Tuesday, July 25, 2006

World War III???

This is reprinted from one of my favorite blogs Louis Proyect: The Unrepentant Marxist.

Newt Gingrich: Look what you’ve been covering: North Korea firing missiles. We say there’ll be consequences, there are none. The North Koreans fire seven missiles on our Fourth of July; bombs going off in Mumbai, India; a war in Afghanistan with sanctuaries in Pakistan. As I said a minute ago, the, the Iran/Syria/Hamas/Hezbollah alliance. A war in Iraq funded largely from Saudi Arabia and supplied largely from Syria and Iran. The British home secretary saying that there are 20 terrorist groups with 1200 terrorists in Britain. Seven people in Miami videotaped pledging allegiance to al-Qaeda, and 18 people in Canada being picked up with twice the explosives that were used in Oklahoma City, with an explicit threat to bomb the Canadian parliament, and saying they’d like to behead the Canadian prime minister. And finally, in New York City, reports that in three different countries people were plotting to destroy the tunnels of New York.

I mean, we, we are in the early stages of what I would describe as the third world war….

Tim Russert: This is World War III?

Newt Gingrich: I, I believe if you take all the countries I just listed, that you’ve been covering, put them on a map, look at all the different connectivity, you’d have to say to yourself this is, in fact, World War III.


Although this is probably just an exercise in hyperbole, it does tend to concentrate one’s attention on the dynamics of a third world war, if did occur some time in the future. As was the case in WWI, events tend to spiral out of control very rapidly. Of course, unlike WWI, a new war that is truly global in character will very likely involve the use of nuclear weapons and destroy civilization as we know it.

There is a tendency to downplay such dangers because the threat of “mutually assured destruction” during the Cold War meant that using nuclear weapons was virtually unimaginable. With the capitalist transformation of the USSR, however, there is no longer a counter-balance to the U.S. and the world’s number one super-power surely must feel the temptation to use its advantage against weaker adversaries.

The Pentagon began reviewing its options in 2001 and decided that the old rules no longer applied. A white paper signed by Rumsfeld said, “nuclear weapons could be employed against targets able to withstand nonnuclear attack (for example, deep underground bunkers or bioweapon facilities).” There was a genuine worry that such weapons might have been used against the Iraqi military in the run-up to the invasion.

One wonders if the top brass in the Israeli army might be thinking along similar lines in light of the fact that a 20 tons of explosives was not sufficient to penetrate Hezbollah’s bunkers in south Beirut and kill its leader Hassan Nasrallah, who commented after the abortive strike: “I can confirm, without exaggerating or using psychological warfare, that we have not been harmed.” If anything, the Hezbollah missiles might even be harder to destroy based on the conclusions of a former Lebanese army officer cited in a July 21 FT report. He said the longest range rockets were buried in the south and in the eastern Bekaa valley, “so deep that bombs cannot reach them and guarded by suicide commandos”.

If Hezbollah can withstand 20 tons of explosives, perhaps they can be destroyed with a tactical nuclear weapon rated at 100 tons. Nuclear weapons experts define such bombs as having a range between 100 tons and one million tons. Hiroshima was destroyed by a 120,000 ton device. But that would be overkill. A nicely placed junior bomb of a mere 100 tons would be more than up to the task.

The Israel nuclear program grew out of a conviction that anything was justified to guarantee its survival, including nuclear weapons. It is of course ironic that the term nuclear holocaust gained currency in the 1950s. As is frequently the case with the Zionist state, threats and outright demonstrations of inhumanity are legitimized by past injustices.

The Federation of Atomic Scientists estimates that Israel has between 100 and 200 nuclear weapons. Israel developed the bomb over 30 years ago but never referred to it publicly until the year 2000 when Knesset member Issam Mahoul–a member of the predominantly Arab communist party Hadash–filed a motion to debate the nuclear issue. The motion was prompted by selections from the first-ever publication of the transcript of the trial of Mordechai Vanunu, imprisoned in 1986 for revealing the existence of Israel’s bomb program.

