Terra! Terra! Terra!

Sorry to inflict more Fox & Friends on you, but this really is beyond the pale. On this morning’s program, Wayne Simmons, a so-called “Terror Analyst” (i.e., former CIA operative, now raving wingnut and occasional columnist for the far right-wing magazine Human Events), responded to Brian Kilmeade’s query whether the increase in “major terror incidents” over the last year is because America has new president as follows:

Yeah, listen this is, ugh, and you’ve heard me say this many times before — nothing has changed, in fact it’s only getting worse since the coronation of the boy king fifteen months ago. It is, again, not an accident that every third world despot, every third world despot; from Venezuela through Cuba to North Korea, virtually anyone in the Middle East who decides they want to take a shot at the United States and our allies, is doing just that. These guys now that are starting to come out the woodwork are EMBOLDENED. They recognize, as do the third-world nations, the dictators, there will be NO repercussions from the Obama administration.

Good grief, what a lunatic.

To get the full flavour of Simmons’ madness, might I recommend the following article from Human Events titled “Cheerleader in Chief” where he decries virtually everything about the Obama administration “from the phony ‘stimulus’ package to socialist health care” and foreign policy that is “ignorant of important principles and completely at odds with the fact that America is a superpower.”

With regards to the “Global War on Terra” Simmons admiringly quotes the following passage from Winston Churchill’s 1899 book The River War: An Historical Account of the Reconquest of the Soudan:

How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Perhaps Simmons should have read a little further in that same book where he would have encountered this passage also written by the young Churchill:

…there are many people in England, and perhaps elsewhere, who seem to be unable to contemplate military operations for clear political objects, unless they can cajole themselves into the belief that their enemy are utterly and hopelessly vile. To this end the Dervishes, from the Mahdi and the Khalifa downwards, have been loaded with every variety of abuse and charged with all conceivable crimes. This may be very comforting to philanthropic persons at home; but when an army in the field becomes imbued with the idea that that the enemy are vermin who cumber the earth, instances of barbarity may easily be the outcome. This unmeasured condemnation is moreover as unjust as it is dangerous and unnecessary… We are told that the British and Egyptian armies entered Omdurman to free the people from the Khalifa’s yoke. Never were rescuers more unwelcome.

Substitute America for England and other parties in today’s conflict as appropriate and it seems clear that little has changed after more than a hundred years of territorial meddling and reckless adventurism by the Anglo-American Imperium in this troubled region of the world.

On Fox “News” and other right-wing talking shops however, it’s all so very simple: just “toughen up on terror” or as Simmons puts it: “locate, identify and kill” everyone suspected of being a terrorist — and if that results in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent Muslims and the displacement of millions more… well, so be it.

About these ads

42 Comments

Filed under Media Bias, Wingnuts

42 responses to “Terra! Terra! Terra!

  1. Bill

    Masochism: A taste for suffering.

    Save yourself Red, it’s not too late.

    When I don’t hear NeoCons shrieking in the forest, I still know they’re there.

  2. You can’t live in fear and be free. Can’t have it both ways. Terrorism is about fear and placing fear 24/7 on the US citizens is a form of terrorism.

  3. OSL

    Interesting how easy they can distinguish between criticism of the President and the government as not being the same thing as criticism of their soldiers.

    Maybe Harper could pick up a few pointers from the current crop of Republican clowns instead of the ones that got booted from government.

  4. You’d think that aggressive foreign policy never caused blowback.

  5. A. Sirrom

    Maybe Wayne ought to move to North Korea for awhile and learn a few things.

  6. Ti-Guy

    It’s really sad to admit that the when the next 9/11 occurs, I don’t think I’ll waste two seconds feeling sorry for these assholes.

  7. Bill

    Ti-Guy, I hope you mean those tools on Fucks News…as most Americans I’ve met just want to get by as you, me or most people on the planet do.

  8. I guess the best way to quantify the West’s current state of xenophobic hysteria is to point out that Churchill, the butcher (and gasser) of the Kurds, is now a voice of moderation.

  9. Ti-Guy

    as most Americans I’ve met just want to get by as you, me or most people on the planet do.

    I almost completely exhausted my supply of empathy in November, 2004 (and believe you me, my sympathy was front and centre from September 2001 to somewhere around to around the summer of 2002).

    I prefer to use whatever remains on people who are more deserving with fewer means at their disposal to strive for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

  10. Penny

    It’s hard not to hate “Americans” “because of their freedom”, until you think about how “Canadians” elected Junior Bush Junior. I will carry to my grave the words of Il Duce Hardpoo claiming that his “democratically-elected” government – of what was it – 35% – had every right to over-rule the Supreme Court… wrt Omar Khadr.

    As Rural Sandi pointed out, the real terra-ists are the governments – or are they really the CIA-SIS? And how is it they manage to keep fooling those supremely elected politicians?

    (Right now I don’t have a lot of faith in Obama, either. But I know that “faith” is dirty word around here!! ;0) )

  11. jkg

    I am glad you put that additional quote up Red; it appears that the right wing blogosphere like to quote mine that one while conveniently leaving out that other part. Context is such a bothersome thing when forwarding a narrative laced with confirmation bias.

  12. Ti-Guy

    until you think about how “Canadians” elected Junior Bush Junior.

    A minority of Canadians did so.

    If it’s any comfort, Americans aren’t all that much less detestable than Canadian “conservatives.” I can’t even tell them apart, most of the time.

  13. Penny

    Ti-Guy

    Eggzackly!!

  14. Ted

    Penny:

    In fact, only about 22% of eligible voters supported Harper in the last election, the lowest level of support for any Prime Minister in our history. In fact, fewer people voted for him in 2008 than in 2006.

    The second lowest level of support was Martin in 2004 with about 23% and the third lowest was Harper’s first win in 2006 with a fraction above that at about 23%.

  15. Penny

    Forgot about the eligible voters, Ted. I did vote, but had to hold my nose, not being a fan of any of ‘em. I suppose the lesson is that we need to get more involved at – ugh – the grassroots level of the political process. I tried that a few times, when I was young and naive, and it was most discouraging.

    How about RT for Primus inter Pares!!!

  16. Primus inter Pares! :)

    There’s an expression one doesn’t hear every day.

    If it comes with an expense allowance to cover my bad habits, I’m game.

  17. Ti-Guy

    I tried that a few times, when I was young and naive, and it was most discouraging.

    Same here. And it’s just gotten worse. All I can commit to is voting but seeing as how they’re all behaving, it’s been a bit of a struggle. I’m just grateful that my own local candidate (Liberal) is just so much better than what the alternatives have been. But if the Party continues on its current path, he’s going to end up being sacrificed.

    Did you hear that, Ted? DUMP Ignatieff already. He’s been given more than a fair chance.

  18. Penny

    You oughtta be hearing a lot more than you do, RT!! Clearly, Our Dear Leader did not study politics at UAC while he was becoming an “economist”!!

    As for the perks, not only do you get a$300K salary, 2 beautiful heritage homes and a cottage, a caddy, a plane and (I’m using wikipedia, so this isn’t gospel) – uh oh! – an RCMP “security” detail, but an incidental expense allowance, which is not accountable or subject to tax. And you deserve it, no??

  19. Penny

    Ted ~ wrt dumping Iggnory!! AMEN Brudda’!!

    But – you have your finger on all the right pulses – who would you replace him with? Personally, I like either Bob Rae or Scott Brison, but apparently I’ve been living on another planet – certainly not in Ontario!! And stupidly, I cancelled my blog a year or two, where I had all the info wrt Scott’s Backberry…

  20. DUMP Ignatieff already. He’s been given more than a fair chance.

    That he’s been given a fair chance–without yet having had the opportunity (or taken the opportunity) to lead the party in an election–is arguable. The fact that I’m nostalgic for Sheila Copps, though, is a worrisome symptom of the Liberal Party’s steep decline.

    In fact, I’m not at all sure that elevating Copps to the leadership in ‘o3 wasn’t the best chance the Liberals had of retaining power. As an obstreperous, vulgar soi-disant “populist”, she was blessed with the political attributes that appear to have become key to electoral success.

  21. Ted

    Ti-Guy:

    I don’t have a problem dumping someone if I think that would make things better.

    There were some reasons for a coronation but we would have been better off with a full leadership race. In fact, like Martin before him, Iggy’s leadership has all the flaws that a real leadership race would have ironed out – including a battled hardened and experienced team behind him.

    I see him now in much the same position as harper was about this time in 2005. Throughout the fall of 2005, Harper’s numbers were about the same as Iggy’s now, Martin’s numbers were about the same as Harper’s now (a bit higher in fact). People had written Harper off, noted all the OLO departures, noted how he seemed to do nothing all summer, etc. In reality, Harper spent the summer and fall rejigging and setting up.

    Far more damage would be done to the party right now in dumping Ignatieff than in keeping him. That would be true whether Rae or anyone else was there. To dump a leader for a turn in the polls without an election or even a leadership review does far more to undermine and damage the whole organization and make it an unserious party in the eyes of the public. The federal Liberal Party would go the way of the Liberal Party in the UK.

    So for self-preservation reasons, the party would be pretty short-sighted to dump him now.

    But there are also more positive reasons to keep him. 2009 was disappointing but not a disaster: fundraising almost caught up to the Conservatives; the number of memberships has gone up by something like 6 times; the number of donors has gone up; a bunch of back-office rejigging has gone on that is only now just starting to bear fruite; the caucus remains united (you can tell from the lack of the return of the infamous Anonymous Liberal).

    Ignatieff has never been the saviour of the party to me; he has just always seemed way better than the alternatives, and he remains that now. To be more frank than I ought online, I wonder if his role now is simply to rebuild the party (well underway), put together a semi-ambitious program (started), get into government to give a bunch of younger leaders profile and experience and then to hand the baton over. Far more Pearson and far less Trudeau aspirations.

  22. Ted

    Geawd, that was a long and longwinded post. Apologies, Red.

  23. Ti-Guy

    That he’s been given a fair chance–without yet having had the opportunity (or taken the opportunity) to lead the party in an election–is arguable.

    He was given that chance when he ran for and lost the leadership contest. Then he was given a do over. After a whole year of appealing less and less to Canadians, I’m not sure how much more is arguable.

    What I find really startling is his naivety. His recent admission that he’s “learning” and his inability to articulate why he wants to be the Prime Minister of Canada (Christ, if there’s a time when it’s obligatory for politicians so simply make shit up, in its response to stupid questions like that) just confirm what I resisted concluding about him…he truly is a mediocrity and a dilettante.

    I don’t really question his commitment to Canada or to offering us the government we deserve (instead of the craptacular one we’ve been saddled with due to a profoundly undemocratic electoral system), but I just don’t think he knows what he’s doing anymore.

  24. Ti-Guy

    Far more damage would be done to the party right now in dumping Ignatieff than in keeping him.

    I know. I’m just venting. But if that son-of-a-bitch Harper ever gets a majority, Iggy’s head will have to role.

  25. Penny — To be honest, I can’t imagine why anyone would want to get into politics these days. Although if like Pierre Poilievre you can qualify for a full pension at 31 yrs. old, maybe it’s worth it…

  26. Ti-Guy — I know. I’m just venting. But if that son-of-a-bitch Harper ever gets a majority, Iggy’s head will have to roll.

    Without question. But I don’t imagine that in the event of a Harper majority he’d want to wait around for another kick at the can, so resignation would be a more likely event.

  27. Ted — No problem. I fully concur with your observations.

  28. Ti-Guy

    But I don’t imagine that in the event of a Harper majority he’d want to wait around for another kick at the can, so resignation would be a more likely event.

    I meant that literally about the head rolling. I imagine Ignatieff would think facing the guillotine, in the grand manner as befits someone of his pedigree, to be flattering.

