Thursday, April 24, 2008

Hillary Clinton Will " OBLITERATE IRAN " GO GIRL GO ! & other madness

Anyway the Iraq war continues as bloody and as devastating as ever while the media claims the war is almost over . Yet over 1,000,000 Iraqis are dead and counting.
Meanwhile tens of thousands of Iraqis are kept in over crowded prisons run by the Americans where prisoners are routinely tortured .

But of course according to the Bush , Cheney , Hillary dictionary all Iraqis are enemy combatants and potential terrorists. Therefore, they argue the Iraqis are merely getting what they deserve. And as these Neocons including Hillary define ' torture ' differently than the rest of the civilized world they therefore claim only a few detainees have ever been tortured . Or they claim that anyone accused of being a terrorist or insurgent or even knowing a terrorist or insurgent ought to be tortured.

Further Bush Hillary and McCain claim anyone who is against the torture of detainees is by definition pro-terrorist and pro-insurgency . They therefore are unAmerican or anti-American. Human Rights are only guaranteed for loyal, patriotic, non-leftists Americans . Though some might argue such rights are only guaranteed for the white middle class and the rich with a few exceptions but that's rather extreme.

And once again Hillary Clinton is out to prove that if she becomes president she will not hesitate to use over-whelming force against Iran or any other nation. She appears to be trying to reassure American voters that her policies will be a continuation of those of the Bush Regime and the Neocons. Voting for her will be not much different than voting for Sen. John McCain. The slaughter of innocent civilians doesn't matter to her since the entire population of Iran or Iraq or any other enemy country are all to be considered as enemy combatants. And she sees no reason to rule out the use of nuclear weapons. As the Neocons argue - why have nuclear weapons if you are not willing to use them. And if this means all out nuclear war we can only assume Hillary is not going to flinch. As long as at the end of the day America and Israel are still standing as they wait for the Messiah .

Like Margaret Thatcher and Indira Gandhi before her she too will be as ruthless as any male world leader. But then again maybe it is more war that the American people actually want.

But then again according to the American media the most important concern Americans have in regards to anyone running for the Presidency is whether or not they believe in God and are good Christians who attend church services every week. This matters more than if the individual wants to drop nukes on civilian populations or supports a wide range of torture techniques to be used on 'detainees'.

Supposedly there is separation of Church and state in America and further there is not supposed to be a religious test for anyone running for any office. That was of course merely a dream and has never been the reality in American politics.

Anyway back to the issue of how more nurturing and loving and compassionate a woman president would be:Hillary says kill them all !!!

Updated with video 3:12 pm.

Hillary Clinton FEAR & MORE FEAR
Some call it Realism I call it Fear-Mongering
She's Frothing at the mouth like John McCain -

Hillary Clinton - 'Would Obliterate Iran'

Hillary Clinton Say's She'll Nuke Iran On Keith Olbermann

Massive attack US elections 2008: Hillary Clinton's pledge to 'obliterate' Iran if it attacks Israel is unnecessarily bellicose

By Richard Silverstein

22/04/08 "The Guardian" -- -- In an interview on ABC's Good Morning America today, Hillary Clinton pledged that if Iran launches a nuclear attack against Israel, the United States would retaliate against Iran. "I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran," Clinton said. "In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them."

"Well, in fact ... I think that we should be looking to create an umbrella of deterrence that goes much further than just Israel. Of course I would make it clear to the Iranians that an attack on Israel would incur massive retaliation from the United States, but I would do the same with other countries in the region."

On Warren Olney's To the Point radio show today, Barack Obama's Middle East adviser and former congressman Mel Levine noted that during the Eisenhower administration John Foster Dulles promised the same "massive retaliation" should the Soviet Union attack the US or its allies. This was widely understood as a threat of nuclear attack. Is this really the type of president Americans want? One who so demonises Iran that she's prepared to go to war at the first sign of conflict in the Middle East? Do we want to create a Middle East cold war like the one we had with the Soviets for four decades?

Equally troubling is the fact that Israel, in Clinton's conception, is merely an extension of the US - a member of the greater commonwealth, if you will. Of course, I find the notion of an Iranian attack on Israel disturbing as well. But the idea that we would react to an attack on Israel as if it were an attack on ourselves ties me up in knots.

We are not the same as Israel. We have our interests. Israel has its own. What if Israel attacks Iran first in an attempt to knock out its nuclear programme and Iran counterattacks? After all, Israeli government ministers have threatened a pre-emptive attack on Iran. In the event of such an assault, is Clinton then bound to retaliate massively against Iran though Israel was the aggressor? You can see where this is going, and it isn't any place good.

Anyway here's a funny bit by Bill Maher talking about Obama's Bitter remarks and who the real "Elitists" are

Bill Maher New Rules: Democrats Will Not Steal Your Guns/God

And here is another example of Bill Clinton speaking about the Religious Right, Neoconservatives and single issue campaigns which target specific groups of voters.

(In the 70s and 80s when I was doing research on the religious Right and the Neocons this was referred to as the " politics of Resentment".)

Here he sounds like remarks made by Obama about how voters feel and how this is used by the Spin Doctors during elections . " Bitter " is the word . Do Americans really need to have such obvious concepts explained to them. Yes & there-in my friend lies the problem.

"God, gays, and guns": Bill Clinton agrees w/Barack Obama?

and so it goes,

No comments: