I happened to tune in to the Howie Carr Show on the radio yesterday and Fox News military analyst and retired Army Col. Dave Hunt was filling in. In their political discussion, they were taking calls from people who had suggestions for who should run for President on the Republican side (like it matters). Now, I can understand why some people like Sarah Palin, but some callers actually suggested her to run for President.
Well, of course Sarah Palin should run for President. But she should not win. Palin is a militarist, a “Christian Zionist,” and is clearly clueless. We have already had militarist-Christian Zionist-clueless Presidents in George W. Bush and the evil elder Bush.
And I couldn’t believe that some callers were actually suggesting that Willard Romney should run for President a third time (and lose a third time). Don’t the callers know that Democrat activists invaded the state primaries to nominate obvious loser Romney?
Oh, let’s “run the country like a business.” Barf. They’re talking about running the government, not the country! No one can “run a country”! (And no one can run a government as well.)
You can’t run a government monopoly bureaucracy “like a business” because there is no profit motive, there are no competitors to keep one on one’s toes, and thus unlike in the productive sector there is no incentive to actually serve the consumers. Government is the parasitic sector that feeds off the productive sector. (For those who are interested in exploring why government can’t be run like a business, see Lew Rockwell, Murray Rothbard, Chris Rossini, and Robert P. Murphy.)
As I have already written several times, Romney is a socialist and a fascist, a corporatist, is criminally corrupt, an ObamaCare-repeal-promise welcher, and an authoritarian who supports Federal Reserve central planning and who supports the NDAA indefinite detention of innocent American civilians, he supports gun control, and the corrupt foreign policy in which your tax dollars are stolen from you to fund counter-productive military escapades to serve the interests of politicians’ election campaigns and profits for the “merchants of death” military contractors and banksters, and in which you are forced to do extra labor to serve and fund the hundreds of U.S. foreign military bases and actions which do nothing but provoke foreigners to want to retaliate (e.g. 9/11).
So much for these useless political campaign discussions on talk radio.
Speaking of Benghazi, Col. Dave Hunt filling in for Howie Carr also discussed the dreaded Benghazi issue. I only heard a little bit, but I have heard him discuss the issue relentlessly when filling in for past shows. The issue was the incident on September 11th, 2012, in which 4 Americans, including the U.S. Ambassador to Libya, were brutally murdered by extremists. Many people believe that was a “serious” international incident, which of course it was and it is very unfortunate that 4 Americans were killed.
But what about the roughly 5,000 U.S. troops whose deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan were caused by U.S. government bureaucrats for no good reason? I happen to believe that that entire issue is more serious, as George W. Bush should not have started those two wars of aggression against two countries which had nothing to do with 9/11 and which were of no threat to Americans. Both U.S. government wars of aggression were planned well in advance of 9/11.
But the American people were bamboozled by our criminal Rulers to support such wars. So roughly 5,000 U.S. troops dead, many more injured and some disabled for life, skyrocketing rates of military suicides, but the conservatives (yes, mainly it’s the conservatives) who are even more upset about the Benghazi incident.
And what about the hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi and Afghan civilians now dead, many more wounded, displaced, their homes and businesses destroyed in those countries, because of covetous and bloodthirsty socialist government expansionists of the Regime in Washington? And that’s in addition to the Iraqi children with birth defects due to the radiation and other effects of the U.S. military’s bombing and use of depleted uranium, and in addition to the hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians murdered by the first President Bush from 1991 through the U.S. government-led sanctions throughout the 1990s.
And the Orwellian U.S. death machine continues. With more secret “ops,” murders and assassinations overseas, and with drones on a reckless murder spree.
In addition to the totally innocent civilians that U.S. forces know to be innocent, there are those who supposedly are “terror suspects,” when rarely has there ever been evidence presented against any one of the many innocent civilians murdered each day by the U.S. military and CIA drones. And generally, “militant” is another word for someone in his own country who retaliates against invaders.
But don’t expect our revolving-door “intelligence” analysts to ever look at any of those concepts more closely, however. Well, there are some people who are no longer connected to the State and who can take a more objective look at these things.
In this article former CIA officer Philip Giraldi discusses the problems associated with determining just who should or should not be considered a “terrorist” or terrorism suspect. There are language and translation problems, and also, whose judgment should be considered in making determinations?
Giraldi writes, among other things:
The ability to manipulate the intelligence explains why some terrorists getting predator droned in Pakistan are undoubtedly on the Pakistani Intelligence Service’s (ISI) hit list and are not actual terrorists.
So this reminds me of the recent report published by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, in which it was shown that the numbers of innocent civilians murdered overseas by the Obama CIA drones (2,000+) since Obama took office of President have far surpassed the numbers of innocent civilians murdered overseas by drones under the command of George W. Bush (~250). Not only have the bombings killed innocents who were not determined to be terrorism suspects but were just “in the wrong place at the wrong time,” but there have been cases of the CIA drones intentionally targeting the rescuers and funerals of drone victims as well as intentionally targeting other group gatherings such as wedding parties. Yes, socialists like Obama and Bush really do wreak havoc.
So for decades, especially since the early 1990s, the U.S. government has been trespassing on foreign lands and provoking foreigners. So much for “moral values” and the Golden Rule. Good for you, “conservatives“! (But the Democrats, as we have seen from Obama, Hillary et al., are just as bad.)
So now we have an increasingly totalitarian government and militarized local police all across America turning the guns, the surveillance, the searches and drones against the American people. It seems that Americans are more accepting of that police state crapola, as though that could actually protect us from terrorists, when the real solution is to stop provoking foreigners. Ya think?
But keep on wasting time and money trying to find a “leader” who will attempt to make government more limited and less powerful. Is the Tooth Fairy available?
Is there any way to convince these “conservatives” that the idea of “limited government” is nothing but fantasy?