Aug 29, 2011 || World News

Monday, August 29, 2011

Perry Praised Hillary for Her Healthcare Scheme

http://i55.tinypic.com/105bb5g.jpg

The Return of the Smear Brigade

The Return of the Smear Brigade
Neocon takes aim at Ron Paul – and misses
by Justin Raimondo, August 29, 2011

As the crisis of the American empire lurches into its final stages, and conservatives begin to question the costs of imperialism, the neoconservative counterattack is going into overdrive. When prominent conservatives rose to say, "Cuts in the defense budget are not 'off the table,'" the neocons began to worry that their formerly iron grip on the "conservative" brand is beginning to slip. As more Republicans in Congress and on the presidential campaign trail began sounding like the staunchly anti-interventionist Ron Paul, the neocons went on offense: Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin decreed that such proposals " are not an option," and various members of the Kagan clan went on to point out that cutting back on a "defense" budget nearly equal to that of all other nations on earth combined would seriously imperil the nation's very survival.

This attempt to prevent the USS Perpetual War from sinking into the ocean of government debt is not succeeding, in part because of the weak arguments advanced by the spend-more-on-defense crowd – do they really expect that conservative Republicans are going to agree with Robert Kagan that "it doesn't make fiscal sense to cut the defense budget when everyone is scrambling for measures to stimulate the economy"? A generally unstated but important part is because of who is making these arguments.

After all, these are the same people who, in the 1990s, invented something called " National Greatness Conservatism," which held up wars, the building of gigantic national monuments, and other costly pyramid-building schemes as the ne plus ultra of conservative thought. More recently, they claimed the Iraq war would be a " cakewalk" that would "pay for itself" – and dreamed of a large-scale military/social engineering project in the Middle East that would " drain the swamp" and lead to a " global democratic revolution" led by George W. Bush. And we all know how that turned out.

Defeated at the polls, and discredited within their own movement, the neocons retreated back into their subsidized think tanks and literary sanctuaries, of which The American Spectator is the Pinta to the Weekly Standard's Santa Maria. From these redoubts, they presume to direct the course of the movement they brought to disaster, and correct deviations from the neocon party line, oblivious to the reality that few conservatives outside the Beltway are actually heeding their sage advice.

As the movement they infiltrated and came to dominate spins out of their control, and the fantasy world created by the likes of Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Mark Levin loses its grip on the rightist mindset, Rep. Ron Paul's stock is rising. Faced with the world Paul has been warning for years was coming, conservatives are flocking to his banner and his solution to the crisis: rein in the Federal leviathan and get rid of our empire.

Neocons have never cared much for domestic policy: my theory is that it bores them. A single nation can hardly contain the grandiosity of their worldview [.pdf], the globe-spanning hubris of their vision of America, once described by neocon guru Bill Kristol as a " benevolent global hegemon."

This is what neoconservatism is all about. On domestic policy, the neocons are all over the map, and especially on the relationship between government and the economy they are positively chameleon-like. Today the neocons are careful to blend their voices with the "anti-government" sentiment that motivates the conservative base, but it seems like only yesterday that Fred Barnes was hailing the arrival of what he called " Big Government Conservatism" in the pages of the Standard: the similarities between a policy aspiring to "national greatness" – another of Kristol's hobby-horses – and "the Great Society" of LBJ's day are not merely rhetorical.

When it comes to foreign policy, however, there is no modulating their rhetoric or hiding their agenda. It's all about war – agitating for it, praising the virtues it supposedly instills, and always arguing that we should have gone to war yesterday, but today will do (e.g., the McCain-Graham critique of Obama's Libyan intervention).

The neoconservative persuasion, as Bill's dad dubbed it, was born in the deepest winter of the cold war, when American school-kids were told to "duck and cover" as the shadow of nuclear war hovered over the American Dream. These former leftists, who once worshiped at the altar of Leon Trotsky, did an about-face and transferred their allegiance from the Red Army to the US Army with varying degrees of rapidity – but always with great displays of polemical fireworks. James Burnham, Max Shachtman, Kristol Père, and a large number of lesser lights, all went on to become the most fanatical advocates of what Burnham, a founding editor of National Review, deemed the " rollback" strategy – military confrontation with the Soviet Union on a world scale. Murray Rothbard relates his personal experiences of what they meant by "rollback" in his book, The Betrayal of the American Right:

"The more I circulated among these people, the greater my horror because I realized with growing certainty that what they wanted above all was total war against the Soviet Union; their fanatical warmongering would settle for no less."

"Of course the New Rightists of National Review would never quite dare to admit this crazed goal in public, but the objective would always be slyly implied. At right-wing rallies no one cheered a single iota for the free market, if this minor item were ever so much as mentioned; what really stirred up the animals were demagogic appeals by National Review leaders for total victory, total destruction of the Communist world. It was that which brought the right-wing masses out of their seats. It was National Review editor Brent Bozell who trumpeted, at a right-wing rally: "I would favor destroying not only the whole world, but the entire universe out to the furthermost star, rather than suffer Communism to live." It was National Review editor Frank Meyer who once told me: "I have a vision, a great vision of the future: a totally devastated Soviet Union." I knew that this was the vision that really animated the new Conservatism. Frank Meyer, for example, had the following argument with his wife, Elsie, over foreign-policy strategy: Should we drop the H-Bomb on Moscow and destroy the Soviet Union immediately and without warning (Frank), or should we give the Soviet regime 24 hours with which to comply with an ultimatum to resign (Elsie)?"

When the cold war ended, the neocons didn't go out of business – they just went into hibernation, retreating to their richly-endowed think tanks and denouncing the GOP majority in the House of Representatives for threatening to defund Bill Clinton's conquest of Kosovo. Kristol, yearning to "crush Serb skulls," as he put it, threatened to walk out of the GOP.

Too bad he didn't, because he and his comrades went on to dominate the conservative movement of the 1990s and eventually lead the party into the oblivion of the Bush era, when the oxymoronic Big Government Conservatism the neocons had been pushing was actually put into practice.

The results – imminent bankruptcy – you see all around you.

For decades, libertarians had been arguing, to little avail, that modern conservatism – the "new" conservatism of William F. Buckley, Jr., as promulgated in National Review – with its commitment to unmitigated militarism, would only lead to fiscal collapse and the subversion of our republican form of government. Today, these arguments have wide appeal, and not just to conservatives. Paul's prescient calling of the 2008 economic implosion gave him real credibility and his second attempt to wrest the GOP presidential nomination is gaining traction, albeit mainly under the media's radar. Last time around, the neocons targeted Paul as the virtual antithesis of all they stand for, and this time, too, they are sharpening their knives, ready to go after their ideological antipode hammer and tongs.

It's early, yet, but already we have the main narrative of the neocon script, as evidenced in Jeffrey Lord's American Spectator jeremiad, wherein an entire laundry list of charges are laid out in convenient indictment form. There's just one problem: Lord's charges are a tenuous tissue of lies. Tenuous because, once one challenges the historical ignorance on which they're founded, the whole house of cards comes tumbling down.

I won't bother with Lord's nonsensical characterization of Paul as a "neo-liberal" – his record shows he isn't any kind of modern liberal, or, indeed, a modern anything – except to note that is what leftists typically call neocons, and, indeed, anyone to their right. Nor will I deal with the charge that Paul and his followers fail to pay sufficient obeisance to such conservative icons as Buckley, Ronald Reagan, Rush Limbaugh, Edwin Meese, Antonin Scalia, etc., except to note that Reagan and Paul were friends, and the Gipper endorsed Paul in fulsome terms during a difficult Republican party primary.

Instead, I'll just deal with the massive falsification of history indulged in by Lord, which involves a complete inversion of events as they occurred. In citing Paul's non-interventionist foreign policy views, Lord declares that Paul is really a "liberal Republican," because, after all, it was "the liberal Republicans of their day" who were the "isolationists" who opposed getting into two world wars. Lord names Senators William E. Borah, Gerald Nye, and the LaFollette brothers as exemplars of the species. These guys were RINOs, he avers, squishy moderates, and even leftists – but this is actually very far from the truth.

