Neoconservatism From Beyond The Grave
The Libya deal was vintage neoconservatism in action – pretending to get rid of non-existent WMD so that the oil money could flow. And look what has come of it.
Share
Filed under: Uncategorized
 |
 |
|
|
|
||
The Libya deal was vintage neoconservatism in action – pretending to get rid of non-existent WMD so that the oil money could flow. And look what has come of it.
[...] via Post Right » Neoconservatism From Beyond The Grave. [...]
Learn to use the apostrophe correctly.
So, you do not deny that basically the term Neo-Con basically is another way of saying Jew?
Because you know good and well, that it is.
Hell, if it were left to Pat Buchanan, The Jews would have never been liberated and Hitler would still be alive!
This explains why Pat Buchanan and his goofball twin Ron “David Duke” Paul is are not in the White House, nor will they ever be.
Buchanan and Paul might be right o Economic issues, but when it comes to foreign policy; they’re both a bunch of bumbling idiots, who’s minds are stuck in a era that predates WW2. They also have the whole Antisemitism down to a science.
Their writings have proven that beyond a shadow of a doubt.
-Pat
P.S. Now watch the cowards pull this comment.
My apologies to the people that read this Blog. My Laptop’s Keyboard is about to wink the dashboard. It’s due to be fixed this coming week. Thank good for extended warranties!
Hence the errors above.
-Pat
The least of its errors are typographical.
Oh, well, if we must:
Most American Jews did not vote for the War Party, insofar as they had any option not to, in 2005. Most of them voted for Obama in 2008. And large numbers of Israeli Jews make a point of voting against the War Party at every opportunity.
They all deserve better, as the whole world does, than the neoconservative movement, thanks to whose activities it is really very likely that no charge of antisemitism, no matter how valid, will ever be taken seriously again.
But look at the list of signatories to the Project for the New American Century, just for a start. If Francis Fukuyama (a partially lapsed but now returning neocon), Dick Cheney, Steve Forbes, Dan Quayle or Zalmay Khalizad is Jewish, then I for one will be *extremely* surprised. Never mind Jeb Bush.
Even people whose names look as if they might be – George Weigel, Donald Rumsfeld, Gary Bauer – are not, Weigel being in fact a German-descended Catholic (and biographer of John Paul II, to whom he should have paid more attention), Rumsfeld a German-descended Protestant-if-anything, and Bauer one of America’s leading Evangelical Protestants (and also, obviously, of German descent).
Yet they have presumed to open the way for all manner of vilification and victimisation of Jews for ever more. I for one strongly suspect that they are in reality visceral antisemites.
In fact, I struggle to think of any other explanation.
2004, of course.
I put that in to see if you’d notice…
P.S. Now watch the cowards pull this comment.
Dear lord, Patrick, I think that I already have made quite clear that those sorts of shenanigans don’t occur at Post Right — no matter how nonsensical or poorly written — or both — the comment be.
Hell, if it were left to Pat Buchanan, The Jews would have never been liberated and Hitler would still be alive!
Actually, right or wrong (I’m undecided.), Buchanan’s argument — I think — is more along the lines of, “If ‘appeasement’ hadn’t been such a bugaboo, and Chamberlain’s policy had been left intact, then Hitler would not have been as much of a threat as he was, and that the Holocaust either wouldn’t have happened or, at least, would have been less drastic; meddling into continental affairs on the parts of the British and, later, the Americans exacerbated what otherwise would not have been such a tragedy.”
I’m not convinced that Buchanan is right, and Lukacs would dissent, but his contention is nothing akin to what you disingenuously assert.
Buchanan and Paul might be right o Economic issues, but when it comes to foreign policy; they’re both a bunch of bumbling idiots, who’s minds are stuck in a era that predates WW2. They also have the whole Antisemitism down to a science.
One can make a seemingly compelling argument that Buchanan is an anti-Semite; notwithstanding newsletter pieces not easily attributable to Dr. Paul, I’m not exactly sure what defense you can make of this claim.
“Hell, if it were left to Pat Buchanan, The Jews would have never been liberated and Hitler would still be alive!”
Can we just note that Patrick thinks that, if Buchanan had his way, Hitler would have lived to be more than 120-years old?
I sometimes wonder whether I am a good fit here at Post Right, as many of my views seem at odds with the other contributors. Then I read breathless comments like Patrick’s. Despite my disagreements with many of the other AmCon writers, at least none of them have ever made the remark, “If you don’t agree with everything I say, then you think the Holocaust was awesome!”