Make what you want of this article. Just because i post it does not mean it represents my beliefs or assumptions of current events.
I feel this is an interesting point of view that will certainly piss off some one.
I am in no way concerned about pissing someone off. I actually find it stimulating.
If you enjoy the content at iBankCoin, please follow us on Twitter
eh…, no biggy, the author doesn’t have much going on his life.
Somehow people are upset when America defends herself against violent perpetrators.
Typical left, let’s “talk nice”, with “double speak” and “code-speech.”
I wonder how the author would feel if his wife, daughter, or son was killed in the World Trade Center or out in the Afghan field?
Right, he’s more confident in his Word Doc. wor(l)d.
The author was an Asst. Sec. of Treasury for Reagan, not “typical left”.
As to how he would feel “if his wife, daughter, or son was killed in the World Trade Center,” you probably just read it. He has devolved from an Asst Sec of Treasury to believer in all kinds of wacky conspiracies, including the notion that the World Trade Center towers were destroyed by explosives planted in the buildings.
People are complex, and don’t easily fit into a simple left/right categories.
Interesting title OttNott, I really couldn’t care less a man’s title.
Title’s do not equal credibility, only in shyster courts of old and new.
President Washington was a mere delegate, had nothing much to contribute to our Constitution, but is most revered because he led and fought for our land against three vicious tribes: Ameri-Indians, England and France.
He had no title other than liberty over (slavery or) death, to quote another “non-titled” gentleman named Thomas Pain.
In the name of our founders, I am American, who are you (20th century immigrant descendant)?
Conspiracy of Cultural Guilt “left.”
No, categories can be defined to which outcomes are probabilities. Immanuel Kant.
Cronk,
You know, I’ve been on the other side of the political spectrum from “Someone” on more occassions than I can count. Doesn’t change the fact that I consider him a friend or that I find his opinion valuable on most things worth talking about.
And I’ve often spoken well of the news and commentary you post here. With this latest post, however, I see why he’s been so dismissive of you lately. Not everything that spills out of someone’s mouth is worthy of being repeated out of some kind of false moral equivolency fairness doctrine or Fox-style “fair and balanced” editorial policy.
Do you really feel that, “Frustrated by their failure, the Americans and their NATO puppets increasingly murder women, children, village elders, Afghan police, and aid workers,” is a statement that merits consideration? I mean, that’s just the part that triggered my gag reflex.
Kind of lost me here, Cronk. If you find “pissing people off” for its own sake stimulating, post on a men’s room wall.
Anton,
I find merit in posting opinions and or factual events that can be supported by realities and facts. Sometimes it may merely be observations that may or may not be true.
I understand that many people / writers have agendas. I understand that what is being presented in a article/oped may not be entirely aligned with reality; but it is important to explore the boundaries of what we consider to be true or factual.
If you do not explore said accusations, or if you do not seek to disprove some edgy material then you have not walked the grounds to form a valid opinion.
Many of the things the writer states can be supported by a reasonable fact finding mission.
How one interprets those facts is what sets us apart in our opinions and belief structures.
Bind Dead Aphid,
I hope people are not upset about America defending herself.
If you have not read The Shock Doctrine, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, and The Globalization of Poverty then you should do so.
I’m not advocating that these books are the entire picture of our foreign policy.
I’m not advocating that the behavior of international banking has the sole motive of what the authors speak of, but there is a sliver of this behavior to be found through out man’s history; including the history of our policies.
You may agree, disagree, or choose not to believe what these 3 books state and attempt to prove through factual information….but for what it worth having a member of your family die in the WTC should not change ones opinion on reality.
If it does the that person has succumbed to anger and vengeance.
Defending oneself is not the issue here IMO.
We were warned by a president of a military industrial complex…….
I can agree to disagree.
I’m well aware of said “theories” even if I won’t spend my time pouring them over, (c)over to (c)over.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zc23nPsmP_Q
Bind,
Said theories are only such when their is no factual documentation to back it up.
Perhaps John Perkins is all conjecture, but even his testimony aligns with the factual documented evidence in the other two books.
I agree to disagree.