To begin with, I don't know of anyone who glorifies our entry into the Great War – except, of course, for the neocons, who exult in any and all military conflict, as long as the US is actively involved. Is it really unquestionable that we should have gone to war to preserve the British, French, and Russian empires, as against that of the Kaiser and the Hapsburgs? European civilization was nearly wiped out, and the conflict was the crucible that gave rise to the twin totalitarianisms of Communism and National Socialism. As for World War II, the opposition to that war was almost exclusively the province of American conservatives, who opposed "Roosevelt's war" because they thought he meant to use it as an excuse to clamp on economic controls and transform the American system – in retrospect, a pretty accurate diagnosis, in my view.

The "liberal Republicans" Lord writes of were a minority within the anti-interventionist movement, and they were no kind of "moderate" Republicans of the sort we would find recognizable. Borah, Nye, and other Midwestern Republicans were known as progressives – indeed, they formed their own party and ran Teddy Roosevelt (that old warmonger!) for President early in the century. They were against bigness – big corporations, as well as big government – and saw Wall Street as utilizing the instrument of government to advance its own interests at public expense. Generally supportive of the New Deal in the beginning, they turned when FDR tried to pack the Supreme Court, and then set up the National Recovery Administration as a kind of corporate syndicalism. In short, these "liberal Republicans" joined the ranks of the President's most implacable enemies – the very "economic royalists" they had once denounced. Conservative businessmen such as H. Smith Richardson, the Vick Chemical Company tycoon, Gen. Robert E. Wood, head of Sears & Roebuck, and Henry Regnery, the Midwestern businessman who later started the first conservative publishing concern, were the core of the opposition to Roosevelt's economic policies, and the financial center of the Republican party.

Lord shoves this well-known history down the Memory Hole, and replaces it with a version made for the dumbed-down cable-TV/talk-radio world that he and his fellow neocons imagine will turn on Paul. This shows the utter contempt the neocons have for their supposed constituency: just throw the rubes some red meat (it doesn't matter if it's rotten) and they'll gobble it down, no questions asked.

But I have a few questions for Lord, such as: where does he get his lessons in Bizarro history? He cites historical "facts," and then not only manages to get them stupidly wrong, but turns the truth on its head. Such as his accusation that, because a book list offered by the Paul organization recommends As We Go Marching, by John T. Flynn, that Paul is "anti-Semitic" – because, you see, Flynn was anti-Semitic, too, and birds of a feather….

This is nothing but a flat-out lie [.pdf].

In the first half of the 1930s, Flynn was a popular writer for The New Republic, and other mass market magazines, author of several best-selling books on economic matters, and a liberal of some note. With the coming of the New Deal, however, Flynn turned rightward, and by the 1950s he was one of America's leading conservative voices. What won him over to the conservative cause – aside from the increasingly corporatist direction the New Deal was taking – was the right's vehement opposition to US entry into World War II, and he became the head of the New York chapter of the American First Committee (AFC), which was led by "isolationist" (i.e. anti-interventionist) conservatives. The issue of whether to enter the war pitted the right against the left, with the latter taking the militantly pro-war position – especially after Hitler attacked the Soviet Union. Lefties, generally sympathetic to the Soviets, ditched their previously held antiwar views and jumped on the War Party's bandwagon, going all out to save the "worker's fatherland" no matter how many lives – and principles – were lost in the process.

The left viciously attacked the AFC as the "Nazi transmission belt." The neocons of today, in labeling opponents of their post-9/11 strategy of world conquest " pro-terrorist," and "appeasers," took a page from history in limning the Roosevelt administration's accusations against the "isolationists" – that in opposing war, they were consorting with the Enemy. Lord, who spends so much time trying to convince us Ron Paul is a "leftist," sounds just like one of these leftist character assassins of days gone by when he accuses Flynn of anti-Semitism, because that is precisely what they did say about him – a charge entirely without any basis in fact.

Indeed, far from being anti-Semitic,

http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2011/08/28/the-return-of-the-smear-brigade/

JP NEWS MEHAR IRSHAD 29.08.011

Re: Right before the 10th Anniversary of 9/11, Mayor 'Dhimmi' Bloomberg will light up the Empire State Building in Islamic 'green'

isn't it cool how jews can be so nice to muzzies?

On Aug 28, 8:26 pm, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> **
> <http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/author/barenakedislam/> Right
> before the 10th Anniversary of 9/11, Mayor 'Dhimmi' Bloomberg will light up
> the Empire State Building in Islamic
> 'green'<http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2011/08/28/right-before-the-10th-...>
> *barenakedislam <http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/author/barenakedislam/>
> * | August 28, 2011 at 3:49 AM | Categories:
> EnemyWithin-American<http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/?cat=16730980>|
> URL:http://wp.me/peHnV-ySJ
>
> Mayor Bloomberg is banning all clergy and first responders from the Tenth
> Anniversary Ceremony for 9/11, but you can be sure he'll invite a bunch of
> Muslims there to celebrate their triumph. By lighting up the Empire State
> Building in green for Ramadan every year , it's as if he's telling Muslims
> which building they [...]
>
> Read more of this
> post<http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2011/08/28/right-before-the-10th-...>
>
> Add a comment to this
> post<http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2011/08/28/right-before-the-10th-...>
>
> [image: WordPress]
>
> WordPress.com <http://wordpress.com/> | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
> Manage Subscriptions<http://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=5d39acfd19218362d540a3fc3dc3315d&...>|
> Unsubscribe<http://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=5d39acfd19218362d540a3fc3dc3315d&...>|
> Express
> yourself. Start a blog. <http://wordpress.com/signup/>
>
> *Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:*http://subscribe.wordpress.com

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: R.I.P.

Goodbye, Dick ... have a safe journey. Thanks!

On Aug 26, 10:08 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It is with great sadness that I report the passing of our member Dick
> Thompson this morning in Flushing, New York. May he rest Rest in Peace.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: CENSORED! Major radio stations will not play this song because it is 'politically incorrect'

Jesus is a Muslim prophet. A BIG one
---
the myths people will believe is astonishing

On Aug 29, 1:45 am, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Jesus is a Muslim prophet. A BIG one
>
> On Aug 28, 2:16 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > I can't think of a major radio station that would play obvious "Jesus"
> > music other than a few country music outlets. They have formats.
>
> > On Aug 27, 2:25 pm, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > **
> > > <http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/author/barenakedislam/> CENSORED!
> > > Major radio stations will not play this song because it is 'politically
> > > incorrect'<http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2011/08/27/censored-major-radio-s...>
> > > *barenakedislam <http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/author/barenakedislam/>
> > > * | August 27, 2011 at 2:34 PM | Categories: Say
> > > WHAT?<http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/?cat=7504>| URL:http://wp.me/peHnV-yQa
>
> > > 'In God We Still Trust' is from a Las Vegas Diamond Rio concert. Because
> > > radio stations refuse to play it, the song was never released to the
> > > public.
>
> > > Read more of this
> > > post<http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2011/08/27/censored-major-radio-s...>
>
> > > Add a comment to this
> > > post<http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2011/08/27/censored-major-radio-s...>
>
> > > [image: WordPress]
>
> > > WordPress.com <http://wordpress.com/> | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
> > > Manage Subscriptions<http://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=5d39acfd19218362d540a3fc3dc3315d&...>|
> > > Unsubscribe<http://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=5d39acfd19218362d540a3fc3dc3315d&...>|
> > > Express
> > > yourself. Start a blog. <http://wordpress.com/signup/>
>
> > > *Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:*http://subscribe.wordpress.com-Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: CENSORED! Major radio stations will not play this song because it is 'politically incorrect'

????????

On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 12:45 AM, GregfromBoston <greg.vincent@yahoo.com> wrote:

Jesus is a Muslim prophet. A BIG one

On Aug 28, 2:16 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I can't think of a major radio station that would play obvious "Jesus"
> music other than a few country music outlets. They have formats.
>
> On Aug 27, 2:25 pm, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > **
> > <http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/author/barenakedislam/> CENSORED!
> > Major radio stations will not play this song because it is 'politically
> > incorrect'<http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2011/08/27/censored-major-radio-s...>
> > *barenakedislam <http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/author/barenakedislam/>
> > * | August 27, 2011 at 2:34 PM | Categories: Say
> > WHAT?<http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/?cat=7504>| URL:http://wp.me/peHnV-yQa
>
> > 'In God We Still Trust' is from a Las Vegas Diamond Rio concert. Because
> > radio stations refuse to play it, the song was never released to the
> > public.
>
> > Read more of this
> > post<http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2011/08/27/censored-major-radio-s...>
>
> > Add a comment to this
> > post<http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2011/08/27/censored-major-radio-s...>
>
> > [image: WordPress]
>
> > WordPress.com <http://wordpress.com/> | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
> > Manage Subscriptions<http://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=5d39acfd19218362d540a3fc3dc3315d&...>|
> > Unsubscribe<http://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=5d39acfd19218362d540a3fc3dc3315d&...>|
> > Express
> > yourself. Start a blog. <http://wordpress.com/signup/>
>
> > *Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:*http://subscribe.wordpress.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Mark M. Kahle H.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: JP Re: after Zulfiqar Mirza's Bombshell By Nasim Zehra

One thing you have to remember always that, Muslim is not nation's name. Nation is deferments and Muslims is def-rents.. Muslim is only Muslim, Do you know about Hardhat Bilal. his position in madina/

From: "nasimzehra@gmail.com" <nasimzehra@gmail.com>
To: joinpakistan@googlegroups.com
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2011 12:50 PM
Subject: **JP** Re: after Zulfiqar Mirza's Bombshell By Nasim Zehra

Analysis: What now after Zulfiqar Mirza's bombshell?

By: Nasim Zehra
Pakistani politics witnessed a new first. Holding the Holy Quran in his hand and then placing it upon his head, Sindh's senior minister Zulfiqar Ali Mirza made some very bold revelations against his friend's key, even if troubled, political ally as well as his friend's closest and most handy aide.
President Asif Ali Zardari perhaps now faces the biggest challenge of his political career as none other than his most loyal friend and senior minister Sindh, Zulfiqar Ali Mirza, at a press conference issued a loaded charge sheet. Mirza gave specific information along with alleged evidence, against all those he accused. He said the ongoing operation was meaningless and that the real killers were not being apprehended.
Zulfiqar Mirza's attack has produced a complex political dynamic. One with the 'evidence' that Zulfiqar Mirza claims he has against the MQM's alleged involvement in target killings, he has put the MQM under pressure. An MQM on the defensive provides political leverage to the PPP in its ongoing negotiations with that party. It may also help to stem the growing alienation of the Sindhis against the PPP leadership, especially earlier the mishandling of the revival of the local bodies.
The claims made by Zulfiqar Mirza can also potentially strengthen the PPP's hand in the Supreme Court's suo motto hearing on the Karachi target killing. The SC bench now meeting in Karachi is bound to call Zulfiqar Mirza to make good his claims in court.
(Read: Suo motu action on Karachi – CJ seeks report from chief secretary, IGP Sindh <http://tribune.com.pk/story/238676/judicial-intervention-cjp-to-hear-karachi-violence-case/> )
But the most challenging for PPP's internal politics is Mirza's attack on Rehman Malik. Zulfiqar Mirza has made specific charges against the interior minister, holding him responsible for leading a "farcical operation" and for being primarily committed to keeping the MQM on board. In addition to his criticism at the press conference, Zulfiqar Mirza, later in a television program insisted that the interior minister "is Pakistan's enemy and if Pakistan breaks up, then Rehman Malik will be responsible for it."
Although Mirza insisted that he would remain loyal to the president till his dying day and would give his life in the party's service, within the immediate context he has created major political challenges for the president. He has alleged that the president's right-hand man is hand in glove with the killers of innocent citizens.
As for whether these extraordinary revelations will lead to any action against Rehman Malik or the MQM, the punch-line comes from Zulfiqar Mirza himself. While speaking on television he said, "I have rolled the ball, now the ball in the court of the president, army chief, the ISI chief, the PM, the speaker of parliament and the chairman of the senate." Mirza expects them to use the evidence that he has presented to take action against the MQM and the interior minister. He said the moment the CJP asks him to present himself in court, he will do so.
Zulfiqar Mirza may have become a thorn in the president's side. But Mirza is one PPP leader that the president will not find it easy to sideline. He will also not able to easily brush aside the alleged charge sheet presented against Rehman Malik nor the MQM. Clearly these moves by Zardari's closest friend puts the Karachi operation in an even greater spotlight and for all the wrong reasons. It also sharply exposes the weaknesses in Zardari's politics of "mufahimmat."
The questions that Mirza's charge sheet raises only confirms public criticism of the operation. Questions that have no easy answers but ones that will now be repeatedly asked by many political and non-political stake-holders from across the country.

Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone using my Telenor Persona connection

From: Muhammed Shafiq <shafiq.muhammed@yahoo.com>

Sender: joinpakistan@googlegroups.com

Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2011 05:26:09 -0700 (PDT)

To: joinpakistan@googlegroups.com<joinpakistan@googlegroups.com>

ReplyTo: joinpakistan@googlegroups.com

Cc: madiha mubasher<silverscreen_88@yahoo.com>

Subject: **JP** Amir Liaqat Exposed!! what is the real background. Must Watch !!

madiha mubasher sahiba,

apny kitny makkari say dr amir ki zalalat say mirza qadiani ki zalalat ko saaf karny ki koshish ki - dr amir nay agar ye kia hay to us ka jurm us shaitan say kahin kam hay jisny astaghfirullah khod nabi hony ka daawa kar dia-or aj us ki baqiat kabhi us ko masiha kehty hain or kabhi mehdi kionke nabowat ka jhoot nahin chal saka to nai nai jhoot tarashy ja rahy hain - fitnay par fitna hay - Allah Taala musalman qaum ko is fitny say bachaye - or ham sab ki islah farmaye - AMEEN

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "JoinPakistan" group.
You all are invited to come and share your information with other group members.
To post to this group, send email to joinpakistan@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com.pk/group/joinpakistan?hl=en?hl=en
You can also visit our blog site : www.joinpakistan.blogspot.com &
on facebook http://www.facebook.com/pages/Join-Pakistan/125610937483197
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "JoinPakistan" group.
You all are invited to come and share your information with other group members.
To post to this group, send email to joinpakistan@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com.pk/group/joinpakistan?hl=en?hl=en
You can also visit our blog site : www.joinpakistan.blogspot.com &
on facebook http://www.facebook.com/pages/Join-Pakistan/125610937483197

JP Looting Libya: Who's first for oil?

The race for Libya's vast oil wealth is gathering momentum. States who worked together during massive NATO airstrikes, are now working against each other in the battle to secure lucrative energy contracts. But as RT's Sara

http://youtu.be/m_73xYIKhmg

JP Fw: PARTITION JAMMU AND KASHMIR ON THE BASIS OF TWO NATIONS THEORY AND DECLARE INDIA A HINDU NATION: SATBIR SINGH BEDI COMMENTS

--- On Mon, 8/29/11, Habib Yousafzai <yousafzai49@gmail.com> wrote:

PARTITION JAMMU AND KASHMIR ON THE BASIS OF TWO NATIONS THEORY AND DECLARE INDIA A HINDU NATION: SATBIR SINGH BEDI COMMENTS

Please refer to the article in the Times of India, "Why are mass graves in Kashmir so passé"?

S A Aiyar

28 August 2011, 12:04 AM IST

The Jammu & Kashmir State Human Rights Commission says 2,730 bodies have been found in unmarked graves in Kashmir. This officially confirms earlier accusations by human rights groups. Security forces once claimed any such graves were those of unidentified militants killed in military encounters. But the commission says 574 bodies have already been identified as those of local villagers, and DNA tests will expose many more. This was mass murder.

Most countries would have treated this as major news, but our media barely noticed. Bored with unending tales of human rights violations in Kashmir, our media saw Anna Hazare's fast and even Aishwarya Rai Bachchan's pregnancy as more newsworthy.

Two decades of insurrection in Kashmir have eroded our ability to feel horror, to be nauseated by mass murder. Yes it's terrible, most people say with a shrug, but it's all Pakistan's fault and we can't surrender to jihadis.

As a libertarian, i dislike ruling people by force, and am dismayed by the parallels between India's independence struggle and the Kashmiri azaadi struggle. Basharat Peer's "Curfewed Nights" and a new collection of writings from Kashmir "Until My Freedom Has Come", highlight Kashmiri humiliation and anger against what they call Indian colonial oppression.

