SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : SUPPORT OUR TROOPS -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Thomas M. who wrote (2076)4/18/2003 7:58:57 AM
From: Glenn Petersen  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 3592
 
The neoconservative foreign policy conspiracy revealed. John Podhoretz confesses all.

nypost.com

I CONFESS

By JOHN PODHORETZ

April 18, 2003 -- OK, I'll admit it. I'm part of a vast conspiracy to control American foreign policy.

Yes, we neoconservatives have succeeded in brainwashing the leaders of the United States and Britain, using nefarious mind-controlling techniques. Those techniques include: Writing articles, circulating letters, giving speeches and appearing on television.

It's amazing and terrifying when you think about it. But even though I will be hunted down like a dog by my fellow conspirators for revealing this highly privileged information, I will now share with you the secret tale of how the neocon conspiracy came to dominate the mind of George W. Bush:

A group of people came to believe in certain things. Because they agreed, they got to know one another. They worked together. They became friends. Their relationships were strengthened by a commitment to a shared cause.


Because they cared about the ideas they shared, they dedicated their energies to making the best arguments for them. Because they believed these ideas would make the world safer and would make America better, some of them went to work in government to convert them into government policy.

Others published their ideas in forums hospitable to those ideas. For a long time, there weren't very many hospitable forums. So these people created new forums in which to advance these ideas.

They advanced their arguments no matter what. Sometimes their arguments had a somewhat attentive audience in government circles, as during the Reagan administration. Sometimes the attention was only grudging, as in the first Bush administration. And sometimes their arguments fell on deaf ears, as with the Clinton administration.

Here's what's interesting, though. Even though the Reaganites paid attention, these people felt entirely comfortable about criticizing the Reagan administration when it did things these people considered wrong.

And even when they had no influence and felt disgust for the president in power - the Clinton years - they offered praise and support when the president acted in ways they considered admirable.

In other words, they were more faithful to the ideas they shared than to the political party with which they were loosely aligned.

How evil!

It's kind of flattering, this notion that a group of people called "neoconservatives" - a term hostile people use to refer to Jewish Republicans with hard-line foreign policy views in and out of government without using the word "Jewish" - have seized the reins of power in the United States.

Especially considering the fact that it's not true. Condoleezza Rice is not a Jew. Nor is Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Colin Powell or CIA Director George Tenet. Nor is, to put it mildly, George W. Bush.

Rice's mentor in government was Brent Scowcroft, the national security adviser to Bush the Elder. There have been few government officials more hostile to the neocon worldview than Scowcroft.

In the House of Representatives, Dick Cheney was no friend to Israel and a consistent opponent of U.S. government spending on foreign aid - both key issues for neocons.


And as liberal Jews are always fond of pointing out, George W. Bush once asked his mother whether Jews could go to heaven since they had not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior. Not very neoconservative-sounding.

These are the people in charge of U.S. foreign policy. Now, they have "neoconservatives" working for them in senior positions (well, all but Powell and Tenet). But these non-neocons are the policymakers.

Indeed, George W. Bush actually passed over one key neocon (Paul Wolfowitz) when it came to choosing a secretary of Defense back in 2000.

So: Why all this hysterical attention on the neoconservatives?

The purpose of focusing attention on a supposed conspiracy of neoconservative officials in and out of government is to deny President Bush ownership of his own foreign policy. Bush's enemies want to believe very badly that he is nothing more than an empty suit. They take comfort in believing that the president is the stooge of a bunch of clever Jews.


There's a sobering aspect for the neocons in Bush's full-throated advocacy of the positions we've advanced over the past three decades: The president seems to have come to an understanding of these ideas almost entirely on his own. He didn't need the books we wrote or the magazines we published.

On the one hand, that suggests our ideas are so commonsensical you don't need a degree from Neocon University to follow them. On the other hand, maybe our influence is really kind of an illusion.

Don't tell anybody, OK? This will be our little secret.E-mail:

podhoretz@nypost.com



To: Thomas M. who wrote (2076)4/18/2003 9:25:43 AM
From: GROUND ZERO™  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 3592
 
Thomas M, I suggest you read the header on this thread, any comments that are not supportive of our troops are not welcome, I suggest you find another thread to bash America and it's military... you're welcome to continue posting, but consider yourself advised and on probation, I suggest you act accordingly...

