[sheik yerbouty]

Raimundo is still seething over the Levitical Codes...

[Keith in Iowa]

Who is Justin Raimondo, and why do we care what he says about anything?

Looks to me he's just a putz with a web site...

[IronJack]

Most of the time, Justin Raimondo's work is well reasoned and articulate, even if he is at the opposite end of the spectrum from my own stance. Lately, it seems the burden of saving the world has taken its toll though, because the tenor and caliber of his writing seems to be in decline. Maybe it's because it's hard to say anything positive about Saddam Hussein, or to keep repeating the same tired talking points about the Iraq situation. Stridency alone won't win that argument.

[MadIvan]

If you want to drive him around the twist call him "Justine". That makes him frothing at the mouth crazy.

I've crossed swords with him before. Justine's hatred of the British and Britain knows no bounds.

Regards, Ivan

[Pinch]

Enemy agent? If a total lack of logic coupled with an alarming ignorance of history makes one so, then I guess you are correct.

I would rather just chalk HIM up as one of the left wing (or so-far-right-that-he's-left) kooks.

[dennisw]

Justin Raimondo's crud no longer can be posted here. (There was a recent exception) The site owners/managers could't stomach his "essays" anymore. 

My take: He's an anti-American and anti-Semitic skunk and I don't care how many phony Jews he has as associates at antiwar.com. Justine is as Jew obsessed as the old German nazis were and the Islamics are today. His crap is copy& pasted on Aryan nation, nazi and Arab websites. I know a man by the company he keeps

[dennisw]

Good luck in your tussle with the skunk

[Registered]

Great article.

[Cicero]

The only reason Justin Raimondo concerns Freepers at all is that he was about 99% right in his opposition to clinton's war against Yugoslavia. His articles then were excellent.

I agree with you that he has been dead wrong about most things since 9/11. But one can't resist the faint hope that someone who was right once may get his head straight again.

Writing for Pravda may or may not make him suspect. I would guess that the Russians may have found a common interest with him because of his writings about the war against Yugoslavia, since Russia supported their "little brothers" the Serbs but were unable to help them in the face of clinton's brutal onslaught.

US security interests sometimes coincide with Russia's and sometimes diverge. On the whole, however, I think that Bush has been very wise to try to work with Putin. Although Putin has ties to Saddam, the US and Russia share a common interest in fighting Islamic terrorism. Whether Raimondo is a tool of the Russians, I have no idea. I would rather doubt it, since he seems to be a man with very strong convictions of his own--even though they have recently been very wrongheaded.

[Vigilantcitizen]

"On FreeRepublic.com, Raimondo admitted to me that he had never taken the trouble to thoroughly familiarize himself with the evidence presented by Mylroie and Davis, but nevertheless felt confident in judging their theories to be "tinfoil hat material" -- FreeRepublic jargon for a conspiracy theory so bizarre and implausible that only a nut would believe it."

However ironic, Justin never met a Billy Mckinney "It's the joos" style conspiracy he didn't like, eh Justin?

[jammer]

We know what Raimondo is doing. The question is, why is he doing it?

At least you're honest in being up front that this criticism is ad hominem.

[Senator Pardek]

Raimondo believes it would have been preferable for Japan to have been victorious in ww II -

It's at times like these that I tend to believe the wrong side won the war in the Pacific. Just think: if we all woke up one day living in some alternate history, as in Phillip K. Dick's The Man in the High Castle, our cultural malaise would disappear overnight. Instead of listening to the latest loutish lyrics of Eminem, American teenagers would be contemplating the subtle beauty of the Japanese tea ceremony.

These are the thoughts of a crackpot.

You're wasting your time.

[veronica]

Why is Justin Raimondo so vociferous in his screeds against our planned campaign in Iraq? I dunno, why is Scott Ritter? I have one theory actually, on some of that set. The reasons are myriad, but here's one IMO.

My theory is that for folks who have a clear and expressed anti-Israel agenda, any act, even if it benefits America, that is perceived to also benefit Israel, is disturbing to them. After all, Saddam pays blood money to the families of homicide bombers, so it can't be bad for Israel, for Saddam to go. And what's good for Israel, is bad for anti-semites. ;)

But when all is said and done, as James Taranto of Opinion Journal stated, antiwar.com is crackpot site.

I don't think Raimondo will respond to this thread. He's very busy writing a book on the UNTOLD BLOCKBUSTER story of the new millenium, the Israeli art student "spying" story. ;)

[Torie]

I think a fairer characterization of Justin's views might be not that he wants American power to weaken, but rather that he does not want it used, or wants it used far less. Perhaps as a functional matter that ends up being the same thing. Morever, I suppose we would disagree whether a failure to use such power will end up preserving or weakening it as a very consequence of its disuse.

[BlackElk]

Actually, Justin is lamenting the fantasized lost social opportunities for folks like Justin which result from the death of young men on the battlefield and trying desperately to prevent the casualties since young men exist primarily (in its imagination) to serve its fantasies. Justine's self-interest and a willingness to intellectually prostitute itself in the cause of preserving imagined social opportunities, however repulsive.

