by Editors

The   CHINA  SYNDROME

By  Dusty Schoch

 

An open letter, by DW Foreign Policy Editor, Dusty Schoch, to Mr. Robert Culp III, High Point, N.C. (DW hometown) C.E.O. of Culp Inc., a furniture, upholstery and fabrics conglomerate which in the past decade has closed most of its manufacturing doors and shipped its fabrication division (labor) “off shore” to China. The company announced the closing of the last remaining two of its plants in N.C., with the sacrifice of 185 jobs.  On December 15, 2006, Mr. Culp was quoted in his local paper, the High Point Enterprise,  as saying “By further consolidating our U.S. manufacturing operations and utilizing lower cost manufacturing alternatives, we are reducing our operating costs and improving our domestic capacity utilization…” Mr. Culp went on to claim that all this means that “We have  been “…highly  successful with our China platform…and continue to be encouraged by the progress we are making in selling non-U.S.-produced products.”

 

What has this to do with U.S. foreign policy you might ask?  Well…. Consider this:

 

Who’s “We”, Mr. Culp?”

 

The quote from C.E.O., Robert Culp, in your Dec. 15 business section was that through the closing of Culp Inc’s last two NC-based fabric plants—eliminating 185 jobs for residents of Lincolnton and Graham—“We have been highly successful with our China platform….”.   Does the “we” include those 185 Culp employees whose jobs have been quite literally Shanghai’d?

 

About 3 years ago I recall an article wherein Culp stated  he was satisfied with the “balance” of off-shoring his company had achieved and hoped to maintain. Now there is no Culp Inc. in NC unless you count what remains of their former industry, where they apparently have switched  roles from American manufacturers to Chinese sales reps.

 

What remains of the furniture and textile industries in this town that prompted its patriarchs to name their  club “The String and Splinter”?  Isn’t it time we call it the “Lint and Dust Club?”

 

As Christmas nears, Mr. Culp,  will your former employees be seated around their tables celebrating their “high success” along with you?  Who’s the “we”, Mr. Culp?   Would that be you and your Chinese partners—the ones paying their employees $179/mth?

 

I’m not an economist and admittedly  have very little knowledge and even less appreciation for mega-million-dollar corporate margins and maneuverings.  But what little I do know includes the fact that exporting jobs and manufacturing  to China betokens industrial defeat and a quest for short-term profits, and one day there will be hell to pay when we are totally dependent on China (our most formidable  nuclear-armed enemy on earth) and they suddenly declare  the dollar is worth about a nickel. When that happens, no Federal Reserve ping-ponging with  prime will keep Peking’s hands off the switch of American inflation and/or depression.  Happy Christmas, Mr. Culp, and

 

God Bless us…every one.

 

Dusty Schoch

 

December 15, 2006

 

Posted in America, American Economy, Corporations, Economics, Political | Leave a comment by Editors

My Current Sadness

 

An 18-Year Old College Student and first-time DW

Contributor shares his views…and Feelings about

Today’s America

 

By: Bradford Clinard

 

This is my frame of reference. It is late and I want to sleep, but sleep alludes me. In its place is a small pain in my head over the sadness I am feeling. The sadness is for my generation, for my country, and for my world.

 

I do not feel I am extremely educated. I am a college student working hard to learn, grow, and discover more about myself and the world around be. This is of course following the implicit politically correct path—constantly reinforced by others telling me how well I am doing. I quickly admit that I don’t think I know a lot. In fact, the more I learn the more I realize I don’t know—one of the great reasons I see to live and learn more.

 

For about the last eight years, I have struggled for understanding about the world around me, a journey taken by most, yet uniquely mine. At this point in my journey, I am very saddened for I feel intrinsically something is very wrong with our system of being. I truly hope that someone wiser than myself can tell me otherwise.

 

In gathering an understanding of the American Way into which I have been so proudly born and indoctrinated, I begin to see increasing discrepancy and hypocrisy. Many of the instruments used to run the show are inherently undemocratic. I can’t be the only one who sees this. However, just in my attempt to write down my thoughts fear has arisen inside myself. The fear says I shouldn’t write my true thoughts for they are not safe; in fact they are oppositional and controversial. Paranoia arises. What might happen to me at the hands of people who enjoy the status quo my writing clashes with and rejects? It’s as if in my mind I see myself in a Communist Regime; where is my democratic free speech in that? I fear not the tar and feathering received by my prior free-thinkers but there is an underlying fear of being stigmatized.

 

I was taught, in school, that America was founded as a free society. It is a safe haven of escape from the tyrannous rule of Monarchs. A place where all men enjoy freedom and are equal. Hard work and dedication can achieve anything. We are told, not so discretely, BE ALL YOU CAN BE! Subscribe to a version of Adam Smith’s capitalism—competition creates competitive markets that self-regulate price and demand. There is a wonderful idea of Meritocracy. And of course how can one leave out the granddaddy of them all–THE AMERICAN DREAM. All this and so much more is packaged and discretely feed to us from infancy. All the dominant ideology running through my head…aches.

 

As I look around, I can see great strides have been taken as we are less racist, sexist, and homophobic than in the past; at least today it has ceased to appear in overt ways. Given that, there is a way to go still, but progress has been made. At the same time, some say there has been a moral landslide, but others call this “toleration” and “liberation.” I find out that primary education system itself is somewhat corrupt, as it taught me “facts” that turned out to be not so factual. It attempted to deprive me of critical thinking skills while teaching me to conform to massification. Meritocracy turned out to be a joke—acceptance to the “Ivy League Club” turned out to be based predominantly on family name or wealth donation potential. I no longer want the American Dream, which I view now as little more than self servitude—servitude to the system in exchange for consumption privileges and escapism. I don’t want to worship the celebrities who live the “great life.” They are wonderfully-employed red herrings, concealing the deliberate injustice and elite capitalist tycoons marketing them.

 

So where does that leave me—still trying to translate and play the game? Every time I am told “you are doing the right things,” or “keep up the good work,” it hits me as a reminder. I see myself, like others, as being goaded through the process of life; be as quiet, containable, predictable, consuming, and possibly productive as possible. Still, I suppose I will continue this until a better alternative presents itself. Ah yes, the self- empowerment junkies. I hear them preaching in the distance—positive thinking is the key to self improvement. What was it Dirken said, “Self improvement is masturbation?” Ok so honestly it’s not that bleak, but it is easy to view things that way.

 

Possibly this is why so many of my peers are habitually depressed and suppressing toxic levels of anger. It seems plain enough to me where one, especially an impressionable young adult or adolescent, could be confused about society. Maybe this is the real reason so many are ambivalent or apathetic about deep issues. They then run to hide in the safety and comforting escapism afforded through technology.

 

All this seems like a big pile of ____. Continually contributing to the pile are the real rulers. One word—OGILOPOLIES. They are running the show now. It seems to me that the US has cast democracy into the hands of the oligopolies. They used (and abused) the capitalist system to push it into its own quiet extinction without a word being said. Corporations did this by predatorily eliminating most of their competitors and allying with the remaining competition. Now they control the media, the government, the people and our way of life.

 

This can easily be seen in the Iraq war. It is the true injustice of today. Corporations are the imperialistic empires of today. First they took over our country by exploiting our people. (Do you think we are not exploited? What do you call it then when junk food is marketed to a five-year old by a Sponge Bob picture?) The country takeover was easy as they (corporate lobbyists) put money into the hands of men running the government, taking on the role of puppet master. They guarantee influence by using the formula—donate roughly thirty percent to Democrats and the remaining to Republicans. No matter who is in control they have a pocket paid for.

 

At the same time, people were sedated by already-available escapist leisure consumption. It is taught that to be democratic one should support the capitalist economy through proper consumption. However, we are never satisfied. Eternal Progress means there is always new and better stuff we can’t live without, just around the corner. Now they seek to expand their Machiavellian interests and policies throughout the world.

 

I now realize my sadness comes from the dehumanization I so vividly see being played out before my eyes, in part because, I choose to reject oppression, a sentiment I grew up believing this country also supported. But sadly, in today’s world like that of yesterday people are simply pawns used by Ogolopolies that further the interests of the powerful…now called corporations. The dehumanization is seen by the prostitution of our lives for a material world in the name of progress.

 

I constantly hear people complain about Bush and his war. The real problem is America. Moral and ethical lines I once knew and looked to have been blurred to non-distinction. Those between Democrats and Republicans, corporations and government, and the exploitation of a notion of freedom. For what purpose or cause is this war being fought? Terrorism, Sadam… democracy in Iraq? Sadam is sentenced to execution and nobody seems to care. Was it not just two years ago when we triumphantly dragged him out of his hole? What has changed?

 

Change has come in the elevation of our day-to-day fear. Maybe this is the true victim of terrorism—our enjoyment of life without fear. Worse yet, our fears today wear numerous faces that are inscrutable. It threatens to strike anywhere anytime. From the awaking bang of September eleventh we have seen shoe, sports drink, roadside, and suicide bombers. All share a similar resolution—they create more destruction and fear. The news media have also had their hand in adding to the flames of fear. Once again corporate profit-driven interests control news media. Because destruction sells news, terrorism is overexposed and under-explained, fueling the fear and more importantly giving our enemy a venue for their message. It is a message of hate, but their propaganda is selling.

 

In America, we relish our celebration of Eternal Progress. I don’t see our state of fear as progress. I don’t think we are getting closer to the Utopia we project; in fact I see this projection as dangerous. It is anti progress. I would gladly trade technology and luxury consumption for a simpler time of yesteryear. A time of relative innocence. Maybe that is in part where my sadness is rooted—a break with that former innocence, a shift to the adult world, and growing pains. Still, maybe it is the pain felt and shared by all who refuse to be inebriated and immersed by consumer media-ism lifestyle.

 

What has changed is the corporation’s agenda. They don’t care who wins—the war in Iraq or the elections. Neither do they care about the lives lost or the injustices done again and again to humanity. In the end they think they will win because they get more power and the “all-mighty dollar.” At least now I understand that expression.

 

I see my sadness more clearly now. My sadness is for lives forever changed, lives never truly lived, and for the ultimately lost. I will not forget.

 

ABOUT THE WRITER:

 

(Brad Clinard is a High Pointer and a sophomore attending the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, where, when he is not ruminating on the state of our nation and culture, he makes excellent grades in his area of scholastic concentration (presently business) and excellent strokes on the tennis court for his University’s Varsity Tennis Team. )

 

Posted in America, American Economy, Economics, Political, War | Leave a comment by Editors

	Realism about Iraq- The Doughnut versus The Hole Part One

By: DW In-House Historian and Philosopher, Len Carrier, with an addendum by DW Foreign Policy Editor, Dusty Schoch.

 

            George Packer’s “Talk of the Town” piece in the November 27 New Yorker decries the lack of realism shown by both Republicans and Democrats concerning what to do about Iraq.  He scoffs at those of us who want to begin removing our military forces now by saying that if we leave we will be unable to compel the Iraqi government to do anything to stop the escalation of violence.  He also points out the obvious by saying that the fading neoconservative hope of eventual “victory” in Iraq is just a pipe dream.  So what is Packer’s only hope of not losing in Iraq?  He says we ought to get all the various warring factions together around the table to work out some means of sharing power and decreasing the level of violence.  If that doesn’t work, nothing will.

How is this supposed to inject a note of realism into the picture?  He would have more success in forcing the Bloods and the Crips to sit down and talk things over.  It just isn’t going to happen.  There is no way, as an occupying force, we are going to get anyone to do anything in Iraq.  Iraq is a shambles.  Its government, hiding in the Green Zone and propped up by our military forces, would fall instantly if we withdrew that support.  Packer apparently thinks this is a bad thing.  He thinks that the ensuing violence will spill over into other countries in the Middle East, and he thinks we must try to prevent it.  This is a pleasant thought, but so was King Canute’s thought that he should try to prevent the tide from rising.

Packer’s mistake lies in thinking that it is up to us to “do something” to make Iraq, and the entire Middle East, a better place—not only for Iraqis but also for ourselves.  But the hard truth is that any more meddling on our part is only likely to make matters worse for all parties concerned.  Would there be an escalation of violence if we left? In the short run, probably.  But how can it be any better to stand watch over the killing of a thousand people each month for two more years (the length of Bush’s tenure), than to have even as many as ten thousand killed in the aftermath of our leaving? 

What the do-gooders forget is that these Arab tribes who are now warring against one another used to live together in relative peace.  They knew their territories and the limits of their powers.  It is we who lit the fires of sectarian war, and we only pour gasoline on the flames by trying to manage the blaze we created.  Perhaps it is time to squelch our paternalistic instincts and leave people alone to work out their own destinies.  Oh, yes, as a token of our sincere regret for killing so many of their citizens, we can bequeath all those billion-dollar military bases we constructed to protect our claim on Iraqi oil to the Iraqi people. Maybe they can make better use of them than we did.

                                                                                                           

Leonard Carrier

 

DUSTY’S ADDENDUM

 

Leonard, as always I have nothing to dispute about your astute observations, except one thing- You’re ruing the hole and missing altogether the doughnut.  This artesian brouhaha  about what’s going to happen while we’re there in Iraq and how awful things are apt to get when we’re gone…it’s all Canute’s naïve struggles about the inevitably returning tide.  The point (of REALITY) is the Neo-Cons knew all along that there was no exit from Iraq…at least no non-chaotic exit.  Bush’s own father turned down the same Wolfowitz/Perle/Wurmser “A Clean Break”- inspired call for ousting Saddam after Kuwait as a mission rendered impossible by lessons taught the French and English on earlier occasions, and the Russians more recently in Afghanistan. No Western nation will ever successfully occupy and/or forcefully democratize an Islamic nation.

The doughnut all along was and remains the oil. The doughnut was that the Bush-led Neo-cons have totally won the war because it was never a war against terrorism in the first place; it was a war to control 20 percent of Middle Eastern oil reserves and in this-the  true reality about American meddling in Iraq—it’s truly a matter of “mission accomplished”.  Bush was telling the truth that day he landed on the carrier in his cute little pretend aviator’s jacket.

 

I urge you and the rest of the DW readership to re-read Chris Floyd’s piece I published on November 7 (hit the “articles” link on this site), entitled “Why Bush Smiles”.  Here’s a “reality-relevant” excerpt:

 

 

 

“Yes, victory. You wonder why Bush and his minions maintain the seemingly irrational belief that “things are going well” in Iraq, that “we’re making progress,” etc.? That’s because things are going well in the war they are fighting: the war for money and power. What happens to the human beings caught up in this war ­ Iraqi civilians, or American citizens at ever-greater risk from the terrorism spawned by the war ­ is, again, no concern of the Bush gang. In fact, the worse things are from that standpoint, the better it is for the Bushists. The war profits (and stolen swag) they and their corporate cronies have accrued from the Iraq War (and the “War on Terror” as well) have given them unimaginable wealth with which to continue their overall dominance of American society ­ no matter who wins the elections in 2006 or 2008, or for decades beyond. As I’ve stated often before, no matter what happens, Bush and his cronies have already won the war .

They’ve won even if Iraq collapses into perpetual anarchy, or becomes an extremist religious state; they’ve won even if the whole region goes up in flames, and terrorism flares to unprecedented heights ­ because this will just mean more war-profiteering, more fear-profiteering. And yes, they’ve won even if they lose their majority next month or the presidency in 2008, because war and fear will still fill their coffers, buying them continuing influence and power as they bide their time through another interregnum of a Democratic “centrist” ­ who will, at best, only nibble at the edges of the militarist state  ­ until they are back in the saddle again. The only way they can lose the Iraq War is if they are actually arrested and imprisoned for their war crimes. And you know and I know that’s not going to happen.”

 

Click here and read the whole article —again and again – until the hole disappears and you see the doughnut - http://democratswrite.com/the_democratic_opinion/page231.htm

 

 

 So, as I said, Leonard—I have no fault to take with your analysis of the flaws inherent in all the armchair quarterbacking in the on-going  Iraq games, the political pragmatisms, posturings, polemics  and pretensions;  I simply want to remind you that all scenarios (exit and staying put)  are going to be disastrous with the exception that Bush’s victory is in either case complete and absolute.  The oil is pouring; we’re in control; we’ll continue to exert that control to protect the flow of oil and dollars so long as the oil is there and our corporate lobbyists can con their  Congressional puppets into funding the military costs of assuring the oil’s security and flow.

 

There is absolutely nothing we can do to alter the fact that Halliburton, and the oily Houses of Bush and Saud have won this war. But let’s not add degrading insult to our nationally-disabling and demeaning injury by letting the sleazy neo-con oil magicians trick us into watching their diversions (tails wagging dogs) instead of paying attention to the legerdemain going on in reality—The oil flows on.  The oil fields were the first assets seized and placed under protective guard after our armed forces landed–you remember, while vandals were emptying the Holy Land (theirs and ours) of irreplaceable historic art and iconic religious treasures in the smoke screen provided by American “shock and awe”.

 

 And the oil fields will remain protected by–Bush has already promised it–American armed forces…indefinitely. 

 

This, my friends,  is the doughnut reality in the case of Iraq. All the rest is–quite wholly— the hole.

 

So, let’s pull our eye away from the hole and put it back on the doughnut. When we do it’ll be plain as a glazed Krispy Cream  that getting out of Iraq ASAP is the only rational option. The mayhem isn’t going to get any worse, and America’s presence in Iraq is clearly the reason it’s as bad as it is. This oily nightmare has now lasted longer than WWII.  Between a 500,000 and a million Iraqis have died because of Bush’s insane declaration of war against a figment of neoconartistry…a tactic (as opposed to a national enemy). So let’s get on with the redemption of America and get out of there now, bring our troops home and impeach the bastard war criminal who sent them there to die…for that god forsaken oily doughnut.

Posted in America, Bush, Political, Terrorism, War, War On Terrorism | Leave a comment by Editors

The Spy Who Came In From the Freezer By:  Dr. Leonard Carrier DW In-House Historian and Philosopher             Robert Gates has been on ice since 1993, when he left his position as Director of the CIA after Clinton became president.  In 2002 Gates became president of Texas A & M University, the institution that houses George H.W. Bush’s presidential library.  Now he has been nominated by George W. Bush to be Secretary of Defense.  So he has been cooling his heels as president of a university that houses the library of George W. Bush’s father.  Is his nomination a coincidence?  I don’t think so.  Gates had a hard time getting confirmed as CIA Director because of questionable behavior in the arms-for-hostages deal involving Iran and Nicaragua.  He was earlier accused of slanting intelligence to favor the views of his old boss at the CIA, Bill Casey, who wanted the threat of the Soviet Union inflated for political purposes. When he was appointed by George H. W. Bush to be director of the CIA in 1991, he was still under a cloud concerning whether he had knowledge of the arms-for-hostages deal.  But the first President Bush persisted with his nomination, knowing that Bush’s own protestations about “not being in the loop” concerning this clandestine deal would be supported by Gates.             Now we have another president who seeks protection.  The electoral turnaround achieved by Democrats on November 7 shows that George W. Bush’s presidency is in trouble.  So now it’s time to call in one of the cold warriors from his father’s presidency to save the son’s legacy.  The simple truth is that George W. Bush’s presidency does not deserve to be saved.  He led his country into a disastrous and unnecessary war that has killed almost 3,000 of our troops and as many as 790,000 Iraqis—these last numbers supplied by scientists who have reported their findings in Lancet magazine. It seems obvious that Bush’s nomination is a way of providing window dressing for a supposed change of strategy on Iraq.  But it is clear from the president’s pronouncements that he intends to stand fast until he achieves “victory” (whatever that can possibly mean now), and that there is no change in his overall policy of having more American troops and more Iraqi civilians killed to satisfy his stubborn insistence that things are going his way.  Never mind the stunning “thumping” that his Party got in the last election, this president simply won’t change his mind.  What he thinks will appease the electorate is an appointment that his father would—and maybe did—approve, that of an old retainer who was waiting in the wings, who owes his allegiance to the Bush family and whose appointment will do nothing to change Bush’s war policy, but will instead try to make it seem as if this president is actually listening to criticism.             What is shocking about Bush’s nomination of Gates is not just that Gates has no experience in military affairs, but that Democrats like Harry Reid are already supporting his nomination.  This is not what the electorate wants.  They don’t want Democrats kissing up to the Bush family to save the presidency of the prodigal son. James Webb, the senator-elect from Virginia, gave the best advice on this matter by suggesting that the next Secretary of Defense be chosen by the new Senate.  Webb knows what he’s talking about.  He was Secretary of the Navy under Reagan, and he knows all about the sycophancy that reeks from this nomination of Robert Gates.  So this is a message to Democrats on the Senate.  Don’t agree to confirm Gates as Secretary of Defense.  Rumsfeld is gone.  Let his deputy limp out the remainder of the year.  When the new Senate convenes there will be time enough to evaluate the credentials of someone who is dedicated to getting us out of Iraq, not someone whose job it is to protect the royal heritage. Leonard Carrier