GZ



To: Thomas M. who wrote (2076)4/18/2003 4:00:24 PM
From: Shawn Donahue  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 3592
 
Is not this parable of rescuing the single lamb reminiscent of the
operation to retrieve Pfc. Jessica Lynch from her captors in Iraq?


The Resurrection is the central fact that distinguishes
Christianity from all other faiths. Only Christianity claims
that its founder was more than a representative for God, but
proved He was God Himself. Only God could raise Himself from
the dead, and only God could have standing to ransom us from
our sin-indebtedness, through a substitutionary sacrifice.
With the cry of Jesus from the cross, "It is finished," our
redemption was complete. Our Risen Lord returned, resurrected,
to prove that His sacrifice was not in vain.

But the other essential message of Easter is the invaluable
worth of every human life, however broken and sin-riddled. The
sacrifice of Christ on the cross was the fusion of perfect love
and perfect justice, a battle to vanquish evil forever, in this
sense: Because we owe God complete obedience, we have no means
to make restitution for our sins. Doing what we ought to do in
any instance merely zeroes our balance for that accounting entry;
we have no coin or currency that will repay the negative sum of
our accumulated sins. And so, only God Himself could rectify that
debt on our behalf, in a sacrificial act that is simultaneously
purely loving and purely just. We are, each of us, so valuable
to Him that only a personal rescue mission would do.

In a parable, Jesus asked, "What man of you, having a hundred
sheep, if he loses one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine
in the wilderness, and go after the one which is lost until he
finds it? And when he has found it, he lays it on his shoulders,
rejoicing. And when he comes home, he calls together his friends
and neighbors, saying to them, 'Rejoice with me, for I have found
my sheep which was lost'!" (Luke 15:4-6).

Is not this parable of rescuing the single lamb reminiscent of the
operation to retrieve Pfc. Jessica Lynch from her captors in Iraq?

Lt. Col. Oliver North, USMC (Ret.), has been "embedded" as a
war correspondent with the 5th Marine Regimental Combat Team,
and he described an incident from two weeks ago: "A number
of the Marines gathered around to hear the latest news and
listen to the press conference from CENTCOM that would shortly
take place. When it was announced that Lynch had been rescued,
the Marines cheered. Before returning to work, it was a brief
moment to share in the happiness that a lost comrade was now
found. ... Army Rangers -- working with Navy SEALs, supported
by Air Force air cover and aided by the diversion created by
the Marines -- made Lynch's rescue possible. Those who were not
directly involved took great pride in a job well done by their
comrades in arms. ... The rescue of Lynch is a story from which the
critics can learn a lesson. It is a story about the value of life
and how the world's most powerful military employs its extensive
resources and risks its most elite forces to save and rescue a
single soldier -- because it views every life as precious.
Because
U.S. forces place such a premium on human life, they are going to
great lengths to avoid civilian casualties and, in some cases,
have put themselves in danger to save innocent Iraqi civilians.
The care with which U.S. forces are prosecuting this war stands
in stark contrast to the illegal and immoral tactics employed
by Saddam Hussein's brutal regime. Iraqi men are conscripted
into Saddam's army while their wives and children are held at
gunpoint. Civilians are used as human shields."

And so, in our conflict with Jihadistan, on the Iraqi war front
and elsewhere, we weigh lives dedicated to rescue against lives
squandered to commit murder. This illustrates the source of the
Jihadis' hostility toward us -- their hatred for those Founding
principles still guiding the lives of Americans. As Thomas
Jefferson put it, "The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at
the same time; the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin
them."

But some of our rescuers have fallen in battle, though we prayed
for their safe return. Has our Commander any explanation for
why some prayers are answered "Yes," others, "No"?

When Jesus prayed in the Garden of Gethsemane on the eve of
His Crucifixion, He pleaded, "O My Father, if it is possible,
let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as
You will." And He received the most resounding "No" that ever
reverberated through eternity -- until that was silenced by the
"Yes" of Resurrection morn.

The hope of our noble national experiment in liberty, defended so
honorably 228 years past, and defended still honorably today, is
based in the belief that we are valuable as moral beings created
in the image of God, and thus as worthy of sacrifice as we are
also called to sacrifice. We have only to follow the greatest
fallen warrior, the victorious Risen Lord.

Lex et Libertas -- Semper Fidelis! Mark Alexander, Publisher,
for the editors and staff.
(Please pray, every day, for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in
harm's way, and their families waiting for their safe return. For a
list of those killed on the Iraqi front in our war with Jihadistan,
link to -- federalist.com )