The Neocon War on Peace and Freedom, Part 1

Future of Freedom Foundation ^ | 18 Feb. 04 | James Bovard

[freeeee]

"Rome established a republic in 509 B.C. The Senators who ruled the city were elected by popular vote, but Roman law restricted what they could do. As a result, the people were free, and most of them prospered. With the passage of time, however, a ruling class evolved and began using the Senate to pursue their expansionist agenda. A series of foreign wars ensued which enriched the oligarchy and impoverished the people. Those who acquired wealth purchased vast tracts of land and farmed them with slaves captured in battle. Small farmers couldn't compete with them, and they were forced to sell their land. Class warfare broke out, and the power of the State was expanded to control the populace. The right to vote was extended to promote democracy and quiet dissent. The oligarchy began fighting among themselves for positions of power, which led to ever increasing chaos. Eventually Augustus Caesar intervened and replaced the Roman Republic with the Roman Empire."
(Encyclopedia Americana Volume 23, pp. 665-69.)

[agitator]

[Dalan]

"Leftist critique? You might look smarter in public if you knew what you were talking about before you typed. Bovard is as opposite of a leftist one could be."

Oh please. Sure, Bovard is bipartisan in a libertarian sense, but this screed on foreign and domestic security policy is straight out of the far left playbook. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.

"I also noticed you skipped the domestic surveillance bit..."

skipped for the sake of brevity only. I chose to focus on the more significant bit - which I noticed you completely dodged. If we're all dead, there isn't much to surveille, is there?

Show me one actual case of abuse of Patriot Act powers. Just one. Cite one single case filed by the ACLU against the Justice Department for Patriot Act invasion of civil rights. Just one!

How many American lives is the theoretic sanctity of your library records worth? Would you sacrifice your own children on the alter of political correctness, or only other people's children? Mine, perhaps?

You seem to act as if the war against Radical Islam (enough with the euphemisms folks; let's call a spade a spade) has no bearing upon or relation to the "domestic surveillance" you fear-monger with.

Are you one of those who also castigates the Bush administration for failing to "connect the dots" to prevent 9/11?

What exactly is your view of the war we're in? Are we even in a war? If you think not, can you address my assertions otherwise from my previous post? If you aren't in denial, how then do you suggest we fight it?

[section9]

"If only those nasty Jews would just up and die quietly, all our troubles would be over."

Yup, it's them thar

JOOOOOZ!

What a hateful little rant. By God, I bet that The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion is in the footnotes.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

What a hateful little rant. By God, I bet that The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion is in the footnotes.

Yup. Sort of like Cynthia McKinney with a thesaurus in her gnarled, orcish hands, wasn't it...? :)

[MarkDel]

U-89,

You responded angrily to your position, and the position of this author, being called "leftist" by some on this forum.

While it's true that you and the author are not traditional leftists, I think it's about time that people began realizing that political ideology is NOT linear, but circular. That's why you have leftists like Chomsky in agreement with rightists like Buchanan when it comes to the War on Terror. You and the author of thi piece, represent the lunatic fringe of the libertarian right...I know, I myself am moderatley libertarian and I recognize what happens when that ideology is carried behind its ideological boundaries, as you are doing in this thread.

The truth is that when ideology moves to far right, you eventually overlap with ideology that has moved too far left, hence Stalin and Hitler, one Marxist and one Facist in theory, become essentially one and the same in PRACTICE.

And this is the case with guys like you and your opposition to Bush and his LOGICAL foreign policy agenda...either that or I'm giving you too much credit and you're simply a garden variety anti-Semite as opposed to an ideological extremist.

[steve-b]

You're still evading the issue. Here's a nice, no clintonizing, YES-NO question: Do you agree with the Frum-Pearle call for a mandatory National ID card?

[r9etb]

No one will accuse Frum and Perle of a shortage of contempt. After a breathless summary of daily life in the Arab world, the authors declare, “This fetid environment nourishes the most venomous vermin in the Middle Eastern swamp.”

Bovard's apparent point being that Islam is not what Frum says it is. Bovard is full of crap. To see that this is true, I show you Exhibit 1:

I stopped reading at that point. Why waste time on a guy who can't even admit something as obviously true as that the salamikazes come from a toxic culture?

[MarkDel]

r9etb,

Isn't that picture sad? What's even sadder is that a large portion of the American public fails to recognize the ugly facts concerning Islamic culture. It's NOT just the extremists, the rank and file Muslims have serious cultural flaws that produce widespread anger and eventually leads to violence. To deny this is, like Samuel L. Jackson said in "Pulp Fiction" is to "walk with shepherd"

Well my eyes are WIDE OPEN...

[Little Ray]

The French were condemned for their nation's behavior and this is perfectly justifiable. If blacks or Jews traveled the world the organizing coalitions against us, or promoting their interests at our nation's expense, then all of the "racism" would be justified, and, I suspect, allowed on this forum.

And if France wants to create a coalition against our interests, they should get used to being run over by a steam roller. Why should the USA tolerate the actions of that sh*tty little country?

[Dalan]

"You're still evading the issue."

I'm evading nothing; you simply hadn't asked me the question yet. :-)

"Here's a nice, no clintonizing, YES-NO question: Do you agree with the Frum-Pearle call for a mandatory National ID card?"

Yes, in the absense of any other coherent alternative. Do I wish it weren't necessary? Of course!

But in reality, the law-abiding among us already have national identification, via our social security registration, employment records, drivers licenses, tax records, etc. In today's world of open borders, political correctness, and easy worldwide transportation, the lack of a coherent, encompassing method of identification serves only to provide cover to those that are here for nefarious purposes. Now why would you want that?

Now, let's see if you can answer without a dodge: do you have an alternative, besides denial of the problem?

[westerfield]

Domestic surveillance, national ID cards, forfeiture of our rights at home, and a neverending war against militant Islam, which just coincidently happens to be any country that might possibly challenge or pose a threat to Israel...these prescriptions from Perle and Frum hale from the extreme wing of neocon idiology - fascism and big government are fine with them as long as they are the ones in charge. Frum was a Canadian citizen up until he was offered a job in this administration, and I find it particularly annoying when a former Canadian suggests we undermine our Bill of Rights and commit to endless war just so we can entertain his Zionist fantasy of wiping out Israel's enemies. Let these two jerks join the IDF instead of demanding American blood and treasure to be used as fodder to fullfill their extreme agenda.

[r9etb]

the rank and file Muslims have serious cultural flaws that produce widespread anger and eventually leads to violence.

I'm not willing to go quite that far: I think most Muslims are just normal folks who want to be left alone. But at the same time, I will acknowledge that there is something about Islam such that, when violence does occur, it tends to turn out real foam-at-the-mouth salamikazes, and their bloodthirsty enthusiasms tend to excite the Islamic masses.

I think Iraq is a good example of this dynamic. And I think it's also a good example of what happens to Islam whenever it comes in contact with a confident Christian culture.

[freeeee]

the lack of a coherent, encompassing method of identification serves only to provide cover to those that are here for nefarious purposes. Now why would you want that?

I oppose national ID because I have this strange penchant for privacy and freedom. I realise that's rare and outdated, especially around here.

[Alouette]

[u-89]

>You responded angrily

I try not to, believe me but it is very difficult to discuss issues around these parts when any challenge to policy is met with ad hominems and vicious slanders. I'd disagree with Perel and Frum if their names were Finney and McNalty and they were passionately attached to Ireland, Jew's and Israel have nothing to do with it. It is all a matter of principle and what is seen as wise policy and healthy for the nation versus what is understood to be reckless and risky to the nation.

The premise of ideology going in circular travels is limited. True the left and the right both could end up in totalitarian regimes dictating every aspect of life however libertarianism just doesn't fit into that equation because they do not use government to enforce their ideals. I know it's popular these days to call libertarians leftist however sloppy the notion is. It's a useful tool for denigrating ideas so conservatives will pay no heed.

Former Congressman Bob Barr was always a staunch conservative and now he is working with the ACLU on opposing the Patriot ACT does that make him a leftist? The US was allied with the Soviet Union to fight Germany. Did that make the US commies?

P.S. I really like how you operate "you're a lunatic on the fringe - I know because I'm a moderate." Well at least you were polite about it. More than I can say for a lot of the others. Nice try.

cordially,

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

Good morning! I see you saved me the trouble of pinging you on this one. :)

[hchutch]

Yup. Gee, I think Frum is making a lot of the right enemies. I like the guy's writing.

[u-89]

>fascism and big government are fine with them as long as they are the ones in charge.

And the ones who get the big profits. Have you seen the news about Perle's investments based on his insider's knowledge and the bonuses he gets? If he was in the Clinton administration there'd be howls of outrage around here and special lists dedicated to documenting his activities.

[agitator]

There is no arguing with those who would happily submit to being a piece of government inventory, tagged and supervised like a common farm animal by their masters, and force others at gunpoint to do the same.

"Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say, 'What should be the reward of such sacrifices?' ... If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animating contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!"

Samuel Adams