Actually, India has not colonized Kashmir. Rather, it has tried to integrate Kashmir with itself. Nation building is a difficult task that, across the world, has required a mixture of persuasion and firmness. Using this mixture, India succeeded in integrating some regions with secessionist movements — Tamil Nadu, Mizoram, Punjab. But 64 years of this approach have manifestly failed in Kashmir. Using ever more force begins to look like colonial oppression more than attempted integration.

Kashmiri alienation flows from Muslim revolts against the erstwhile Dogra ruler, rigged elections after 1947, and security forces guilty of torture, killing and rape in the name of national security. The Kashmiri insurrection has taken 70,000 lives of civilians, armed forces and militants. Some are due to terrorism, some to genuine defence against jihadis and armed infiltrators. But the mass graves bear testimony to horrors against innocent Kashmiris too.

Secular Indians feel outraged by 900 Muslim deaths in Gujarat's 2002 riots. They are outraged by the killing of 3,000 people by Chilean dictator Pinochet. But they are mostly bored by 2,730 Kashmiri bodies in unmarked graves.

It's all the fault of Pakistan and jihadi terrorists say some. True, Pakistan trained many jihadis. But many of these were Kashmiri youngsters angered by Indian outrages. They were killed in droves by Indian security forces, and their flow to Pakistan greatly diminished. There was no Pakistani training or inspiration behind the thousands of youngsters who took to the streets during the Srinagar intifada last year. They did not seek union with Pakistan. They simply wanted Indian "killers" off their soil.

Many analysts emphasize the legalisms of Kashmiri accession to India. But hundreds of Indian princes had legal treaties with the British Raj, which our independence movement declared irrelevant after the rise of Indian nationalism. Liberal values cannot be based on legalisms alone.

Let us forget legalisms and hold a plebiscite, which we promised anyway in 1947. Probably the valley will vote for azaadi, with Jammu and Ladakh opting for India. We should see this not as a loss of territory but a gain of moral stature, and return to the liberal values that drove our independence movement.

Most Indians say a plebiscite will wreck Indian secularism and let loose another round of partition killings. Really? If India was so wedded to secularism, it should never have accepted partition along communal lines in 1947. Having agreed to communal partition, it was hypocritical to violate this norm in Kashmir.

In Junagadh in 1947, a Muslim Nawab ruling over a Hindu majority, acceded to Pakistan. India refused to accept this, ousted the Nawab forcibly, and justified this by holding a plebiscite that went overwhelmingly in India's way. If this was a secular tactic, why call a similar plebiscite in Kashmir a danger to secularism?

Critics of a plebiscite claim that a vote for azaadi will trigger fresh partition riots, targeting Muslims throughout India. Really? Is supposedly secular India actually so communal that Hindus will slaughter Muslim innocents galore, with the state a helpless bystander? I have a better opinion of India than that.

Forget what Kashmiris demand. Let us allow self-determination in Kashmir to cleanse our own hands and hearts. This will not mean surrender to militants or Pakistan. It will mean returning to the liberal values of our independence movement, which are getting tainted beyond recognition by the mass graves in Kashmir. We need to regain our capacity to feel horror."

At the time of partition of the country, the Congress party agreed to the division of the country on the basis of two nations theory. Thus a new State Pakistan was created out of pre-partition India which was a Muslim state. The next logical step would have been to declare the other state which was called India, a Hindu state but Pandit Nehru, Gandhi and Patel committed a blunder and made the remaining portion a secular state. The British rulers while granting independence to pre-partition India not only divided the territory directly ruled by them on communal basis and created the two nations of Pakistan and India but also allowed the princely states to remain independent or accede to India or Pakistan. The two Hindu majority states of Junagarh and Hyderabad which were ruled by Muslim rulers decided to remain independent but India soon took action against them and merged them with India. Similarly, the Muslim majority state of Jammu and Kashmir ruled by a Hindu ruler decided to remain independent. However, it was attacked by Pakistan sponsored tribals so that it could be merged with Pakistan just as Junagarh and Hyderabad were merged with India but the Hindu ruler of J&K hurriedly agreed to accede to India and then Indian forces drove Pakistanis away from about two thirds of the territory of J&K. Then Nehru took the matter to UN who called for a plebiscite. However, such plebiscite was never held. Therefore, to resolve the J&K issue, it should be divided on the basis of the two nations theory with the Muslim majority areas going to Pakistan and the Hindu majority areas going to India and India be declared as a Hindu nation.

