I have just sent the following letter to the president of Harvard University, regarding the university's plans to name a building after an ignorantly offensive professor who says that "Muslim life is cheap."
May I urge you to send similar letters.
Dr. Drew Gilpin Faust, President
Harvard University
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138
Dear President Faust,
I am disgusted by Martin Peretz’ ignorant and obscene remark, and both shocked and ashamed that Harvard University will still name a building after him.
Does Harvard think it is above criticism? My colleagues and students here certainly don’t think so.
I taught for twenty-eight years at the University of Michigan. Public bigotry was not honored there. And here, where people are sensitive to bigotry and prejudice, the remark is seen as utterly offensive.
Surely Harvard’s honor is not so cheap as honoring Martin Peretz will make it.
Sincerely yours,
Bert G. Hornback
Professor of English, Universitaet des Saarlandes
Emeritus Professor of English, University of Michigan
donderdag 23 september 2010
zondag 12 september 2010
I don't quite know where to start. I don't like to use--let alone depend on--statistics. I would prefer to argue principle. But nobody seems to pay any attention to principle.
If Christians were attentive to principle, they would have to quit hating Muslims, call off all their wars--and give up all their wealth to follow Jesus. If Christians were attentive to principle, they would despise--as Jesus did--all hypocrisy. (Sorry, Benedict: you are the number one hypocrite.)
But Christianity is a minority religion, and the United States is largely a godless place unless you let the hypocrites count as godly.
Even as a secular nation, the United States pretends to principle. We talk about democracy even as we subvert it. We talk about equal opportunity but do nothing to establish it. Our president talks about our consitiution while he violates it. We talk of justice and honor while we kidnap and torture and run a World War II style concentration camp.
So let's not try to talk principle. Let me cite a few statistics, and invite you to focus your attention on them.
You and I own slightly more than 61% of General Motors. For some alleged reason it was "saved" by our generous government, and still exists. It has a new CEO, Daniel Akerson. And somehow, President Obama's overseer has agreed that Daniel Akerson deserved a $9,000,000 pay package for this year!
How does Daniel Akerson deserve such? Deserve? There are hungry Americans, homeless Americans, jobless Americans who can't get work because Daniel Akerson needs $9,000,000.
We approved that? Are we crazy? Or is our greed so blind and stupid that we will protect Daniel Akerson's greed because someday we might get a chance at a similar-sized theft?
TIAA-CREF is a retirement fund organisation created for teachers. For some years Clifton Wharton. Jr., was its president. Dr. Wharton came from the academic world. Dr. Wharton was and is a great man, and not a greedy man; he didn't need a huge salary in 1987 when he accepted the presidency of the organisation founded to help university teachers prepare for retirement. But in 2009, when Roger Ferguson took over that job, he "needed"--and was given--$11,000,000 a year, plus benefits and expenses.
Should TIAA-CREF be spending teachers' money so extravagantly? If university professors are now making enough to afford people like Roger Ferguson, then university professors are paid too much, too.
But $9,000,000 a year isn't much in the United States, nor is $11,000,000 plus benefits and expenses. Daniel Akerson's annual $9,000,000 is four and a half minutes--minutes--worth of the United States military budget.
The United States spent $1,039,531,000,000 on what was euphemistically called "defense" this past year. That's $2,000,000 a minute.
And what is our defense? War in Iraq, war in Afghanistan, bombings in Palistan, kidnappings and assassination attempts everywhere, United States troops occupying parts of Cuba, Japan, Germany, Britain, Italy, Greece. Dangerous, murderous, and not very bright CIA operatives--I have known five of them--all over the world. (I wonder if the assistant economics attaché at the United States Embassy in London is still the cover for the chief CIA man in Europe?)
The best defense the United States could mount would be decency in the world at large, and a decent society at home.
Since the days of the Marshall Plan--which was one of the greatest undertakings of any government in the history of this world--the United States has gone from failure to failure, disaster to disaster, lie to lie, greed to more greed.
