Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Joe Conason: No Vast Missile Shield Could Have Prevented This
The New York Observer ^ | September 17, 2001 | Joe Conason

Posted on 09/14/2001 4:11:52 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-102 next last
What planet does this guy come from?
1 posted on 09/14/2001 4:11:52 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
I was gonna gig you for omitting the Barf Alert but then I realized that it's Conason, the BA is automatically implied.
2 posted on 09/14/2001 4:23:47 AM PDT by Uncle Fud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
What planet does this guy come from?

From the planet "SpinCycle...."

A cold, dead world orbiting the star "Goron...."

3 posted on 09/14/2001 4:25:17 AM PDT by backhoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
<> Don't worry Joe thanks to Clinton the so-called irrelevance will soon be relevant thanks to Clinton's Chinese connections. A little headstart won't hurt at all.
4 posted on 09/14/2001 4:25:28 AM PDT by gbaker (gbaker59@home.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
The man is an idiot.
5 posted on 09/14/2001 4:25:49 AM PDT by truthkeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
Wonder what rebuttal Joe has for this?

CIA Officials Reveal What Went Wrong – Clinton to Blame

6 posted on 09/14/2001 4:27:27 AM PDT by backhoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
Mr. Conason, you, sir, are a drooling moron.
7 posted on 09/14/2001 4:28:07 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: backhoe, All
BUMP!
8 posted on 09/14/2001 4:28:39 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
No, Joe, it wouldn't have prevented THIS tragedy. But because something doesn't prevent one tragedy DOES NOT mean it will not prevent other future threats. Does he not understand this?
9 posted on 09/14/2001 4:31:41 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
The LIBERALS are scurrying for cover and dropping misinformation turds on their way out the door.
10 posted on 09/14/2001 4:32:27 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
Mr. Conason, no dentist can help me with a broken leg...
11 posted on 09/14/2001 4:32:34 AM PDT by calvin sun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
Conason's dumb as a bag of head lice. He's answering a question that no one asked.
12 posted on 09/14/2001 4:34:06 AM PDT by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach
Does he not understand this?

Either he's stupid or against the U.S. Oh hell, he's probably both.

13 posted on 09/14/2001 4:34:15 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
I vote for both, too. The sheer ignorance is breathtaking.
14 posted on 09/14/2001 4:35:30 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
He's answering a question that no one asked.

He's nurturing the continuance of vulnerability.

15 posted on 09/14/2001 4:35:49 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
So far...this administration.. yada yada yada yada. Is this really appropriate at this dark hour of grief for our beloved nation? Not only is it an obvious politcal rather than rational piece of crapola, it is simply an effort to push the author's personal agenda. Again showing the short sighted, no, blind emotionality of the liberal rancor. We may have to face, in the future, the threat of missile capability from hostile antagonists which have benefitted from the leaky ship of state from the last eight years. Did you notice the sneaky way he tried to blame Bush for this attack? Lets buy this guy a one way ticket to Afghanistan or China.
16 posted on 09/14/2001 4:36:43 AM PDT by Dudoight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
John, do you realize you just insulted all the drooling morons of the world. Shame on you.
17 posted on 09/14/2001 4:38:19 AM PDT by ladtx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
But one American on each plane with a gun could have...
18 posted on 09/14/2001 4:39:25 AM PDT by copycat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ladtx
hehe..you've got a point =^)
19 posted on 09/14/2001 4:45:27 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Dudoight
Excerpted from Hillary Clinton and the Racial Left--

Hillary Clinton and the Third Way-- Ever since abandoning the utopian illusions of the progressive cause, I have been struck by how little the world outside the left seems to actually understand it. How little those who have not inhabited the progressive mind are able to grasp the ruthless cynicism behind its idealistic mask or the fervent malice that drives its hypocritical passion for "social justice."

No matter how great the crimes progressives commit, no matter how terrible the future they labor to create, no matter how devastating the catastrophes they leave behind, the world outside the faith seems ever ready to forgive them their "mistakes" and to grant them the grace of "good intentions."

It would be difficult to recall, for example, the number of times I have been introduced on conservative platforms as "a former civil rights worker and peace activist in the 1960s." I have been described this way despite having written a detailed autobiography that exposes these self-glorifying images of the left as so many political lies.

Like many New Left leaders whom the young Mrs. Clinton once followed (and who are her comrades today), I regarded myself in the 1960s as a socialist and a revolutionary. No matter what slogans we chanted, or ideals we proclaimed our agendas always extended beyond (and well beyond) the immediate issues of "civil rights" and "peace."

New Left progressives-including Hillary Clinton and her comrade, Acting Deputy Attorney General Bill Lann Lee-were involved in supporting, or protecting or making excuses for violent anti-American radicals abroad like the Vietcong and anti-American criminals at home like the Black Panthers.* We did this then-just as progressives still do now-in the name of "social justice" and a dialectical world-view that made this deception appear ethical and the fantasy seem possible.

As a student of the left, Jamie Glazov, has observed in an article about the middle-class defenders of recently captured Seventies terrorist Kathy Soliah: "if you can successfully camouflage your own pathology and hatred with a concern for the 'poor' and the 'downtrodden,' then there will always be a 'progressive' milieu to support and defend you."* Huey Newton, George Jackson, Bernadine Dohrn, Sylvia Baraldini, Rubin Carter, Mumia Abu-Jamal, Rigoberta Menchu and innumerable others have all discovered this principle in the course of their criminal careers.

There is a superficial sense, of course, in which we were civil rights and peace activists-and that is certainly the way I would have described myself at the time, particularly if I were speaking to a non-left audience. It is certainly the way Mrs. Clinton and my former comrades in the left refer to themselves and their pasts in similar contexts today.

But they are lying. (And when they defend racial preferences now-a principle they denounced as "racist" then-even they must know it).

The first truth about leftist missionaries, about believing progressives, is that they are liars. But they are not liars in the ordinary way, which is to say by choice. They are liars by necessity-often without even realizing that they are. Because they also lie to themselves. It is the political lie that gives their cause its life.

Why, for example, if you were one of them, would you tell the truth? If you were serious about your role in humanity's vanguard, if you had the knowledge (which others did not), that you were certain would lead them to a better world, why would you tell them a truth that they could not "understand" and that would hold them back?

If others could understand your truth, you would not think of yourself as a "vanguard." You would no longer inhabit the morally charmed world of an elite, whose members alone can see the light and whose mission is to lead the unenlightened towards it. If everybody could see the promised horizon and knew the path to reach it, the future would already have happened and there would be no need for the vanguard of the saints.

That is both the ethical core and psychological heart of what it means to be a part of the left. That is where the gratification comes from. To see yourself as a social redeemer. To feel anointed. In other words: To be progressive is itself the most satisfying narcissism.

That is why it is of little concern to them that their socialist schemes have run aground, burying millions of human beings in their wake. That is why they don't care that their panaceas have caused more human suffering than all the injustices they have ever challenged. That is why they never learn from their "mistakes." That is why the continuance of Them is more important than any truth.

If you were active in the so-called "peace" movement or in the radical wing of the civil rights causes, why would you tell the truth? Why would you tell people that no, you weren't really a "peace activist," except in the sense that you were against America's war. Why would you draw attention to the fact that while you called yourselves "peace activists," you didn't oppose the Communists' war, and were gratified when America's enemies won?

What you were really against was not war at all, but American "imperialism" and American capitalism. What you truly hated was America's democracy, which you knew to be a "sham" because it was controlled by money in the end. That's why you wanted to "Bring the Troops Home," as your slogan said. Because if America's troops came home, America would lose and the Communists would win. And the progressive future would be one step closer.

But you never had the honesty-then or now-to admit that. You told the lie then to maintain your influence and increase your power to do good (as only the Chosen can). And you keep on telling the lie for the same reason.

Why would you admit that, despite your tactical support for civil rights, you weren't really committed to civil rights as Americans understand rights? What you really wanted was to overthrow the very Constitution that guaranteed those rights, based as it is on private property and the individual-both of which you despise.

It is because America is a democracy and the people endorse it, that the left's anti-American, but "progressive" agendas can only be achieved by deceiving the people. This is the cross the left has to bear: The better world is only achievable by lying to the very people they propose to redeem.[End Excerpt]------ Author: David Horowitz

20 posted on 09/14/2001 4:45:31 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-102 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson