This has long been something not addressed by the Democratic party, trying to show they can be tougher than the Republicans. This is why if Hillary Clinton is the nominee in 2008, she will surely be defeated.

Short term history looks at Jimmy Carter as a failed president, but in my son’s lifetime, I believe he will be regarded as one of our best in foreign policy.

As to China, how can they not help but be a dynamo soon, we have been letting them build just about everything for us for years, and they haven’t been doing it blindfolded.

Dear Marc

How are you this evening? I agree that we need a strong Democratic contender for this seat. I just hope Obama or Edwards has what it takes to win.

If you have read other comments on my writing you will see that the Evangelicals don’t agree with me at all. Many of them are so conservative that they refuse to look at people as individuals with the right to utilize God’s given right for Freedom of choice. That makes me so sad as all of us bleed, love, hurt, laugh and eventually die and if everyone would just learn to be tolerant of each other there would be no need for war or bigotry. Have a nice evening. Jackie

I’m fine. I too wonder where the ‘Evangelicals’ went off the track. I consider myself Christian and yet I agree with little of what the right wing does. I am not glad that Jerry Falwell passed last week, but I will say I used to refer to him as the ‘Ayatollah Falwell’ because of his narrow and pushy view. I wonder how we can both read the Bible and get such different things from it. I do believe that Falwell as well as our president were/are both stuck, without rescue, in the Old Testament, never looking to see the good news of the Gospels. Of concern to me also is why they believe that the views of the Republican party somehow coincide with the teachings of Christ. As far as I can remember, the only thing Christ ever did that would be considered war-like was when he drove the money changers out of the temple, other than that he was a pacifist.
This is one of the reasons I find it maddening that George Bush talks about his prayer. He must pray, but never listen.

Good Morning Marc

I love what you said about George Bush and prayer. I sometimes wonder if he doesn’t just say that to influence the right wing and make them believe he is one of them. My sister goes to church every Sunday and donates all kind of time to good causes but even she can see past Bush’s facade.

Have a good day. Jackie

Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. (Mat 5:9)
1Th 5:14-15 Now we exhort you, brethren, warn them that are unruly, comfort the feebleminded, support the weak, be patient toward all men. (15) See that none render evil for evil unto any man; but ever follow that which is good, both among yourselves, and to all men.

We get different meanings from our “Bibles” because we use different versions. I am one of those King James only believers because that is the version that so many died for. The rest are have copywrites and require about 75,000 changes at each copywrite. You can’t tell me what God orginally wrote is still there in the NIV, RSV, etc. The KJV is public domain and cannot be copywritten or however you say it.

What hurts Christianity the most are the those that claim to be Christian and do not live it. It is a feeling way. If you can’t feel the Sprit and there are many sprits, the Bible says to try them to see if they are of God. There is only one Holy Sprit and if you can’t feel it you beter find a place you can. Seek out a small church that truly wants to serve the Lord.

The versions above, say what Jesus actually said about the peacemakers. I have heard the argument that all Bibles are the same and that God would not allow versions that corrupt his word. Well, look back in Genisis and you will see the very first sin was commited due to a corruption of what God said. So it can happen and has happened and still happens today.

Gen 3:1-5 Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? (2) And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: (3) But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. (4) And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: (5) For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

They new good and evil allright and began to experience it which soon led to the first murder and so on.

The next versus could describe Osama or it could describe the American state of mind. It definitly applies to most of our Politicians.

2Pe 2:9-22 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished: (10) But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, self-willed, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities. (11) Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might, bring not railing accusation against them before the Lord. (12) But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption; (13) And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you; (14) Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: a heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children: (15) Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness; (16) But was rebuked for his iniquity: the dumb ass speaking with man’s voice forbade the madness of the prophet. (17) These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest: to whom the mist of darkness is reserved forever. (18) For when they speak great swelling words of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error. (19) While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage. (20) For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. (21) For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. (22) But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.

We should all head the words written here.
Rom 12:17-21 Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men. (18) If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. (19) Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. (20) Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. (21) Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.

Heaping coals on there head has always amazed me. the first thing an enemy will do when you help them is get mad but eventually, they will desire to repay your generosity.

I’m a conservative. God bless you all.

After watching Harry Kreisler’s amazing “Conversations with History” interview of Chalmers Johnson on UCTV, “Blowback,” “The Sorrows of Empire,” and his latest book “Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic” are on my reading list. Right now I’m reading John Perkins’ “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man” (see video at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3968544393356669182) and Richard Greaves’ “Who Really Runs the World? …An overview of what’s behind the ‘New World Order’” (at http://www.bilderberg.org/whorunstheworld9.doc) –both of which make essentially the same points.

WARNING: Only readers who have come to the realization that media consolidation in this country has sealed us in a virtual information vacuum need bother to try and read any of these offerings since they’ll seem quite heretical to disciples of Fox News, Bill O’Reilly, Rush Limbaugh and Pat Robertson.

While I don’t begrudge anyone their religious beliefs it seems to me that organized religions have become part of the problem. The underlying SPIRITUAL aspect common to all religions (including the Islamic faith) is virtually the same…regardless of what Pat Robertson would have us believe. The same is true of blind ethnocentrism which manifests itself as “patriotism.” Mindless nationalism gave rise to Hitler’s fascist Third Reich, and it’s gotten a pretty good foothold right here, right now.

I used to wonder how otherwise good, intelligent, “Christian” people could have been responsible for the unprovoked invasion, occupation and decimation of sovereign nations; how they could be responsible for wholesale torture and the slaughter of millions of innocent people. Now I know.

Why can’t we aspire to RATIONALISM instead of NATIONALISM? Why can’t we aspire to the innate, God-given SPIRITUALITY common to all of us rather than feeling compelled to adhere to the arbitrary and prejudicial strictures of man-made religions, which are more divisive than unifying?

No–I’m not anti-religion. In fact I suspect that if Christ were here today he’d be appalled at what’s being done “in his name.”

No–I’m not anti-American. In fact I’m very sure that the founding fathers would be appalled at the course this country has taken in the last hundred years…most especially the last six.

Regarding China: As if outsourcing U.S. production to them hasn’t injured the citizens of this country enough, the United States is borrowing money from them to wage the war in Iraq! Money which–needless to say–will have to be repaid.

Finally, labels like “Christian,” “Muslim,” “left-wing,” “right-wing,” “Republican,” “Democrat,” “liberal,” “conservative,” “hawk,” “dove,” “American,” “Iraqi”–these are all just invitations to disdain, if not HATE outright.

This “blowback” doesn’t happen for no reason at all.

This sounds like an interesting book, offering another perspective on current events and politics.

Without reading the book it’s hard to judge it’s worth, however from the summary I can already see some fallacies presented. For example the part about “military interventions in the world that have sponsored dictatorships, genocidal campaigns, war crimes, state terrorism and paramilitary death-squads and sadly 90 % of all US weapons were sold to human right abusers.” I don’t see where there is any distinction between right-wing or left-wing extremists. In other portions liberal and conservative viewpoints are listed as cause or excused. This tendency shows me that the author is leading the readers for his own purposes, not in a search for truth or reality.

Please don’t misunderstand me, that doesn’t bother me. After all it is HIS book and he is free to express himself. I mention it because this opinion like any other must be taken with a grain of salt.

I’ll read this book because getting varied opinions helps to keep my own opinions from leaning too far to either side.

I’m going to say it…even if people STILL refuse to believe it. September 11, 2001 was caused by decades of ill-fated US foreign policy…not by the groups Falwell & others loved to harp on.

One thing this nation has failed to come to understand…Johnson said it so clearly… that you do reap what you sow…whether in your personal or national life. Unlike the president keeps saying & I believe he actually believes it…the world is not a safer place for US intervention into others affairs. What does the administration think…if we kill someone’s loved ones that the youth that witness these events are going to thank us? America is on a downward slope. It will not be long before what this nation has caused to happen will be coming back to roost.

I just want to thank the US Government for making the world a more dangerous place.

Dear Steve

You are inspiring. I like what you have to say and agree with you wholeheartedly. I also believe that God and our forefathers would be appalled at what has been accomplished in their names. Tolerance of others would definitely be a big step in righting some of the wrongs that have been committed in the last 6 years. Even then I don’t think that America will ever regain the respect of other nations until we can learn that democracy and truthfulness is better than invading sovereign countries without the support of other free countries.

Dear Ernie

I don’t know if you are aware of when the King James version was written. If you don’t I am adding a couple of paragraphs regarding the King James Version of the Bible. As the reign of Elizabeth (1558-1603) was coming to a close, we find a draft for an act of Parliament for a new version of the Bible: “An act for the reducing of diversities of bibles now extant in the English tongue to one settled vulgar translated from the original.” The Bishop’s Bible of 1568, although it may have eclipsed the Great Bible, was still rivaled by the Geneva Bible. Nothing ever became of this draft during the reign of Elizabeth, who died in 1603, and was succeeded by James 1, as the throne passed from the Tudors to the Stuarts. James was at that time James VI of Scotland, and had been for thirty-seven years. He was born during the period between the Geneva and the Bishop’s Bible.

One of the first things done by the new king was the calling of the Hampton Court Conference in January of 1604 “for the hearing, and for the determining, things pretended to be amiss in the church.” Here were assembled bishops, clergymen, and professors, along with four Puritan divines, to consider the complaints of the Puritans. Although Bible revision was not on the agenda, the Puritan president of Corpus Christi College, John Reynolds, “moved his Majesty, that there might be a new translation of the Bible, because those which were allowed in the reigns of Henry the eighth, and Edward the sixth, were corrupt and not answerable to the truth of the Original.”

As you can see it wasn’t until the 1600s that this translation came into existence and given your own testimony translations are done by man. If that is so it is quite likely that the King James version contains man’s interpretation of what God has written since even a comma in the wrong place can change the meaning of a phrase.

I do thank you for taking the time to provide your opinion, however, I will continue to love God and seek him in my own way. Have a good evening. Jackie

Dear Jesse

The US gave money to Afghanistan when they were at war with Russia. They provided them with guns Etc. If I had the time I would name several other instances where America supported a country to find out only later that they would be forced to fight against their own weapons. Don’t be mistaken by what our President, Fox News etc tries to tell you. They are quite one-sided and sadly our media is fed what the Adminstration wants them to hear.

Thank you for opinion, however, as I value all input to this site. Have a nice evening. Jackie

Dear Don

I agree that 9/11 would not have occurred without the stupidity of the people in charge of our foreign affairs. I also am afraid that we are going to reap what the current Administration has sown. I sincerely, hope that the next president is more diplomatic in his contacts with other countries and will seek a common ground on which to stand. Have a nice evening and thank you for visiting my site. Jackie.

I’m very sorry to take Mr. Smiley face from this kindergarten discussion of American foreign policy and turn him up upside down into a frown, but all your stroking of each other’s egos on the war in Iraq is akin to blaming a murder victim for being out at the wrong time of night instead of the criminal.
I am probably twice the age of any one of you and attended school when teachers taught subjects such as mathematics, geography, history, civics, English, and grammar, among others, instead of diversity, self-esteem, how not to burn, the NEA is god [small 'g' intended], and the “let’s put party before country mantra of the Democrat Party. Now mind you, I am no staunch Republican; I learned too much in my 30+ years as a trial lawyer for that. And no, I did not sue anybody, but defended those who were about to be victimized by the get-rich-quick schemes of my brethern on the other side of the fence.
What made me even take the time to post this rant is the juvenile speculation about our founding fathers on current events. In the first place they are already spinning in their graves over the fact that we are now ruled over by a professional political caste, called Congress and the further erosion of the will of the people by activist judges who also were absent from school the day the difference between “legislate” and “decide” was taught.
All of your speculations are pathetic; if you want to know, look it up and you’ll find they had a view of what a free country should be like and how far astray our foolishness has led us. The Constitution was drafted by Alexander Hamilton and James Madison. For three years, they wrote letters and gave speeches to Colonial legislative bodies explaining exactly what the document was meant to do with its interaction of powers so that the individual colonies would have no qualms about giving up their independence after the Revolutionary War was won in favor of this new nation that was to be the last great hope of mankind. These letters and drafts of speeches Madison, Hamilton and John Jay are collected and known as the Federalist Papers. Try reading some of them.
As a matter of fact, if you all want a much shorter way of knowing how we are misled by the media, both written and electronic, just read the Constituion itself and try to find: 1. Separation of Church and State 2. The Right to Privacy 3. The People’s Right to Know 4. A Woman’s Right to Choose 5. That the Death Penalty is Cruel and Unusual Punishment. I’ll stop at five. Compassion is a private virtue and every time it creeps into public policy it results in injustice. Feel compassionate for the plight of illegal aliens? Let’s help them by screwing all the immigrants who played by the rules and even our own citizens with five years of income tax forgiveness. See how it works?
I don’t really know how I found my way to this site except that it was through Lockergnome, which is my way of telling you that I probably won’t see your replies. Chris and his bloggers are a lot smarter when they stick to the geeky stuff. You all do a disservice to your State, your Country and most importantly to yourselves when you just repeat the slogans of the Blame America crowd. It is like trying to make progress by standing on the shoulders of midgets [not, God forbid, used politically insensitive, but as an antonym for "giants"]. I was already in my adulthood during the Viet Nam era and have enough friends’ names on memorials. This war is not like Viet Nam, in which 52,000+ were killed. But I digress–that was a war of Kennedy and Johnson, Democrats, so you can go on “feeling” they are comparable.

Dear Robert

Surprisingly, I don’t disagree with you on a lot of what you have to say. Basically, what I said is that our forefathers would not recognize America today as what they intended it to be. Also as a matter of fact, I am a college graduate and have read the Federalist Papers and the Constitution, as well as the Bible and War and Peace. However, I still disagree with the Bush Administration’s War in Iraq believing it to have been a vendetta war against Saddam Hussein for targeting the first President Bush. I further believe that the war has much to do about economics and oil which puts us into a position of blowback by other nations especially those in the Middle East.

Have a good day. Jackie

I’m glad Mr. Hallas “probably won’t see this reply” because I’d hate for him to get his feathers any more ruffled than they already are. This rebuttal is for anyone else who might read this thread, and also so it doesn’t end on a sour note (although Jackie’s doing a wonderful job of keeping things peaceful).

First of all, unless he’s well over a hundred years old Mr. Hallas is NOT “twice the age of any one of us,” although his willingness to so readily assume facts not in evidence exemplifies precisely the point I was trying to make about prejudice, divisiveness and this “us versus them” mindset. The implication that “these young whippersnappers today are clueless compared to kids who came up half-way through the last century” is specious. Age (or having grown up during a particular era) no more confers wisdom and enlightenment than an advanced degree confers intelligence.

The French were similarly maligned at the beginning of this misbegotten campaign in Iraq for having declined the invitation to help provide the Bush administration with the quorum it needed to avoid the appearance that this was a unilateral adventure. Never mind that the U.N. (which had routinely rubber-stamped everything the U.S. wanted to do) and the world community at large were almost unanimously opposed to it: the French “owed us for bailing their asses out in WWII.” Never mind that the U.S. (while it was a major player) was not the only Allied force responsible for liberating France. Never mind that most of the Frenchmen who would have deployed to Iraq weren’t even alive during WWII. Never mind that the architects of the Iraq war not only were NOT the ones who helped liberate France, most of them had conscientiously evaded military duty themselves. Never mind that France had already tried its hand at imperialism in Vietnam and failed…wisely deciding to “get out while the gettin’ was good.” Never mind that the Statue of Liberty–the very symbol of American freedom–was a gift from France. Maybe we should rename “French fries” to something else.

I am in complete agreement with Mr. Hallas that we have gone far astray of the founding fathers’ intentions for the republic and democracy, which is why I’m a bit baffled by his conclusion that to criticize an administration which has so defiled them is somehow misguided. Those founding fathers envisioned autonomous States with great latitude in shaping their own socio-political landscapes locally. It’s very clear that they never intended so centralized a federal government as we have today. Case in point: despite the fact that California passed a law decriminalizing the therapeutic use of marijuana (by a large majority of the voters) the DEA has nevertheless conducted raids on marijuana dispensaries here, acting under federal authority. It’s exactly this kind of federal audacity that would have those founding fathers “spinning in their graves.”

If Mr. Hallas is the champion of underdogs he purports to be (i.e., “defending those who were about to be victimized…by my brethern on the other side of the fence”) I’m having a hard time understanding why he disparages those who criticize administrations which have victimized entire nations–and under false pretenses at that.

Saddam Hussein was a tyrant, to be sure, but his meteoric rise to power and armament was courtesy of the United States of America, primarily as a hedge against Iran after the equally tyrannical Shah was deposed. Like the Shah, Suharto in Indonesia, Pinochet in Chile, Noriega in Panama, et al., the atrocities committed by Saddam Hussein within his own borders never bothered Washington in the least so long as he played by their rules internationally. You can find pictures of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Hussein in 1983 (atrocities in full swing) all over the Internet.

Then there was all the subterfuge that got us into Iraq: “artist’s conception” drawings of mobile biological weapons laboratories; warnings about anthrax (a quantity of which had been authorized to receive by the U.S. State Department); inferences that Hussein was somehow associated with al-Qaeda; suggestions that Iraq was either responsible for or complicit in the events of 9-11; assertions that Iraq was attempting to purchase fissionable material from Niger; guarantees that Iraq had stockpiled weapons of mass destruction and was hiding them somewhere in the desert.

The truth was quite different: the mobile biological weapons labs, anthrax and WMDs didn’t exist, Iraq never tried to purchase fissionable material from Niger, Hussein had no association with al-Qaeda and Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11.

This administration has also promulgated a host of well-engineered fabrications, such as the circumstances of the death of Army Ranger Patrick Tillman; the extent of Jessica “Girl Rambo” Lynch’s injuries, Lynch having being mistreated by the Iraqi hospital staff which attended her, and having to be “rescued” from that hospital by an elite Delta Force; the deliberate misrepresentation of an apparently enormous “impromptu” crowd of jubilant Iraqis gathered in Firdos Square to demolish Hussein’s statue; and how much the war was likely to cost U.S. taxpayers. (When asked in January, 2003 Donald Rumsfeld answered that the budget office had come up with “a number that’s something under $50 billion.” To date it’s cost nearly ten times that amount.) Then there was Bush’s announcement in May of that same year that “major combat operations in Iraq have ended.” Since then the war has only escalated.

