"The wealthy, not only by private fraud but also by common laws, do every day pluck and snatch away from the people some part of their daily living. Therefore, when I consider and weigh in my mind these commonwealths which nowadays do flourish, I perceive nothing but a certain conspiracy of rich men in procuring their own commodities under the name and authority of the commonwealth.
They invent and devise all means and crafts, first how to keep safely without fear of losing that which they have unjustly gathered together, and next how to hire and abuse the work and labor of the people for as little money and effort as possible."
Thomas More, Utopia
Tuesday, February 05, 2008
Happy Anniversary!
It's been five years since Colin Powell's bruva performance before the UN Security Council in his role as Team Bush's most credible official. Sitting before the Security Council, his props carefully organized beside him, Powell passionately spun the Iraqi/WMD lies that bamboozled the nation into supporting a war of aggression. Jon Schwarz lays it all out in devastating detail.
5 comments:
Anonymous
said...
"Powell passionately spun the Iraqi/WMD lies that bamboozled the nation into supporting a war of aggression"
Lol, what a laughably retarded statement. First of all, The nation already supported removing Saddam and liberating Iraq. The American people were clamoring for Saddam's removal ever since 1991 when Bush 41 didn't "finish the job". US support for Saddam's removal remained extremely high (70-85%) throughout the 1990s an up until the 2003 Iraq Liberation.
Bush merely enacted the collective will of the American people. Secondly, your claimed "war of agression" is bullshit. Saddam was our enemy, we had every right to remove him, end of story
Let's see, when Powell was saying what the conservatives wanted he was a prince. Look we support blacks in the party, they'd say. Then they would point to Connie Rice. When he didn't say what they wanted he is a jerk.
Where are the WMD's? That's old news. They were not there. The president deceived the American people to go to Iraq. No, make that he out and out lied. History will show us he is one of the worst presidents in history.
WMD was a total irrelevancy. That nonsense was purely for the consumption of the "international community". Who gives a damn about what they think? I didn't need WMD to support an Iraq liberation. I DEMANDED one, despite the presence/absence of WMD....as did a majority of the American people
I can think of at least a half dozen dictators worse than Saddam. Why pick on him? Bush thought we would run through there like a hot knife through butter.
When we finally leave there I give the country three months (tops) before OUR regime is overthrown.
“The nation already supported removing Saddam and liberating Iraq” -“Gen. Pinochet”
Who gives a fuck what “the nation” supported? Was a US attack on Iraq sanctioned by the UN Security Council or conducted in accord with Article 51 (self-defense from imminent attack) of the UN Charter as required by international law? Answer: hell no and that’s all that matters. Just out of curiosity, why wasn’t “the nation”, more accurately those who own and run it, clamoring to “liberate” the people of Iraq when the murderous tyrant was at the height of his power? For example, when he launched his invasion of sovereign Iran in 1980 at the cost (with US assistance) of perhaps one million lives, why did the Reagan administration provide Saddam with diplomatic, economic and overt military support for this clear violation of the UN Charter? When Saddam gassed the Kurds in 1988 after they rose up against him, why did the US shield him from international sanction with its UN Security Council veto?
“…your claimed "war of agression" [sic] is bullshit” -GP
Fascinating. Then perhaps you can explain what Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, our chief prosecutor at Nuremberg, meant when he announced the following at the Tribunal:
An "aggressor” is a state that is the first to commit such actions as "invasion of its armed forces, with or without a declaration of war, of the territory of another State"; and that a war of aggression was, "…the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole” [see: “Just War? Hardly” by N. Chomsky].
“Saddam was our enemy, we had every right to remove him, end of story” -GP
On the contrary you imperial prick, we had no such “right” to invade a sovereign nation, overwhelmingly contribute to the slaughter of over one million of its citizens, create four million refugees, shatter its infrastructure, and set up institutions for the purpose of looting its most important natural resource.
For the definitive exposition of the Team Bush lies that led us to war, take the time to read this report by Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith of the Center for Public Integrity.
After Iran’s retaliation
-
[image: Iranian military conducts nationwide drills in 2022. (Photo:
Salampix/Abaca via ZUMA Press/APA Images)]Israel's apparently limited
response to Iran...
India: Modi and the rise of the billionaire Raj
-
A general election in India starts today. 970m Indians, more than 10% of
the world’s population, will head to the polls in what will be the largest
electi...
Why I Rarely Care About The Events Of the Day
-
[image: Why I Rarely Care About The Events Of the Day]
There are two forces in history.
The first is weight. Or mass. Or trajectory. The unstoppable force...
Signs of weakening in the Australian labour market
-
Today (April 18, 2024), the Australian Bureau of Statistics released the
latest – Labour Force, Australia – for March 2024, which shows that the
labour mar...
The Farce of Diplomatic Assurances
-
The United States has now, on the face of it, produced the Diplomatic Note
giving the two assurances required by the High Court to allow the
extradition ...
Hilarious and Philarion
-
Lots going on this weekend….join the con-versation. Speak words. Use
language thatsymbolizes acts and objects: a cat,a verb of action,
adjectives. The dawn...
Media Say ... Gloom And Doom In China
-
The New York Times, and other western media, are running a 'doom and gloom
in Xi's economy' campaign. The latest entry is this piece: China’s Economic
Pain...
Baddiel, an ignorant, arrogant charlatan
-
If Twitter obsessed David Baddiel's book, *Jews Don't Count* was a
*Wikipedia* entry it would be flagged as having "multiple issues".
The first problem ...
The Great Student Loan Ruse
-
These appalling figures don't fully capture the cruelty of the reality to
which they refer.
The post The Great Student Loan Ruse appeared first on The Co...
Moving Interruptus, and Why Hospitals Suck
-
In the event, June turned out to be the horrible month I had expected --
but June also proved unexpectedly resourceful. It was horrible for reasons
I hadn'...
Taking our final steps
-
From the ISO
Members of the leadership team responsible for carrying out the decisions
made by current and recently resigned ISO members in voting to diss...
On Fetish
-
God creates Adam and immediately—sooner than we thought—He speaks to him.
This first address, according to the midrash, is a seduction:
*“And the Lord ...
Responsibility Is For The Poors
-
*Paul Ryan fixing Obamacare.*
Let's talk about responsibility.
When you break something, you have a responsibility to fix it. When you do
your damnede...
Yoshie Furuhashi, "After MRZine"
-
[image: MRZine]Today MRZine comes to an end, after over a decade's run.
Thank you for your past support. . . . My next project is to establish
Movement Tra...
Trump Era Fresh
-
For those who still swing by to see if I'm around, you might want to go here.
Yes, it's a new site for a New Day. Let's learn together.
The Return on My Investment
-
By: Aaron Datesman
It's easy to recognize a win when it comes with a trophy at the end (or, in
the case of politics, an inauguration). It's harder to rec...
It's really very simple
-
[Note: I am pushing this article live two days early because ZeroHedge
somehow managed to get a hold of it and post it before I did. Needless to
say, I do...
5 comments:
"Powell passionately spun the Iraqi/WMD lies that bamboozled the nation into supporting a war of aggression"
Lol, what a laughably retarded statement. First of all, The nation already supported removing Saddam and liberating Iraq. The American people were clamoring for Saddam's removal ever since 1991 when Bush 41 didn't "finish the job". US support for Saddam's removal remained extremely high (70-85%) throughout the 1990s an up until the 2003 Iraq Liberation.
Bush merely enacted the collective will of the American people. Secondly, your claimed "war of agression" is bullshit. Saddam was our enemy, we had every right to remove him, end of story
To the general:
Let's see, when Powell was saying what the conservatives wanted he was a prince. Look we support blacks in the party, they'd say. Then they would point to Connie Rice. When he didn't say what they wanted he is a jerk.
Where are the WMD's? That's old news. They were not there. The president deceived the American people to go to Iraq. No, make that he out and out lied. History will show us he is one of the worst presidents in history.
WMD was a total irrelevancy. That nonsense was purely for the consumption of the "international community". Who gives a damn about what they think? I didn't need WMD to support an Iraq liberation. I DEMANDED one, despite the presence/absence of WMD....as did a majority of the American people
To the general:
I can think of at least a half dozen dictators worse than Saddam. Why pick on him? Bush thought we would run through there like a hot knife through butter.
When we finally leave there I give the country three months (tops) before OUR regime is overthrown.
“The nation already supported removing Saddam and liberating Iraq”
-“Gen. Pinochet”
Who gives a fuck what “the nation” supported? Was a US attack on Iraq sanctioned by the UN Security Council or conducted in accord with Article 51 (self-defense from imminent attack) of the UN Charter as required by international law? Answer: hell no and that’s all that matters. Just out of curiosity, why wasn’t “the nation”, more accurately those who own and run it, clamoring to “liberate” the people of Iraq when the murderous tyrant was at the height of his power? For example, when he launched his invasion of sovereign Iran in 1980 at the cost (with US assistance) of perhaps one million lives, why did the Reagan administration provide Saddam with diplomatic, economic and overt military support for this clear violation of the UN Charter? When Saddam gassed the Kurds in 1988 after they rose up against him, why did the US shield him from international sanction with its UN Security Council veto?
“…your claimed "war of agression" [sic] is bullshit”
-GP
Fascinating. Then perhaps you can explain what Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, our chief prosecutor at Nuremberg, meant when he announced the following at the Tribunal:
An "aggressor” is a state that is the first to commit such actions as "invasion of its armed forces, with or without a declaration of war, of the territory of another State"; and that a war of aggression was, "…the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole” [see: “Just War? Hardly” by N. Chomsky].
“Saddam was our enemy, we had every right to remove him, end of story”
-GP
On the contrary you imperial prick, we had no such “right” to invade a sovereign nation, overwhelmingly contribute to the slaughter of over one million of its citizens, create four million refugees, shatter its infrastructure, and set up institutions for the purpose of looting its most important natural resource.
For the definitive exposition of the Team Bush lies that led us to war, take the time to read this report
by Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith of the Center for Public Integrity.
Post a Comment