Winning the Peace

Pages

Winning the Peace

An unreal dilemma

By Rochi613

Middle East • November 2012 • Views: 2,610

sultanknish.blogspot.co.il
Tuesday, November 20, 2012

Winning the Peace

by Daniel Greenfield

In our modern age, things no longer exist to perform their function. Washing machines aren’t designed to clean clothes, but to save water and energy. Food isn’t there to be eaten, but not eaten. And armies aren’t there to win wars, but to be moral. And the truly moral army never fights a war. When it must fight a war, then it fights it as proportionately as possible, slowing down when it’s winning so that the enemy has a chance to catch up and inflict a completely proportional number of casualties on them.

Forget charging up a hill. Armies charge up the slippery slope of the moral high ground and they don’t try to capture it from the enemy, because that would be the surest way to lose the moral high ground, instead they claim the moral high ground by refusing to try and capture it, to establish their moral claim to the moral high ground, which they can’t have because they refuse to fight for it.

Recent Pages by Rochi613:
Israel's only alternative Why Palestinians yes, Kurds no? Developing Countries Want Rich Nations to Pay for Climate Change

Jump to bottom

68 comments

Randall Gross Wed, Nov 21, 2012 10:23:47am

Downdinged for linking to a blog that proudly proclaims how he's quoted by pamela geller and other hate group leaders.

Randall Gross Wed, Nov 21, 2012 10:27:03am

I'm also not liking the "screw morals, who needs them" tone of the essay either, Daniel Should have been honest just came out and said that he seconds what Gilad Sharon said.

Rochi613 Wed, Nov 21, 2012 10:30:02am

re: #1 Randall Gross

So you don't listen to Wagner?

Vicious Babushka Wed, Nov 21, 2012 10:30:36am

re: #3 Rochi613

So you don't listen to Wagner?

I love Wagner!

Randall Gross Wed, Nov 21, 2012 10:32:34am

re: #3 Rochi613

No, I don't.

Rochi613 Wed, Nov 21, 2012 10:38:11am

re: #2 Randall Gross
Your are such a bright gentleman. Instead of looking down your nose at a 'tone,' Please come visit me in Israel and see how much more complex it is than you think. I have an extra bed. . . I'll introduce you to my delivery man from the Supermarket, a Palestinian married to an Israeli Arab citizen. We've become very friendly over the years: he is the son of a mukhtar and I'm the daughter of of a rabbi. Please, he said to me today today, please pray Tzahal wipes out Hamas totally.

Randall Gross Wed, Nov 21, 2012 10:40:51am

re: #6 Rochi613

I don't have a problem with wiping out hamas, as I said the other day go to it. I do have a problem with linking to hate bloggers who link arms with neo fascists and tribal nationalists. I do have a problem with Pam Geller, and the rest of sultan knish's friends.

Rochi613 Wed, Nov 21, 2012 10:46:51am

re: #7 Randall Gross

I understood that. That's why I asked the Wagner question. I'm different -- I read everything in search of good thought, except outright trash, whether its source is left, right or unclassifiable.

Charles Johnson Wed, Nov 21, 2012 10:47:26am

re: #7 Randall Gross

I don't have a problem with wiping out hamas, as I said the other day go to it. I do have a problem with linking to hate bloggers who link arms with neo fascists and tribal nationalists. I do have a problem with Pam Geller, and the rest of sultan knish's friends.

You're not the only one. I'm frankly disgusted to see people like this and israellycool being linked at LGF, and seriously considering blocking accounts so it doesn't happen any more.

I didn't spend so much effort to renounce and disassociate from these hateful far right lunatics, just to have them posted at my site by others.

Vicious Babushka Wed, Nov 21, 2012 10:48:10am

re: #8 Rochi613

I understood that. That's why I asked the Wagner question. I'm different -- I read everything in search of good thought, except outright trash, whether its source is left, right or unclassifiable.

What's your problem with Wagner?

Randall Gross Wed, Nov 21, 2012 10:51:02am

re: #8 Rochi613

I read everything too, and I've seen fifteen different iterations of the "screw morals, kill 'em all" essay that takes fifteen paras and much circumlocution to say what I just did. You probably like Ned May and Fjordman too if you like that package deal either/or viewpoint.

Rochi613 Wed, Nov 21, 2012 11:24:46am

re: #10 Vicious Babushka

There are people who do not listen to Wagner because Nazis loved him.