Posted in America, Bush Lies, Political | Leave a comment by Editors

YOU–WHO VOTED FOR BUSH… WHO ARE YOU? You’re the Wrong, the Guilty, and the Damned! By Robert Healy* You were wrong.  You, who’ve supported George Bush.  You, who’ve advocated war with Iraq.  You, who’ve continued to ignore the perilous fact that our constitutional laws and separation of powers have been broken.  You, whose arrogance is displayed through your pro-Bush stickers on your vehicles.  I’m talking to you.  You were wrong.  And you still are. We the People of the United States of America are guilty.  We are guilty of crimes against humanity for the wanton mass slaughter of innocent fellow human beings.  We are guilty of war crimes.  We are guilty of abusing our military service-members for the sole purpose of enhancing corporate profits.  We are guilty of torture and harboring torturers, and guilty of passing immoral laws that retroactively protect torturers, and those who gave the orders, from prosecution for their crimes.  Habeas corpus is dead.  We are guilty. Do not invoke 9/11 or terrorism as an excuse.  There is no excuse.  Neither our collective arrogance nor collective ignorance will shield us.  It matters not whether we as individuals supported the war or marched in opposition to it.  We invaded, and we were wrong in doing so.  We all bear the blame and the guilt.  Our hands are covered in blood, and no amount of hand-wringing will ever cleanse them.  Not ever. We have become a nation of bullies and cowards.  Real patriots – those who dared to bring reason, compassion, understanding, or true leadership to the equation – were trounced, pummeled, ridiculed, and vilified by each.  That trend continues to this day. The bullies are in control, supported by their zombie-like adherents, all utterly intoxicated with their own false-godlike sense of power.  All of them are corrupt to their very souls.  They believe might is right.  They have corroded not only our national political core, but also America’s spirit of unity, brotherhood, and hope.  Every word is an attack, every deed divisive.  Every law passed during their reign has been to the detriment of the citizen and to the benefit of corporations and the rich.  The bullies will fall like all bullies eventually do – only these bullies will be taking America down with them. The cowards are the failed majority, the ones who’ve abdicated their power, disoriented by their continued ingestion of fear.  They fear the bullies, each other, and themselves.  All of them are frightened to their very souls.  From the spineless clergymen in the pulpits through our weak-kneed military officers and our equally ineffective elected officials, to the majority of Americans in between, the cowardice and lack of heartfelt outrage shouts volumes across the land and around the world.  For in their silence they were complicit in the crimes, and in their continued silence, they are accessories after the fact. In America, evil has taken root and prospered because of a raging case of collective moral impotence.  As Frank Herbert famously wrote, “Fear is the mind-killer.”  Well, fear is a nation-killer as well. Do unto others as you’d have done unto you.  Love your neighbor.  Love your enemy.  But, no.  We wanted an eye for an eye, America.  We took it, and we were wrong.  Well, we’d better prepare ourselves.  Yes, we will surely reap from what we’ve sown.  You bully.  You coward.  Live by the sword, die by the sword.  A so-called “Christian nation” should’ve known that.  But the damage is done.  Tens upon tens of thousands are dead.  And for what?  Vanity?  The dead are still dead.  And we’ll be damned for it. And so, Mr. Republican, Mr. Democrat, Mr. Unaffiliated: it’s election time.  Need a suggestion?  To paraphrase Dick Cheney: go vote yourself. About Robert Healy: Robert Healy is a political columnist currently living in North Carolina.  He is a graduate of the University of North Carolina at Greensboro with a BA in English, and is a veteran of the U.S. Army. Although Healy wrote this article, the caption (title) was edited (re-written) by our DW editor, Dusty Schoch.  Robert Healy had used the pronoun “we” in his caption, and we (at DW)  know full well that anyone with sufficient intelligence to have authored the foregoing essay, on his dumbest day could not have been conned into voting for GWB. This article was previously published in (and copyrighted by) the High Point Enterprise on Saturday, October 28, 2006 and re-printed here with their kind permission.

Posted in Bush, Bush Lies, Political | Leave a comment by Editors

Don’t Make Nice, Nancy (An open letter to Nancy Pelosi on becoming Speaker of the House) By: Leonard Carrier (DW’s In-House Historian and Philosopher)             We won it fair and square.  The citizens of the United States spoke out loud and clear on November 7.  The nation-wide election was a repudiation of the policies of George W. Bush and his inept administration.  Donald Rumsfeld is gone—and good riddance.  His disastrous military policies resulted in the deaths of nearly 3,000 brave American troops, and the killing of as many as 790,000 Iraqis.  But Bush’s policies have not gone.  He still makes jokes while saying in his smirking, sidewise manner that we’ve got to pursue his vision in the Middle East, even though he’s willing to change tactics.             Don’t be fooled, Nancy.  Bush is a weaselly, draft-dodging, macho-talking bully who thinks that all he has to do is schmooze with you a little and you’ll fall under his spell. We know what a gutless little pip-squeak he is from the way he tried to joke his way out of lying about having to replace Rumsfeld in his recent press conference.  Before the election, he said that Rumsfeld would stay.  After the election, he said that he’d made up his mind to replace him but said what he did because he didn’t want politics to get in the way.  This is a typical example of his way of governing–joke and smirk while lying about serious matters, and all the while doing his best to favor the rich and put the screws to everyone else.             I understand that there are more important things to accomplish before thinking about impeaching our liar-in-chief.  You’ve got to oversee raising the minimum wage, get drug companies to negotiate prices the way the VA does, rein in our deficit, get the 9/11 Commission’s recommendations passed, and put Medicare and Social Security on a sound footing for our posterity.  You’ve also got to engineer our departure from Iraq—something Bush will insist is not in our nation’s interest. But it is in our interest.  Bush is concerned only about getting cheap Iraqi oil into the hands of his favorite oil companies.  You’ve got to resist the pressure he’ll bring to bear on this issue, Nancy.  You’ve got to push Jack Murtha’s line that we should withdraw and let the Iraqis settle their own political differences.  He’s going to try to sweet-talk you, the way he used to try to charm the girls in the bars he frequented before he decided to get religion.  But you’ve got to put him in his place, tell him that his days strutting around in a little pilot’s jacket are over.  Perhaps you can do this without hurting his fragile ego, but if he starts in with his phony macho act, just tell him to stand in the corner because his posturing days are done.             So, don’t make nice, Nancy.  Tell our diminished president the facts of life, that he’s the lamest of lame ducks, and he’d better start quacking the right tune.  If he doesn’t, then there are well deserved Articles of Impeachment that might be waiting in the wings—Articles that would put the quietus on his tenure as the most abject failure as a president we’ve ever experienced. Leonard Carrier

Posted in Bush, Political | Leave a comment by Editors

NEO-CONTENTIONS  V

The Political and Polemic Correctness of…

HATING GEORGE W. BUSH

 

PREFACE: DW Readers may wish to review the July 25 article entitled “Why I Hate Bush” by DW In-House Historian and Philosopher, Dr. Leonard Carrier. In this exchange, that article is taken to task by conservative, Michael Holdcraft, Colonel, USAF, retired.

Michael Holdcraft has sent DW the following cover letter as a preface to his criticism of the previous DW article written by Len Carrier.  Contrary to Mr. Holdcraft’s opinion, DW is pleased to print both his letter and his rebuttal.  The object of Mr. Holdcraft’s criticism, Len’s “Why I Hate George W. Bush,” has also been reprinted below.  Len Carrier believes that all of Holdcraft’s objections are spurious, and he has refuted them in an article which follows Holdcraft’s.  In the meantime, since Mr. Holdcraft has elected to include his email address at the end of his criticism, Len reasons that this constitutes an invitation to DW readers to reply to Mr. Holdcraft on their own.