Can we still save us? Yes: but we need to get busy now, before there's nothing left to save, nothing left worth saving.
If Christians were attentive to principle, they would have to quit hating Muslims, call off all their wars--and give up all their wealth to follow Jesus. If Christians were attentive to principle, they would despise--as Jesus did--all hypocrisy. (Sorry, Benedict: you are the number one hypocrite.)
But Christianity is a minority religion, and the United States is largely a godless place unless you let the hypocrites count as godly.
Even as a secular nation, the United States pretends to principle. We talk about democracy even as we subvert it. We talk about equal opportunity but do nothing to establish it. Our president talks about our consitiution while he violates it. We talk of justice and honor while we kidnap and torture and run a World War II style concentration camp.
So let's not try to talk principle. Let me cite a few statistics, and invite you to focus your attention on them.
You and I own slightly more than 61% of General Motors. For some alleged reason it was "saved" by our generous government, and still exists. It has a new CEO, Daniel Akerson. And somehow, President Obama's overseer has agreed that Daniel Akerson deserved a $9,000,000 pay package for this year!
How does Daniel Akerson deserve such? Deserve? There are hungry Americans, homeless Americans, jobless Americans who can't get work because Daniel Akerson needs $9,000,000.
We approved that? Are we crazy? Or is our greed so blind and stupid that we will protect Daniel Akerson's greed because someday we might get a chance at a similar-sized theft?
TIAA-CREF is a retirement fund organisation created for teachers. For some years Clifton Wharton. Jr., was its president. Dr. Wharton came from the academic world. Dr. Wharton was and is a great man, and not a greedy man; he didn't need a huge salary in 1987 when he accepted the presidency of the organisation founded to help university teachers prepare for retirement. But in 2009, when Roger Ferguson took over that job, he "needed"--and was given--$11,000,000 a year, plus benefits and expenses.
Should TIAA-CREF be spending teachers' money so extravagantly? If university professors are now making enough to afford people like Roger Ferguson, then university professors are paid too much, too.
But $9,000,000 a year isn't much in the United States, nor is $11,000,000 plus benefits and expenses. Daniel Akerson's annual $9,000,000 is four and a half minutes--minutes--worth of the United States military budget.
The United States spent $1,039,531,000,000 on what was euphemistically called "defense" this past year. That's $2,000,000 a minute.
And what is our defense? War in Iraq, war in Afghanistan, bombings in Palistan, kidnappings and assassination attempts everywhere, United States troops occupying parts of Cuba, Japan, Germany, Britain, Italy, Greece. Dangerous, murderous, and not very bright CIA operatives--I have known five of them--all over the world. (I wonder if the assistant economics attaché at the United States Embassy in London is still the cover for the chief CIA man in Europe?)
The best defense the United States could mount would be decency in the world at large, and a decent society at home.
Since the days of the Marshall Plan--which was one of the greatest undertakings of any government in the history of this world--the United States has gone from failure to failure, disaster to disaster, lie to lie, greed to more greed.
Can we still save us? Yes: but we need to get busy now, before there's nothing left to save, nothing left worth saving.
zondag 29 augustus 2010
GO TO JAIL FOR TELLING THE TRUTH
Go to jail for telling the truth.
The Bush government violated everything this country supposedly stood for. We all knew much of what they were doing, but we didn't have hard evidence. Like most criminals, the Bush government tried to keep their worst criminal acts secret. And they tried to keep the criminal acts of others secret. But the truth kept leaking out. Their crimes were so gross that they couldn't stay secret. Some of them--like attacking Iraq and the concentration camp at Guantanamo Bay--weren't secret at all; they were arrogant acts of illegal, unconstitutional, immoral violence. They tried to keep their world-wide kidnapping and torture program secret, but we found out. about it.
Now, thanks to a young man named Bradley Manning, we know a lot more. Thanks to Bradley Manning's patriotism and his heroism, we have a great deal of evidence. It is in the public domain.
Knowing what he knew--having the evidence that he possed--Private First Class Bradley Manning had two choices. He could keep his mouth shut, and join all the others involved in the cover-up. Had he done so, he would have committed a crime underArticke 78 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. In both civilian and military jurisdictions, this crime is called "accessory after the fact." His other choice was to make known what he had discovered.
Remarkably, Bradley Manning is now being held in prison, in solitary confinement, for obeying the law. By whom? Not by the Bush administration, but by the Obama administration.
Why is President Obama holding Bradley Manning? Because he told the truth? Because he made public the evidence for some of our crimes of violence? Of murder, of torture?
Now you and I have two choices. We can demand Bradley Manning's release from prison. Or we can keep quiet, and ourselves become guilty of being accessories after the fact. We can join the conspirators, and by our cowardice become criminals.
At present you and I can't be charged with crimes for supporting Bradley Manning and demanding his release. But if we keep quiet we might as well be living under such a threat--and maybe soon we will be. "Keep quiet," the tyrant says.
Unless President Obama wants to be the same kind of criminal join George Bush and his cronies were and are, he must release Bradley Manning immediately. The rule of law demands it. And without the rule of law, we are indeed what many in the world accuse us of being: a rogue state.
Bert Hornback
The Bush government violated everything this country supposedly stood for. We all knew much of what they were doing, but we didn't have hard evidence. Like most criminals, the Bush government tried to keep their worst criminal acts secret. And they tried to keep the criminal acts of others secret. But the truth kept leaking out. Their crimes were so gross that they couldn't stay secret. Some of them--like attacking Iraq and the concentration camp at Guantanamo Bay--weren't secret at all; they were arrogant acts of illegal, unconstitutional, immoral violence. They tried to keep their world-wide kidnapping and torture program secret, but we found out. about it.
Now, thanks to a young man named Bradley Manning, we know a lot more. Thanks to Bradley Manning's patriotism and his heroism, we have a great deal of evidence. It is in the public domain.
Knowing what he knew--having the evidence that he possed--Private First Class Bradley Manning had two choices. He could keep his mouth shut, and join all the others involved in the cover-up. Had he done so, he would have committed a crime underArticke 78 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. In both civilian and military jurisdictions, this crime is called "accessory after the fact." His other choice was to make known what he had discovered.
Remarkably, Bradley Manning is now being held in prison, in solitary confinement, for obeying the law. By whom? Not by the Bush administration, but by the Obama administration.
Why is President Obama holding Bradley Manning? Because he told the truth? Because he made public the evidence for some of our crimes of violence? Of murder, of torture?
Now you and I have two choices. We can demand Bradley Manning's release from prison. Or we can keep quiet, and ourselves become guilty of being accessories after the fact. We can join the conspirators, and by our cowardice become criminals.
At present you and I can't be charged with crimes for supporting Bradley Manning and demanding his release. But if we keep quiet we might as well be living under such a threat--and maybe soon we will be. "Keep quiet," the tyrant says.
Unless President Obama wants to be the same kind of criminal join George Bush and his cronies were and are, he must release Bradley Manning immediately. The rule of law demands it. And without the rule of law, we are indeed what many in the world accuse us of being: a rogue state.
Bert Hornback
vrijdag 13 augustus 2010
Logic, Law, Justice, and Freedom
It's tiresome, dealing with ignorance. George W. Bush, John McCain, Sarah Palin, Phylis Schlafly's absurdly stupid husband. The California woman protesting against gay marriage, and except on a few miraculous good days Thomas L. Freidman of the New York Times. They all have right to be heard. But the rest of us have a responsibility to respond.
We have had good presidents. FDR. Harry Truman--despite the gravest error of modern times, the nuclear bombing of Nagasaki. I would not agree that the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima was justified; I would argue forever that the nuclear bombing of Nagasaki was criminal. So was the fire-bombing of Dresden, carried out by the United States and Britain.