The difference between Justine Raimondo and George McGovern is simply age and the fact that McGovern was inclined to marry and father children. Their respective service to the soviets and former soviets is rather congruent. Look what Justine did for Pat Buchanan. Imagine what he could do to America if anyone were foolish enough to nsuccumb to the siren song of his hybrid of warmed-over McGovernism and Neville Chamberlainism posing fraudulently as either "Paleo-conservatism" (which means not at all conservative) or as libertarianism (as though actual libertarianism were a support system for dictators).

If "mondo" means "world" then "rai" must mean "tinfoil in a curious blend of lavender and pink". Justine, baby, show me your friends and I'll tell you what you are.

[Pharmboy]

There has never been a world power like the US that has wielded their power in a more benign manner. Can you imagine--for an instant--an unopposed old-style Soviet Union? Leftist dreck like Raimundo hate the US because we are successful without commies telling us what to do. Whatsa matter, Justin, managing your own life isn't engaging enough for you and you need to manage everyone else's?

Islamonazis have always attacked the west--before there was an Israel or a US. The problem is with THEM and not us. Ef you and all the rest of you commie b*stards Raimundo. The US of A will prevail; we may occasionally get a bloody nose but we will do what we must no matter what the leftist scum bleats.

[Unadorned]

First, with all respect to Richard Poe and Lawrence Auster (both of whom I admire immensely), I disclose that am a member of the Anti-Iraq-war right -- I haven't yet appreciated why we must attack that country (but am keeping an open mind, I hope). I also appreciate this excellent post by Mr. Poe, and all the careful reasoning and detective work that went into it -- journalism at its very best! (something which Mr. Poe never fails to give us). I want to say simply, look at the name of Justin Raimondo's web-site: Antiwar.com. Think about that. Need one necessarily go any further than that, in understanding Raimondo's orientation? And isn't that particular orientation consistent with his recent writings?

Mr. Poe has elsewhere, and more than once, spoken of his admiration for Mr. Raimondo's skills as a writer of opinion journalism, and I share his admiration. Though I very seldom read Raimondo because I simply haven't the time, I don't ever recall a single instance when, having read him, I didn't consider his writing a treat to read (though I by no means agree with much of it). But if the man runs a site called Antiwar.com, can't he remain true to his site's aims as advertised?

[Doc Savage]

Raimondo is a dork. He must have a Press Agent on FR to constantly have these articles about him. Let's all promise to let this nitwit slip beneath the electronic waves. Enough of this stupic Raimondo twerp!

[Byron_the_Aussie]

...Justin Raimondo -- Enemy Agent?....

Richard Poe -- Joe McCarthy clone?

[Justin Raimondo]

Oh, right, I must be a Russian agent since Pravda took it upon themselves to reprint my work without my permission. So, if we follow the "logic" here, we have to also infer that I am an Israeli agent (since my stuff has been reprinted in Israel), a Macedonian agent (since a number of Macedonian papers have reprinted my work), ad infinitum.

Pravda, Shmavda -- if this is the kind of "logic" involved in Richard Poe's contention that Iraq really bombed the World Trade Center (and, I guess, the Oklahoma City federal building), then I don't think "tinfoil hat" quite covers it: Poe's wacky screed is a Reynolds Wrap Special, for sure.

As for being a "traitor," and "enemy agent," or whatever, for questioning whether the invasion and indefinite occupation of Iraq is in America's national interest -- I guess we'll have to also target Brent Scowcroft, General Anthony Zinni, Norman Scharzkopf, the former commander of the Marines, and Senator John Hagel as my fellow conspirators. Good luck with that one....

Ad hominem attacks are always an indication that the writer has run out of valid arguments, and that is certainly the case with the War Party. They know perfectly well that attacking Iraq makes no sense -- none at all -- in the midst of a war against Al Qaeda, and benefits one and only one country, and that is Israel. So they try to distract us away from the real issue, in the hope that no one will notice the paucity of their own arguments.

I find it fascinating that people on this thread are saying how right I was when it came to opposing the Kosovo war -- but my reasons for opposing that war, and this one, are identical. The Kosovo war was fought for the benefit, not of the U.S., but of the Turks, and the Albanian Kosovars (really, the same entity): this current war is being fought for Turkey's main ally in the Middle East, which is Israel. I am being entirely consistent: I support wars of self-defense, not wars of conquest against nations that have never attacked us (a describtion that fits both Serbia and Iraq).

Wars of conquest are un-American. That's why I oppose this war. And, don't forget: war is the health of the State. I see Drudge is running a huge headline about "Part II" of the "Patriot" Act: now we'll see a real-life demonstration of the principle that you can't have a global empire and a constitutional republic at the same time. Hey, Iron Jack, long time, no see.

Oh, and "Hi, Veronica!" Sold any artwork lately?