 

 

 

Col. Michael Holdcraft says…

 

Mr. Carrier has personally asked me numerous times to submit my comments on his article to your web site.  He says your site is fair-minded and would print it.  I told him there is no way you would print my comments because I question his motivations in writing the article, political motivations in my opinion. I don’t question Len’s hate for the President, but do question his reasons.  He has only one reason to hate the President and that reason is he is a “Republican’.  It is my firm belief that if Mr. Bush were a Democrat, Len would be solidly behind and supporting every decision he has made.  My reply also challenges Len to prove any of the statements he has made by producing facts to back them up.  He hasn’t yet done that because he can’t.  You won’t print my comments because they directly question almost all of Len’s accusations in his article. I believe his article as well as most of the articles I see on your web site are all politically motivated, and therefore you cannot print my comments because they directly challenge all the left wing propaganda you have published to date.

 

Sincerely,

Michael D. Holdcraft, Colonel, USAF, Retired

 

 

HOLDCRAFT FURTHER HOLDS FORTH:

 

 

 

Why is Mr. Carrier wrong! In Mr. Carrier’s first paragraph of his article “Why I Hate George W. Bush” (included below), he states that our President is,  “a cowardly, macho-talking bully.  He is a child of privilege, never having had to work a day in his life.  He is a former alcohol drinking, cocaine using, woman abusing, draft-dodging, mama’s boy who was allowed to get away with every affront he gave to civil decency.”  The last time I checked being born into a rich or in well-off family was not a crime, but maybe a privileged only enjoyed by a few of us.  Does Mr. Carrier also dislike Ted Kennedy, who was also born into a wealthy family and never worked at a real job in his life?  I suspect not.  Does he have the same contempt for all rich people that he shows for our current President?  Mr. Carrier states the President never worked a day in his life; but any real look at the President’s life shows he definitely did work in the oil business, so Mr. Carrier’s statement is not factual, but based it seems on his own personal biases against certain rich people?  He calls Mr. Bush a coward and bully, but where is the proof of that statement?  None was included in his article?  Was Teddy Roosevelt likewise a coward and bully too?  Both President’s had similar foreign policies.  Mr. Carrier calls Mr. Bush a “woman abusing, draft-dodging, mama’s boy”.  I think he must have Mr. Bush mixed up with a very recent former President on at least one of those charges?  It is documented that Mr. Bush was in the National Guard and that is not “draft dodging” unless Mr. Carrier is willing to say that every American who was in the National Guard during Vietnam was also a “Draft dodger”.  I don’t think he will to do that?  And what is Mr. Carrier’s definition of civil decency?  He gives none in this article, so the reader must use his or her own definition and I cannot think of one time where Mr. Bush has ever shown any lack of civility or decency toward anyone by my definition?  Can Mr. Carrier please be more specific in these charges?  So, now after calling the President every bad name he can think of to tell us why “he doesn’t hate Mr. Bush”, Mr. Carrier asks us to continue to read on into his “unbiased” article on why he does hate Mr. Bush??? Mr. Carrier states Mr. Bush had no good reason for invading Iraq.  I and every American can count the numerous UN Resolutions from 1991 until 2002 that gave the United States every reason to go back into Iraq.  Iraq never complied with the cease-fire conditions laid down by UN Resolution 687 immediately after Operation Desert Storm in 1991.  Iraq was in constant and flagrant violation of that resolution and the cease-fire for 11 years and all the numerous other resolutions laid down by the UN between 1991 and 2002.  Saddam’s government constantly blocked and delayed UN inspections and would not allow access to key sites and documents concerning Iraq’s WMD and other weapons and delivery systems for all of those eleven years. Weapons and systems that we all know existed prior to Desert Storm.  Why else would our Intelligence establishment have assumed Iraq still had WMD?  It was a reasonable assumption given the actions of the Iraqi government during the eleven years between Desert Storm and the current conflict.  Mr. Carrier says he hates the President for the military deaths in Iraq and the civilians killed there, while ignoring the fact that the great, great majority of those civilians deaths and all our military deaths were caused by terrorists and Hussein henchmen fighting us and the democratically elected Iraqi government.  He also conveniently ignores the reign of terror Saddam Hussein had over his people for decades and the thousands unjustly murdered by Hussein’s government during that period of time. Mr. Carrier’s condemnations seem more politically motivated than based on established fact.  Mr. Carrier condemns the President for tax cuts to the wealthy, while ignoring numerous tax cuts to the middle class.  I personally believe almost all tax cuts are good for our economy.  But Mr. Carrier seems personally jealous that he didn’t get more of them himself?  He condemns the President for the damage done by the most devastating hurricane to ever hit the continental United States.  I personally know from my family, who live in Louisiana and Mississippi and suffered through that storm, that it was a small miracle anyone got to New Orleans within 4 days after Katrina.  FEMA had many problems, problems they would have had under any President, Democrat or Republican.  None of those problems were caused by our President. Mr. Carrier, in all his knowledge and wisdom, goes on to condemn the White House for the release of a CIA employees name, not a covert CIA operative, as he inaccurately states.  Mr. Carrier seems to enjoy finding guilt before actually producing any proof of guilt.  We now know the person/s he blamed did not release that information to the press.  Does he still hate Mr. Bush for this?  I certainly hope we don’t have an earthquake on the west coast any time soon, for if we do, I’m sure Mr. Carrier will find a way to blame it on Mr. Bush too.  Why don’t I agree with Mr. Carrier arguments?  Because they are based on “half-truths, factually inaccurate statements, and supposition yet to be proved.”  If I were accusing Mr. Carrier of similar crimes with a similar level of proof, he would be crying foul or slander.  Oh, that’s right, Mr. Carrier has stated he believes the rules should be different for politicians.  He can say anything he wants about them, no proof needed.  Mr. Carrier wants you to believe he is being “a Patriotic American” by his actions and writings, when in truth he is going against every American tradition of fairness and objectivity by his assumption of “guilty until proven innocent.”  His actions undermine confidence in our government and it’s leaders and I don’t think that is “patriotic” at all.  If he must accuse our President of wrongdoing, then let him produce his proof along with his accusations, then maybe I can treat his writings as something other than a “left wing political hatchet job.” Michael Holdcraft Colonel, USAF, Retired [email protected]

 Why I Hate George W. Bush

By: Len Carrier *

 

           It’s been a long time coming. I used to say that hate was a useless emotion, and that we ought to concentrate on the act and not the actor.  But I can resist no more.  We have a president who is a cowardly, macho-talking bully.  He is a child of privilege, never having had to work a day in his life.  He is a former alcohol drinking, cocaine using, woman abusing, draft-dodging, mama’s boy who was allowed to get away with every affront he gave to civil decency.  But that’s not why I hate him.

            I hate him because he has lowered the status of our country in the eyes of the world by his shocking behavior in office.  I hate him because he invaded Iraq for no good reason and thereby caused the deaths of nearly 3,000 U.S. military and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians. I hate him for giving tax cuts to the wealthy, while ignoring the poor. I hate him for saying he was an environmentalist while promoting bills that pollute our rivers and coastal shores.  I hate him for squandering the surplus that Clinton left us and putting our children and grandchildren in debt.  I hate him for more than 1 million lost jobs since he took office. I hate him for putting an inept crony in charge of FEMA and letting New Orleans sink into the mud. I hate him for saying he’d fire the person who leaked the information about a covert CIA operative, and then back-tracked when he found out it was Dick Cheney. I hate him for sitting on his thumbs while Israel bombs innocent civilians in Gaza and Lebanon. I hate him for vetoing stem-cell research to pacify the crazies on his religious right. I hate him because he has spied on Americans without warrant.  I hate him because he has allowed torture of prisoners in defiance of the Geneva Conventions.  So, go ahead, call me a Bush hater.  I’ve got good reason.

 

DUSTY ADDS…

 

 And while you’re at it (calling Len a “Bush Hater”, like me) don’t you dare call us ipso-facto “Un-American”,  or “Un-Patriotic” or say we’re “aiding our terrorist enemies” or “undermining our brave soldiers” for  cutting down this fascist cretin of a president.  G.W. Bush is an “American” as Adolph Hitler was a German.  We’ll both survive our respective fascist regimes.  And if you don’t agree with Len Carrier and me on our having good reason to hate this president, just pick and research one of the reasons Len lists—Bush’s lies.  It’s an easy experiment to perform to get a quick historic “feel” for the world’s perception and consensus on Bush in the truth category. Here’s what do:  Go to your computer and pull up Google for a search engine. Type in just two words:  “Bush lies” .  There will follow references to over 50 million articles in which those words are juxtaposed at least once. A perhaps  more alarming thing is evident  when you Google in “Hitler lies” and  you only get 8.2 million, and we’ve had over 50 years to accumulate data on his, the biggest lies ever told….that is B.B.  (before Bush).

 

*(Dr. Leonard Carrier received his B.A. and M.A. from the University of Miami in ’56 and ’58, respectively, and his Ph.D from Stanford in 1967.  He taught at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia and the University of South Florida (Tampa) before spending the rest of his teaching and research career (29 years until 2000) at the University of Miami. )

 

Dr. Carrier’s Response to Holdcraft:

 

 

 

Michael Holdcraft has taken me to task for my DW submission, “Why I Hate George W. Bush.”  His response is typical right-wing boilerplate, which consists mainly of twisting another’s words into a different shape so that they can be more easily managed.  For instance, I asserted that Mr. Bush was “…a child of privilege, never having had to work a day in this life.”  Holdcraft twists this into saying that I consider Bush’s lassitude a crime, and that it’s only certain rich people—but not Ted Kennedy—whom I deem guilty of this offense. He also goes on to say that Mr. Bush worked “in the oil business,” so what I said must be false. But this is all nonsense. Being born rich is not a crime, but it does give us some insight into why he proposes tax cuts for the wealthy, since they are his kind of people.  As for Bush’s working in the oil business, he did no real work, and the company he controlled was a failure.  It was through his father and other wealthy connections that he managed to get windfall profits by selling his ownership in another failed venture—the Texas Rangers baseball team.  Give me millionaires like George Soros and Bill Gates any day.  They actually worked for their money and didn’t have it handed to them in behind-the-scenes deals.

            Holdcraft also asks for evidence that Mr. Bush is a coward and a bully, as well as being a “woman abusing, draft-dodging, mama’s boy.”  Being a draft-dodging coward is fairly easy to support.  Bush got into his Texas Air National Guard unit because of his father’s connections.  It’s on the record that he leap-frogged over others who were also waiting for such an appointment, and that allowed him to avoid the draft.  The fact that he went AWOL from his unit before serving his commitment, plus his father’s comment that Bush found flying F102s “threatening” is evidence that he experienced SLOG (sudden loss of guts)—a pilot’s term for cowardice. That’s also on the record.  If Holdcraft doesn’t believe it, he can read Hugh Scott’s book, George Dub-ya Bush:  The Phony Fighter Pilot. As for abusing and bullying women, it’s also on the record that a woman in Texas who knew Bush since high school said that he verbally abused her and was in the habit of using derogatory language when talking to women in bars.  It’s also a fact, taken from a biography of the Bushes, that George didn’t get along with his father, and that his mother had to take him in hand.  Bush himself does not deny that he abused alcohol, even while serving in the National Guard, and he refuses to deny that he also used cocaine. So I’m hard put to know what Holdcraft’s definition of “civil decency” could be if he thinks that Bush’s transgressions are not an affront to it.

            As I said in my article, these aren’t–or weren’t–my reasons for hating Bush.  There are lots of people who match my description who aren’t worth hating.  I say they weren’t my reasons for hating him, because it’s unclear now whether Bush is suffering from some mental impediment.  This possibility was explored by Dusty Schoch in a
DW piece that appeared after my article did, and I did a DW follow-up on it, as well.  If Bush really is the victim of a physical disability, perhaps brought on by previous alcohol abuse and an inherited susceptibility to Graves’ Disease, then he is no longer a fit candidate for hatred, and he should instead be pitied.  For purposes of responding to Holdcraft, however, I’m going to assume that Bush is fully rational and knows what he is doing.  Acting under this assumption, here is my refutation of Holdcraft’s attempt to show that our president is not a fit object of abhorrence.

            I said that Bush had no good reason for invading Iraq.  Holdcraft claims that Saddam’s flouting of UN Resolution 687, plus his hindering UN weapons inspection teams for 11 years after Gulf War I was reason enough to invade.  To see how nonsensical this is we have only to point out other countries that have failed to obey UN resolutions.  One such country is Israel.  If ignoring UN resolutions were reason enough to invade a sovereign country, then an invasion of Israel would have been justified. But we would all agree that such an invasion would be completely unjustified.  Holdcraft also conveniently forgets that Iraq had been allowing UN inspection teams free access to sites just before the invasion.  The only reason they were not allowed to do finish their job was that Bush announced that he was invading.  Holdcraft also forgets that Bush gave Saddam 48 hours to leave Iraq with a large part of his fortune.  Saddam refused, but this shows that it was “regime change” that Bush had in mind, not weapons of mass destruction.  What Bush wanted was a docile government in Iraq—mainly to ensure access to Iraqi oil.  If Holdcraft still believes in the WMD scare, then he must also believe in goblins and gremlins.  Hence, Bush had no good reason for invading Iraq—unless Holdcraft thinks that it’s a good enough reason to invade a country just because we don’t like its leader.  If that were the case, then most of the world would have good reason to invade us!

            Another reason I listed for hating Bush was his being the cause of the deaths and injuries inflicted on our military, and also on Iraqi civilians.  Holdcraft counters by saying that the great majority of deaths were caused by terrorists.  This is sheer rubbish.  It was recently reported by Lancet magazine that our war against Iraq has resulted in the deaths of as many as 790,000 Iraqis—either by violent actions of coalition forces, or because of the uranium depletion in our bombs and the contamination of their water supply.  As bad as Saddam was, he never got results like that.  Holdcraft is also wrong to say that “terrorists” caused all our military deaths.  Here he’s buying Bush’s line that anyone who fights back against our forces is a terrorist. But guerrilla militias, not terrorists, caused most of our military deaths. Terrorists are those who target noncombatants for the purpose of instilling fear in a population and thus reducing its will to fight. This more accurately describes our “shock and awe” campaign of bombing civilian population centers, and not insurgent reactions against our occupation forces. Holdcraft is simply ignorant of the meaning of the word, ‘terrorist’. Despite Holdcraft’s rhetoric, Saddam was not engaging in a “reign of terror” when we invaded his country.  What our invasion did, however, was to set forces free that led to a sectarian fight that Thomas Hobbes would have described as a “war of all against all.”  It was Bush’s bravado that began this killing.  He didn’t have to pull the trigger that unleashed these horrors.  But he did pull it, and he is deserving of hatred for it.  That hatred is also spilling over onto all Americans—with all those surviving Iraqi civilians now having good reason to hate us all.

