The Bombs-Away Election
Many Americans are rightly disgusted by the non-choice they are offered in the presidential race every four years. This year is no different despite the serious problems that the United States faces at home and abroad. Mitt Romney has no actual plan to fix the economy, and the record of President Barack Obama over the past four years speaks for itself. Romney is a big-government Republican, while Obama is an even-bigger-government Democrat. Either will increase the deficit to the bankruptcy point; Romney through more spending on arms, soldiers, and wars, Obama with a sorely needed health-care program that will break the bank because it was created in collusion with the health-care and insurance industries and makes no effort to limit costs.
Most other differences are cosmetic, since the Democrats and Republicans in reality represent two nearly identical faces of the Washington policy elite, an elite that inevitably circles the wagons and protects its own first, last, and always. There is, however, one area in which American voters can actually register a preference, and that is foreign policy. The presidential foreign policy debate on Oct. 22 appeared to be a consensus product, with challenger Mitt Romney agreeing to most policies supported by incumbent Barack Obama. As expected, Israel was repeatedly exalted as the most valued U.S. ally, even though it is a strategic liability. Iran was mentioned no less than 47 times, repeatedly described as the greatest international threat to the United States even though it has never actually threatened to harm the American people and has no capability to do so. Obama shifted position somewhat on supporting an Israeli military operation against Iran by indicating that he would do so with U.S. military resources, a position that has been part of Romney’s playbook ever since he began his run. The only real difference between Romney and Obama consisted of Romney’s assertion that Iran should be denied the “capability” to create a nuclear weapon. “Capability” presumably means the ability to enrich uranium and engineer a bomb, which Iran already can do, meaning that Romney for all intents and purposes believes that he already has a casus belli to go to war against the mullahs.
The record of President Barack Obama is, to put it mildly, despicable. The public has learned recently how he has sought to make war a permanent feature of the U.S. landscape while allowing Iraq and Afghanistan to wind down to diminish any popular concern over what is happening in the name of “security.” So there will be fewer boots on the ground while the government moves full-speed ahead on creating an infrastructure in which kill lists will be managed by the White House through the National Counterterrorism Center. The lists will be expanded and will include detailed information on when and how the target might best be identified and killed. Information will be obtained through a massive data-mining operation that will quite plausibly intrude on the privacy of billions of people all around the world, including nearly everyone inside the United States itself.
The White House reportedly sees a continuing decade long struggle against militancy that will require an increasing number of drone strikes and special-operations assassinations in a number of countries with which the United States is not officially at war. A major part of the plan to take out the alleged terrorists identified in the government’s “disposition matrix” will involve killing suspects in areas where drones either cannot or do not operate, which means that teams of Delta and SEAL commandos will do the dirty work. That is what President Obama, who portrayed himself somewhat disingenuously as a peace candidate to win in 2008, has turned into: another all-American monster and war criminal.
Mitt Romney, not surprisingly, supports the drone operations, and one would have to assume that he also approves of the kill lists. If he objects to them in any way, he has certainly not said so. Romney’s comments in the debate that the U.S. can’t “kill our way out of this mess” in the Middle East and America possesses “the mantle of leadership for promoting the principles of peace.… We don’t want another Iraq. We don’t want another Afghanistan” were markedly out of character, a transparent attempt to portray himself as something less than a complete warmonger. Speaking to other audiences, Romney has been more consistent, advocating increases in the defense budget, calling for Washington’s asserting its “leadership” in the world, and touting American exceptionalism. He has turned over the decision-making for an American attack on Iran to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and has promised to support Israel in whatever it chooses to do, whether or not it damages U.S. interests.
Romney is truly an empty suit when it comes to foreign policy. His ignorance is astonishing, and his gaffes on foreign geography and politics are memorable. And dangerous. Russia and China are enemies, and they need to be confronted. The Palestinians don’t deserve a state and are culturally backward. Iran needs Syria to have a salt-water outlet. Britain doesn’t know how to run an Olympics safely. Both Russia and Iran have been described by Romney as America’s principal enemies, depending on which audience is being flip-flopped to on which occasion.
The big question is, of course, whether Romney will actually do what he appears to be saying or will he moderate his views if elected. The evidence is that he will be another George W. Bush, pursuing a blinkered and interventionist foreign policy that will surely include a war against Iran. Why is it possible to say that with some confidence? It is because of the people he has surrounded himself with. Seventeen of 24 identified senior foreign policy advisers are Bush administration neocons. Nearly all of them who have expressed an opinion on the subject are in favor of a preemptive military attack on Iran.
John Bolton and Joe Lieberman are reported to be in the running for secretary of state and secretary of defense. Lieberman has also been tabbed as a possible director of Homeland Security. Cofer “the gloves come off” Black, a former CIA officer and senior Blackwater executive, who has been described as “one of the most brutal figures in CIA history, heading the agency’s Counterterrorism Center at the time of the 9/11 attacks,” has been identified as a possible director of national intelligence or possibly director of the CIA. The national security adviser could be Eric Edelman, who replaced Doug Feith at the Office of Special Plans at the Pentagon. Elliott Abrams, the Iran-Contra felon, and Dan Senor are also in the mix for the senior security, defense, and intelligence slots. Senor has become Romney’s principal adviser. He was a Pentagon adviser when he was elevated under George W. Bush to become the principal spokesman for the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq. Senor is a passionately pro-Israel hawk who is close to Benjamin Netanyahu. His sister Wendy runs the Jerusalem office of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. He is Romney’s principal adviser on Israel and the Middle East, favors attacking Iran, and is the apparently the source of the comments made by Romney denigrating the Palestinians.
Other Romney foreign policy advisers include Fred and Kimberly Kagan, Robert Kagan, Robert Joseph, and Elliot Cohen. Paul Ryan has been receiving foreign policy briefings from the Kagans and Elliot Abrams.
So there is a choice, of sorts. To my way of thinking, a Romney victory is a virtual guarantee that there will be war with Iran accompanied by the usual bellicose muscular interventionism that we have become accustomed to since 9/11. That sort of bluster will continue until the cash runs out, but Romney is also clearly willing to continue to borrow money so it can be given to the Pentagon, perhaps prolonging the process. Romney would also undoubtedly continue the odious policies relating to drones, kill lists, and assassination teams that he would inherit from his predecessor. Obama, on the other hand, will, if reelected, continue his Pilgrim’s Progress to become America’s most distinguished war criminal of the 21st century, even eclipsing the redoubtable George W. Bush and Dick Cheney in that regard. The choice for the voter comes down to how one prefers to see worldwide chaos and the death of the Constitution develop. It would be in heavy doses wrapped in the flag with Romney, while Obama would take pains to hide what he is doing as he marches down what is pretty much the same road. Some choice.
Read more by Philip Giraldi
- How Government Grows – January 2nd, 2013
- A Flat Earth New Year – December 26th, 2012
- Christmas in Connecticut – December 19th, 2012
- Why Remember Iraq? – December 12th, 2012
- The Protocols for Death – December 5th, 2012
Ben_C
October 31st, 2012 at 9:26 pm
I think the correct "move" at this point, considering we will apparently be stuck in this "2 party" system for the foreseeable future, is to cede power to the so-called 'genuine' "Neo-Cons"… These people (the "Neo-Cons") will obtain power at some point in the future…it could be next year, it could be 4 years from now, it could be longer…the main point is that these 'people' are not going away, and there is no way to get 'rid' of them, and they have already "won" a great deal by not even being in power, and they will regain "power" at one point or another…
If the "American People" refuse to listen…then let the "American People" suffer the consequences…it's better than making even more "Neo-Con" fantasy policy 'legitimate' via pseudo "precedent" (keep in mind: "law" means nothing it terms of "Defense" 'policy') …
Robert Emmet
October 31st, 2012 at 9:45 pm
But, but, but………the eminent Mr. Barack Obama is a recepient of the Nobel Peace Prize.
QUESTION : Why is Mr. Giraldi describing his eminence as possibly "America’s most distinguished war criminal of the 21st century" ?
Does someone have an answer?
romi
October 31st, 2012 at 9:53 pm
{If the "American People" refuse to listen…then let the "American People" suffer the consequences}
WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT? Gullible people MUST suffer to wake up. The problem we have is exactly this that gullible people have it easy so they don't care, otherwise by now they should have get rid of the professional killers at the WH, senate and the congress.
As long as people do not bring piece of US criminal work HOME, like what they are doing in Syria, or they did in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan, vietnam and else where, then the gullible people DO NOT CARE. People of the Middle East , Asia, Africa ARE FED UP WITH THIS SITUATION AND SHOULD accept this situation. They must be united against the gullible and arrogant in US who are silent against the killing of millions of people and now going to allow another war criminal for the next fucking 4 years at the whore house.
david
October 31st, 2012 at 9:55 pm
{If the "American People" refuse to listen…then let the "American People" suffer the consequences}
WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT? Gullible people MUST suffer to wake up. The problem we have is exactly this that gullible people have it easy so they don't care, otherwise by now they should have get rid of the professional killers at the WH, senate and the congress.
As long as people do not bring piece of US criminal work HOME, like what they are doing in Syria, or they did in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan, vietnam and else where, then the gullible people DO NOT CARE. People of the Middle East , Asia, Africa ARE FED UP WITH THIS SITUATION AND SHOULD accept this situation.
David
October 31st, 2012 at 9:58 pm
People of the Middle East , Asia, Africa ARE FED UP WITH THIS SITUATION AND SHOULD NOT accept this situation.
Johnny in Wi.
October 31st, 2012 at 10:15 pm
I am voting for Romney. Obama has been a disaster on both foreign and domestic policy. In no way does he deserve to be re-elected. Romney will have to change his tune or he will end up as a total failure like Bush Jr. and Obama. If Romney trys to take us into another war, the streets will fill with the whole left and half the right. I expect Romney to flip flop on foreign policy like he has on everything else. It is good to throw a worthless president out after one term. If Romney is such a flop as Obama he will get the same treatment.We don't know for sure what Romney will do but we have Obama's record of total failure to judge him on. We need a guy with executive experience and to make some hard decisions. The wars and a lot more programs have to be liquidated. That is one of several things Romney is good at executive experince, cutting expenses, and liquidating things. Obama had no executive experience when he came into office, and hasn't learned much since.
Steve
October 31st, 2012 at 11:07 pm
I'm not a fan of Romney, or of the Communist from Kenya.
But, it occurs to me that regardless of who wins – the top ranking US military people have been reportedly very opposed to the neo-con's lust to attack Iran. These are the voices who provide
advice and who give briefings to whichever ignoramus happens to sit in the White House.
It occurs to me that Romney hasn't been forced to attend any of those briefings and, thus far, is just running around shooting his mouth off in order to curry favor with the rapidly dwindling war mongering segments of the electorate. Should he win, he will then have to listen to his generals and admirals and let's hope that once he is shown the facts about what a nightmare a war with Iran would be – he'll suddenly decide to cool his macho rhetoric.
mickperry
November 1st, 2012 at 1:09 am
You've got to be kidding. The title came with the job, and there never has and probably never will be a saint occupying the White House. In order to restore US legitimacy before the eyes of the world though, this president needed to institute criminal proceedings against the former regime at home and to begin repairing international relations abroad.
Meanwhile, Buddy Bell's article published here today describes a world sadly familiar to readers of the Afghan and Iraq war logs released by WikiLeaks in 2010; and Obama has poured the cement that makes policy of arbitrary and unaccountable murder a permanent reality.
During the eight years of the Bush junta, around 50 drone strikes were recorded, whereas the figure now likely stands in excess of 500, deployed over an ever widening field of operations.
The secret war on dissent at home also mirrors this sinister and accelerating trend, and the US electorate faces a dreadful choice next Tuesday. Turkeys voting for Thanksgiving is the only way that I can describe it.
mickperry
November 1st, 2012 at 1:30 am
Maybe you could get back to us after you've watched Greg Palast on the Real News.
El Tonno
November 1st, 2012 at 2:28 am
> until the cash runs out
The cash ran out a long time ago, in the 50s I think. But it doesn't matter because it comes out of the infinite well so beloved by people from the left/progressive persuasion (because you can pay for 'social services' and other do-gooder boondoggles). Hard money is, like reading and knowing stuff, unamerican.
sherban
November 1st, 2012 at 3:36 am
America is real the country of all possibilities if people like G.W.Bush,Romney,Sarah Palin, etc,etc may get such power and such money.The question is when will be the turn of smart people?Seeing American politics,American t.v,movies,papers it is a long time to wait.However,God bless America.
Johnny in Wi.
November 1st, 2012 at 3:56 am
Romney has said he will follow the advice of his intelligence services and military advisors. Well they are almost to a man against another war. I respect Romney's ability as a businessman and executive. We have had enough of an amateur who has been a total flop. I can't take another 4 years like the last 4. Obama has gotten away with stuff Bush never would have been able to. If he is re-elected he will make this country into Chicago at best and Venezula at the worst. They will build a machine that only a violent revolution can overthrow. Romney will be on a short leash, as the President should be. I have had enough of this earthly messiah.
Phil Giraldi
November 1st, 2012 at 4:06 am
Johnny – It doesn't quite work that way. Romney will appoint the generals who will be giving him advice and will do so based on what he is toldy by his neocon advisers. Sure, there are generals out there (mostly in the air force) who are itching for a fight with Iran and the neocons probably already have them lined up.
Johnny in Wi.
November 1st, 2012 at 4:12 am
Obama is a war criminal who has shredded the Constitution. To vote him back would be to condone his crimes and the wars he has started and continued. Romney as of this date is only a potential war criminal. Obama had his chance, and has been a total failure in both Domestic and foreign policy. Let someone else take over. It is good to throw out a politician who is a bad apple after one term. It might become a habit. The situation is far to dire for Obama to continue with his amatuer hour. At least Romney has shown some ability to add and subtract. The country is headed toward bankruptcy The wars and a lot more of the government need to be liquidated. Romney has shown himself to be a master liquidator. I am willing to give him a chance. Obama has had his.
geo1671
November 1st, 2012 at 5:23 am
Johhny come Lately–are you kidding us–Obama is worse than Bush?
Did Obama allow Sept11/2001 to occur and coverup or 1 million Iraqies dead on lies
Did Obama cause the financial mess we are in? Wake-up foolish boy
omop
November 1st, 2012 at 5:34 am
Spot on as the saying goes Mr. G. Found this quote from the days when the USA reflected what its President stood for rather than what the present Liebermans, McCains, Grahams, associated neocons [democrat and republican] as well as "dual citizenships folks" are pursuing.
And as the song goes, "those were the days my friend."
" Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies,
in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed,
those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending
money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its
scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all
in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity
hanging from a cross of iron.
Dwight D. Eisenhower, From a speech before the American Society of Newspaper Editors, April 16, 1953
Die Wahrheit zählt
November 1st, 2012 at 6:16 am
Mick,
You write "to RESTORE US legitimacy". Was it ever otherwise than what it is now?
liberal
November 1st, 2012 at 6:16 am
I completely agree.
I'm not happy with the drone stuff, and it's completely counterproductive, but Obama has a long way to go before he matches Bush in terms of innocent foreigners murdered.
liberal
November 1st, 2012 at 6:17 am
Actually, the cash can't run out for a sovereign that has a fiat money supply.
It might not be a good idea to overspend, if it threatens inflation. But right now, in a liquidity trap, that ain't happening.
liberal
November 1st, 2012 at 6:21 am
"Obama, on the other hand, will, if reelected, continue his Pilgrim’s Progress to become America’s most distinguished war criminal of the 21st century, even eclipsing the redoubtable George W. Bush and Dick Cheney in that regard."
Sorry, Phil—while I agree with a lot of the sentiment of this piece, and agree with much of your writing in general, this is just hyperbolic.
We know that, at a minimum, Bush murdered 100,000 Iraqis, and probably quite a few more than that.
Obamas got a much, much longer way to go before he reaches that record.
Furthermore, while I don't like the fact that Obama is doing AIPAC's bidding re Iran, he appears to be less in AIPAC's pocket than 95% of Congress.
Sure, I'll concede (even as someone who despises the Republican Party) that the least pro-Israel president in recent history was Bush 41. But there's worse than Obama—e.g., Romney, as his list of probable advisors show.
liberal
November 1st, 2012 at 6:23 am
"To vote him back would be to condone his crimes and the wars he has started and continued. Romney as of this date is only a potential war criminal. Obama had his chance, and has been a total failure in both Domestic and foreign policy. Let someone else take over. It is good to throw out a politician who is a bad apple after one term. It might become a habit."
You're nuts. If you vote for Romney, you're not just voting against Obama, you're voting _for_ Romney.
If you think that Romney is going to do anything other than increase the rate of transfer of wealth in the US to the top 0.05% or increase the chance of getting us involved in more costly wars (_as compared to Obama_, not some dream peacenik who unfortunately has no chance of winning), you've got a hole in your head.
geo1671
November 1st, 2012 at 6:58 am
Sure is–Gary Johnson running for President. I suggest all Americans force the major networks to show the RT all third party candidates airings,which was a surprize to me–Larry King was the moderator. Gary shined as a true American that has the smarts and can outshined any US President. His main point of turning this messed up country–term limits for all politicians.
Jim Bovard
November 1st, 2012 at 8:09 am
Excellent piece, Phil.
Is this election simply a choice of retail killing or wholesale killing by the US government?
‘The Bombs-Away Election’ « Silver Lining
November 1st, 2012 at 8:13 am
[...] by Philip Giraldi, source [...]
Phil Giraldi
November 1st, 2012 at 8:25 am
Yes, lib, I did get carried away about Cheney. Bush, however, was easily duped by the neocons in the Pentagon. Compared to Obama, who has expanded drone warfare by a multitude for four, and who has been assassinating US citizens, Bush was almost restrained. Romney, of course, will continue the worst aspects of Obama and will add in his own peculiarities…
PEACE EVER AFTER
November 1st, 2012 at 9:45 am
At this point all we can do is go for the much lessor of 2 evils.Obama may not have lived up to all expectations but he can not that easly buck the Zionist lobby, At least he stood up to Netanyahoo and behind closed doors he said he wants some daylight between US and the Zionist state.Romney wants no daylight between US and the Zionist entity.
Jane
November 1st, 2012 at 10:21 am
"Some choice." Some choice indeed, Phil – and at a time in our nation's history when we need a strong leader who has the stones to round up these neocon warmongers and frogmarch them before a tribunal for war crimes and treason. He or she would have to commit to never again allowing this cowardly filth to hold positions of influence in OUR country and he/she would need to begin the process of fixing our economy and repairing relations abroad. This would require courage and integrity which neither of these candidates possess. The list of policy advisers to Romney is almost to a man the pack of jackals that surrounded Bush and Obama has caved over and over again to neocon threats and pressure. Poster Johnny said something about keeping the president on a short leash. Well the neocons DO keep the president on a short leash, whoever the president and whatever his party he will dance like a puppet to do their bidding.
I don't think there is anything that can be done to turn the tide on this neocon train wreck. I guess we prepare ourselves for a bumpy, bloody ride both at home and abroad and hope the money runs out for their military adventurism and empire expansion. Maybe from the wreckage, we can rebuild a country that we can again be proud of – a country that won't have our forefathers rolling in their graves. These brave men who fought and died for the freedoms that we have taken for granted and are now rapidly losing without so much as a peep.
baz
November 1st, 2012 at 10:26 am
if romney is elected, there will be a war before he is inaugurated….
buy oil
baz
November 1st, 2012 at 10:29 am
while we discuss the issues of who will be the next war criminal president of the US, the previous mass murdering war criminals and their henchmen continue to move freely….. riding horses on texas ranches and hunting with their friends in wyoming….
Agvo
November 1st, 2012 at 10:48 am
Why not vote for a third party candidate. We know that one of the two lame stream parties candidate will win, but as a matter of principle let's not reward them with our vote. If enough people in the future vote to change the system, maybe one day we'll have a decent president elected to run the country.
jrs
November 1st, 2012 at 11:21 am
Yea in raw numbers of people killed, it's hard to top Bush. However in terms of precedent (murder by presidential decree alone), I don't think even Bush topped Obama. It's not just about numbers (as horrible as they are).
jeans
November 1st, 2012 at 12:42 pm
I wrote in Ron Paul
Aireck
November 1st, 2012 at 1:04 pm
True. And if the Libertarians can get just 5%, they will get about 90 million in Fed (your) funds. Getting third parties accepted has to happen. The Republicans have shown how willing they are to cheat to keep sanity out of the party.
And if a Republican is in charge the left peacenicks will finally come out of their closets and hopefully spread the message that all this killing and death has a downside. Oh yeah, and the constitution thingy…people might start talking about that again.
Claus Eric Hamle
November 1st, 2012 at 1:20 pm
Bottled water, tinned food, kelp powder. Regardless of who wins: The US aims to achieve a Disarming First-Strike Capability according to missile engineer Bob Aldridge -www.plrc.org. GPS (NAVSTAR) was made to get an accuracy of less than 30 meters, necessary to destroy missile silos. Professor J. Edward Anderson, "Deployment of anti-missile missiles in Eastern Europe is part of a first-strike strategy". The US Navy can track and destroy all enemy submarines simultaneously according to Bob Aldridge. The missiles in Eastern Europe will be operational by 2018. This leads to Launch On Warning by 2017.
Kolya_Krassotkin
November 1st, 2012 at 1:21 pm
That alone is a very good reason to support Obama or, at least, not to vote for Romney. I am tired our nation's affairs being meddled in. Our closeness to our best "friend" in the ME has become unhealthy for our American republic.
wars r u.s.
November 1st, 2012 at 1:43 pm
bolton, lieberman, abrams, the kagans…..and you think romoney will keep us out of more wars?
Sam
November 1st, 2012 at 3:34 pm
One thing for sure, most people abroad wish Obama to win.
Jane
November 1st, 2012 at 4:32 pm
As it's very likely that Romney will take us to war with Iran, I wonder if he will encourage his five strapping sons who's ages range from 30 to 42 to sign up and serve in this latest mideast venture?
It's highly doubtful, as he himself, dodged the draft by hastening to France with the Mormon Missions from 1966 – 1969 as a nineteen year old "minister of religion". Really? He had also received further deferments for his student status. Romney is photographed attending a counter-protest to a protest at Stanford University in 1966 against the draft deferment policies for students at the university. So he backed having student deferments from military service, but supported US engagement in Viet Nam, just so long as he was well out of it! A typical elitist approach for a young man who's Daddy (who was a war hawk) was the governor of Michigan at the time.
It would seem Mitt's own five apples didn't fall far from the tree.
the world is fed up
November 1st, 2012 at 7:07 pm
Not true. They don't give a damn about the selection process, known to gullible as election, in the US.
They want to be left alone by the war criminals and baby killers, Black and White. Why don't you keep these savages at home? This is your fault, otherwise you would have been out protesting and burning their WMD down.
RParker
November 1st, 2012 at 11:34 pm
What a steaming load of crap coming from a Zionist war criminal like good old Ike. Like a good politician even when still a general, he danced to the tune of his even bigger criminal Zionist-controlled boss Roosevelt, went along with "unconditional surrender' for Germany and Japan, needlessly prolonging World War II, murdered German and other European civilians by the boatload with a terror bombing campaign (along with the British), and after the surrender of Germany, was responsible for the deaths by starvation and exposure of German POWs in open-air camps. Yeah, everybody liked Ike, though.
Articles for Another Friday » Scott Lazarowitz's Blog
November 2nd, 2012 at 4:22 am
[...] Philip Giraldi: The Bombs-Away Election [...]