Vicious Babushka Wed, Nov 21, 2012 11:25:56am

re: #12 Rochi613

There are people who do not listen to Wagner because Nazis loved him.

Are there people who do not listen to the Beatles because Charles Manson loved them? That makes as much sense.

Rochi613 Wed, Nov 21, 2012 11:31:10am

re: #11 Randall Gross

No Sir, I don't. And I don't think Mr. Greenfield is saying 'screw morality.' I think that makes a good point about how notions of a 'moral high ground' can be used as a manipulation, and how Israel lives in a never-ending war because of it.

Rochi613 Wed, Nov 21, 2012 11:32:34am

re: #13 Vicious Babushka

Indeed. My point was that even though unattractive people quote this blogger shouldn't make him "treif."

Rochi613 Wed, Nov 21, 2012 11:33:49am

re: #9 Charles Johnson

I didn't mean to offend you in any way, Charles.

researchok Wed, Nov 21, 2012 11:34:22am

I have to agree with most everyone else on this.

Hamas is despicable in no small measure because they count among their 'friends' regimes that tyrannical, repressive and oppressive.

That Omar Bashir of Sudan is a welcome friend of Hamas speaks volumes as to their morality of the Hamas regime.

That this writer proudly proclaims solidarity with bigots and racists is nothing to be proud of.

You might say Bashir is very different and you'd be right.

However, Bashir's bullets and genocide also started with words.

Vicious Babushka Wed, Nov 21, 2012 11:35:39am

re: #15 Rochi613

Indeed. My point was that even though unattractive people quote this blogger shouldn't make him "treif."

Apples and oranges. If SultanKnish posted the Gettysburg Address you still shouldn't link to it, you could find it in a more acceptable venue.

Charles Johnson Wed, Nov 21, 2012 11:51:18am

re: #15 Rochi613

Indeed. My point was that even though unattractive people quote this blogger shouldn't make him "treif."

Please. Just stop trying to defend this. "Sultan Knish" proudly links to some of the most hateful sites on the web - Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, Gates of Vienna.

You need to take a look at the people you're getting your ideology from. I do not like seeing these haters linked at LGF. If these are the people you think are worth listening to, I suggest you spend your time at their sites instead.

Rochi613 Wed, Nov 21, 2012 11:56:15am

re: #18 Vicious Babushka

Shame.
I've been hanging out here for years and I guess I didn't realize how much things have changed.
Right doesn't necessarily mean wrong.
Bye, all.

Obdicut Wed, Nov 21, 2012 11:56:46am

re: #20 Rochi613

Have fun at Gates of Vienna.

Rochi613 Wed, Nov 21, 2012 12:20:24pm

re: #21 Obdicut

I'm not going to the Gates of Vienna, Obdicut. Just because I don't think exactly like you doesn't make me an enemy. For a bunch of folks against haters, you guys can be awfully snotty yourselves. It limits intellectual exchanges. And I thought that what was LGF was about.

JamesWI Wed, Nov 21, 2012 12:25:53pm

re: #12 Rochi613

There are people who do not listen to Wagner because Nazis loved him.

There's a difference between creating something that terrible people enjoy........and being proud of the fact that terrible people enjoy your creation.

Of course, you probably understand that. You just threw out the Wagner "analogy" to try to distract from your source's disgusting, voluntary associations with terrible people.

Obdicut Wed, Nov 21, 2012 1:06:17pm

re: #22 Rochi613

Then why are you comfortable linking to a blog that endorses Gates of Vienna?

goddamnedfrank Wed, Nov 21, 2012 1:58:45pm

This is the same Daniel Greenfield that recently wrote the GOP looks more like America precisely because so few minorities vote for it. Lord what a ponce.

lgffan Wed, Nov 21, 2012 2:09:23pm

While I do not necessarily agree with you all on this matter, the site belongs to Charles and it is his playground, if he doesn't want links to certain sites, we should comply. As my moniker indicates, I am a huge fan of the site, do a lot of lurking, very little engagement - most of you guys are too smart and too mean for me to go up against - and would not want to offend anyone, but especially not Charles.

Charles Johnson Wed, Nov 21, 2012 2:43:35pm

I'm not trying to be mean. But the bottom line for me is that I want nothing at all to do with anyone who associates with Geller, Spencer, et al. I'm very serious about it.