Since World War II, we have had Truman's war in Korea, stupid in hindsight. And ten other wars, stupid and immoral and criminal in foresight. Johnson's lies to get us into Vietnam: the admitted fabrication of that attack in the Gulf of Tonkin. (The CIA was operating in Vietnam as early as 1962, according to CIA operative Paul Corscadden.) President Kissinger and his stooge Richard Nixon, bombing Cambodia.)
Stupid Gerald Ford, and poor Jimmy Carter: both feebly tried to have war; Ford with Nortnh Korea and Carter with Iran. Carter's attempt was much more perverse: a bunch of young Iranis had captured 50 CIA agents in the U.S. Embassy in Terehan; we couldn't release their names--or confirm their number--because they all had multiple identities and passports. The world was lucky: Carter's attempt to start WW III failed when his attack forces' helicopters went down in the desert. At time, our European friends were trying to reach a diplomatic solution to the situation in Teheran; but Carter was running for reelection, and needed to prove that he was macho. To hell with diplomacy.
Reagan didn't get to have war. But he reminisced about his combat flights in World War II--though of course those took place only in movies. He did manage to bomb Lybia, and to invade Grenada.
George I wanted a war, and he got one. He was quite a guy: remember when he said that the reason he had been so outrageously vulgar in the vice-presidential debate with Geraldine Ferraro was that he "just wanted to kick a little ass"? In August of 1990 George I decidedto go to war, though he insisted that was looking for peace. In January of 1991 he went to war, as planned.
Bill Clinton began his presidency beybombing Basra, in Iraq. Why? To prove that he was as ruthless a murderer as any other American. An Iraqi had been accused of plotting to murder George I. According to American law, an accusation is the same thing as a conviction, so Clinton prempted any court, and trial, and bombed Basra. Oddly, the man was never brought to trial. Count a few deaths for murderer Bill.
And then we got George II. And now we have Barak Obama.
Is Mr. Obama a good president? Well, he told us that he would restore "habeas corpus," but he hasn't. He promised to close the U. S. concentration camp at Guantanamo, but he hasn't. He promised an end to U.S. torture, but he hasn't ended it. And he told us he would end our illegal war in--our invasion of--Iraq, and our illegal war in Afghanistan.
He is a very bright man, but he has failed at everything. And in addition to no "habeas corous," the continued operation of the concentration camp in Cuba, torture, and our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, we are now invading and attacking Pakistan.
So . . . what about all those good things? I had intended to talk about them. But--sorry--I am too depressed to talk about justice and law and society and community and goodness and freedom and all those other un-American ideas: ideas that have been a part of human history for at least the past 8,000 years.
Maybe I will try again. Right now I am too depreseed--as I always am, when I think about our country. Funny: the only times I can feel good about us are when I read about Sarah Palin or Mitch McConnell.
We have had good presidents. FDR. Harry Truman--despite the gravest error of modern times, the nuclear bombing of Nagasaki. I would not agree that the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima was justified; I would argue forever that the nuclear bombing of Nagasaki was criminal. So was the fire-bombing of Dresden, carried out by the United States and Britain.
Since World War II, we have had Truman's war in Korea, stupid in hindsight. And ten other wars, stupid and immoral and criminal in foresight. Johnson's lies to get us into Vietnam: the admitted fabrication of that attack in the Gulf of Tonkin. (The CIA was operating in Vietnam as early as 1962, according to CIA operative Paul Corscadden.) President Kissinger and his stooge Richard Nixon, bombing Cambodia.)
Stupid Gerald Ford, and poor Jimmy Carter: both feebly tried to have war; Ford with Nortnh Korea and Carter with Iran. Carter's attempt was much more perverse: a bunch of young Iranis had captured 50 CIA agents in the U.S. Embassy in Terehan; we couldn't release their names--or confirm their number--because they all had multiple identities and passports. The world was lucky: Carter's attempt to start WW III failed when his attack forces' helicopters went down in the desert. At time, our European friends were trying to reach a diplomatic solution to the situation in Teheran; but Carter was running for reelection, and needed to prove that he was macho. To hell with diplomacy.
Reagan didn't get to have war. But he reminisced about his combat flights in World War II--though of course those took place only in movies. He did manage to bomb Lybia, and to invade Grenada.
George I wanted a war, and he got one. He was quite a guy: remember when he said that the reason he had been so outrageously vulgar in the vice-presidential debate with Geraldine Ferraro was that he "just wanted to kick a little ass"? In August of 1990 George I decidedto go to war, though he insisted that was looking for peace. In January of 1991 he went to war, as planned.
Bill Clinton began his presidency beybombing Basra, in Iraq. Why? To prove that he was as ruthless a murderer as any other American. An Iraqi had been accused of plotting to murder George I. According to American law, an accusation is the same thing as a conviction, so Clinton prempted any court, and trial, and bombed Basra. Oddly, the man was never brought to trial. Count a few deaths for murderer Bill.
And then we got George II. And now we have Barak Obama.
Is Mr. Obama a good president? Well, he told us that he would restore "habeas corpus," but he hasn't. He promised to close the U. S. concentration camp at Guantanamo, but he hasn't. He promised an end to U.S. torture, but he hasn't ended it. And he told us he would end our illegal war in--our invasion of--Iraq, and our illegal war in Afghanistan.
He is a very bright man, but he has failed at everything. And in addition to no "habeas corous," the continued operation of the concentration camp in Cuba, torture, and our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, we are now invading and attacking Pakistan.
So . . . what about all those good things? I had intended to talk about them. But--sorry--I am too depressed to talk about justice and law and society and community and goodness and freedom and all those other un-American ideas: ideas that have been a part of human history for at least the past 8,000 years.
Maybe I will try again. Right now I am too depreseed--as I always am, when I think about our country. Funny: the only times I can feel good about us are when I read about Sarah Palin or Mitch McConnell.
zaterdag 24 juli 2010
LIES THAT LEAD TO WAR
When I was a schoolboy, the argument was over whether Franklin Roosevelt knew in advance that Pearl Harbor was to be attacked, but let that attack happen so that he could get the United States into World War II. Then--as quick as quick--we were at war in Korea, over aggression from the North. To make this war legal Harry Truman called it a "Police Action."
We invaded Lebanon in 1958, without invitation, because Admiral Holloway wanted a "show of force" in the Mediterranean, and Dwight Eisenhower let him have his way. After three months we came home. Our accomplishments: ruining Beirut's streets, almost burning down the port (my fault), killing one of our own soldiers, and getting in the way of a democratic election.
Then Lyndon Johnson lied his way into the Vietnam War--undeclared by Congress, but allowed thanks to the fabricated story about attacks on U.S. ships in the Gulf of Tonkin. Lies. A war justified by deliberate lies. A hideous ten-year war followed. But it was actually longer, because the CIA started it in 1962--not in 1964.
Gerald Ford sent U.S. Navy gunboats into North Korea, but failed to start a war. Jimmy Carter asked our European allies to try to resolve our problem at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, and while they were doing so he tried to invade Tehran. Thanks
to U.S. technology, his invasion failed in the desert, and Carter didn't start a war.
Ronald Reagan had a hard time finding a war to fight, and finally settled on invading Grenada. The pretext? Cuban soldiers. But the Cuban "soldiers" had been invited there by the Grenedan government, to build new runways for the airport--so it could land 747's loaded with U.S. tourists! On the second day after the U.S. invasion, the Grenedan president was produced aboard a U.S. Navy ship, holding a typewritten letter (unsigned) requesting (after the fact) U.S. intervention. We admitted this. Awkwardly, we had invaded a member-state of the Commonwealth of Nations, whose head was and is the Queen of England--and she had not been consulted about this invasion of her territory.
George Bush invaded Iraq for oil. Pure, simple, overt aggression. Like Hitler taking Poland. For several months after his decision to invade was made, Bush pretended not to have decided to to go to war. Lies. Documented lies. Several thousand Iraqi soldiers were buried alive by Colin Powell in this exercise in American freedom and justice.
Then Bill Clinton. First thing, in February of 1963, he ordered a bombing raid on the Iraqi city of Basra. Why? Because an Iraqi civilian in puppet Kuwait had been accused of plotting to assassinate George Bush. The Iraqi was never tried, let alone convicted. But that didn't bother Clinton: he was proving that he was an American president, by going to war and killing people.
And then George Bush II. All the stupid lies to get us into war. Nine years' worth now.
And after having said that this war was wrong, and that he would end it; after saying that he would close the U.S. concentration camps around the world, and stop the U.S. torture of abductees--after a year and a half, Obama has done nothing except expand the Bush wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to Pakistan.
Now, it seems we are lying our way toward a war with North Korea. The evidence of a North Korean attack on a South Korean ship is very, very suspicious. It seems to have been manufactured by the South Korean government, perhaps in collusion with the U.S. government.
Lies. Lies. Lies. Lies.
What is this country? Criminal is not a big enough word for us. But it's maybe the biggest we have available. And since the U.S. claims to be a democracy, we are all--every last one of us--criminals. We know full well that we are being told lies. But we don't care. We are a dying society--a non-society, dying of our own stupid greed and arrogance. But we are still trying to rule the world.
We invaded Lebanon in 1958, without invitation, because Admiral Holloway wanted a "show of force" in the Mediterranean, and Dwight Eisenhower let him have his way. After three months we came home. Our accomplishments: ruining Beirut's streets, almost burning down the port (my fault), killing one of our own soldiers, and getting in the way of a democratic election.
Then Lyndon Johnson lied his way into the Vietnam War--undeclared by Congress, but allowed thanks to the fabricated story about attacks on U.S. ships in the Gulf of Tonkin. Lies. A war justified by deliberate lies. A hideous ten-year war followed. But it was actually longer, because the CIA started it in 1962--not in 1964.
Gerald Ford sent U.S. Navy gunboats into North Korea, but failed to start a war. Jimmy Carter asked our European allies to try to resolve our problem at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, and while they were doing so he tried to invade Tehran. Thanks
to U.S. technology, his invasion failed in the desert, and Carter didn't start a war.
Ronald Reagan had a hard time finding a war to fight, and finally settled on invading Grenada. The pretext? Cuban soldiers. But the Cuban "soldiers" had been invited there by the Grenedan government, to build new runways for the airport--so it could land 747's loaded with U.S. tourists! On the second day after the U.S. invasion, the Grenedan president was produced aboard a U.S. Navy ship, holding a typewritten letter (unsigned) requesting (after the fact) U.S. intervention. We admitted this. Awkwardly, we had invaded a member-state of the Commonwealth of Nations, whose head was and is the Queen of England--and she had not been consulted about this invasion of her territory.
George Bush invaded Iraq for oil. Pure, simple, overt aggression. Like Hitler taking Poland. For several months after his decision to invade was made, Bush pretended not to have decided to to go to war. Lies. Documented lies. Several thousand Iraqi soldiers were buried alive by Colin Powell in this exercise in American freedom and justice.
Then Bill Clinton. First thing, in February of 1963, he ordered a bombing raid on the Iraqi city of Basra. Why? Because an Iraqi civilian in puppet Kuwait had been accused of plotting to assassinate George Bush. The Iraqi was never tried, let alone convicted. But that didn't bother Clinton: he was proving that he was an American president, by going to war and killing people.
And then George Bush II. All the stupid lies to get us into war. Nine years' worth now.
And after having said that this war was wrong, and that he would end it; after saying that he would close the U.S. concentration camps around the world, and stop the U.S. torture of abductees--after a year and a half, Obama has done nothing except expand the Bush wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to Pakistan.
Now, it seems we are lying our way toward a war with North Korea. The evidence of a North Korean attack on a South Korean ship is very, very suspicious. It seems to have been manufactured by the South Korean government, perhaps in collusion with the U.S. government.
Lies. Lies. Lies. Lies.
What is this country? Criminal is not a big enough word for us. But it's maybe the biggest we have available. And since the U.S. claims to be a democracy, we are all--every last one of us--criminals. We know full well that we are being told lies. But we don't care. We are a dying society--a non-society, dying of our own stupid greed and arrogance. But we are still trying to rule the world.
dinsdag 20 juli 2010
REFUDIATION
REFUDIATION is a perfectly good word. Sarah Palin has no need to indulge in palinody for having used it.
To REFUDIATE is to be asinine, or act like an ass, again.
Sarah Palin’s whole career is REFUDIATION. FUD (or FUDD) is an old Northern word for “ass,” or “backside.” Funny: PALIN is itself an old Greek word for “back,” or “backward.”
And Sarah Palin—going back, perhaps, to her roots, being both a Palin and an ignorant, loud, hee-hawing ass, has been REFUDIATING throughout her public career.
Everybody who laughed at poor, ignorant Sarah should be ASSHAMED for mocking her REFUDIATION.
America needs more ignorance.
It also needs more stupidity and dumbness. Both those words have to do with not saying anything, with keeping your mouth shut.
Bert
To REFUDIATE is to be asinine, or act like an ass, again.
Sarah Palin’s whole career is REFUDIATION. FUD (or FUDD) is an old Northern word for “ass,” or “backside.” Funny: PALIN is itself an old Greek word for “back,” or “backward.”
And Sarah Palin—going back, perhaps, to her roots, being both a Palin and an ignorant, loud, hee-hawing ass, has been REFUDIATING throughout her public career.
Everybody who laughed at poor, ignorant Sarah should be ASSHAMED for mocking her REFUDIATION.
America needs more ignorance.
It also needs more stupidity and dumbness. Both those words have to do with not saying anything, with keeping your mouth shut.
Bert
zaterdag 17 juli 2010
DEALING WITH LIARS
Given that, in the case of Shahram Amiri, we are dealing with the world's premier liars and the world's dumbest bunch of thugs since comic books were born, shouldn't news agencies like the New York Times be a little bit more circumspect?
The world's premier liars and the world's dumbest bunch of thugs are one and the same, of course: the CIA. If I were in charge of guessing through this fiasco, I would have no problem choosing my route.
The first premise is that the CIA made a mess. The second is that they are lying, trying to get out of it. Shahram Amiri either wasn't a nuclear scientist, or he was a plant posted by the Iranian government. He was either kidnapped, or bribed to defect. He was allowed to return to Iran either because he had already set up the disclosure of his "exploitation," should he disappear, or because the CIA was hoping to hide its stupidity, or because they were even stupider than they usually are and just let him go home since he wasn't a nuclear scientist anyway.
The CIA has housed incompetent people since I first met them in 1957. They are Keystone Cops with huge budgets, huge egos, and the intelligence of earthworms.
Earthworms take things in: blind observation. It runs through them, and comes out the other end as intelligence. Ask Philip Agee if I'm right. Or Mark Sullivan. Or the widow--or the children--of Paul Corscadden.
Bert Hornback
The world's premier liars and the world's dumbest bunch of thugs are one and the same, of course: the CIA. If I were in charge of guessing through this fiasco, I would have no problem choosing my route.
The first premise is that the CIA made a mess. The second is that they are lying, trying to get out of it. Shahram Amiri either wasn't a nuclear scientist, or he was a plant posted by the Iranian government. He was either kidnapped, or bribed to defect. He was allowed to return to Iran either because he had already set up the disclosure of his "exploitation," should he disappear, or because the CIA was hoping to hide its stupidity, or because they were even stupider than they usually are and just let him go home since he wasn't a nuclear scientist anyway.
The CIA has housed incompetent people since I first met them in 1957. They are Keystone Cops with huge budgets, huge egos, and the intelligence of earthworms.
Earthworms take things in: blind observation. It runs through them, and comes out the other end as intelligence. Ask Philip Agee if I'm right. Or Mark Sullivan. Or the widow--or the children--of Paul Corscadden.
Bert Hornback
Abonneren op:
Posts (Atom)