Add to that the fact that U.S. sanctions against Iraq before the war killed more Iraqis than Saddam Hussein, the fact that over 2-million people have fled the country (notably ones with the resources to leave, like doctors and engineers), the fact that over sixty-thousand civilians have been killed, and the fact that more U.S. soldiers have been killed in Iraq than the number of people who died in the 9-11 attacks and you’ve got some very good reasons to “blame America” (or, more precisely, this current administration)–although I do so for logical, well-researched reasons rather than just parroting “something I heard.”

Disregarding for the moment the fact that the purported reasons for invading Iraq were a pack of lies, on what basis do we attempt to justify (i.e., rationalize) our continuing presence there? Hussein’s been gone for years. The country’s been “liberated.” Even the fallback excuses are no longer valid.

The Iraqis are glad to be rid of Saddam Hussein, but–like the Somalis who turned on U.S. forces when the humanitarian effort to deliver food mutated into a military campaign to depose Mohamed Aidid–they don’t want us there anymore. But just as with Vietnam, this administration knows that to withdraw now would mean losing the country to factions hostile to American (i.e., “Big Business”) interests. And just as with Vietnam, U.S. forces will never kill enough Iraqis for America to have its way because the people there want ACTUAL autonomy and not another puppet government with strings to the White House.

Mr. Hallas is wrong when he states that, “This war is not like Viet Nam.” On the contrary: it’s very much like Vietnam. The differences are: the Vietcong were much better trained and equipped (by Russia and China) than the Iraqi “insurgents,” and we “inherited” Vietnam from an exiting military force (France) which had already occupied it. What’s different is that in Iraq we, ourselves, breached the borders of an unoccupied, sovereign nation without any provocation whatsoever.

How can we be proud of that?

What makes our invasion of Iraq any different from Hitler’s invasion of France or the Soviet Union’s invasion of Poland?

Do you honestly believe German troops viewed Hitler with any less idealism than American troops view Bush? Of course not! People are people. Only the hindsight afforded us by “history” will allow the majority of people to remove their blinders and see the reality of such escapades for what they really were. The desire to agree on the handsomeness of the emperor’s new clothes is much too compelling for most people to resist.

I’ve never found a single person–civilian or vet–who’s been able to explain just what we thought we were doing (or accomplished) in Vietnam. (BTW, Mr. Hallas must have missed one of those history classes he mentioned at the top of his posting: Vietnam was NOT “a war of Kennedy and Johnson, Democrats”–it was a war of Eisenhower, Republican…not that parties are relevant to this discussion.)

The idea that one’s own nation might practice the same kinds of deceit and corruption as those attributed to other nations can be as difficult to confront as the notion that oneself might have behaved badly toward another person (or others) in his or her own personal life. We easily recognize having been wronged by someone else but we tend NOT to recognize instances of having committed such wrongs ourselves. In fact, it’s entirely possible that a great many people would be even more willing to accept personal responsibility for injurious behavior which they themselves have committed against another person than they would be to acknowledge that their own nation has committed wrongs against another country.

In 1964 when the Greek Ambassador protested as unacceptable a plan to partition a region of Cypress, Lyndon Johnson replied arrogantly, “Then listen to me Mr. Ambassador. F*** your parliament and your constitution. America is an elephant, Cyprus is a flea, Greece is a flea. If these two feckless fleas continue itching the elephant they may get whacked by the elephant’s trunk, whacked good.”

When the U.S. Navy shot down an Iranian passenger plane in 1988, killing 290 innocent civilians, George Bush Sr. stated flippantly, “I will never apologize for the United States of America; I don’t care what the facts are.”

Which version of the Golden Rule do you subscribe to? –the “do unto others” version or the “one who has the gold” version?

The U.S. has over 700 military bases in 130 of the world’s 190 countries. What–besides some perverted vision of global Manifest Destiny–makes us think we have any right to be in all those places when we wouldn’t tolerate even a single foreign military base on U.S. soil?

I sense Mr. Hallas’ contempt for the “touchy-feely, New Age” kinda people who are generally opposed to war, imperialism and “empire” but if this country continues on its present course there is little doubt that Chalmers Johnson’s predictions will come true…and sooner than later.

George Bush IS making enemies faster than we can kill them.

Dear Steve
I appreciate your comments and agree with them. I marvel at how well you have articulated your ideas and personally think you should consider writing some articles regarding your research and study into these matters.
Have a wonderful day. Jackie

In my case, Mr. Hallas would be about 92 years old. Somehow in looking at history, I keep seeing the backdraft hit over and over again. The support of strongmen who will give what is desired over the support of democracy is why a democracy like India chose the alignments they did. Shah Pahlavi, Somoza, Pinochet, the list goes on.

Thanks, Jackie! I may just take your advice.

;-)

PS: It never fails. Right after posting my “magnum opus” (above) I realized I’d forgotten to include another event that makes Iraq like Vietnam: the My Lai-like massacre of 24 innocent civilians in Haditha by U.S. Marines.

So my “Add to that…” paragraph should have included: Haditha, Abu Ghraib, and the decimation of the Iraqi infrastructure.

Pardon my “overkill” (no pun intended) but I like to be complete.

Dear Jackie and Steve,
I was wrong on one point, and that was that I might not find my way to this site again. However, I sent my blog to five of my friends and asked them to be brutally honest in what they thought and one of them included the link again. Let me respond:
First, because it will be the easier and shorter of the two, to Jackie: I appreciate your response because at least you have seen and read some of the source meterial to which I referred. Where I still differ is that you use all different forms of the word “believe” instead of backing up any of the harsh things you “believe” with fact that support those beliefs.
Secondly, there are a lot of things going on with Chalmers Johnson that remove him from a serious author to an apologist for the Hate America Crowd. Chalmers received his M.A. and Ph.D. in Political Science from, guess where, folks, the Univ. of Ca at Berkeley. During the Korean War, he served with the U.S. Navy in Japan; hostilities with Japan had blown over by then, of course. He was a staunch cold war warrior and served five years with the Office of National Estimates within the CIA. Now get the dates: from 1967 to 1972. His field of expertise all through his career has been China under Communism and Maoism. He has by neither training nor experience the ability to comment with authority on American policy in the mideast or any other part of the globe. To show you that both Chalmers and the reviewer speak from a predisposed adgenda, they didn’t even tell you the subtitle of his book, which is one of a trilogy clearly, and by their own titles, removing them from the realm of either history or fair comment by a knowledgeable, impartial aulthor. They are: Blowback, The Sorrows of Empire; Nemesis, The Last Days of the American Empire, and The Sorrows of Empire: Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic. If you knew nothing of he author, and there is quite a bit more to know, if someone had just read to you the full title of the books that the author himself penned, would anyone of you who is still fair-minded think that this was anything other than propaganda in a slip jacket?
Chalmers and his reviewers would have you believe that the word “Blowback” is some secret concept that Chalmers liberated from the CIA’s lexicon. It is merely a nickname for what activist jugges and justices have been doing to usurp the power vested in both the legislative and executive branches of government from the planning board to the White House. A short example to show by fact. We all have insurance policies of one form or another; from auto, to homeowners to personal catastrophe or “umbrella” policies. And we used to know that those policies protected us if we accidentally harmed someone else. We also knew, or as adults, should have known that insurance policies do not cover intentional wrong-doing. If I get in my car and run down my neighbor because his obsessive lawn care protocol makes my lawn look bad, I am on my own, and well it should be. But then, going back to my original blog, misguided “compassion” by appellate courts crept in and injustice resulted. Example: A guy goes into a bar, drinks too much thereby cutting whatever tenuous hold his brain had on his mouth and he provokes a fight and gets his jaw broken. Since nobody is innocent, justice would seem to demand that they all rest where they fell. But, alas, that would not be “Blowback,” or as a fiction invented by the courts, THE UNITENDED CONSEQUECES OF INTENTIONAL CONDUCT. Now the drunk gets to sue the bar because it allowed him to throw too many beers down his own gullet, as well as the puncher, who can get his homeowners insurance to cover just by saying that he intended to hit him, he just didn’t mean to break his jaw. Not to mention that in the criminal law you are assumed with a bebuttalble presumption to mean the natural and ordinary consequeces of your actions. The latter legal fiction and Chalmers poly sci version of it are different ends of the same jackass; let’s give more credit to the after-the-fact naysayers than to those who had the responsibility to make the decision before everyone would see the blowback.
As to my friend Steve, I assure you that my feathers were not ruffled then or now, but your rambling missive gives me thoughts of a naked chicken whose feathers got so ruffled as to have fallen out. I’m sorry for the assumption about your age, but your writing sounded so ‘today’ where self-esteem trumps facts.