There's a reason the SPLC calls them a hate group - they're allied with very bad people, the worst of the far right in America and in Europe, and they push horribly bigoted agendas. Anyone who thinks they're helping the cause of Israel is sadly deluded.

jaunte Wed, Nov 21, 2012 2:59:33pm

This poorly reasoned and illogical essay is also available to read at a site called canadafreepress.com.
It doesn't improve.

Dark_Falcon Wed, Nov 21, 2012 3:56:54pm

re: #20 Rochi613

Flounce!

palomino Wed, Nov 21, 2012 7:25:48pm

re: #25 goddamnedfrank

This is the same Daniel Greenfield that recently wrote the GOP looks more like America precisely because so few minorities vote for it. Lord what a ponce.

That's some pretty substandard math, even coming from a Republican who probably thought Romney would win the popular vote by 7 percentage points.

By Greenfield's logic, a party that gets 1% of the Native American vote and 2% of the Jewish vote would be the more "American" party since those figures represent the two groups' portion of the electorate. Mathematically the guy is mixing apples and oranges, but he's too dense or disingenuous to let that get in the way.

philosophus invidius Wed, Nov 21, 2012 7:34:38pm

re: #30 palomino

From that article.

The racial composition of America is 16 percent Hispanic. The Republican Party exceeded the Hispanic share of the population in its representation by picking up 27 percent of the Hispanic vote.

Wow.

philosophus invidius Wed, Nov 21, 2012 8:45:28pm

So the GOP would represent the demographics of America if they get 51% of the Protestant vote--but they would need only 5% of the Southern Baptist vote, 3% of the Methodists, etc. They should aim for 16% of the Hispanic vote, but (let's say) 9% of the Mexican-American vote and .5% of the Guatemalan-American vote.

I'm also wondering how one would properly represent the make-up of America in terms of age groups.

Sorry, I'm having a hard time letting go of this.

alinuxguru Thu, Nov 22, 2012 10:41:49am

re: #23 JamesWI

There's a difference between creating something that terrible people enjoy........and being proud of the fact that terrible people enjoy your creation.

And, what if there is no distinction? In the case of Wagner, terrible people enjoyed his work and his work is roundly criticized in some circles as perpetuating anti-semetic stereotypes. Did Hitler embrace Wagner for the rhythm or for the "heroic teutonic nature"?

Randall Gross Thu, Nov 22, 2012 3:17:23pm

re: #33 alinuxguru

You are still missing the point. Wagner was Dead before Hitler was born, he wrote Parsifal before he encountered the works of DeGobineau. So unlike SultanKnish who personally preens in his sidebar that he's quoted & liked by hate group leaders and bloggers, Richard Wagner never personally gave a crap whether or not Hitler liked his works because he was already dead. Now can you see the difference?

If not, I'm going to submit that you might be wanting to follow this Wagner rabbit trail since it's one of several favorite diversions that tribal nationalists and their apologists run when cornered. I know, I've been here before which is why I did not take the bait up thread.

Vicious Babushka Thu, Nov 22, 2012 3:22:31pm

re: #34 Randall Gross

You are still missing the point. Wagner was Dead before Hitler was born, he wrote Parsifal before he encountered the works of DeGobineau. So unlike SultanKnish who personally preens in his sidebar that he's quoted & liked by hate group leaders and bloggers, Richard Wagner never personally gave a crap whether or not Hitler liked his works because he was already dead. Now can you see the difference?

If not, I'm going to submit that you might be wanting to follow this Wagner rabbit trail since it's one of several favorite diversions that tribal nationalists and their apologists run when cornered. I know, I've been here before which is why I did not take the bait up thread.

THIS.

Wagner kicked musical ass no matter who enjoyed his compositions. Also, I do not recall any of his works that contained any portrayals of Jewish characters, much less "anti-Semitic stereotypes." Maybe, in a personal correspondence to somebody, he might have said "Jews suck," so what? Maybe Mozart said the same thing. Maybe Chopin did too. Who gives a shit?

Aligarr Thu, Nov 22, 2012 9:47:55pm

Daniel Greenfield !!!@$% oh please , anyone wanting to acqaint themselve with the yellow journalist hack and essay writer , please go to Frontpage magazine . Greenfield is especially bent out of shape over Romney's loss , or should I say Obama's win . Daniels Greenfield's brain is twisted in Obama Hate Syndrome .....when he is directly criticized for the enormous pile of partisan dung on FPM ...he seeks to ban those who criticize his many many totally B.S. articles .

Obdicut Fri, Nov 23, 2012 3:51:23am

re: #35 Vicious Babushka

If we're not allowed to enjoy the works of anyone who was an anti-semite, then pretty much the entirety of European historical figures are off the list.

For that matter, most of them didn't believe women were equal to men, either, the bastards.

Randall Gross Fri, Nov 23, 2012 5:02:36am

Wagner was rumored to be Jewish himself, and his contemporaneous detractors & critics used to caricature him with exagerated Jewish features.
Image: Wagnerclic.jpg

Buck Fri, Nov 23, 2012 5:40:33am

Maybe the "link to" policies would not be as confusing if it was more consistent.

As an example people seem to have no problem with linking to Alternet despite the truther/antisemitism that has been posted there.

Buck Fri, Nov 23, 2012 6:10:00am

re: #12 Rochi613

There are people who do not listen to Wagner because Nazis loved him.

There are people who do not listen to Wagner because it offends the holocaust survivors in their lives.

This is a very interesting thread.

Can anyone see the similarity with the "Promoting/listening to Wagner" and the "Linking to sites that have political beliefs we find repugnant"?

Vicious Babushka Fri, Nov 23, 2012 6:16:01am

re: #40 Buck

There are people who do not listen to Wagner because it offends the holocaust survivors in their lives.

This is a very interesting thread.

Can anyone see the similarity with the "Promoting/listening to Wagner" and the "Linking to sites that have political beliefs we find repugnant"?

Wagner had nothing to do with the Holocaust. Wagner was not a nazi, and did not promote nazi-like ideas. He may have expressed some anti-Semitic attitudes that were typical for the mid 19th century, which were probably shared by other composers and artists who lived at the same time.

Dark_Falcon Fri, Nov 23, 2012 6:56:52am

re: #39 Buck

Maybe the "link to" policies would not be as confusing if it was more consistent.

As an example people seem to have no problem with linking to Alternet despite the truther/antisemitism that has been posted there.

The critical point is: "Is hateful speech a main feature of the site?" For sites like the Huffington Post or National Review Online, the answer is 'no', though both sites have their problems. But for Sultan Kish, the answer may be said to be 'yes', due to its owner's hostile depictions of Islam and his working with Pam Geller and Fjordman.

wrenchwench Fri, Nov 23, 2012 9:04:48am

re: #39 Buck

Maybe the "link to" policies would not be as confusing if it was more consistent.

As an example people seem to have no problem with linking to Alternet despite the truther/antisemitism that has been posted there.

I'm not surprised that you don't get it.

Charles Johnson Fri, Nov 23, 2012 11:27:45am

re: #42 Dark_Falcon

The critical point is: "Is hateful speech a main feature of the site?" For sites like the Huffington Post or National Review Online, the answer is 'no', though both sites have their problems. But for Sultan Kish, the answer may be said to be 'yes', due to its owner's hostile depictions of Islam and his working with Pam Geller and Fjordman.

I do NOT agree on National Review. They promote the very worst aspects of the right, including racial hatred. They were busted this year very publicly for that, and it was NOT a fluke or a random connection. They still have racist haters like Mark Steyn and David Yerushalmi writing for them, as well as anti-science creationists from the Discovery Institute.

The National Review is every bit as much of a far right propaganda rag as any wingnut blog.

Buck Fri, Nov 23, 2012 11:40:00am

re: #41 Vicious Babushka

Wagner had nothing to do with the Holocaust.

Are you really unaware of how this effects holocaust survivors?

You do know that in part out of respect to holocaust survivors, Wagner's music was not performed publicly in Israel until 2000?

Look, you can listen to this all day and night. However there are people who have an emotional reaction.

I wasn't there, obviously, but it has been reported that his music was played by the guards at Dachau.

Reality is that many holocaust survivors don't like German Shepherds (the dogs).

My step mother doesn't ride in a Mercedes.

I really would have thought you would show a bit more consideration on this subject. It clearly is not as cut and dried as you seem to want to make it.

Buck Fri, Nov 23, 2012 11:42:13am

re: #42 Dark_Falcon

It is interesting to me that you didn't address the one site I mentioned. Alternet.

On the subject of IP, it certainly qualifies for me as a hate site.

Charles Johnson Fri, Nov 23, 2012 11:42:30am

re: #45 Buck

Really, Buck - so now you're going to upding blog posts advocating indiscriminate murder, from lunatics associated with Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer?

