Obama's counterterror strategy: Release jihadists, investigate CIA

"Release jihadists, investigate CIA"

This strategy is beyond Dhimmitude. Obama appears to be in cahoots with the terrorists.

The time to question Barack Hussein Obama’s loyalty was during the election campaign. But let’s take a quick inventory of what we have now anyway: Our commander-in-chief launched his political career in the living room of two convicted terrorists. Not Jihad war terrorists, but Marxist terrorists of the globo-socialist variety. This after years of toil as a commie agitator on Chicago’s hyper-racist South Side. Speaking of hyper-racism, his spiritual mentor ran an awful church which Obama deigned to attend for 20 yrs. He even maintained silence when his mentor flew with Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan to glad hand acknowledged Jihad war terror sponsor Moammar, the buck Mohammedan. Then Barack took off his American flag lapel pin, but still his loyalty is beyond question, to put it politely. Then his first international mass communication on Al Arabya, the network with nuanced views on all the Jihad terror activity over the past decade. Then London, where he apologized to the Ummah yet again, and insulted the Queen with clumsy protocol. Then Cairo and still more apologies, but this time with musings about the greatness of the Moslems who helped forge America, the wonders of Islamic science, and how American Infidels had lost their moral compass by mistreating Moslem activists. Still his loyalty was above question. And now, Prez Obama (a born Moslem who attended madrasas during his formative years) has directed the self-acknowledged crook Eric Holder, whom he chose to head the Dept of Justice, to explore the possibility of staging show trials where soldiers of the War on Terror are to be put to task as misbehaving Infidels.

*** 2:256 ***

What was the question again?

It's working so we must find other means......

[PUKE]

Here's what the enemy thinks of their B.O.

Tge interrogations of Khaled Sheikh Mohammed and others were successful. They helped to find out much more about Al Qaeda, and thus helped to save lives. What else does one need to know?

Would that the clearmindedness of the Bush Administration in dealing with such people had been accompanied by some understanding of the need for those who claim, in our government, to be able to protect and instruct us (instruct us in order that we may be better protected, or support policies that will better protect us) to learn about Islam, its texts, tenets, attitudes, atmospherics. It is the failure, by successive American administrations, and by those in the Pentagon and CIA. Exhibits of such mental failure would have to include the Dulles Brothers, who thought that Islam could best be thought of as "a bulwark against Communism" and that limited man, Robert Gates, who spent three or four decades in the CIA and elsewhere, without ever, apparently, having thought he had the duty to inquire further about Islam, and to learn from others, including the apostates from Islam and the great Western scholars of Islam who are no longer alive (but Islam does not change), and not from the smiling Muslim apologists and their esposito-expositors among the non-Muslim handmaidens of such apologists.

Though Dick Cheney is too loyal and polite to come out candidly and say it, some of his public statements recently indicate that he (and a few like-minded others) was the one prodding the Bush Administration toward the tougher stance on "torture" while others were pulling away from that, and Bush was sort of in the middle -- but the Cheney view more or less prevailed, with a few relatively minor compromises along the way.

Obama Watch? ...a name Change might be in order.

"Investigate the CIA" is the part I agree with. Only the investigation should be comprehensive, not selective. Here is what the investigation of the CIA should be focused on:

1) The systematic treason toward Israel starting in 1969, and getting gradually worse throughout the '70s, 80's and '90s;
2) The whole account of the CIA training of bin Laden's al-Qaida and Palestinian Hamas, especially in Kansas City and Chicago in 1998, just 3 years before 9/11, per Robert Wright;
3) The public televised hearing on the relentless sabotage by the CIA of John O'Neil's and his FBI team's efforts to prevent 9/11;
4) The full account of the CIA's role in the kidnapping, rape, torture, mutilation, organ harvesting and murder of Serb civilians by Kosovar Albanian KLA terrorists; the entire Clinton administration should be investigated as well;
5) The full truth about the CIA, DIA and US State Dept. role in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland. No more "al-Megrahi did it" lies.

But what are the chances of such full, honest investigation under Obamus or any other president in our supposedly "open" American society?
Ruslan Tokhchukov, EnragedSince1999.

Binyam Ahmed Mohamed (born 24 July 1978) is an Ethiopian national who was detained in Guantanamo Bay prison between 2004 and 2009. He was captured and transported under the US extraordinary rendition program. After charges against him were dropped, he was eventually released and arrived in the United Kingdom on 23 February 2009. Mohamed admitted while he was detained that he trained in the Al-Qaeda terrorist training camp Al Farouq, but has since claimed that the evidence against him was obtained using torture.

If it is true that torture was used against him to obtain a confession and there was no other evidence to support a conviction then he should have been released long time ago.

Instead of providing justice and living up to its obligations according to the international protocols and the convention against torture the US once more face international dondenmnation and a lawsuit from Binyam Ahmed Mohamed for damages due to illegal detention, rendition and torture.

Shame on you USA for lowering the standards of POWs and free and fair trial. Such methods will not win us victory in the fight against radical Islam but the rightful condemnation of civilized people and nations.

Obama seems to be working hard to bring back the legal standards so the US once more may be the moral leader of the West.

I wonder what kind of Attack plans Obama gave Mohamed as he was leaving?

Changing Enemy's to Friends and Friends to Enemy's is not the kind of "change" that is healthy for the Country.

Only a true Marxist can make the claim that it is.

The life and times of Barracks Omama- the making of a true American Marxist.

More Euro-fag morality.."Shame on you USA for lowering the standards of POWs and free and fair trial. Such methods will not win us victory in the fight against radical Islam but the rightful condemnation of civilized people and nations."...The guy should have been executed on the battlefield in my Judeo-Christian understanding of ethics. Any non-uniformed opposition on the battlefield should suffer the same judgment....SHAME on the hand wringing limp wristed leftists and their ilk which would lead us all into enslavement.

Posted by: Ipso Facto at August 27, 2009 10:50 AM

Nice Wikipedia cut and paste. I see your sources are impeccable.

I am curious about your ommission that he was arrested while trying to travel from Pakistan to the UK with a fake passport? It was in the same article, why didn't you hi-lite that fact?

Was it because it would not have fit in to your anti-American rant?

Ipso:
"Obama seems to be working hard to bring back the legal standards so the US once more may be the moral leader of the West."

What a load of crap. His administration is one of the shadiest to date, bypassing every legal standard he can get away with.

And remember Ipso, if the US was overly concerned about moral standards in a time of war, you'd probably be speaking German right now whether you liked it or not, that is, if you were able to speak at all.

Awake:

"And remember Ipso, if the US was overly concerned about moral standards in a time of war, you'd probably be speaking German right now whether you liked it or not, that is, if you were able to speak at all."

I am speaking German and Danish and Polish ;-)

You are quite wrong. The allied war crimes - terror bombing of the civilian population - were committed during the last 7 months of WWII at a time when victory was as sure as amen in the church. So these attrocities against the innocent men, women and children were completely unnecessary and done for revenge only.

Churchill subsequently distanced himself from the bombing of Dresden in February, 1945. On 28 March, in a memo sent by telegram to General Ismay for the British Chiefs of Staff and the Chief of the Air Staff, he wrote:

"It seems to me that the moment has come when the question of bombing of German cities simply for the sake of increasing the terror, though under other pretexts, should be reviewed. Otherwise we shall come into control of an utterly ruined land… The destruction of Dresden remains a serious query against the conduct of Allied bombing. I am of the opinion that military objectives must henceforward be more strictly studied in our own interests than that of the enemy.

The Foreign Secretary has spoken to me on this subject, and I feel the need for more precise concentration upon military objectives such as oil and communications behind the immediate battle-zone, rather than on mere acts of terror and wanton destruction, however impressive."

I agree with Winston Churchill!

More Eurofag idiocy........"I agree with Winston Churchill! ".........A..duh...so do I. Look at the context dummy! It was for our interests because the war was already won, a minor point for you I guess.

The mind boggles. Would Frank Church be thrilled or concerned?

Am I the only one who has the feeling the entire western world is being run by five year olds and counter terrorism / self defense is: throwing rocks at airplanes?

"I am speaking German and Danish and Polish ;-)"

Posted by: Ipso Facto at August 27, 2009 11:59 AM

Cute, but useless response when taking my point in context.

I see you just glossed over the fact that your weak Wikipedia cut and paste was also contextually edited to support your diatribe, with no mention of the arrest for attempting to use the fake passport.

Innocent until proven guilty, and then even after that, still innocent Ipso, right? That is, as long as you have the US to blame.

Churchill's memo was also modified and reflected hindsight considerations for focusing on more military targets, but for aliied considerations.

Dresden certainly did expedite Germany's surrender, no? War is hell. Fight fire with fire. It was fine for the Germans to bomb London daily from September 1940 to May of 1941.

Ultimately, the blood of the Germans in Dresden is on the hands of Hitler, likewise the Japanese in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

awake:

"Ultimately, the blood of the Germans in Dresden is on the hands of Hitler, likewise the Japanese in Hiroshima and Nagasaki."

No. The blood is on the hands on anybody who breaks the rules of civilized warfare and commit terror or war crimes against the innocent population of the enemy.

The Nazis was rightly convicted for crimes against the peacer, war crimes and crimes against humanity. The problem is that nobody has the power to convict the victorious in a court of law.

So we have to leave the moral judgement to history. That is exactly what I am doing when arguening the facts and point out our own moral weakneses. So we may learn from history and never again commit the same mistakes in the heat of the fight when emotions run wild.

If not those nations who imposed the rules of civiliyed warfare should live up to their own moral standards who should? The barbarians?

I dont know if CIA or other departments did anything wrong in "the war on terror". There seems to be reasonable suspision that a crime has been committed and they should be given the full protection of the law and considered innocent until found guilty in a court of law.

The same high legal principles should apply to our enemies or suspected enemies because then nobody could claim the US use double standards.

To my knowledge we are not fighting for double standards but universal legal and Human Right standards applicable to everyone, everywhere and at all times.

That´s what we are fighting for, not to become like the barbarian enemy.

ipso facto-
You are so good and noble and fair pure and just and thoughtful and well-balanced. You and yours are about to be swept away in a tsunami of unspeakable evil. There are PRIORITIES buddy, and I, for one, don't giving a flying f-ck for your considered opinions on the bombing of Dresden. You and your ilk will go down talking talking talking talking talking talking. Like some kind of hideous Hieronymous Bosch creature that is all mouth with spindly useless arms and legs.

Ipso Facto joins the list of loony JW posters who deluge posts with a barrage of factoids that, upon closer inspection, inevitably turn out to be untrue or have flimsy evidence supporting them (another I can think of had a double vowel in his or her name).

ispo facto: civilized warfare

Ok, that made me laugh out loud....

ipso facto: To my knowledge we are not fighting for double standards but universal legal and Human Right standards applicable to everyone, everywhere and at all times.

I get it now! Here's where you and many other well meaning imbeciles have it wrong: We are fighting for our very survival against people who use all and every means to extinguish us.

Playing fair won't win this fight.

Try to remember: THEY ARE NOT POW's, they shouldn't be treated as conventional enemy combatants as they don't wear a uniform and use the civilian population as protection.

The only reason they were arrested in many cases was the misguided belief that they had intel.

Kill them when they are found on the field of conflict unless they are a high value target. If they are a HVT do anything and everything then throw away the husk.

That's how you win a war.

For those who want the facts on Dresden, and not ipso factos, see this link:

http://glossaryhesperado.blogspot.com/2008/04/facts-about-dresden-bombings.html

Nice work, Hesperado!

Treason has a new name: Obama.

(Insanity, as well.)

"To my knowledge we are not fighting for double standards but universal legal and Human Right standards applicable to everyone, everywhere and at all times."
-- from a messianic poster above

God, I certainly hope not. I hope we are simply conducting, as intelligently as possible, a campaign to prevent any further growth in the threat that Jihad -- in all of its manifestations -- presents to the advanced Western world, and in that campaign of self-defense, we are also intelligently making common cause with other threatened non-Muslim states and peoples, even if they are not, strictly speaking, part of that West.

Spare us, please, the "fighing...for universal legal and Human Rights [sic] standards" and for god's sake do not even hint that such things might be "applicalbe to everyone, everywhere and at all times."

What a crazed, nightmarish notion. See Edmund Burke. See Learned Hand. See Michael Oakeshott. ds applicable to everyone, ever

Posted by: Hesperado [TypeKey Profile Page] at August 27, 2009 3:29 PM........Excellent, thanks.I never for a moment ever bought the lefties BS and you just once again confirmed the correctness of not believing any of their schlock. However, even if they were truthful the real war crimes and blood would still be upon the heads of the nations and peoples which launched aggressive wars of conquest without mercy on their victims marshaling millions into slave labor and exterminations. It is typical of godless shit worthless morality to equated their adversaries with their crimes. BOO EFFIN HOO

As CJK points out, the blame for Hiroshima and Dresden must ultimately rest with the Japanese and Nazi leadership who launched ruthless wars of conquest against peaceful neighbors. Dresden was not bombed out of the blue, for no reason at all, but as another savage step in a savage war, a war neither begun nor desired by the Allies.
That said, I believe that the Allied strategic bombing was a mistake, and not only for moral reasons. Basically, it didn't work; and it was a mis-use of precious industrial resources.
German war production rose every year of the war until 1945. The heavy bombers had to bomb whole cities because they couldn't hit anything smaller; if they dropped a thousand bombs they could count on a few of them actually hitting the refinery, or steel plant, or power plant, or whatever.
The proper role of air-power was in the "attack" or "assault" mode, as part of a coordinated effort with infantry, armor, and artillery. The Germans showed this with their blitzkriegs in 1940 and 1941, and the Americans and British showed it again in 1944. The human and material resources would have been better used in this mode, rather than on strategic bombing.
For a eye-witness and informative account of Dresden, see Kurt Vonnegut's "Slaughterhouse Five"; he was among a group of P.O.W.'s who survived the bombing and were used to pull bodies out of the ruins.

"Obama seems to be working hard to bring back the legal standards so the US once more may be the moral leader of the West."
Posted by: Ipso Facto

Wow, it's really hard for me to write this, I'm laughing so hard. Somehow, it's just impossible for me to associate the terms "legal standards" and "moral leader" with President Obama; maybe you're referring to some other Obama. The only Obama I know is the one that "won" the election by means of the vote-stealing and phony registration tactics of ACORN, and who enjoyed the teaching and preaching in "Rev." Wright's racist and bigoted church. As President, he has plundered the tax-payers to enrich his cronies, and unleashed thugs and goons against anyone who dares question him and his policies. Morality and legality just don't go with Obama.

"To my knowledge we are not fighting for double standards but universal legal and Human Right standards applicable to everyone, everywhere and at all times"

An Ideal that only you would think of, Ipso +_+

WARNING: Ipso is a new brand of troll serving up something stronger and deadlier than Kool-Aid, and with a smile, no less.

champ-

...a stronger and deadlier Kool-Aid...

I think ipso fructose (all treacle, no survival) is an apt designation for this kind of pious suicidally-silly drivel.

First win the war for your very existence, then wring your oh-so-concerned little hands.

The ones your jihadi foe would laughingly chop off with no more shred of concern than a butcher carving up a lamb.

Daintiness makes a wonderful headstone motto in that all-too-familiar cemetary called "The Moral Highground"... site of many a razed civilization who were too circumspect to fight for their own survival.

Ipso's got the lawyer's disease.

Everything sounds so reasonable... but it gets your killed.

Ipso wrote:
"The blood is on the hands on anybody who breaks the rules of civilized warfare and commit terror or war crimes against the innocent population of the enemy."

Thank you for validating my argument. Hitler, in his calculated attack on civilians during his London bombing campaign did just that.

Ipso:
"That is exactly what I am doing when arguening the facts and point out our own moral weakneses."

No, you are certainly not. When you say "our" you are not referring to yourself or your country, as a member of the allied forces during WWII. You are referring to yourself as a personal victim of liberalism, a victim that in hindsight dares to judge the actions of the allies to stop Germany during the most heinous, unprovoked historical war waged by Germany in the annuls of history.

Nice try.

Ipso:
"The problem is that nobody has the power to convict the victorious in a court of law."

No. And why should they? This war, WWII was not a voluntary war for Europe, Russia, the Jews, the US or anyone else, waged on a voluntary level. It was merely a survival response, to Hitler and Germany's aggression.

Ipso:
"So we have to leave the moral judgement to history."

Yes, we do. Not your revisionist, anti-American, limp-wristed, liberal history...but real history.

It's a tough pill to swallow, I know.

Ipso:
"That is exactly what I am doing when arguening the facts and point out our own moral weakneses."

Nonsence. You do not speak for me or anyone in the West. Currently, you enjoy a realative happy life by the fruits of what you so desperately despise.

Ipso:
"So we may learn from history and never again commit the same mistakes in the heat of the fight when emotions run wild."

Who is "we"? The Allies responding to Hitler's aggression, or did you forget about the same historical aggression by Germany in WWI?
By the way, the willful attempt to exterminate all Jews, a staple in Hitler's Germany during WWII, was that not a supreme example of emotions running wild?

Ipso:
"If not those nations who imposed the rules of civiliyed warfare should live up to their own moral standards who should? The barbarians?"

War is war. It is ugly and encompasses many casualties, the guilty and innocent alike. An enemy that transgresses the "rules of civilized warfare" deserves no quarter in retribution.

Ipso:
"I dont know if CIA or other departments did anything wrong in "the war on terror". There seems to be reasonable suspision that a crime has been committed and they should be given the full protection of the law and considered innocent until found guilty in a court of law."

I agree, but you have already drawn a baseless conclusion in this regard.

You still have not answered honestly the question about the subject's guilt or innocence. You have also not to date, ACKNOWLEDGED the crime he was initally charged of, or offered your opinion on that as I have already pointed out.

Do you care to do that anytime soon?

Ipso:
"The same high legal principles should apply to our enemies or suspected enemies because then nobody could claim the US use double standards."

Agreed, but you have not offered a shred of evidence aside from appealing to emotion to past "crimes" you deem commited by the Allies in WWII, specifically, the US.

Ipso:
"That´s what we are fighting for, not to become like the barbarian enemy."

Sayith you. I do not agree. War is fought with an intention to obliterate your enemies. That is the only way a war can be one.

Eradicate your enemy, or have them surrender is the only way I know.

By the way, did Germany surrender before Dresden?

Didn't think so.

You are a limited liability here Ipso. I called it awhile back. It is not a question of if, but a question of when...at least under your current moniker, that is.

Regards.

Yes Abu_Lahab and CJK, and as that report I linked argues, the interpretation of Dresden and, by extension, the other bombing the Allies had to do to stop a global alliance of megalomaniac supremacists, as "war crimes" by the Allies began as Communist propaganda -- which over the decades since has become filtered down to Leftist propaganda, and then, through the filtering process further to the more decaffeinated and sweeter version, PC MC, swallowed by nice suburban middle-class Westerners as easily as the decaf mocchaccinos made from coffee beans that don't "exploit" poor black Africans (about whose real horrible oppression by Muslims they don't give a fuck) that they sip at Tully's cafes and Barnes & Nobles bookstores before they go off shopping at nice suburban malls while they listen on their ipods to the latest hits that make millions for the self-righteous Bonos of the globalist pop machine before driving home again to their comfy homes.

Ipso's got the lawyer's disease.

Everything sounds so reasonable... but it gets your killed.

Posted by: profitsbeard

Good gawd, he's a lawyer? Greaaaat! ...funny post, Profitsbeard :)

champ, Abu_Lahab, ebonystone, CJK, profitsbeard, poetcomic1 and last but certainly not least, Hesperado.

Thanks.

Ipso_Facto, the obviously intentional, nonsensical, leftist troll has proven to be a tough nut to crack here to date, but crack him together, we surely will.

I for one, will not desist.

Regards.

The allied forces did what they had to do in order to win a war that had to be won, it really is as simple as that.

The bombing of Dresden was effectively a war crime according to some.

Those "some" were not shedding, or in immediate danger of shedding some of their own blood in order to afford the lucky "some" the opportunity of slagging them off in later years.

My grandfather took such a beating in North Africa whilst risking his life for the freedom of the "some" to have the freedom to knock his efforts in later years that he was unable to talk about it or even watch a war film until the day he died.

He was a mere (ultimately lucky) one in the allied force against tyranny, he was an Englishman in the 8th Army. His ally was an American soldier he never met that died on the approach to Normandy in the landings. Another ally was an Aussie fighting for his life in the hell of Borneo. Another allied soldier being murdered in the Samaria Gorge in Crete whilst trying to retreat.

Ipso Facto - you are full of shit, our civillisation was at stake in that war, we could not have won it without the aid of the US, the Commonwealth countries and the free soldiers of the occupied countries that helped in the fight. Do you think a Polish pilot had any place dying in a RAF plane in a dogfight over London? Many did.

You insult the memories of all the brave men that fought for your freedom, regardless of their nationality. The tactics used are very easy for you to pick apart 60 odd years after the fact wjen they have done their job.

We have a more important war to fight now, as our grandparents and parents fought for our freedom, now we have to fight for the freedom of our grandchildren. Our foe is worse, if we fail, their fate will be worse that ours would have been (depending on your race and religion of course).

Imma F'nclown doesn't stand a chance against awake, Hesperado, Abu_Lahab, ebonystone, CJK, profitsbeard, poetcomic1, and last but not least, me :)

CriticalEndGame - I think you'd enjoy a poem by an Australian, John Manifold: "The Tomb of Lt. John Learmonth, A.I.F'. 'At the end on Crete he took to the hills and said he'd fight it out with only a revolver. He was a great soldier'...(One of his men in a letter).

"This is not sorrow, this is work: I build
a cairn of words over a silent man
my friend John Learmonth, whom the Germans killed.
There was no word of hero in his plan:
verse should have been his love and peace his trade -
but history turned him to a partisan.
Far from the battle as his bones are laid
Crete will remember him. Remember well,
Mountains of Crete, the Second Field Brigade!
Say Crete, and there is little more to tell
of muddle tall as treachery, defeat
and black despair resounding like a bell;
but bring the magnifying focus near
and in contempt of muddle and defeat
the old heroic virtues still appear.

Australian blood where hot and icy meet
(James Hogg and Lermontov were of his kin)
lie still and fertilize the fields of Crete.
Schoolboy, I watched his ballading begin
billy and bullocky and billabong
our properties of childhood, all were in.
I heard the air, though not the undersong -
the fierceness and resolve, but all the same
they're the tradition, and tradition's strong.
Swagman and bushranger died hard, die game,
die fighting,,like that wild colonial boy
Jack Doolan, says the ballad, was his name.

He also spun his pistol like a toy
turned to the hills like wolf or kangaroo
and faced destruction with a bitter joy.

His freedom gave him nothing else to do
but set his back against his family tree
and fight the better for the fact he knew
he was as good as dead; because the sea
was closed, and the air dark, and the land lost:
'They'll never capture me alive', said he.

That's courage chemically pure, uncrossed
with sacrifice or duty or career
which counts and pays in ready coin the cost
of holding course; armies are not its sphere
where all's contrived to achieve its counterfeit;
it swears with discipline, it's volunteer.

I could as hardly make a moral fit
around it as around a lightning flash -
there is no moral, that's the point of it.
No moral. But I'm glad of this panache
that sparkles, as from flint, from us and steel
true to no crown nor presidential sash
nor flag nor fame. Let others mourn and feel
he died for nothing; nothings have their place
while thus the kind and civilised conceal
this spring of unsuspected inward grace
and look on death as equals, I am filled
with queer affection for the human race."

I discovered this poem as a teenager and learned it by heart (though my memory of it is rusty, now). An odd thing for a 15 year old girl to find worthy of committing to memory.

The best lines in it are those that run - 'his freedom left him nothing else to do/ but set his back against his family tree/ and fight the better for the fact he knew/ he was as good as dead...'They'll never capture me alive, said he'. In today's context the likes of John Learmonth would be saying, 'lan astaslem'.

Those lines clang like great bells across Europe today. What else is Geert Wilders doing, or Kurt Westergaard, and many, many others less famous? They have set their backs against their family tree - call it the great Tree of Life that is everything that is best in human civilisation, and in western civilisation - and they will *fight*, though the air be dark and the land seem lost.

You Americans wanted change, well, you are going to have change!

I'm curious what Oprah is going to talk about in her crybabyshow when there were new attack on the West. Probably blame the white man.

Grouphug anyone?

“Spare us, please, the "fighing...for universal legal and Human Rights [sic] standards" and for god's sake do not even hint that such things might be "applicalbe to everyone, everywhere and at all times."
What a crazed, nightmarish notion. See Edmund Burke. See Learned Hand. See Michael Oakeshott. ds applicable to everyone, ever"

-- from another lonely nihilist poster above.

And spare us for Edmond Burke and his doubts about the merits of democracy:

"Burke was a consistent doubter of the merits of democracy. His analysis found the general public ill qualified to exercise power, disposed to follow their passions, and too willing to tyrannize the minority. All things considered, Burke found democracy a more troubling form of government than either oligarchy or despotism. The amount of damage a single tyrant or an oligarchy can do to a state is limited, but a tyrannical majority without appeal to any counterauthority can do almost unlimited harm.”

Oakeshotts moral relativism is the last thing we need in the West because we know where that road leads us: to cultural relativism, multiculturalism and an open invitation to legal pluralism, Islamic law and Islamization:

“Oakeshott used the analogy of the adverb to describe the kind of restraint law involves. For example, the law against murder is not a law against killing as such, but only a law against killing 'murderously'. Or, a more trivial example, the law does not dictate that I have a car, but if I do, I have to drive it on the same side of the road as everybody else. This contrasted with the rules of enterprise association in which those actions required by the directing purpose were made compulsory for all.”

What the world need right now is not more magical relativistic thinking but less!

Yet more Eurofag drivel......"And spare us for Edmond Burke and his doubts about the merits of democracy:".......The great USA was not founded as a democracy by the far seeing geniuses that thought it up and constituted it on paper. I agree with Burke and they probably also did to some extent. As the USA has steadily moved away from it's original design as a federal republic towards a more perfect democracy, the very problems predicted by Burke have begun to appear. They and Burke were right from the beginning....... Note; by they I mean the founders corporate thought as revealed in the US constitution.

We may rethink what was done in the past. But, after the dust settled, the war was won, and was truly over.

Fast forward to today, is this "new" war, how it is being waged, better? Will it end with victory, for our betterment, as it is being fought?

Hesperado @ August 27, 2009 3:29 PM

Thanks for the link to the Dresden material, Hes. It provides much needed context to events that were going on at the time, including the involvement of the Soviets, and provides perspective that is usually lacking when listening to Leftist comments. The same is true about the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings.

Would you by chance have similar material about the March, 1945 fire bombing of Tokyo?