Vanunu, as opposed to the gangsters running Israel, demonstrates a commitment to true Jewish values as these remarks to a 2005 press conference after his release from prison demonstrate:

“I have no more secrets to tell and have not set foot in Dimona for more than 18 years. I have been out of prison, although not free, for one year. Despite the illegal restrictions on my speech, I have again and again spoken out against the use of nuclear weapons anywhere and by any nation. I have given away no sensitive secrets because I have none. I have not acted against the interests of Israel nor do I wish to. I have been investigated by the police again and again, and re-arrested twice, but they have found nothing. I have done nothing but speak for peace and world safety from a nuclear disaster… I did not seek to harm Israel, but rather to warn of an enormous danger. I do not seek to harm Israel now. I want to work for world peace and the abolition of nuclear weapons. I want the human race to survive.”

From http://www.vanunu.freeserve.co.uk/

In 1959, Hollywood released “On the Beach,” a film about WWIII based on Neville Shute’s best-seller. It was a memorable film that detailed the last days on earth of a group of survivors who are driven to the Arctic Circle to escape the radiation that has engulfed the planet. All of them die. The war began after Egypt bombed Great Britain using Russian-made planes, which the British interpreted as a Soviet attack. It was surely plausible then, as it is now, that the Middle East would spawn a nuclear war.

In the year 70 AD, there was a Jewish revolt against the Roman Empire led by the “Zealots” who objected to Roman rule just as Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank object to Jewish rule today. Under the leadership of Elazar ben Ya’ir, the Zealots seized control of Masada from the Roman garrison stationed there.

In the fight to defend Masada from Roman assault, the Jews decided to kill themselves rather than relinquish control. Today Masada is used by the Israel Defense Forces and youth movements for swearing-in ceremonies, where participants swear the oath that “Masada shall never fall again.”


Tina said...

The following comes from an interview of the Jewish military historian Martin van Creveld by the Dutch magazine Elsevier:

Creveld: "We are destroying ourselves. In Israel a scenario of doom is taking shape.
I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen, before Israel goes under.
Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: 'Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.' ".... telling and insightful, no?

Daniel Hoffmann-Gill said...

Hyberbole from a madman.

Anonymous said...

Slightly off topic...

Today, the Lebanese Communist Party announced the death of two members who were fighting the occupation troops. Not all the Southern Lebanese who are fighting the brutal Zionist occupation troops are members of Hizbullah.

Frank Partisan said...

I read one Lebanese writer lamenting about why the Lebanese army, doesn't move south, and fight an outside incursion.

Israel has weaponry for war, not the industrial base or the political will, for a long term war. The industrial problem is why Israel is so tied with USA.

celticfire said...

I think beyond the current invasions this reflects the scope of long term occupation of Middle East territories by Irsraeli and U.S. forces. Clearly this all very confusing the leftist and progressive forces in the U.S. Many aren't sure who to support - the reactionary programs of Hizbulla and Hamas, who fight for self-determination, or the Israeli invaders with the pretense of "self-defense." I think, obviously a communist standpoint means opposing imperialism and struggling for the rights of self-determination, while criticizing the backwards aspects of organizations like Hamas.

This could playout positvely for progressive forces. If there is a split in the ruling class.

Anonymous said...

Conflicts with night sticks
Illegal sales districts,
Hand-picked lunatics, keep poli-TRICK-cians rich
Heretics push narcotics amidst its risks and frisks,
Cool cliques throw bricks but seldom hit targets
Private-DIC sell hits, like porno-flicks do chicks.
The 666 cut W.I.C. like Newt Gingrich SUCKS DICK!!

-- The Beast, Fugees

k. edward warmoth said...

I was just reading up on the WWIII theories and most of them were put out like this, except most mentioned Venezuela's invovlement heavily.

Great blog. I'll be sure to link to it.

John Brown said...

It's good to see that the LEBANESE left has united and begun fighting alongside Hizbulllah.

On the other hand, it's a shame that they can't garner the same support here among the left on Uncle Sam's Plantation.

