Topic
A prudent PM would help persuade Israel away from military action, not goad nuclear hysteria.
Obama's turned away from Israel PM Netanyahu's stance on Iran.
ENERGY & EQUITY: Nikiforuk on how oil lubricates bellicose statecraft.
As if to embody the opposite of diplomacy, he fans hazardous flames in Middle East.
The unintended consequences are myriad, says top U.S. military leader.
It might be useful for Prime Minister Stephen Harper to read a U.S. state department cable from Israel released by Wikileaks. It reveals that talk of Iran's imminent production of nuclear weapons goes back to the early 1990s: "The head of the MFA's [Ministry of Foreign Affairs] strategic affairs division recalled that GOI [Government of Israel] assessments from 1993 predicted that Iran would possess an atomic bomb by 1998 at the latest."
The March 2005 cable to Washington cautioned that Israel's estimates of Iranian nuclear capability "...need to be taken with caution." While Harper recently reiterated the need for diplomacy and did not support military action, his emphasis that such action was "on the table" and his acceptance of Israel's declaration that Iran is seeking to build a weapon makes the call for diplomacy hollow. Harper seems immune not only to the facts surrounding the Iranian nuclear issue but to the consequences of adopting Israel's position as Canada's own.
One of those consequences is that it encourages Israel to consider a military attack on its own without U.S. support. Accepting Israel's declaration that Iran is seeking -- and would actually use -- nuclear weapons, threatens to keep the price of oil climbing and undermines any hope of global economic recovery. The other critical consequence is that Harper's carte blanche for Israel is directly at odds with the U.S. position and undermines President Barack Obama's efforts to prevent a catastrophic military adventure in the most volatile region in the world.
Harper is proud of his lock-step support of the U.S. on most foreign policy issues. But he has made it known that Canada will support Israel no matter what, which in effect means that Israel, not the United States, is Canada's de-facto closest ally on Middle East policy. That is a reckless foreign policy based not on Canada's interests but on Harper's domestic politics. While you would never know it from mainstream media coverage, the U.S. officially remains unconvinced that Iran is actually seeking to build a nuclear weapon. And no one in the U.S. military actually believes that Iran would ever adopt a first strike policy even if it did have a weapon. In short, the U.S. does not accept Israel's insistence that Iran is an "existential threat" to Israel as Harper clearly does.
Newsflash for PM
Three developments on the Iran-Israel front should be of interest to a prime minister actually engaged in a rational foreign policy. The first is the recent parliamentary elections in Iran which severely weakened the political clout of the unpredictable and provocative President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The elections resulted in a resounding victory for the supporters of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme ruler, who in the past had supported Ahmadinejad. Khamenei's increased power is especially significant because before the election he made the clearest statement yet about Iran's intentions regarding nuclear weapons.
In a speech to nuclear scientists he stated: "The purpose of the uproar they [the West] cause is to stop us. They know that we are not after nuclear weapons. They already know this. I do not have any doubts that in the countries that are opposed to us, the organizations in charge of decision-making are fully aware that we are not after nuclear weapons.
"Nuclear weapons are not at all beneficial to us. Moreover, from an ideological and faqih [Islamic legal] perspective, we consider developing nuclear weapons as unlawful. We consider using such weapons as a big sin. We also believe that keeping such weapons is futile and dangerous, and we will never go after them. They know this, but they stress the issue in order to stop our movement."
One of the predicted outcomes of the election is that it will unify political power in the country -- a change from the factional infighting which has allowed the West to portray Iran as volatile and unpredictable and also played into the hands of those promoting the position that Iran was seeking nuclear weapons. There is increasing evidence that the U.S. and Israel are getting further apart on their positions on Iran, especially regarding the possibility of a military attack. In an interview in mid-February, Army General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, said, "A strike at this time would be destabilizing and wouldn't achieve their long-term objectives. I wouldn't suggest, sitting here today, that we've persuaded them that our view is the correct view and that they are acting in an ill-advised fashion."
This is the context for Harper's position of supporting Israel no matter what. Yet he seems unaware that the U.S. could use Canada's help in persuading Israel to back away from the threat of military action. Or he is simply ignoring it.
Hazards of hysteria
More evidence of the growing divide between Israel and the U.S. was the reaction of Israel Prime Minister Netanyahu to Dempsey's interview. Netanyahu was furious and actually accused the top military commander of the U.S. of "serving Iranian interests."
What he meant was Dempsey was weakening the credibility of Netanyahu's carefully constructed propaganda that Israel and/or the U.S. would bomb Iran if it didn't comply with demands to abandon its nuclear program. For the first time it seems that Obama is confident enough to stand up to Israel and the awesome power of its lobby in the U.S. – AIPAC, the American Israel Political Action Committee. According to U.S. blogger Jim Lobe, Netanyahu and AIPAC were both pushing for the U.S. to drop the option of "containment" (through sanctions and other measures) and that stopping Iran from developing a weapon is a "vital national interest" of the U.S.
That would have left military action as the only real option if diplomacy didn't work. But Obama did not comply (though in his speech to AIPAC he denied that U.S. policy amounted to containment). It's not hard to see why Netanyahu was so furious. A recent poll in Israel shows lukewarm support for a go-it-alone Israeli attack on Iran's multitude of nuclear facilities. Just 19 per cent favoured such an attack while 42 per cent did so if the U.S. approved (and presumably helped). Thirty-four percent opposed an attack while 19 per cent thought it would have no effect on Iran's program.
One of the most telling responses of the comprehensive poll was the 68 per cent who believed that such an attack would unleash retaliation by Hezbollah, the well-armed and highly disciplined force that humiliated the Israel army in its invasion of Lebanon in 2006. What is probably worse for Netanyahu is that the Israeli military believes a strike by Israel alone would fail -- it is just not strong enough, has too few planes and effective armaments and would have to risk flying through other countries' air space to make a strike. Worse, this failed strike could unleash Iran's very effective and highly accurate Shahab-3 medium range ballistic missiles (flying time: 10 minutes) on dozens of targets in Israel.
According to Nahum Barnea, a journalist with the Israel's largest Hebrew newspaper Yedihot Ahahronot "... the IDF [Israeli Defence Force] Head of Staff Beni Gantz, Mossad Director Tamir Pardo, Head of Aman (IDF Military Intelligence Corps) Aviv Cochabi, and the Head of Shin Beth Yoram Cohen -- in other words, Israel's leading generals -- oppose an attack on Iran."
So a rogue Israeli attack on Iran is extremely unlikely, especially in this U.S. election year. Last time around Barack Obama received 78 per cent of the Jewish vote. He is totally confident that he can repeat that in November and will not back an Israeli attack. But he must be very anxious about another consequence of Israeli hysteria over Iran -- the rise in gas prices, something the Republican candidates are already attacking him for. Not only will high prices anger American voters, it will have a chilling effect on the now-growing U.S. economy (227,00 new jobs in February).
Does Stephen Harper even know these facts about the Israeli-Iran situation, and if he does, does he care? It's impossible to determine for sure, though given his contempt for the expertise in the foreign affairs department, we can expect the worst. Harper might want to reconsider contributing to the Iran hysteria and higher oil prices. Canada lost 2,800 jobs in February -- it needs a robust U.S. economy to help recover those lost jobs. ![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
42
Login or register to post comments
igbymac
1 year ago
Newsflash for Murray Dobbin
DOBBIN QUOTE:
Unfortunately your analysis does not reconcile what President Obama actually said at the AIPAC meeting (transcript link here) a couple weeks ago:
* the open-ended catch-all
(emphasis added)
So all America has to do is to accept military intelligence (I interject to say M.I. is unreliable in the political sphere) that Iran is developing a nuclear bomb and the war is on.
Hardly a negotiating approach with Iran considering the geo-politics of the region. And it is hard to reconcile these words with your own suggesting Obama is making efforts to prevent a catastrophic war. And let us not forget the precursor to this all, the 'slam dunk existence of WMD' propagandised as M.I. leading up to the Iraq catastrophe.
I think you missed the Direct Commandment from the Oval Office on this one, Murray Dobbin, despite Harper remaining a colossal waste of DNA. Or are such threats just Obama's earnest efforts to prevent an escalation toward warfare?
PS. Israel does not take orders from the USA or any Imperial Power. I thought the Balfour Declaration of 1917 set the record straight as to who is running the show on this 3rd Rock.
coop
1 year ago
What drives Harper
Don't forget that Harper is a right-wing Christian who likely believes in rapture which depends on Israel remaining in control of the west to work. He joins the crazy Republicans whose strong support for Israel fits with their religious beliefs to ensure that rapture happens. Along with support for Isreal, the rapture believers have no concern for the environment as climate change and pollution will also help bring on rapture. Unfortunately, religious extremism is one of the hidden force behind international politics.
jimmmmy
1 year ago
lap dog
mr harper is o'bama's lap dog picture him waddling up to the podium at copenhagen oil sloshing in his pockets, stating the o'bama position "kyota is dead." mr harpers foreign policy is making money for him and his cronies , that and pushing evangelical christianity.he gets his marching orders from the corptocracy much like o'bama. these nuances in policy are carefully scripted for effect.
Art the Green
1 year ago
since his party committed election fraud
harper has no moral authority to govern,
he has no legal authority to govern.
and it certainly doesnt mean he has a mandate to threaten iran on our behalf.
but i've also heard that mulcair also supports isreal no matter what, and barrick gold supports mulcair for ndp leadership
i'm supposed to write the governer general to urge the government be dissolved while byelections are held to determine what our actual government is. and by elections could be held without the pointless debate in parliament about it, there's some clause in elections canada's charter. well i'll let you all know how that turns out
vegguy
1 year ago
Harper undermining Obama
Shouldn't we expect stephen Harper to side swipe Obama as often as possible over the next 7 or 8 months. Harper is far more aligned to the policies & philosophies of US Republicans than he is to the Democrats. Harper is almost a Gingrich clone on economic & environmental issues. He would be far more likely to have influence with a Santorum or Gingrich or even Romney than he will ever have with Obama. Look to Harper to try to undermine Obama whenever possible; although his influence is much less than he thinks.
MEW
1 year ago
Petro Dollars Drive Harper
It seems to me that the hysteria that Harper is feeding is only good for the people who want the price of crude to go up. He has shown no inclination to back down on his full tilt promotion of the tar sands. The higher the price of crude the more the filthy bitumen is worth.
rollandmiller
1 year ago
Harper and Israel
Prime Minister Harper has taken Canada into a Fascist POLICE STATE with the New Crime Bill C-10, and his War attitude.
Harpers stand with Israel against Iran is inflamatory, and ill thought out.
Iran is not making an atomic bomb according to the USA analasis.
A War against Iran is not warranted and opposed by the majority of the World.
If Harper was looking out for Canada and the World he would demand an end to Israel's 200 or so Nuclear Bombs with full IAEA inspections.
judycross
1 year ago
Petulant Bibi allows Obama to look like a Peacenik
I think it is all kabuki. The US is already a police state and they are giving Israel Bunker Busters.
Netanyahu, Obama and Harper are all on the same side, the side of the Globalist Banksters.
I'm worried there will be a false flag terrorist act sometime after mid September which will be blamed on Iran. War is a great diversion from financial collapse and will keep the privately owned central banking system going for a while longer.
Okanagan Orchardist
1 year ago
Excellent comments, all ..
A recent comment from Global Research in Montreal (OK, it is "left-wing") indicates Obama's stance on Syrian/Iranian/Isreali wars:
"Yet amidst this mounting drive for Western intervention into Syria, President Obama spoke on Tuesday in an apparent attempt to tamp down all such notions, going so far as to call military intervention a “mistake.” As the president went on to state, “the notion that the way to solve every one of these problems is to deploy our military, that hasn't been true in the past and it won't be true now.”
Such reassurances aside, actions do, as the president himself implored in his AIPAC speech over the weekend, speak louder than words. And so while the president publicly posits that military intervention would be a mistake, his military readies for intervention into Syria, while continuing its larger ongoing build-up in the region.
The march towards Syria with eyes cast towards Iran continues on. For as Albeit Einstein once remarked, "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war."
Who can you believe? Do we have a "good guy -- bad guy" situation here? We know we absolutely cannot trust Harper, but having recently read the book "GET RID OF THEM ALL", I wouldn't trust Obama anymore than Harper. We really do need to get rid of them all here in Canada as well.
straightshooter
1 year ago
Israel, the U.S. and Iran.
The outcome of the Bibi/Obama "conflict" over Iran will be determined by the fact that in today's world, the United States needs Iran much, much more that it needs Israel. Israel is America's number one geopolitical liability, a millstone around its neck. We are witnessing the beginning of the end of the "special relationship."
In his Farewell Address, George Washington admonished his fellow citizens to steer clear of a “passionate attachment” to another nation, as it could create “the illusion of a common interest...where no common interest exists.” America has no viable option other than to act upon the wisdom of its founding father. Israel is very much aware of this. According to a high official in its government, the Obama administration “no longer seems to see Israel as a ‘special’ or ‘extraordinary’ state in the Middle East, with which the U.S. must maintain a different dialogue than with other states. ‘The feeling is that the dialogue and coordination with the Arab states and with Europe is today no less important to the U.S. and perhaps more so than with Israel,’ the official said.” (Ha’aretz, 8 May 2009)
Also, to quote from a recent article in
Ha'aretz, (January 13, 2012):
“‘Israel is supposed to be working with us, not against us,’ ” Foreign Policy quoted an [American] intelligence officer as saying. ‘If they want to shed blood, it would help a lot if it was their blood and not ours. You know, they’re supposed to be a strategic asset. Well, guess what? There are a lot of people now, important people, who just don’t think that’s true.’ ”
Kreditanstalt
1 year ago
Huh?!
You didn't make any kind of case that Obama is any different from Bush in terms of warmongering and unquestioning support of Israel.
They're one and the same...George W. Obama...
jimorsheryl
1 year ago
Utter Tripe!
@coop
"Along with support for Isreal, the rapture believers have no concern for the environment as climate change and pollution will also help bring on rapture."
Where do you get this nonsense???
jimmmmy
1 year ago
kredit
i agree but the article was about harper and o'bama the author saw some differences in their israel policys. i don't, herr harper is playing the roll of pit bull here and i mean "playing".
Skywalker
1 year ago
I think straitshooter is onto something.
U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East is influenced by the Jewish community in the U.S. who have never been able to separate U.S. interests from Israeli interests. What has made it difficult for the U.S. to cultivate friendships in the Middle East has always been the looney concept of things like "God's Chosen People" and " The Promised Land". The mentality that brought the slaughter of the Crusades is still prevalent.
Israel plays on this and Harper is just another dupe. It is too bad that we don't fight wars like they did in ancient times with those who tell us who our enemies are, leading the charge into battle. Now we send in young men brainwashed into killing other young men while the politicians sit in comfort and luxury and wonder why these men come home as damaged goods.
And, Harper thinks his religion excuses his actions.
Fiat lux
1 year ago
Harper is a psycho maniac,
Harper is a psycho maniac, born without conscience, miseducated with the theories of the Leo Strauss, incapable of rational thought.
Like his "Crime Bill" his minions will pass, against the advice of the highest legal experts and even US politicians who have seen the results for years.
He'll go wild this and probably the next year, until even his own caucus may force him out of office, as it happened to Campbell.
Ed Deak.
coop
1 year ago
rapture
re: jimorsheryl
not at all twisted
you think right wing Evangelists like Harper are actually concerned about Israel?! - their support is based on their twisted religious beliefs
perhaps the Tyee could post an article on this issue?
plenty out there on this topic
here are a few links:
http://www.clipsandcomment.com/2011/02/02/huckabee-barbour-the-rapture-and-u-s-foreign-policy/
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/05/which-politicians-waiting-rapture-palin
igbymac
1 year ago
Skywalker
QUOTE: What has made it difficult for the U.S. to cultivate friendships...
Sometimes you really pull the rabbit out of the hat, Skywalker. No friendship is unilateral -- my way or the highway. Yet this is precisely America's long-standing foreign policy. America does not have friends. It has interests. Obama just told us that plain and clear.
These words Obama and other politicians sling around like hash must be reconciled with what they do. We listen to the politicians but we do not hear them. We routinely mis-interpret what they are saying, and it is by design. Thanks to our training, we prefer to reconcile what we hear with the we mean well illusion of our faux democratic values.
Two quick examples:
Harper said,
With hindsight, most Canadians now get it, and realize that Harper meant precisely what he said. For various reasons, we missed the alarm. In late 2005, where was the outrage? Where was the mass revolt?
Today most every Canadian can regurgitate the end of this passage in anger, frustration and indignation. But nothing has changed about what was said, or what was meant. Harper hid his intention in plain sight and still, like most things political, we were unable to see it.
The second example is Obama campaigning in 2008 on the domestic security issue. Here is a clip to remind you of his plans for a civilian national security force. It was Nancy Reagan on steroids, children requisitioned by state to turn in their parents for smoking pot.
And we can now see that Obama, too, said exactly what he meant. America was going to implement a community surveillance system of one another, as strong as anything the military could provide. Despite making this intention plain and clear, as the more informed analysts warned he had, Americans did not see the downside of such a program. All they heard was 'stop the terrorists in our midst'. And who isn't for that, right?
Today Obama is saying to the world, Iran is a suspect. And if we decide to go destroy Iran or any other nation which is against our interests, you have been warned. Somehow Murray Dobbin and others interpret this as diplomacy. ;)
realisticman
1 year ago
Igbymac
Most every Canadian ...?
Not sure about that.
http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/canada/Support+Tories+unchanged+robocall+controversy+swirls+poll/6285086/story.html
straightshooter
1 year ago
Iran, Israel & Obama.
It is not in America's interests to "destroy Iran." Nor is Israel a strategic asset for America. Indeed, it is an ever-growing geopolitical liability. No one knows this better than well educated Israeli Jews. Hence, nearly one million have emigrated seeking better lives elsewhere and more and more are lining up to get out. Meanwhile, immigration is less than a trickle.
Iran is directly connected to Israel's number one fear: The Palestinian "demographic bomb." According to the US State Dept., Palestinians already outnumber Jews between the River Jordan and the Sea and those living within Israel's recognized borders are increasing by 65,000 per year. At the same time Jews living in other countries, especially the all important young, are increasingly abandoning Zionism and Israel. Israel's leaders fear that if Israel does not remain the "invincible" and only nuclear armed bully/state in the region, emigration of its Jewish citizens will accelerate dramatically,immigration will virtually cease and it will be unable to maintain its belligerent/illegal and brutal occupations of Palestinian and other Arab lands.
Noah_Scape
1 year ago
weapons of...
Aside - I am thinking that Obama is giving Israel those new weapons [announced last week] - Bunker Buster Bombs and Long Range bombers - because the USA does not want to go to war [at least not now], and Israel doesn't have the long range planes and bunker busters so they cannot go it alone... and so the USA gives Israel the tools to go it alone.
igbymac
1 year ago
realisticman
Well, you have one thing nailed down tight, realisticman; it doesn't seem to matter what Stephen Harper says or does, he can under the current system convince enough Canadians he cares.
A sad, pathetic and oh so understandable reality.
Fiat lux
1 year ago
igby....Where did the
igby....Where did the quotation from Harper re: "changing Canada", originate and where can one find the whole thing ?
Of course, he's correct. By the time he finishes with Canada, it won't be a second rate socialist country, but a fourth rate colony of the communist/capitalist conspiracy with the GDP booming and millions begging for food.
In the sacred name of "competitiveness" of course.
I have a feeling, this is going to be a very long, hot summer.
Ed Deak.
RickW
1 year ago
R/M old man....
Could be because Harper hasn't actually DONE anything yet?
realisticman
1 year ago
igbymac
"he can under the current system convince enough Canadians he cares."
The current system being democracy and freedom of the press.
"A sad, pathetic and oh so understandable reality."
We Canadians like democracy. At least, the vast majority do.
Fiat lux
1 year ago
Too bad the Conservative
Too bad the Conservative Party its "leaders" don't believe in democracy.
Democracy is supposed to be the rule by the majority.
39% is hardly a majority to excuse, or even legalize, 4 years of dictatorship by a corrupt system and its bought leaders in service of foreign powers, like communist China.
Ed Deak.
Art the Green
1 year ago
its a majority achieved throuh electoral fraud
and is illegitimate. every law this fraudulant government passes should be reversed
if you get caught stealing a car, you dont get to keep the car
http://www.change.org/petitions/the-right-honourable-david-johnston-governor-general-of-canada-dissolve-parliament-call-for-a-full-election
not even sure this is the way to go. who is the governer general accountable to?
igbymac
1 year ago
realisticman
Like I said, it's both sad and pathetic but I do understand your reality shared with many. I just wish you did. And there's the rub.