I don’t know what the point about France was except to paint you as a French apologist, a country which is really in dire straits from its past immigration and socialist policies. It is having trouble competing in the modern world, so I say no more on the subject.
In your original blog, despite you protestations to the contrary, you show yourself to be anti-religious. Your own use of langurage betrays your true beliefs when you say you don’t “begrudge anyone their religious beliefs.” How very big and tolerant of you! As if that weren’t enough, in the SAME paragraph you equate the underlying SPIRITUAL aspect of all the organized religions to Islamic fundamentlaism, ethnocentrism, patriotism and then end with what you imply is the end result of all the “isms,” goose-stepping fascism under Hitler! Are you mad? That is as hate-filled a paragraph as I have seen.
You then wonder how intelligent “Christian” people could have been responsible for “unprovoked invasion,” “occupation and decimation,” “the wholesale torture and slaughter of millions of people.” Keeping in mind that “decimation” comes from the Latin root for “ten,” and a million is a thousand thousands, You don’t give a single fact for your assertion and don’t even mention who the “intelligent Christians” are or when and to whom this fabricted event took place. Are you talking about the Crusades? I challenge you to tell us here what and of what time period you spoke. No, you’re not anti-religion or anti-American. Just like all the hypocrites on Capito Hill who would pass funding bills to take away the troops food, weapons, supply lines, and all forms of bodily protection are “Supporters of the Troops.” Your words, Sir, shout what you are, while the ones denying it shrivel and disappear like ice in August.
The rest of your diatribe on Iraq is too rife with the same kind of unsupported allegations as I have shown on the subjects I chose above, all with no authoritative source, so it behooves me little to go into them one by one. Therefore, I will end this round with the last two examples of your lact of intellectual honesty. One, your assertion that medial centalization at the hands of Fox news et al. has sealed us in a “virtual information vacuum.” Get real. Compared to the bias of the traditional media, CBS, NBC, and ABC, and their market share compared to Fox et al., it is those of us with more traditional views that are presented with the information vacuum; just ask ABC and Barbara Walters. Oh, sorry, the show is not about Iraq but another episode of Brittany Spears, brat celebrity.
Second example is the most moronic I have ever heard, including from the likes of Al Franken. You, Sir, are just wrong when you argue that Viet Nam was a “Republican” war. I wasn’t absent from history class at that time, and I suspect all you know of Viet Nam is that it happened. you see, Sir, I was in Washington from 1963, including the day Kennedy was killed to 1967. I learned about Viet Nam everyday from the Washington Post and the Washington Star, as well as the public events I attended and saw all these Asian army officers in French-looking uniforms being excorted by men who wore the same little circular pin as the men who guarded the President. I filed by Kennedy’s casket on Lincoln’s catafalque, so I got a good look at those pins. In what grade were you when Kennedy was killed? Come on, give a specific number. Yes, there were American “advisors” in Viet Nam when Kennedy took office, but the number was less than 7,500 and stayed there until Kennedy uped it to somewhere under 15,000, and it stayed at that figure until Kennedy was assassinated. Johnson doubled the number while he served out the remainder of Kennedy’s term. Now here’s where the truth comes in, Steve. In the 1964 election, Johnson ran as the “peace” candidate. He said over and over to anyone that would listen that, “He was not going to havd Amercan boys doing the fighting that Asian boys should be doing.” His adversary was Barry Goldwater, whom Johnson slandered with the famous “Atomic Bomb” political ad. You will note he frightened and lied his way to the Presidency. By 1968, when Johnson’s true nature was known to all of America and he could not have won an election as street sweeper, he gave him infamous echo of the “if nominated I will not accept, if elected I will not serve,” speech. When he gave that speech just four years after election as the “peace” candidate, there were 500,000 troops in Viet Nam and they were dying at the rate of beween 350 to 500 per week. So I repeat myself so you get it this time: 1) Iraq is nothing like Viet Nam, and 2) it was Lyndon Johnson’s war, a democrat.
Unlike my other tome, I will not wait for a friend to point me to this site but will look often for your response, especially to the identity of the tortued, decimated millions at the hands of Christians. Respectfully, Bob Hallas

Dear Sean

I agree that history is filled with such instances. One interesting note is that Ron Paul, Texas representative, who is running for the GOP presidential ticket has expressed this same concern. Of course, the other rubber stamped GOP candidates attacked him on the spot but he is the only one that is thinking independently, and honestly.

Have a good day. Jackie

Dear Steve,

I am sorry that I didn’t respond to your post earlier but our site has not been allowing us to post responses. Once again I find your information useful and well thought out. If you have time check out Ron Paul (GOP) from Texas. He actually thinks independently from the others and agrees that we are in danger from blowback. Of course, the other rubber stamps attacked him but what else can one expect. Have a good day. Jackie

Dear Mr. Hallas

I apoligize for taking so long to respond to you but our site has not allowed us to make response comments until now.

I thank you for visiting my site and expressing your opinions. I am so thankful that we still have the right to express ourselves but with the Patriotic Act and other controls I can’t help but wonder how long this freedom will remain. I hope that others take the time to read all the arguments posted here and make up their own minds as to what they believe. Have a wonderful day. Jackie

Dear Jackie,

>

Ah, so that explains it. I tried to post a reply the other day and figured it’d failed either because of too many active links, or maybe because you’d decided enough’d been said on the matter. Anyway, I just tried to post again and it’s still not working.

The post (without the links) went…

Mr. Hallas:

>

“Blowback” is in fact a forensic term which refers to the bloody “backspatter” the perpetrator of a homicide gets on himself via the high-velocity mist of blood which emanates from the close-proximity shooting of a victim.

>

I assumed (please forgive my naïveté?) it was obvious: Nazi Germans…with the implication that it’s happening all over again: right here, right now.

>

…although that’s just as good an example.

>

Sorry! I thought you might have copy/pasted search terms out of my post (as I’ve done with ones like yours) if you’d really been interested.

Here, then, just for you…

(followed by approximately 160 linked references)

Dear Jackie,

(Sorry for this double-posting but I hadn’t realized angle brackets would cause the text enclosed within them to disappear. If you have the resources please feel free to remove my last two posts, from which the quotations are missing.)

“our site has not been allowing us to post responses”

Ah, so that explains it. I tried to post a reply the other day and figured it’d failed either because of too many active links, or maybe because you’d decided enough’d been said on the matter. Anyway, I just tried to post again and it’s still not working.

The post (without the links) went…

Mr. Hallas:

“Chalmers and his reviewers would have you believe that the word “Blowback” is some secret concept that Chalmers liberated from the CIA’s lexicon.”

“Blowback” is in fact a forensic term which refers to the bloody “backspatter” the perpetrator of a homicide gets on himself via the high-velocity mist of blood which emanates from the close-proximity shooting of a victim.

“You don’t give a single fact for your assertion and don’t even mention who the “intelligent Christians” are…”

I assumed (please forgive my naïveté?) it was obvious: Nazi Germans…with the implication that it’s happening all over again: right here, right now.

“Are you talking about the Crusades?”

…although that’s just as good an example.

“The rest of your diatribe on Iraq is too rife with the same kind of unsupported allegations…”

Sorry! I thought you might have copy/pasted search terms out of my post (as I’ve done with ones like yours) if you’d really been interested.

Here, then, just for you…

(followed by approximately 160 linked references, which I am still unable to post)

Dear Steve

Feel free to post whatever you like. Between you and Mr. Hallas the debate is quite interesting. You are more than welcome to express your views as that is what this great land of ours is supposed to be all about.

Have a good day. Jackie

Dear Steve:
I think there is one thing upon which we will agree: we each believe that the saying, “there are none so blind and those who will not see,” is true for the other, and therefore, any further attempt at rational discourse will be fruitless.
The term blowback has its use in all three areas of this discussion page. Foremost, it is a ballistic term to define the action in a semi- or full automatic firearm and refers to the method of siphoning off some of the explosive gases from the shell fired to eject the empty cartridge and load a fresh one in the breech. What you described is more accurately referred to as high velocity blood spatter. The second meaning is the way Chalmers used it in which a country that disseminates false information to another nation and the false information drifts back to undermine the country’s goals in disseminating the false information. The third is the way I used it, the more generalized use of the unintended consequences of intentional conduct.
On the crux of what we have been disputing, I think you have been brain washed and I hope to offer a modicum of proof of that at the end of this reply. The fact that you would assert that the “thoughtful” Christians to whom you attributed the mass killing of innocents were Nazi soldiers and then compare them to our own troops is astonishingly ignorant and poisonous. Among Hitler’s first targets were the Churches and private schools so that he could manufacture the cult of the “Leader” in which he was the one to be adored instead of Christ and those who thought otherwise were long imprisioned in concentration camps. Don’t forget, the camps were set up first to quell any conscience of the German people. By time hostilities started in 1939, there were few thoughtful Christians in Germany and those were undergroud. His army had no religion except fealty to Hitler and his cult of personality, not to Christ. His army were all conscripts, wereas ours are all volunteers, and you are deeply deluded if you think the American serviceman or servicewoman has anything remotely resembling the German soldier’s cult of leadership to Bush as the German soldier had to Hitler.
The fact that you have such delusions as to compare Bush and Hitler and the American soldier with a Nazi says volumes about the you and the cult of hate of the liberal left in this country. You want some proof of how bad and pervasive this nonsensical and vitriolic bile is? I went to Google and typed in, “Hitler is a Nazi.” I got back 15,900 hits. I then typed in, “Bush is a Nazi,” and got back 15, 200 hits. Now with whatever attributes you choose to paint the President, he is not a Natzi. We know that. But the fact that his name drew so many hits considering Adolf was in fact a Nazi and had an eighty to ninety year head start means that there are a pathetically high number of lemmings who go so far into this vodooism of hate they can’t even see the edge anymore. Tell me: when Bush leaves office in two years, what will you all have to live for? Probably another Streisand farewell tour. I wish you all happiness, contentment and peace of mind. Goodbye, Bob Hallas