Uncle Sam has been fighting this 'World War III' since he went after Mossadeq. Meanwhile, all too many people on the left sit on the fence, sniping at the people fighting and dying to liberate themselves from Apartheid Israel's sustained assault on Palestine and Lebanon.

Frank Partisan said...

One can support Hezbollah against Zionist aggression, without giving it political support. They call it critical support.

Mummia Schlemiel Jabbar said...

Will you fake revolutionaries give it a rest. The wave of the future is short people. All you supersized people are resource inefficient. When the revolution begins anyone over 4'9'' will be sterilized for your own good.

We will plan a classic liberation via starvation. The lucky children who survive will have their growth stunted so they can join the elite.

Power to the short people. Short Power!!!! I am starting an urban guerilla army called the pint sized panthas. The reactionary forces will have a hard time in shootouts because we are small targets.

Our motto is whats yos is mine and what mine is mine and mind you beezness you supersized oafs

Short Power Short Power.

We demand all bakets be lowered to 5'0''. We demand 100 pount NFL linemen.

Less is more Short Power Short Power.

You super sized middle class amatuer revolutionaries disgust me.
The Pink Sized Panthas shall be the vanguard of the revolution.

Short Power!!!!!!

Brian said...

Iraq was supposed to make us and the world safer but we're on the verge of WWIII. Yea...

Mark Prime (tpm/Confession Zero) said...

It’s been years since I told the howling boys to run.
`Run', I yelled! `They’re coming!
Coming with the chips
To let slip
‘neath your skin!'

O! This incalculable age!

The earth, now a pitched hue,
Everything roofed in ice,
The face of the Auschwitz sky now hovers,
Wrinkled and battered by the oven
Of its own treacherous star.

The trees have long burned,
All that remains are bony slivers
Jutting up like the spindles of those
Once most towering shafts.

The foul and the fish and the beasts
Have long ago finished eating one the other.
The oceans and seas are nothing more than
Vast echoing lands of waste.
The lakes and rivers and streams are black-knifed viens.

O! This incalculable age!

Years after the final battle
The pitching clouds of hubris blot the sun;
A tragedy mask etched in longing…
`Run, howling boys! Goddamnit! Run!'

Graeme said...

good stuff general, I haven't listened to that in ages.

It is quite clear some people in Washington have a hard-on for WWIII. It is sick.

I agree with Ren, you can support expelling the murderous forces without locking hands with Hezbollah

billie said...

yes- and you can support troops without supporting the people who put them in harm's way. things don't always have to be black or white- or brown in this case, it's ok to think in shades of gray.

Frank Partisan said...

I think my critical support is abstract. I'm not ready to send Hezbollah arms.

roman said...

It's the Islamofascist terrorists who are stoking the fires of WWIII and not the USA. History tells us so and a few well researched documentaries will bring this to light. Whether they take the form of Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas, Syria or Iran, they are all singing the same song. Death to Israel. Death to Amerika. Death to anyone who stands in the way of their sharia based 7'th century world theocracy.
Any US citizen, no matter how he/she intellectualizes the issue, who supports Hezbollah, a terrorist organization responsible for the death of many US service men and civilians in the recent past is, without a doubt, a traitor to this country.
The enemy of our friend is and should be our enemy.

Frank Partisan said...

Roman: Israel would make nice, with the Islamists, if they had a secular, socialist opposition. Under all the rhetoric, the Islamists want a deal.

They have no vision or program, beyond the immediate.

They are nostalgic for the days, US armed them.

El Güero said...

I vote Rumsfeld for anti-Christ.

Anonymous said...

The Political Bureau of the Lebanese Communist Party reviewed the dangerous repercussions of the Zionist aggression against Lebanon and its people that has continued for 12 days and has released a statement translated by LENIN'S TOMB

Frank Partisan said...

The statement is quite strong for an old Moscow orbit communist party.

sonia said...


The statement is quite strong

On the contrary. The statement effectively says, 'We, the Communist Party of Lebanon, have become Hezbollah's bitch'.

Under all the rhetoric, the Islamists want a deal

I doubt that. They know the demographic realities (1 billion Muslims vs 6 million Israelis) and they hope their luck will change. It might, but before that happens, Mecca might become radioactive for 5000 years...


Damascus Jews financed the Arab Muslim conquest of Egypt Syria Persia and Libya. It is a moral duty of Israel to support civilized world to make Egypt, Libya, Algeria, Syria and Turkey Christian again and to make Iran Zoroastrian again.
Refusenik must pool their brains to find out how to wage te world war three so that Allied Powers led by USA, India, Britain might win the WWIII.
World War Three is coming to every countries neighborhood as more than 100 memebrs of the UNO shall become colonies of one of the top six world powers during world war three.
World War three is a war by great powers on smaller powers and wars on oil producing OPEC nations.
India welcomes the Third World War.
Islam is a religion of Sword. Islam was imposed by sword on Egypt, Syria, Libya, Algeria and Persia.
Christians have a moral duty to reclaim Egypt, Syria, Libya, Algeria, Turkey for Christianity as no one ever became Muslim without the threat of sword.
Islamic nuclear weapons is a threat to human race.
Conquest and colonization of all oil-producing Islamic nations is a small price to pay for eradicating the Islamic nuclear menace.
(1) The "World War Three" has started.
"WORLD WAR THREE" has begun. Republican Vice President Dick Cheney declared the restart of the New Cold War in March 2006. Republican Former Speaker of the Congress declared the start of the first phase of the "WORLD WAR THREE" in July 2006.
(2) "World War Three" now promotes the national interests of United States, India and China. Imperial colonial powers of the yester years- France, Germany, Japan, Italy, Ottoman Turkey, Russia, Spain- are in decline now and they wouldnever again be world powers.
(3) The post-1945 decolonization process permanently weakened former colonial powers that also suffer from disastrous population decline due to the declining fertility rates of their women. The Declining populations would rule out any imperial pretensions of Russia, France, Germany, Japan, Spain and Italy.
(4) The 2006 start of the World War Three is in the geopolitical national interest of the United States as presently United States enjoys military preponderance in the world. The 2006 is the ideal time for the start of the World War Three as it would guarantee that the coalition of Allied Powers led by USA, India and Britain is highly likely to win the World War Three. Any delay or postponment of the World War Three would progressively work against the national interests of the United States. Now is the good time for the World War Three.
(5) The 2006 start of the World War Three is in the national interest of India as well as China. Any delay of the World War Three would make Islamic Nuclear Terrorism formidable. The World War Three should begin now, so that the civilized world may successfully De-Nuke Islamic Atom Bomb and Islamic Nuclear Weapons Delivery Systems.
(6) The 2006 start of the World War Three is in the national interest of Russia as it would allow Russian Army regain for Russia the glory it lost after the demise of the Soviet Union in 1991.
(7) The principal goal of the World War Three is to gain control over world's oil and gas reserves so that OPEC Oil Gas Producers are brought under the civilized occupation and control of the Great Power led Petro-Colonial Empires. The purpose of the World War Three is to partition the OPEC Oil Producing Nations into the spheres of influence of leading Six world powers, namely, USA, India, China, Russia, Europe and Japan.
Diplomat Kalki Gaur
email: diplomatkalkigaur@yahoo.com
web Blog: http://360.yahoo.com/diplomacyofcivilizations
Blog: http://360.yahoo.com/neoconservativemanifesto
WEBBLOG: http://diplomacyofcivilizations.squarespace.com
Blog http://www.clearblogs.com/neoconservativeparty

Agnes said...

Oh my. I love conspiracies. And theories.

In wish they were shorter....

John Brown said...

Roman would have us believe that Uncle Sam didn't start a war with Iraq.

He would have us believe that Apartheid Israel doesn't occupy Palestine.

He suggests that the fault for today's war lies with the oppressed and not the oppressor.

What, other than total servility, could enable someone to think this way?

John Brown said...


You keep playing a double-game that helps only the Zionists: when did Uncle Sam send weapons to Hizbullah? Give a source.