You can yammer on about democracy or freedom of the press until the cows come home, but that does not mean they exist in Canada. And even assuming they do, there are mere remnants of the ideal and certainly not the concrete embodiment you proclaim.
Here's a couple of articles to help wash away your confusion about democracy.
The first is a recent story on the Top 100 Lobbyists in Canada: LINK
And the second is an article on the undemocratic impact of policy shapers in the Shadow Government by George Monbiot.
As Monbiot points out as he signs off:
(emphasis added)
igbymac
1 year ago
Ed Deak
In 1997, Harper as vice-president of the National Citizens Coalition delivered a controversial speech, for a rightwing American think tank, the Counsel for National Policy, in which he said:
I believe Stephen Harper revealed his true colours, particularly his contempt for Canadian people at large and his ideological disconnect, early in his career
Mr Harper has also said in an interview with CBC's Peter Mansbridge:
(underlining added)
As for this exact passage, "Canada appears content to become a second-tier socialistic country, boasting ever more loudly about its economy and social services to mask its second-rate status", it is attributed to the National Post, Dec. 8, 2000 p. A18, but I cannot access their archives that deeply.
Buttressing this review of Harper's objectives, I think Murray Dobbin's account found HERE regarding the 'disorders' of Stephen Harper is insightful as well.
Still if one does not know what Stephen Harper is about by this time, a change in understanding is remote.
igbymac
1 year ago
Quick but important EDIT, 2nd paragraph, CNP speech
Should read:
In terms of the unemployed, of which we have over a million-and-a-half,
(I)don't feel particularly bad for many of these people.realisticman
1 year ago
Scared of What?
Understanding is quite different from concurring. So, you like expensive promises from your politicians. Good for you. You can easily find them.
Nevertheless, why don't you give Churchill a bell and ask him which system is his fave.
Fiat lux
1 year ago
Thanks Igby.......... I
Thanks Igby.......... I remember the speech, but didn't have the exact wording.
Not surprisingly, at the intellectual level of Hitler's racial theories.
Ed Deak.
igbymac
1 year ago
realisticman
Funny you mention Churchill, and I reckon you are thinking of his classic line, "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried".
Of course, Churchill also said, The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."
I suspect the ol' Churchill was laughing at the time, openly warning the population that it had to be educated for democracy to work but, and to his own occupational safety, knowing democracy didn't stand a chance as things stood. And today, our collective education is even worse.
zalm
1 year ago
Utter tripe?
""Along with support for Isreal, the rapture believers have no concern for the environment as climate change and pollution will also help bring on rapture."
Where do you get this nonsense???'
Right here at Living Word Baptist Church with Pastor Steven Anderson. He really gets into the principles of pre-tribulation living at about the 10-minute mark.
http://www.faithfulwordbaptist.org/060108p.mp3
This guy's perhaps the best example of "Ultimate Preaching" - the Cage Match of Christianity. He's a real winner - see what he says about who men aren't men...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRP5xIeqBB8&feature=related
...and what he does with parishioners who don't agree with him...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdtJwg_8aG8
A real fine example of the unregulated and illogical side of organized Churchianity.
loblollyboy
1 year ago
Behind Bibi's Belligerence?
an interesting take on this issue:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2012/03/israel-iran-and-america#note
Fiat lux
1 year ago
James Watts, Reagan's first
James Watts, Reagan's first Secretary of the Interior, another fundamentalist, was asked by some journalists, after he gave permission to log in some of the national parks, whether the environmental destruction bothered him?
His reply was: "When the last tree is cut, the lord will return"
Has anybody ever heard of the fundamentalists of any religion ever expressing concern over, or complaining against, ecological destruction?
Or any capitalist, or communist, for that matter ?
Ed Deak.
jimmmmy
1 year ago
fiat lux
your way wrong about herr harper. he's a very well educated christo-fascist in the american sense. he is coldly rational and deeply committed to his cause, which is to bring back the dark ages. the 500 years when christians ruled.
jimmmmy
1 year ago
vegguy
i think your way off when it comes to the harper/o'bama relationship. don't believe what o'bama says watch what he's doing. as for herr harper he's always been honest about his aims and actions. which is very unfortunate for canadians
Fiat lux
1 year ago
jim....a cold,highly educated
jim....a cold,highly educated person can still be an unintelligent nutcase.
It is written all over him and gave me the creeps ever since I first saw his eyes on a photo, many years ago.
As I wrote many times, I've seen that face, and those eyes, under Totenkopf and Red Star caps many years ago and am certain his handlers put glasses on him to cover them .
Brutal, empty, without any human feelings.
Hitler, Stalin, Mao and now the GM food manufacturers and multinational corporate mafia execs, are, had and have the highest educated scientists working for them, as all maniacs in history before them.
At the same time, I fully agree with your estimate of his plans, but what intelligent person could possibly have those plans?
What intelligent, rational person could invent and use DU ammunition ?
The list is endless, and I have see quite a bit of it.
Ed Deak.
jimmmmy
1 year ago
fiat
yes but not psycho or insane. he's a man with a plan. the hitler stalin mao part is still ahead but approaching fast. wait until a majority get hungry and looses their homes today most canadians cling to what i call "criminal optimism" which requires them to do nothing . down play the seriousness of the problem and hope they resolve themselves, while they go on holiday or shopping.
robertjb2
1 year ago
If Canada wants to get involved in a real fiasco this is it!
Ex-Israeli spymaster:
Iran response to Israeli attack
would be devastating
Former Mossad head Meir Dagan says military
action against Iran will not stop the Islamic
Republic from attaining the bomb.
Former Mossad chief Meir Dagan said that an Israeli strike on Iran would lead to a missile attack on Israel that would have a "devastating impact" on the country, in an interview that aired Sunday on CBS's 60 minutes.
According to Dagan, an attack will start a regional war. “And wars, you know how they start. You never know how you are ending it," he said.
Read More.....
http://www.terminalx.org/2012/03/security-experts-say-china-hacked.html
Fiat lux
1 year ago
The difference is that
The difference is that Hitler, Stalin and Mao all took over desperate, destitute countries, but the opposite is true here.
I was 6 when Hitler took over a destitute Germany and turned it into a booming prosperous country within a couple of years. We and the rest of Europe were still in the rags of the depression, and suddenly were flooded with German tourists on new motorcycles and in new cars.
In the first 6 years of the Hitler regime, nazi Germany was the envy of Europe, with nazi parties jumping up all over. Nobody envied Stalin's or Mao's regimes, apart from a low percentage of ideologues.
In the case of Stalin and Mao, they took over destitution and gave people hope, but didn't deliver. What Hitler later delivered was a world war, KZ camps, Europe in ruins and millions dead, albeit still admired by, once again a few ideologically warped fools.
In Canada's case all Harper can deliver is a daily growing poverty in a country, where reasonable prosperity and democracy used to exist. Which is the opposite of the situations of the gangsters above.
At the same time, there's worldwide movement growing by the day, starting to question and oppose the neocon economics and agenda, which suggests to me that Harper, and the so called "conservatives" all over, won't get away with their plans. Too late for them. Times are changing and people are beginning to wake up.
I don't want to see any violence anywhere, have seen too much of it, but right from the beginning, I've been suggesting that with his majority, Harper will go crazy and there's a big chance that he'll be forced out of office, before his term is over.
Ed Deak.
igbymac
1 year ago
jimmmmy
re: Harper...yes but not psycho or insane.
Why not? What is sane about Harper's behaviour? There is little logically sound about his general reasoning. True, if one adopts Harper's 'well understood as erroneous' premises about the world, one will reach the same ridiculous conclusions.
Recall the remark Harper made (cited supra):
So how 'educated' is Harper when it takes so little to get up to speed with the fundamental errors of that view:
(emphasis added)
Social Pathology LINK
This is just one of many examples of the ridiculous positions held by Harper. Positions which, when examined, help anchor him to his ideological faiths on various fronts.
Stephen Harper is neither a thinker nor an educated man. He is well-schooled in the myths, old and new, that perpetuate the false hierarchies of select men over all others.
In short, Harper's head has been "instructed with learned ignorance, and furnished with unlearned wisdom": Bertrand Russell.