defend his country. But national security is one thing, empire security another.”

There is another matter I have raised in “Statism Starts With You!” and other recent columns, and it is “America’s fondness for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid — which combined, account for close to half of the federal government’s budget.” “Only 7 percent of the country will consider slashing the first two welfare programs. And a mere eleven percent of those living in the ‘Land of the Free’ are prepared to pare down Medicaid. Keep the government out of my Medicare!”

For a lack of any other viable option for stalling State spending, the Tea Party must position itself in opposition to Obama’s volitional and inherited wars; ignore Mr. Hannity’s nagging about “Empire security,” and preach and proselytize about the end of Empire.

If ever there was a religious cause, ending America’s military forays abroad is it.

UPDATE: Abu Ghraib à la Afghanistan. You remember the pornographic pictorials from Abu Ghraib prison, starring some sadistic and slutty servicemen and women? Well, GI JOE and GI HO have relocated. And they will continue to do their thing until the US government stops unleashing them in other countries. (Place them on the US-Mexico border where they can scare some gangsters their own size—drug cartel members—if that’s not posse comitatus.)

HERE goes:

Those who have seen the photos say they are grisly: soldiers beside newly killed bodies, decaying corpses and severed fingers.
The dozens of photos, described in interviews and in e-mails and military documents obtained by The Associated Press, were seized by Army investigators and are a crucial part of the case against five soldiers accused of killing three Afghan civilians earlier this year.

UPDATED: 40,000 Protest Ground-Zero Mosque (“Wilders Was Not Wilders”)

Islam, Journalism, Media, Propaganda

Geert Wilders included. So says anti-mosque activist, Pamella Geller. Yet the media is silent. Did you hear anything? I did not. Who are the bums working for?

UPDATE (Sept. 13): I did not read Geert’s speech. Larry Auster contends that in it, “Wilders Was Not Wilders.” Auster postulates that the dictates of the Geller-Spencer duo account for Wilders’ weak, soft message. Some time ago, I delineated clearly how America’s incoherent anti-Islamization contingent differs from the fierce and focused Wilders.

In “Dhimmis At Ground Zero?”, I pointed out that by requesting kindness and consideration from those they regard as conquistadors, these anti-mosque activists run the risk of sounding like dhimmis.

“Such pleas,” I pointed out, “remind me of the victim impact statement so popular in our Courts. How humiliating and futile is it to plead for contrition from sadists who’ve amply proved they are incapable of such sentiment, and derive sadistic pleasure from watching their victims squirm.”

Nor am I convinced that the Washington Post was wrong when it implied that, by prancing around with Pamella, Spencer, a serious scholar of Islam, was undermining his well-established bona fides.

Writes Auster:

Moreover, this is the first time to my knowledge that Wilders has ever done this. In his career as an internationally known Islam opponent over the last six years, he has adopted consecutively harder-line positions on Islam, never reverting to an earlier, weaker position once he had taken a stronger position. Among Wilders’s many admirable traits is his remarkable consistency. So I found his speech on Saturday not only disappointing, but unsettling.

Pamela Geller, a passionate activist, deserves credit for having driven the mosque issue. But the way she has driven the mosque issue may well have had the effect of weakening the anti-Islamization cause, by reducing the meaning of anti-Islamization to “no mosque at Ground Zero.”

UPDATED: 40,000 Protest Ground-Zero Mosque ("Wilders Was Not Wilders")

Islam, Journalism, Media, Propaganda

Geert Wilders included. So says anti-mosque activist, Pamella Geller. Yet the media is silent. Did you hear anything? I did not. Who are the bums working for?

UPDATE (Sept. 13): I did not read Geert’s speech. Larry Auster contends that in it, “Wilders Was Not Wilders.” Auster postulates that the dictates of the Geller-Spencer duo account for Wilders’ weak, soft message. Some time ago, I delineated clearly how America’s incoherent anti-Islamization contingent differs from the fierce and focused Wilders.

In “Dhimmis At Ground Zero?”, I pointed out that by requesting kindness and consideration from those they regard as conquistadors, these anti-mosque activists run the risk of sounding like dhimmis.

“Such pleas,” I pointed out, “remind me of the victim impact statement so popular in our Courts. How humiliating and futile is it to plead for contrition from sadists who’ve amply proved they are incapable of such sentiment, and derive sadistic pleasure from watching their victims squirm.”

Nor am I convinced that the Washington Post was wrong when it implied that, by prancing around with Pamella, Spencer, a serious scholar of Islam, was undermining his well-established bona fides.

Writes Auster:

Moreover, this is the first time to my knowledge that Wilders has ever done this. In his career as an internationally known Islam opponent over the last six years, he has adopted consecutively harder-line positions on Islam, never reverting to an earlier, weaker position once he had taken a stronger position. Among Wilders’s many admirable traits is his remarkable consistency. So I found his speech on Saturday not only disappointing, but unsettling.

Pamela Geller, a passionate activist, deserves credit for having driven the mosque issue. But the way she has driven the mosque issue may well have had the effect of weakening the anti-Islamization cause, by reducing the meaning of anti-Islamization to “no mosque at Ground Zero.”

UPDATED: Crazy Like A Fox (Bush & Laissez-Faire Capitalism)

Barack Obama, Bush, Capitalism, Conservatism, Political Philosophy, Propaganda

The following is taken from my new column, “Crazy Like A Fox,” now on WND.COM:

“From Cleveland, Ohio, Obama issued forth this week with renewed vigor. Media plaudits notwithstanding, the president’s words were either inane or simply insane.

An instance of “insane” was Obama’s professed fealty to a “lean and efficient government.” The trillion-dollar deficit man declared: “I believe government should leave people free to make the choices they think are best for themselves and their families, so long as those choices don’t hurt others.”

On the sly side was the president’s confession that he was propelled to run for president because for much of the last decade, a very specific governing philosophy had reigned about how America should work … The idea was that if we just had blind faith in the market, if we let corporations play by their own rules, if we left everyone else to fend for themselves that America would grow and America would prosper.

Evidently, Oprah’s backing and naked ambition had nothing to do with Barack Obama’s selfless ride to the nation’s rescue; it was the philosophy of laissez-faire capitalism, RIP.

Not for nothing did Ayn Rand call capitalism “the unknown ideal.” This ideal has not been practiced in the US for a very long time; it is a fable that George W. Bush was an unfettered capitalist.” …

Read the complete column, “Crazy Like A Fox,” now on WND.COM.

Read my libertarian manifesto, Broad Sides: One Woman’s Clash With A Corrupt Society.

The Second Edition features bonus material and reviews. Get your copy (or copies) now!

UPDATED: Bush & Laissez-Faire Capitalism. Bush gave the economy its first stimulus, or “shot in the arm,” as he called it, in 2002. Like Obama, Bush believed with all his brutal little heart that consumption undergirds the American way of life and that any slack in consumption must be filled by government spending.

Bush gave us the Sarbanes-Oxley Act by which Bush federalized corporate law, and ensured that the SEC’s politically voracious prosecutors were able to pursue any business executive as long as a lay jury could be convinced the unfortunate chap intended to mislead or stiff shareholders. The same “capitalism” saw the detestable Decider pass an enormous prescription drug entitlement program, Medicare Part D, and “No Child Left Behind,” which further federalized education and increased the reach and size of the federal government. Let us not forget the “Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)” of 2008, which showed the way for Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) in 2009.