Thanks for making it clear that you have no problem with racists and fascist groups.

b_sharp Fri, Nov 23, 2012 12:10:11pm

re: #31 philosophus invidius

From that article.

Wow.

Math is hard.

wrenchwench Fri, Nov 23, 2012 12:13:42pm

re: #45 Buck

Would it surprise you to learn that we don't call our grandparents "The Greatest Generation"?
— Shit Germans Say (@ShitGermansSay) November 19, 2012

Varek Raith Fri, Nov 23, 2012 12:19:44pm

re: #45 Buck

And yet you have no issues with linking to Geller and Spencer.
Both of who support various European neo nazi and fascists groups.
At least try to appear consistent, you twit.

Charles Johnson Fri, Nov 23, 2012 12:35:42pm

re: #39 Buck

Maybe the "link to" policies would not be as confusing if it was more consistent.

As an example people seem to have no problem with linking to Alternet despite the truther/antisemitism that has been posted there.

By the way, Buck, I have never seen Truther articles at Alternet, and I've never seen antisemitism, either. In point of fact, Alternet is pretty strongly opposed to conspiracy theories of any kind.

You're just making stuff up again.

TedStriker Fri, Nov 23, 2012 12:36:22pm

re: #39 Buck

My lord, you're dense...

Charles Johnson Fri, Nov 23, 2012 12:52:04pm

For example:

3 Good Reasons (And 1 Bad One) Why I Don't Buy Into Your Conspiracy Theories | Alternet

Your accusation that Alternet is a "truther" site is complete bullshit, Buck.

Obdicut Fri, Nov 23, 2012 12:52:28pm

re: #51 Charles Johnson

They have a few small things, like this one:

[Link: www.alternet.org...]

But they have far, far more articles busting conspiracy theories than supporting them. Far more than the standard press, and about a zillion more than right-wing media.

Charles Johnson Fri, Nov 23, 2012 1:19:37pm

re: #54 Obdicut

They have a few small things, like this one:

[Link: www.alternet.org...]

But they have far, far more articles busting conspiracy theories than supporting them. Far more than the standard press, and about a zillion more than right-wing media.

Don't know if I'd call that post a "Truther" post either - it's just a link to a newscast from 9/11, with an NYPD official suggesting the possibility of another bomb being planted inside the towers. I actually remember this report - there was a lot of speculation and misinformation flying around back then.

Buck Fri, Nov 23, 2012 3:19:34pm

re: #51 Charles Johnson

Seriously? It took me 1 second to find this:

[Link: www.alternet.org...]

truther and bonus antisemitism of Robert Fisk

Buck Fri, Nov 23, 2012 3:28:17pm

re: #50 Varek Raith

And yet you have no issues with linking to Geller and Spencer.

Actually that is a lie. I have never said that. I am just saying that the policy would be easier to understand if it were consistent.

Pure unadulterated antisemitism from Alternet:

Posted as a LGF page: [Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

Ziggy Standard Fri, Nov 23, 2012 4:04:51pm

re: #57 Buck

Actually that is a lie. I have never said that. I am just saying that the policy would be easier to understand if it were consistent.

Pure unadulterated antisemitism from Alternet:

Posted as a LGF page: [Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

This is an article which expresses the dissatisfaction of progressive American Jews with those who claim to speak for them while advancing nuggets of purest wingnut:

What they will not talk about is reality. US Jews are increasingly uncomfortable with a lobby that claims to represent us, but is deeply committed to the militaristic and rightwing policies of successive Israeli governments. Jews in the US tend to be politically progressive, but we are being asked to suspend our liberal beliefs when it comes to Israel. While maintaining a steady dream beat for war against Iran and a world view that, “Israel continues to fulfill its ancient obligation as a ‘light unto the nations,’” AIPAC lobbyists with their Christian Zionist allies guarantee billions of dollars in military aid for Israel each year . Much of this goes towards buying US military weapons and machinery, cementing the massive, interconnected, and lucrative military-industrial-security complex that now exists between our two countries.

It isn't antisemitic at all. Unless it's also anti-American to criticise the GOP.

But that's the creepy agenda you espouse - label anything less than 100% pure wingnut with regard to Israel as 'anti-semitism'.

Absolutely pathetic.

Dark_Falcon Fri, Nov 23, 2012 4:13:56pm

re: #46 Buck

It is interesting to me that you didn't address the one site I mentioned. Alternet.

On the subject of IP, it certainly qualifies for me as a hate site.

I didn't bring up Alternet because I wanted to address the article that was the subject of the Page. Moreover, while Alternet, like NRO, clearly has problems, it also actively works to smack down conspiracy theories. Also of import is that while Robert Fisk is a moonbat ass, Alternet doesn't host or support articles or sites that advocate violence. What I will call the "Counter-Jihad Circle" does incite violence and supports those who engage in violence. I would submit that this is eliminates equivalence between the Alternet and Sultan Kish.

wrenchwench Fri, Nov 23, 2012 4:16:59pm

OK, Dark. You downdinged #44 so I'm going to downding #42, which I never should have updinged, but I scanned it too fast and missed the NRO reference. I was going to leave it, but you just changed my mind.

NRO is poison.

Buck Fri, Nov 23, 2012 4:24:32pm

re: #58 Ayeless in Ghazi

It wasn't too long ago when Harvard professor Stephen Walt and University of Chicago professor John Mearsheimer said this sort of stuff, we all agreed it was antisemitic.

However, everyone is entitled to their opinion, and that article is filled with serious hate filled lies masquerading as opinion.

I like free speech, it helps me know who the assholes are.

Buck Fri, Nov 23, 2012 4:34:59pm

re: #59 Dark_Falcon

I didn't bring up Alternet because I wanted to address the article that was the subject of the Page. Moreover, while Alternet, like NRO, clearly has problems, it also actively works to smack down conspiracy theories. Also of import is that while Robert Fisk is a moonbat ass, Alternet doesn't host or support articles or sites that advocate violence. What I will call the "Counter-Jihad Circle" does incite violence and supports those who engage in violence. I would submit that this is eliminates equivalence between the Alternet and Sultan Kish.

Well, I think you are splitting hairs. Robert Fisk certainly advocates violence, incites violence and supports those who engage in violence (terrorists).

I really shouldn't have to tell you that.

Ziggy Standard Fri, Nov 23, 2012 5:10:55pm

re: #61 Buck

I like free speech, it helps me know who the assholes are.

That would be everyone to the left of Pamela Geller in your book.

The feeling is mutual.

Ziggy Standard Fri, Nov 23, 2012 5:16:37pm

re: #59 Dark_Falcon

Not that I agree with much in Fisk's piece, but it should be pointed out for the record that he isn't promoting trutherism either, as the increasingly desperate Buck suggests - he actually is pretty scornful of it while at least partially blaming it's existence on the lies of the Bush administration (eg WMDs in Iraq).

Dark_Falcon Fri, Nov 23, 2012 6:39:49pm

re: #61 Buck

It wasn't too long ago when Harvard professor Stephen Walt and University of Chicago professor John Mearsheimer said this sort of stuff, we all agreed it was antisemitic.

However, everyone is entitled to their opinion, and that article is filled with serious hate filled lies masquerading as opinion.

I like free speech, it helps me know who the assholes are.

Has Jimmah at any time defended Mearsheimer or Walt, or quoted them approvingly? I'm pretty sure he hasn't. Nor do I recall him attacking free speech. Stop building strawmen.

As for the allegation that I engage in hairsplitting: Of course I split hairs. As detail oriented as I am and with so many other detail oriented people in my family, it would be shocking if I did not split hairs.

Obdicut Sat, Nov 24, 2012 1:12:57pm

re: #56 Buck

That's not a truther article. At all. In any way.

Buck Tue, Nov 27, 2012 8:34:12am

re: #66 Obdicut

That's not a truther article. At all. In any way.

Ya, not in any way. (sarc)

In the years since, of course, we've been deluged with a rich literature of post-9/11 trauma, from the eloquent The Looming Tower of Lawrence Wright to the Scholars for 9/11 Truth, whose supporters have told us that the plane wreckage outside the Pentagon was dropped by a C-130, that the jets that hit the World Trade Centre were remotely guided, that United 93 was shot down by a US missile, etc. Given the secretive, obtuse and sometimes dishonest account presented by the White House – not to mention the initial hoodwinking of the official 9/11 commission staff – I am not surprised that millions of Americans believe some of this, let alone the biggest government lie: that Saddam was behind 9/11. Leon Panetta, the CIA's newly appointed autocrat, repeated this same lie in Baghdad only this year.

I showed that as a two fer. However it doesn't take strong Google fu to find more. A lot more.

Buck Tue, Nov 27, 2012 8:37:49am

re: #65 Dark_Falcon