No matter what you say about their 'program' (which I really know nothing about except that they build schools, food coops and health centers for the oppressed Shi'i population in Lebanon), Hizbullah is currently doing more to resist imperialism than you ever have.

Yet you question them! That's the height of sectarianism. You need to review the tactics of the United Front.

By their actions, Hizbullah has clearly taken a side against imperialism. Consequently, even if we don't agree with their program, we should stand with them against the imperialists.

roman said...

John Brown,

“Roman would have us believe that Uncle Sam didn't start a war with Iraq.”

Uncle Sam was the only superpower with the “cojones” to assemble a coalition to enforce years of the Saddam regime’s complete disregard and contempt of UN sanctions. You know, the UN, as in the UNITED NATIONS, an international representative body who was completely impotent to enforce its own mandates.

“He would have us believe that Apartheid Israel doesn't occupy Palestine.”

The word Apartheid refers to a unique and specific political system once practiced in South Africa. Are you contemplating a future issue of the new and improved John Brown/ Mirriam Webster Dictionary?

“He suggests that the fault for today's war lies with the oppressed and not the oppressor.”

Hezbollah is a proxy terrorist organization who oppresses the citizens of a free and democratic nation for the benefit of both the repressive Islamofascist regime in Iran and West Bank hungry Syria. Syria lost the West Bank in a war against Israel. A war where Syria was the aggressor. Instead of Syria negotiating a peace treaty with security guarantees, they resort to act like typical uncivilized thugs and start a new confrontation with help from their like-minded Iranian sponsors.

“What, other than total servility, could enable someone to think this way?”

Thank you for inquiring. Logic and simple common sense with obedience only to my own conscience.

Frank Partisan said...

Hezbollah has the mentality of a guerilla group, which is different than a revolutionary socialist. It is also different than a terrorist group. It has no concept of exploiting differences in Israel, to force prisoner exchange. There is little evidence, these events are from orders from Iran, to divert from Iranian nuclear issues.

Zionists have done nothing to get released the captured prisoners. Little was done, to stop the capture. Their families are for prisoner exchanges. They have much more blood than Hezbollah on their hands.

Hezbollah has following, because the Lebanese government is weaker. It is providing the most protection against Israel.
Still it's pro-capitalist and Islamist. Leftists don't need to be as George Galloway, Tony Blair's hand picked left straw man.

Yes JB, I do talk from both sides of my mouth. One can be so correct, they isolate themselves.

pinkfem said...

I remember when Vanunu was kidnapped from London and taken back for trial.
He was a technician at their facility in the Negev desert.

troutsky said...

The enemy of my enemy can also be an idiot, a reactionary , whatever.Im insanely tired of this game of Who Shall I Support and How. Expand the Frame, my friends, and notice how little any of this violence REALLY has anything to do with the Revolution to which we should be committed.Like the FARC in Columbia or Sadr in Iraq, Hizbollah resistance is not revolutionary till it meets some crucial criteria.I can understand it but am obligated to criticize their tactics, strategy and goals.

Nicholas said...

Roman: the West Bank was lost by Jordan not Syria.

The point about WWIII should be made that both previous world war's were inter-imperialist wars not wars between imperialst powers and smaller regional powers or little upstarts like Syria. I suspect that the French imperialists must have felt the world was comming to an end with both the Vietnamese and Algerians fighting brutal Gaulic tyranny. At some point all empires face "barbarians" at the gates and uprisings through out the Empire, these minor threats I believe hardly even amount to that. The point is how do we revolutionaries, workers, activists respod to our own countries' aggression, something we at least have some hope of doing something about.

Lew Scannon said...

"Uncle Sam was the only superpower with the “cojones” to assemble a coalition to enforce years of the Saddam regime’s complete disregard and contempt of UN sanctions." Of course what our friend here fails to mention is that Israel stands in contmept and disregard of more UN resolutions than Saddam ever was, and if that weren't enough, when brought before the Security council, gets the US to block any action against them.

Dardin Soto said...

I respect Newt for certain things. His novel of the civil war, for example is amazing.
As to his hyperbole?... one must know that these people, -no matter the political aliance-, know journalism. They know the buzz words and phrases guaranteed to gather a 15 second sound-bite.

roman said...


I stand corrected. Jordan lost the
West Bank not Syria.
Thank you.

sonia said...


I'm insanely tired of this game of Who Shall I Support and How.

And I'm amused by it. Like Hezbollah cares whether an infidel supports them or not. They would kill any fool stupid enough to approach them, no matter how much 'help' and 'support' he would be offering...

And Hezbollah isn't fighting any 'imperialism', John Brown. They are deliberately provoking the Israelis into attacking Lebanon in order to distract attention from Iran's nuclear program. And the Israelis fell for it.

I don't think any of you fully realize the stakes of this game. This isn't about 'capitalism', 'revolution', 'imperialism' or 'Zionism'. It's about whether an entire region get pulverized in a nuclear Holocaust. If Iran ever gets a bomb, if they ever give one to Hezbollah (or Hamas), if one suicide bomber explodes it in Tel Aviv...

Ever heard of nuclear winter ? At least we wouldn't have to worry about global warming anymore...

roman said...

Troll Watcher,

If you can't even perceive the difference between the former Saddam Hussein's murderous tyranical regime and democratic Israel, then there is no sense to even discuss the matter with you.
Keep drinking the Kool Aid.

David Broder said...

I don't understand Renegade Eye's assertion "my critical support [for Hezbollah} is abstract"

The fact that you're not in the financial/organisational position to support them with weapons etc. doesn't make the position ok. We can't say just anything because we know our slogans won't have any negative effect in the real world.

As I've written in comments on my blog, I don't think you can meaningfully "critically support" a group which has no democratic structures to intervene in. If there's no forum to argue out your ideas, then what does the "critical" bit count for?

Hezbollah's over-arching aims, to set up a Caliphate across Lebanon/Israel, is so disgusting that I don't think you can rely on them as an agent of military resistance to Israel. To support them at any level is to surrender to the hard-right of Lebanese politics and ignore any hope of a democratic solution forced from below by workers.

The question about critical support is - if you were in Lebanon, would you fight alongside them? Or would that alienate women, gay people, secularists, socialists from your Trot group so much as to make it un-stomachable? Sitting in the West it's easy to give qualified "support" in an abstract sense....

I don't mean to sound hostile, but it's an argument you hear a lot and no-one explains themselves.

Lew Scannon said...

What's the difference between one murderous regime and the other? Oh, that's right, Israel massacres children, that somehow makes them better!

Agnes said...

David,"won't have any negative effect in the real world." - wrong. Some regimes could persist exactly because of the huge (and blind) support they got. Both political and moral.Iran, the Baath, the former Communist regimes, nowadays Castro and Chavez.

roman said...

Troll Watcher,

You said: "What's the difference between one murderous regime and the other? Oh, that's right, Israel massacres children, that somehow makes them better!"

The difference is very clear. The Israelis target Hezbollah rocket launchers and tries to AVOID civilian casualties. Hezbollah, however, like their Islamofascist counterparts, Hamas, use civilians as human shields and target Israeli civilians ON PURPOSE. That is evident from recent Israeli military video showing Hezbollah truck mounted rockets launched and then quickly scurying for cover next to the nearest civilian housing complex. How utterly despicable and devoid of any human norms of behavior.
I guess that is why they're called terrorists.

? said...

It will not matter who starts it, no one will win a nuclear war

“The Pentagon began reviewing its options in 2001 and decided that the old rules no longer applied. A white paper signed by Rumsfeld said, “nuclear weapons could be employed against targets able to withstand nonnuclear attack (for example, deep underground bunkers or bioweapon facilities).” There was a genuine worry that such weapons might have been used against the Iraqi military in the run-up to the invasion.”

Maybe next time…

This is scary stuff, I would advise anyone to read or watch “When the Wind Blows”, 1986, a fantastic book/film by Raymond Biggs :

Following a nuclear strike, an ageing couple seek refuge in their homemade bunker, a ramshackle shed barely strong enough to withstand a grenade, let alone the fallout from a US-USSR war. Awaiting help that never comes, Jim and Hilda (Mills and Ashcroft) slowly suffer the horrifying effects of radiation poisoning.

When I watched this film, it sent a shiver down my spine, and has stayed with me ever since, the anti-nuclear war lobby has a long history and you would certainly want to join it after watching this….

There can be no winners, it has always amazed me that people are clearly not understanding what will happen if some crazy superpower starts WWIII, it has to involve nuclear weapons because the new war “terrorism” can not be wiped out any other way……. Trouble is so will everyone else. So really, it doesn’t matter who has what, if you have it and use it, we are all dead, this is a desperate world, and the powers that be will be the ones to decide our fate…….

Nicholas said...

To Renagade Eye: thanks for the encouragement on Aff Act.

On WWIII: Did anyone hear Norman Podhorets (arch conservative) call the Cold War the actual WWIII and that we will enter WWIV? I tought it was interesting from simply an academic standpoint. If viewed from the Perspective of the Koreans, the Vietnamese, the Angolans, etc, the imperialist proxy wars attempting to roll back real existing socialism must have felt like WWIII, no?

Also the Middle East editor for Newsweek was on NPR and he surprized me with his balanced coverage and rightful but weak condemnation of the Israeli state, even for such a bourgeois journalist.

Mummia Schlemiel Jabbar said...


Why do you associate with a fake Commie like John Brown. What sort of commie denigrates welfare, pimps and hos and freely uses anti black rhetoric.

Being a pimp is tough job and hard work two subjects Brown knows nothing about. Being a Mac Daddy like my self requires a killer hoopdee and retro threads. We also perform a service with satisfied customers. John Brown sits on a keyboard and does jack.

Welfare is how some of my friends and the people next door live. Aren't you commies supposed to be in favor of income redistribution. We all can't be like Brown and suck off out parents scratch. Brown pretends to be a man of the people while mocking the people.
Did this clown fail intro to Marx 1001?

Then there is this wonder bread dolt using all kinds of racist lingo like calling people Sambos and klansmen. It seems that Brown has an affection for modern klansmen in Lebanon. Lets see all those masked clowns doing Hitler salutes nust think it is Halloween.

What type of Nazi clowns do you let hang out on this blog?

Where are your posts in support of the pint sized panthas? Are you just another short person opressor?

Short Power

Don't trust anyone over five feet.

Mummia Schlemiel Jabbar said...

Lets see we can make South Lebanon a workers paradise with John lazy stupid wonderbread craker in charge. We can use classic commie tactics like planned starvation. Yes we will liberate the masses by starving them. Death s an alternate form of liberation.

We can send all the Muslims on cattle cars and send them to Siberia just like Uncle Joe Stalin. We can build walls to keep all the serf in our utopia. We can enjoy Neoslavery in gulags. What is a revolution without killing fields and class slaughter.

We also need a brainless incoherent dolt to lead this new Utopia. There is nobody on this planet with better qualifications as a brain dead dolt then Brown.

The problem is Brown has all these Nazi tendencies. He engages in racist lingo and in an unhealthy adult relationship with the lady next doors parakeet. If I were you I wouldn't eat a salad John Brown prepared either. One does not want to know where he put the vegtables.

pharter said...

Monday, July 31, 2006

YEAH, JOHN BROWN?Nobody even likes you even the commies in Union Square park think you're the demended ravings of me, MULLAH BEAK the DHS PEDOPHILE.

posted by pharter @ 8:48 PM 0 comments

Thursday, July 13, 2006

I went to a Pseudostinian protest in New York City looking for JOHN BROWN and even the commie nitwits they're thought his wer the ravings of a traustafundia wanttobe lunatic.
12:50 PM

DHS Doyle said...
The best part about that protest was all the 14 year olds... mmm... we DHS Pedophiles fondle ourselves every day just thinking about them.
12:51 PM

posted by pharter @ 1:14 PM 0 comments

John Brown said... Wow, Beak.
You took pictures and wrote a whole article about a protest you attended?
Good work.
Unfortunately, I couldn't make it to the rally... I was busy at my not-job being a trustafundia!
7:00 AM
Comment Deleted This post has been removed by the blog administrator.
9:50 AM
MULLAH BEAK the DHS PEDOPHILE said... I went to a Pseudostinian protest in New York City looking for JOHN BROWN and even the commie nitwits they're thought his wer the ravings of a traustafundia wanttobe lunatic.
11:01 AM
DHS Doyle said... The best part about that protest was all the 14 year olds... mmm... we DHS Pedophiles fondle ourselves every day just thinking about them.
11:02 AM
MULLAH BEAK the DHS PEDOPHILE said... Hell yeah, JOHN BROWN!!!!!
My super-cool blog rocks you're world. I rule so much that I can't even tell you how much I rule.
You, on the other hand, are a commie loser wanttobe trustafunnia who fellow commies don't even like at Psuedostinian protests because of youre loooserness!
I rule.
Ducky in 08.
12:21 PM

posted by pharter @ 12:38 PM 0 comments

Wednesday, July 12, 2006

4:43 PM
DHS Doyle said... Did you hear the news today... the little boy fondlers at FEMA may get de-named.
4:44 PM

posted by pharter @ 4:54 PM 0 comments

Mummia Schlemiel Jabbar said...

Where is this Marxist Labotomy John Brown? Some working mans hero he can't even hold a job. Brown is so dumb he looks for Lawn Jockies on the racing form.

Brown's next intelligent thought will be his first. Is he an affirmitive action special education Commie? Has the party lowered its allready low standards.

? said...

I wish we lived in a peaceful world

Jeff Richards said...

This is an interesting proposition from Gingrich, one worth reflecting on. I would not put it his way. His view of the world argues that ‘we’ are being besieged, when what he really means is that ‘he’ (singular for a plural ‘them’) is feeling besieged by forces out of the control of the global hegemon, the United States of America.
Never the less, it is worth considering the possibility that we are witnessing a ‘tectonic’ shift in global politics. Both the first and second world wars represented major tectonic shifts in the architecture of imperialism. I wont go into any detail, but a very concise summary of the major issues in these tectonic shifts can be found in Ernest Mandel’s 'The Meaning of the Second World War' London, Verso, 1986. How this will play out politically is going to be interesting (and full of tragedy and horror).
I would argue that world war in the 21st century will be different from the two world wars in the 20th . In the 20th century, world wars were articulated through nationalism and class. In the 21st it looks like politics will be articulated through trans-national networks of power and money, as well as confession, region and ethnicity. It is hard to see at this point in time how the ensuing political struggles will alter relationships of power among interest groups.
The fracturing the international system of order and authority has been going on for some time (since the implosion of the ‘eastern block’, or even as far back as the Sino-soviet split). However, I think that the tectonic shift is being ‘supercharged’ by the resource boom that is placing vast amounts of financial resources into the hands of elites who are have an ‘ambiguous’ or contradictory relationship to Washington elites (e.g. Saudi Arabia) or to elites who are downright hostile (Venezuela; Iran). Dollars are also pouring into the pockets of elites other countries that have single or multiple forms of mineral resources that can be sold to the great economic powerhouses like India and China. These are creating intense struggles for control with spill over effects like weapons proliferation and opportunities for corruption that are simply breathtaking, which in turn will create intense conflicts whose consequences will be unpredictable. Perhaps it might be better to say ‘intense conflicts whose consequences will be asymmetric’.
The cultural consequences could also be interesting. Think of the difference between say Edwardian England (pre-World War 1) and the Futurist cultures in the early years of the Bolshevik Revolution or Weimar Culture in Germany. Now that is a very big jump in culture! One could say that the ‘post-modernity’ that we now enjoy/endure/and weep for is the grandchild of that brief futurist flash of light and the magnificent decadence and violence of Weimar. All that is missing in our time is Walter Benjamin.. Maybe she is lurking around the next corner.

Anonymous said...