    ;)

  29. I imagine Ignatieff would think facing the guillotine…to be flattering.

    And should he summon enough presence of mind to turn to the crowd and say, “It is a far, far better thing I do than I have ever done,” it shall be the first sincere and tolerably accurate assertion he will have made in years…

  30. Ti-Guy

    He’ll go more with something less obscure and French, naturally: “Après moi, le déluge!”

  31. Penny

    Sorry, Ted. It was Ti-Guy who wanted to dump Iggy asap. Me too, but you’re right; we can’t dump him now. But wrt Liberal coffers filling up, why am I thinking it has very little to do with Iggers himself – who seems to be on holiday whenever the big issues comes up (I’m thinking Israel/Palestine, but there have been other more recent ones) – but rather to the efforts of the same king-makers who brought him back from exile? And why do I find myself thinking that those very same old-guard Liberals are using Iggy as a front man for their own objectives, irreproachable as they no doubt are?

    Or should I just stop “thinking”?

    Thanks for making sense out of it all, Ted, although I do prefer my own conspiracy theories. All drama and terra, all the time!

  32. Ted

    Ti-Guy — I know. I’m just venting. But if that son-of-a-bitch Harper ever gets a majority, Iggy’s head will have to roll.

    No question about that, but hopefully not immediately.

    The Liberals and Chretien benefitted enormously from Turner sticking around a bit and building the party who could not lead. Martin did a great deal of damage by just cut and running.

  33. Well, the most obvious way to make flying, using subways and working in tall office buildings safer is to pull out of the Middle East. Of course, when that is suggested, the knuckledraggers scream ‘anti-semite’.

  34. Ted — Martin did a great deal of damage by just cut and running.

    Good point, albeit a highly debatable one. If a more adept successor had assumed that position then Martin’s decision (for whatever reason) may have been vindicated.

  35. Dan — Well, the most obvious way to make flying, using subways and working in tall office buildings safer is to pull out of the Middle East. Of course, when that is suggested, the knuckledraggers scream ‘anti-semite’.

    Did you happen to witness the cage-match the other night on CNN between Ron Paul and Ben Stein when Paul made the same point and Stein fired back that American “occupation” in the Middle East was nothing more than an “anti-Semitic” argument? Priceless.

  36. TofKW

    Ron Paul, possibly the last sane man left within the Republican party.

  37. Ti-Guy

    Ben Stein when Paul made the same point and Stein fired back that American “occupation” in the Middle East was nothing more than an “anti-Semitic” argument?

    What an appallingly pedophilic accusation for Stein to make. Absolutely adulterous.

  38. If Ron Paul is “sane,” then the word has lost all meaning. He was straight-out bats when he ran as an independent, and hasn’t improved.

  39. TofKW

    If Ron Paul is “sane,” then the word has lost all meaning.

    That was kind of my point. It begs the question that if the iconoclastic libertarian of the party is the most sane of the bunch, then what does that say about the remainder of the GOP?

  40. Ti-Guy

    I wouldn’t agree at all that Ron Paul is insane. I would ask Metro to back up that assertion.

    He does attracts a lot of insane followers, but that seems to be the case with less mainstream politicians who, most egregiously, don’t sound like politicians (ie. mystifying and incomprehensible, for the most part). Partly, it’s the rest of us who think a less popular, fringe candidate is loony and avoid them and partly it’s the media, who aren’t interested in presenting fringe candidates objectively and are more differential to the mainstream ones, which they demonstrate by pretending they understand them when they’re being mystifying and/or incomprehensible.

    You should have seen Carol MacNeil today pretty much giving Dimitri Soudas a pass when he unloaded his bullshit. (right, third interview down). Although I doubt she could have done anything else with that oily little spokescatamite.

  41. toujoursdan

    Yeah, that was the exchange I had in mind.

    Whether R. Paul is sane or not is really beside the point. At the very least he’s naive. There is no way the U.S./West will pull out of the Middle East. We need their oil too much.

    I was having a conversation with a friend about Jimmy Carter. He was the last sane politician, warning that the days of cheap energy were coming to an end and that the West needed to conserve/invest with that in mind. Instead Reagan was elected and we went on a 40 year party with SUVs and McMansions in the exurbs.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s