Scott Ritter: By Releasing Intel, U.S. Endorses Israel's Illegal Bombing of Alleged Syrian Nuke Site
Scott Ritter: By Releasing Intel, U.S. Endorses Israel's Illegal Bombing of Alleged Syrian Nuke Site
If there is anyone in this country who still buys any feculent chunk, however small, of this administration's endless stream of bullshit, I pity him (or her).
Meanwhile, look for the US to jump off "allege" and strike Iran this year. I'm sure Saint Obama will risk everything to stand up against it, too. Yeah, right.
This entire fiasco is more proof, as if any more was required, that "we" don't need to follow the rule of law, due to our innate goodness and selfless interest in World Peace. Israel -- a.k.a., the pit bull we keep chained up out back -- is also innately good, by definition. The rule of law is for bad people, and bad nations, who need laws to restrain them, not for We, the Chosen.
This is not just the Bush doctrine; it is the doctrine of all power centers all over the planet. It's just that we have the most power now, and are thus the most dangerous. For now. Reacting to this utterly predictable garbage with some "innatist" notion that America is somehow uniquely evil is simply putting a negative sign in front of the term: it's the term itself that is inaccurate.
Feel free to forward anything by Obama decrying this event in terms of the rule of law. You know, what those stupid Iraqis can't manage to institute despite all of our selfless help, as every leading Democrat will tell you. That's known as "feeding narcissistic, childish self-congratulation to the 'Great Unwashed' for whom you have no respect in order to cover up your own crimes."
Let's do try to prove the Owners wrong on this most recent "Hitler-of-the-month-club"-fueled saber-rattling, and thus choose not to be Good Germans. Call your congresspeople; make noise! Let's not be accessories to this latest crime before or after the fact.
Think the Owners will suffer any blowback or any other consequences from a strike on Iran? Of course not: that alone, if you don't care about anyone other than yourself and your country, ought to be enough to incite some action.
More by Ritter here.
Meanwhile, look for the US to jump off "allege" and strike Iran this year. I'm sure Saint Obama will risk everything to stand up against it, too. Yeah, right.
This entire fiasco is more proof, as if any more was required, that "we" don't need to follow the rule of law, due to our innate goodness and selfless interest in World Peace. Israel -- a.k.a., the pit bull we keep chained up out back -- is also innately good, by definition. The rule of law is for bad people, and bad nations, who need laws to restrain them, not for We, the Chosen.
This is not just the Bush doctrine; it is the doctrine of all power centers all over the planet. It's just that we have the most power now, and are thus the most dangerous. For now. Reacting to this utterly predictable garbage with some "innatist" notion that America is somehow uniquely evil is simply putting a negative sign in front of the term: it's the term itself that is inaccurate.
Feel free to forward anything by Obama decrying this event in terms of the rule of law. You know, what those stupid Iraqis can't manage to institute despite all of our selfless help, as every leading Democrat will tell you. That's known as "feeding narcissistic, childish self-congratulation to the 'Great Unwashed' for whom you have no respect in order to cover up your own crimes."
Let's do try to prove the Owners wrong on this most recent "Hitler-of-the-month-club"-fueled saber-rattling, and thus choose not to be Good Germans. Call your congresspeople; make noise! Let's not be accessories to this latest crime before or after the fact.
Think the Owners will suffer any blowback or any other consequences from a strike on Iran? Of course not: that alone, if you don't care about anyone other than yourself and your country, ought to be enough to incite some action.
More by Ritter here.