The Enemy At Home:
The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11

"In this book I make a claim that will seem startling at the outset. The
cultural left in this country is responsible for causing 9/11.

On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 15:58:00 -0600, "del.icio.us." their.org> wrote:

Wait a minute. I thought you radical righties blamed 9/11
on the Taliban, then on Saddam, then on Iraq in general.

Now you're trying to pin it on the lefties?

You guys really need to get your stories straight.

- Scott Smith: scott@sludgereport.org
Books Blog: http://scottsbooks.blogspot.com
Blue States Rising: http://www.bluestaterising.blogspot.com

On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 15:58:00 -0600, "del.icio.us." their.org>
wrote:

Total Bull.. 9-11 is blowback...plain and simple . Read Chalmers
Johnson.

If the USA wants to prosper in the 21 st century, it needs to change,
five ways.

One) Cut it's military budget by 75%%....China will stop dead in their
tracks when we do that.

On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 15:58:00 -0600, "del.icio.us." their.org>
wrote:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/walter-c-uhler/stinky-inky-part-v-dine_b_39179.htm...
snip
(3) "The United States is hated across the Muslim world because of
specific U.S. government policies and actions. The hatred is concrete
not abstract, martial not intellectual and will grow for the
foreseeable future." [p. 240]

On 20 Jan 2007 21:12:22 GMT, Bert Hyman iphouse.com> wrote:

Bert.... you military-industrial complex profiteer you..... Do you
have no scruples?

75%% cut is disarmament?? .not even close.

25%% => 130bb PER YEAR ...that's a bull number but relevant.See world
expenditures below

Rank

Country

Military expenditures - dollar figure

Date of Information..CIA. 2005 .not updated!?!?!?!

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2067rank.html
1
United States $ 518,100,000,000 2005 est.
2
China $ 81,480,000,000 2005 est.
3
France $ 45,000,000,000 2005
4
Japan $...

On 20 Jan 2007 21:12:22 GMT, Bert Hyman iphouse.com> wrote:

I looked it up...YOU ARE RIGHT! iT WORKED ...2 FOR 2 IN THIS
ANALYSIS.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unilateral_disarmament

SNIP

[edit] USA

President Richard Nixon's unilateral discontinuation of biological
weapons development in 1972 is often characterized as 'unilateral
disarmament'.

Costa Rica

Concerns mount in the world after Chinese missile blows up satellite.

The test and the lack of information are seen by many experts as China's
most provocative military action since it test-fired missiles off the coast
of Taiwan more than a decade ago

Although China's research and development of such weapons was well known,
the apparent decision to test-fire an anti-satellite weapon is seen as a
clear message to the United States, the world's leading military and space
power.

And everyone agrees that this show of force is not very compatible with
China's pledge that its development was peaceful and that its requests for a
peaceful use of space are genuine.

"This is the other face of China, the hard power side that they usually keep
well hidden," said Chong-Pin Lin, an expert on China's military in Taiwan.
"They talk more about peace and diplomacy, but the push to develop lethal,
high-tech capabilities has not slowed down at all."

...Dinesh D'Souza, who in his new book The Enemy At Home says that "the
cultural left in this country is responsible for causing 9/11." I do not
believe that either the left or the right in America is responsible for
causing 9/11, which I believe took place because of the expansionist and
totalitarian jihad ideology and the renewed strength of some in the Islamic
world to further its ends -- with, to be sure, a healthy sense of grievance
against the West used for recruitment purposes. But I have long stressed,
and continue to believe on the basis of numerous historical precedents, that
those grievances, if redressed, would not end the jihad, which would simply
continue to recruit on the basis of different grievances.

In any case, I just discovered, via referrals from Powerline, that D'Souza
goes farther, and blames me also for Islamic terrorism. I have his book but
haven't finished reading it yet -- when I wrote this and this about
interviews he conducted, I didn't know this was in his book. But I just
found this on page 278:

On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 12:06:26 -0600, "Guerite."
wrote:

snip

Everyone ... does not agree.....

I almost applauded the anouncement that such a Chinese test was
successful. It highlights the vulnerability of peaceful, commercial,
space applications and the waste of time militarizing that
geographical area.....space. It also is a shot across the US bow that
imperialism in the 21st Century is obsolete and counterproductive.

snip

Simply put, if the Chinese have such a weapon, we currently have no defense
against it. Moreover, we are highly dependent on our space assets, something
that the Chinese have no doubt been observing in our recent military
activities.
...
Take them out, and we're back to the Vietnam era in terms of capability. In
fact we'd be worse off, because at least then, we had systems that weren't
dependent on space capabilities, whereas the loss of our satellites today
would render much of our terrestrial, aerial and naval armament much less
effective at best, and useless or even counterproductive junk at worst.
...
In the most comprehensive article written to date on the incident,
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16694039/
noted space analyst James Oberg suggests that this is part of a diplomatic
move by the Chinese to leverage the international (i.e., anti-American)
community to pressure the US in support of an anti-ASAT treaty. As he notes,
classically, our major-power adversaries love such arms-control treaties
because, unlike them, we have internal institutions, such as federal checks
and balances and a free press, to make us accountable to abide by them,
whereas they simply ignore them. This particularly treaty would probably be ...