            Holdcraft also thinks that reducing taxes on the wealthy is a good thing, claiming that the middle class got its tax cut, too.  This is absurd.  The largest tax reduction went to the people who didn’t need it—those with the upper 2% of income.  The middle class got peanuts, and the poor got their programs cut.  The war in Iraq is draining our resources to the tune of billions of dollars a month, and we’re borrowing from China and Japan to pay the bills.  And Holdcraft thinks this is a good thing?  Lyndon Johnson promised to give us guns and butter during the Vietnam War. He delivered neither.  Bush is going down that same road, oblivious to the fact that he is bankrupting our nation for the good of his “base”—the corporations that profit from tax cuts and war.  The U.S. Air Force has just asked for $50 billion extra for next year’s budget. Where is this money coming from? One of the axioms of economics is that there’s no such thing as a free lunch, but Bush and Holdcraft apparently think they can just crash the cafeteria line.

            Holdcraft also thinks that the damage done by Hurricane Katrina was not Bush’s fault. But Bush appointed the directors of FEMA and of Homeland Security.  They showed themselves to be inept, especially FEMA head Michael Brown, who was being congratulated by Bush for doing a good job just at the time that he was doing a miserable job.  The person who makes the appointments to key disaster organizations should ensure that the people chosen are qualified.  Bush picked unqualified cronies to do the job, and so it’s his fault that the Katrina disaster turned out to be far worse than it could have been.  Also, if the Corps of Engineers had been given the funds they requested to reinforce the levies, the 9^th ward might not have been inundated.

            Holdcraft also defends Bush on the question of leaking the name of a covert CIA agent to the press.  Bush’s promise to fire the leaker was soon forgotten when it was revealed that Karl Rove might have been one of those who blabbed to the press.  Holdcraft claims that Valerie Plame was not a covert agent, only a CIA employee.  He should check his facts.  The release of Ms. Plame’s identity threatened the lives of her overseas contacts, plus it removed her from undertaking any further undercover assignments.  Holdcraft doesn’t mention that releasing her name was an act of petty spite to get revenge against her husband, Joseph Wilson, who exposed Bush’s lie about Iraq’s obtaining uranium from Niger.  The fact that a Grand Jury has indicted a White House aide—Dick Cheney’s right-hand man, I. Lewis Libby, for obstruction of justice, shows how serious a blow this was to our intelligence gathering efforts.           

Holdcraft thinks I engage in half-truths bordering on slander.  He should read the newspapers more often.  Everything I’ve said has been said over and over again by journalists and analysts.  All I’ve done is put the pieces together.  What I’ve been doing is engaging in dissent, something that it is incumbent on every American to do when he believes that his government is in the wrong.  Holdcraft claims that one must stifle such dissent because it “…undermines confidence in our government and its leaders.”  Yes, that’s exactly what it is meant to do.  Holdcraft is confused when he says that for a citizen to accuse a president, “proof” of a crime must be produced.  He should read the Constitution.  It is up to Congress to draw up Articles of Impeachment if it thinks that that a president is guilty of “high crimes and misdemeanors.”  If a president is impeached, then it is up to the Senate to try innocence or guilt.  They are the ones who need “proof.” As a citizen, one has a constitutional right and obligation to speak out.  It is only when citizens are able to speak freely that governments are held accountable.  Holdcraft would rather muzzle free speech in the name of authority.  He should be living where they have a monarch instead of a president, but perhaps he thinks he is already living there.

 

                                                                                                           

Leonard Carrier

November 1, 2006

Posted in Bush, Bush Lies, Political, War On Terrorism | Leave a comment by Editors Posted in America, Political, Terrorism, War, War On Terrorism | Leave a comment by Editors

AMERICAN  MUSLIMS…

 

SHOULD WE STAMP THEM OUT?

 

Have Christians or Islamic Terrorists Killed  More Innocents?

 

 

 

By:  Robert R. (Dusty) Schoch, DW Foreign Policy editor

       October 18, 2006 (advanced copy of headline http://www.Democratswrite.com )

 

 

 

Dear DW readers.

 

What follows here is an open letter I just wrote to a dear Christian friend in response to his e-letter to me forwarding a call for all good Christian folk in the U.S. to protest the printing and boycott the buying of a new (Christmas 2006) issue of U.S. Postage stamp depicting Islamic symbols and paying tribute and respect to the Muslim faith and tradition. I’ll print the letter I received in full and follow it with my own comments in an open letter to my friend, Eugene.   

 

Here’s what my Christian friend forwarded me without comment:

 

 

Subject: Christmas Stamp .. How could this happen???? They don’t even believe in Christ and they’re getting their own Christmas stamp, but don’t dream of posting the ten commandments on federal property. USPS New Stamp to be re issued in 39 cent denomination this month. This one is impossible to believe. Scroll down for the text. If there is only one thing you forward today…..let it be this!

REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of PanAm Flight 103!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the military barracks in Saudi Arabia!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the American Embassies in Africa!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the USS COLE!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM attack on 9/11/2001!
REMEMBER all the AMERICAN lives that were lost in those vicious MUSLIM attacks!

 

What’s the message here?  You want me to forward this Fundamentalist Christian hate mail opposing the new stamp to my friends, and you want me to “boycott” using it?  So as not to dishonor those who have been “bombed or killed by Islam”?  At this proposal, my friend, I feel confident that  ‘Ol’ Jesus would have puked” (Holden Caufield,  “Catcher in the Rhy”)!  

Eugene,   true Christians do as Jesus said: They love those they perceive to be their enemies.  But the hypocrisy is not what galls me in this pathetic little Christian mob reaction.  What galls me is the dogmatic ignorance.  These terrorists did terrible things and they did many of them (including 9/11/01) in the name of Allah.  But that didn’t mean they were right. That didn’t make it true.

Moreover, when you compare the number of people who’ve been slaughtered in the name of Christ by purported Christians, Islam can’t hold a candle to Christians.

 

Starting from the most recent, your bully Christian boy George Bush in his retaliation for 9/11 has now accumulated in Iraq alone probably close to 800,000 killed.  Some (a distinct minority) were militants; most innocent Islamic civilians including women and children.  All the innocents killed in that list you mailed me don’t number close to what Lancet just calculated the number of innocents killed by Christian America since the Bush-led invasion of Iraq.  And that’s just in the past 3 years. In my lifetime a purported Christian named Adolph Hitler waged a war in the name of Christ that consumed over 20 million lives before it was over.  The swastika was a Christian Cross for Christ’s sake!  Should the Holocaust victims hate today’s Christians because of what Hitler did in his name?

 

In the name of Christ more crusading and just plain imperialistic acquisitive invasive murders have been committed than for any cause de guerre in Earth’s history.  From the killing of ancient pagans by Christian mobs by the thousands…e.g. Emperor Theodoslus executed children for playing with the remains of their father’s destroyed pagan statues.  Charlemagne had 4500 Saxons beheaded because they were unwilling to convert to …Jesus.  German peasants unable or willing to tithe were slain in Germany on 5/27/1234, numbering between 5000 and 11,000 men, women and children.

 

In the Christian “Crusades”  it would take thousands of words just to list the battles where non-Christians were systematically exterminated sometimes 200,000 at a time (e.g. Battle of Askalon, 8/12/1099)–all “killed in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ”.

Then came the so-called purging of “Heretics”…where Christians are killing each other for spouting the wrong Christian Dogma…. Several thousands of Christians were killed in Europe because they chose to baptize their children at age six  (when they could think and consent) instead of at birth (look up the story of these “Anabaptists” )!

 

Then came the Witches….several thousands of innocent women slain because they were supposedly in league with the Christians’ enemy-the “devil”.  (Most were simply disobedient in the face and ambit of fiery fundamentalist Christian  church elders). 

20^th Century Christian atrocities include the Catholic extermination camps (Croatia and elsewhere), Rowanda massacres and the list goes on and on without end, amen.

 

More have been killed by putative Christians in the name and cause of  Christ than for any other cause in man’s history. Don’t take my word for it;  read the history you evidently either never read or have forgotten. I will attach it for you…one very-well documented bibliographed essay on “Victims of the Christian Faith” by  Kelsos.http://www.truthbeknown.com/victims.htm

 

Go ahead and boycott the stamp.  Raise Holy hell over America’s finally doing something right…honoring the beliefs (and freedom to exercise that belief) of 3 to 6  million Islamic Americans who have been our neighbors, living over here in peace while terror was being performed elsewhere in the name of their professed God.  And in the same process, try not to forget that both claim the same man (Abraham) as their ethnic and religious progenitor and patriarch respectively, which would make Jesus’ and Mohammed’s claimed Father and God…you guessed it…the same One.

 

When Jesus told us to love our neighbors as ourselves, and to turn the other cheek, and even to love our enemies, he made no exceptions I know of.   I guess he just wasn’t as smart as the one who generated this piece of hate mail you ask me to circulate to those I care about.

 

Your hate mail stops here. It’s deleted. It’s a wrong which, at least from my own standpoint is forgiven…Forgiven for a reason Jesus uttered shortly before the end of his all-too-brief stay here on earth…. Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do.

 

Love always,

Dusty

______________________________________________________________

 

For those of you who want to know more about …what  Christians really do…. Read the attached history lesson.  There’s a really good benefit to reading history.  It helps us avoid repeating it.  (DW readers may find the Kelso history letter I sent Eugene on line at

 

http://www.truthbeknown.com/victims.htm    )

 

For a bottom line…

 

…let me close this open letter with the following supplemental declaration behind which I will stand pat:   Bin Laden’s brand of terrorism is a perversion of Islam, but no greater a perversion of Islam than Bush’s (or Hitler’s) brand of perverted onward-Christian soldier terrorism presently being waged as preemptive war in Afghanistan and Iraq.  Only difference is, according to recent count, bin Laden is falling way behind Bush in terms of body counts. Do the math:  3,000 + killed on 9/11/01 (OK this is an exaggeration since about 20 percent of the dead were Islamic) and about 3,000 more in the wars—Afghanistan and Iraq—(which Bush started).  Bush on the other hand has just been credited (read the Lancet report on line) with probably 800,000 and counting, just in Iraq.  Bin Laden’s Islamic warriors are true slackers next to Bush’s Christian Crusaders.

 

War is still the only enemy.

But Ignorance is war’s greatest ally.

The antidote for ignorance and hypocrisy is…. history.

Posted in Islam In America, Political | Leave a comment by Editors

The Virginia Senate Race

 

By: Leonard Carrier (DW’s In-House Historian and Philosopher):

 

 

 

 

            Nowhere in America is there a clearer contest for the soul of our country than in the once great state of Virginia.  Republican Senator George Felix Allen is running for re-election against Democrat James Webb, Jr.  Here is how they stack up against one another.  Senator Allen was born rich in California, the son of George Allen the football coach. He attended California schools where he played football, transferring from UCLA to the University of Virginia because, a teammate said, he wanted to attend a university where “blacks knew their place.” He was arrested in 1974, but it is unclear what the charge was.  When he moved to Virginia he affected cowboy boots and an “aw shucks” accent.  He became enamored of the Confederate flag and was reported to have expressed racist views on numerous occasions.  Friends have said that he once shot a deer and placed its head in the mailbox of a black family as a joke.  He supported the Vietnam War, but he got a deferment so that he wouldn’t have to serve. After his stint as governor of Virginia, he served on several corporate boards, and the SEC twice admonished him for not reporting stock sales on time. While governor of Virginia, he supported the pardoned traitor, Oliver North, for the U.S. Senate in 1994. He also supported the invasion of Iraq in 2003.  The Republican Party is touting him as presidential material for 2008.

            James Webb was born in Missouri, the son of a military officer.  He attended the University of Southern California until he received an appointment to the Naval Academy at Annapolis.  After being commissioned he served in the Vietnam War, where he received the Navy Cross for extraordinary heroism in action. He was also awarded the Silver Star, the Bronze Star, and two Purple Hearts in that conflict.  In 1987 he was appointed by Ronald Reagan to be Secretary of the Navy. During his tenure he reorganized the Marine Corps to make it a more effective force.  He resigned his position in 1988 to protest cuts made in the Navy’s budget. During the 2004 presidential race, he criticized John Kerry for the stand Kerry took in actively protesting the Vietnam War; but he criticized President Bush for making the worst strategic mistake in history by invading Iraq.  Relatives of Webb have served in every major American war. Webb has written six critically acclaimed novels and a work of non-fiction that depicts the history of the Scots-Irish in America.

            In my opinion, Virginians have a clear choice.  They can either choose someone who is very much in the mold of George W. Bush, a child of privilege, someone who was born wealthy and got wealthier through his business connections; someone who supported two wars but declined to serve in either; someone who pretends to be down-home and folksy, when he really isn’t; someone who claims to be compassionate, yet doesn’t act that way; or they can choose a man of honor, someone who has shed blood for his country and who has always acted on principle.  If Virginians choose to re-elect Senator Allen, we will know that wealth, power, and race mean more to them than having an honest, independent-minded senator.  We will know what is really in their hearts.  For those who cannot stomach voting for a rich, racist, phony, but who also think that Mr. Webb is still too conservative for them, there is always the Green Party candidate, retired USAF officer Gail Parker.  If Webb and Parker together cannot muster more than 50% of Virginia’s votes, then Virginians should hang their heads in shame for caving in to their baser instincts.

 

Leonard Carrier

 

*(Dr. Leonard Carrier received his B.A. and M.A. from the University of Miami in ’56 and ’58, respectively, and his Ph.D from Stanford in 1967.  He taught at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia and the University of South Florida (Tampa) before spending the rest of his teaching and research career (29 years until 2000) at the University of Miami.

 

Posted in Political | Leave a comment ← Older posts Newer posts →