Iowa Scribe
November 2nd, 2012 at 12:36 pm
Mr. Giraldi's is perhaps the best analysis and commentary I've read regarding the foreign policy choices facing Americans in the upcoming election.
richard vajs
November 2nd, 2012 at 2:25 pm
Absolutely – when an addict can't convince his doctor to prescribe Percocet or some other opiate, does he resign himself to following doctor's orders or does he go looking for another doctor (one who will give him what he craves).
The Bombs-Away Election (by Philip Giraldi)
November 2nd, 2012 at 4:50 pm
[...] http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2012/10/31/the-bombs-away-election/ Posted in Zionist Threat « US deploys troops to Turkey amid Syria unrest: US General [...]
james
November 3rd, 2012 at 2:39 am
Hi Johnny,
I must respect your choice, but I cannot respect the choices you have been given. As a long time poster here, I have always voted up your comments including this one although I do not agree with your vote.
I seriously believe that to change things in Washington, people must change and I do not see it. Choosing Romney just to give him a chance is ludicrous and I might add dangerous. You can judge the book by the cover Johnny, look at his advisors, there is no way this idiot will be better than the current idiot.
I like your dream of leftists going to the street, but do not kid yourself Johnny, the left in America are far worst than the right most of the time and it just will not happen short of a catastrophic event or a mass awakening.
The Bombs-Away Election | 9/11 - A Cheap Magic Trick
November 3rd, 2012 at 6:04 am
[...] Read more 911 Cover-up, CIA crime network, Explosives in WTC, Fake al qaeda, False flags, Inside job, Israeli complicity, Media coverup, Pentagon, Phony war on terror Leave a comment Trackback [...]
Canadian
November 3rd, 2012 at 10:56 am
The USA was not always universally despised in the Middle East. Believe it or not, there was once a time when it was actually admired and respected there. That change is due to Washington's policy capture by, and slavish devotion to, the zionist entity as well as its blatantly anti-Arab and anti-Muslim attitude. There was a wave of worldwide sympathy and goodwill toward the USA following the "very good for israel" 9/11 attacks (there were even candlelight rallies in Iran despite Washington's animosity toward that country, its imposition of the Shah, training of his secret police (SAVAK) to suppress the population and egging on and material support of Saddam's attack on Iran). That worldwide goodwill has largely evaporated as a direct result of the USA's policy of world domination ("full spectrum dominance") and actions since 9/11.
Canadian
November 3rd, 2012 at 11:07 am
A vote for the lesser of 2 evils is a vote FOR evil.
A vote for a third party candidate is a vote AGAINST evil. If you support criminality, then vote for evil and proudly admit that you support and endorse it.
If you do not support evil, then vote for someone who opposes it.
Canadian
November 3rd, 2012 at 11:21 am
"However,God bless America."
Why should God bless America? What has America done that God should single it out, over and above all other nations, to be blessed?
"Blessed are the peacemakers" was what I heard. Is America a peacemaker?
Would Romney Pursue a Neocon War Agenda?
November 3rd, 2012 at 2:47 pm
[...] http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2012/10/31/the-bombs-away-election/ [...]
The Bombs-Away Election (by Philip Giraldi)
November 3rd, 2012 at 3:00 pm
[...] http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2012/10/31/the-bombs-away-election/ Posted in Zionist Threat « Entangled with Israel (by Philip Giraldi) [...]
Canadian
November 4th, 2012 at 9:11 am
"The missiles in Eastern Europe will be operational by 2018. This leads to Launch On Warning by 2017."
The missiles in Eastern Europe are there to provide Amerika with a first strike capability on Russia and the Russians know it. And that is exceedingly dangerous and transforms nuclear war from a possibility to a near certainty, because Russia must then launch on warning or else have no chance of ever responding. The Russians will have no time to consider whether the threat is real or not and their only choice will be to respond immediately or face annihilation with chance of response.
Canadian
November 4th, 2012 at 9:13 am
That final sentence should read "… face annihilation with NO chance of response".