That would end the tussle between the Kashmiri Muslims and Indian army.

Satbir Singh Bedi, BH(Poorvi)682, Shalimar Bagh, Delhi-110088

JP Re: after Zulfiqar Mirza's Bombshell By Nasim Zehra

Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone using my Telenor Persona connection

From: Muhammed Shafiq <shafiq.muhammed@yahoo.com>

Sender: joinpakistan@googlegroups.com

Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2011 05:26:09 -0700 (PDT)

To: joinpakistan@googlegroups.com<joinpakistan@googlegroups.com>

ReplyTo: joinpakistan@googlegroups.com

Cc: madiha mubasher<silverscreen_88@yahoo.com>

Subject: **JP** Amir Liaqat Exposed!! what is the real background. Must Watch !!

madiha mubasher sahiba,

Re: State Senator Tells Obama To Step Down Or Face Impeachment!

A state senator can't impeach a ham sandwich

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: CENSORED! Major radio stations will not play this song because it is 'politically incorrect'

Jesus is a Muslim prophet. A BIG one

On Aug 28, 2:16 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I can't think of a major radio station that would play obvious "Jesus"
> music other than a few country music outlets. They have formats.
>
> On Aug 27, 2:25 pm, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > **
> > <http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/author/barenakedislam/> CENSORED!
> > Major radio stations will not play this song because it is 'politically
> > incorrect'<http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2011/08/27/censored-major-radio-s...>
> > *barenakedislam <http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/author/barenakedislam/>
> > * | August 27, 2011 at 2:34 PM | Categories: Say
> > WHAT?<http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/?cat=7504>| URL:http://wp.me/peHnV-yQa
>
> > 'In God We Still Trust' is from a Las Vegas Diamond Rio concert. Because
> > radio stations refuse to play it, the song was never released to the
> > public.
>
> > Read more of this
> > post<http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2011/08/27/censored-major-radio-s...>
>
> > Add a comment to this
> > post<http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2011/08/27/censored-major-radio-s...>
>
> > [image: WordPress]
>
> > WordPress.com <http://wordpress.com/> | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
> > Manage Subscriptions<http://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=5d39acfd19218362d540a3fc3dc3315d&...>|
> > Unsubscribe<http://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=5d39acfd19218362d540a3fc3dc3315d&...>|
> > Express
> > yourself. Start a blog. <http://wordpress.com/signup/>
>
> > *Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:*http://subscribe.wordpress.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: JP MQM TERRORIST.........

Recently some one given an incident regarding a complaint of the son against his father to the Holy Prophet PBUH, can any one send it to me.

Re: JP EID MUBARAK

thanx Eid Mubarik to you n all member

On 8/29/11, iqbal sheikh <iqbalyat@gmail.com> wrote:
> *for all respected members *
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> very happy eid to u n ur family.****
>
> Allah aapko esi hazaron Eiden naseeb farmaae Aameeen.****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> [image: eid muba_0.tmp]****
>
> [image: 1.jpg][image: 2.jpg][image: 3.jpg]****
>
> *With Best Regards,*
>
>
>
> *Mohammad Iqbal, *
>
> *Labour Department ,*
>
> *Nass The Group,*
>
> *Manama,Kingdom Of Bahrain.*
>
> *Phone : +97317725522*
>
> *mobile : +97339056265*
>
> *Fax : +97317826037*
>
> *iqbal@aanass.net <abhilash@aanass.net>*
>
> *iqbalyat@gmail.com*
>
> *www.nassgroup.com*
>
> * *__._,_.___****
>
> *
> *
>
>
> *undefined* » *undefined*
> جاري البحث والترجمه......
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "JoinPakistan" group.
> You all are invited to come and share your information with other group
> members.
> To post to this group, send email to joinpakistan@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com.pk/group/joinpakistan?hl=en?hl=en
> You can also visit our blog site : www.joinpakistan.blogspot.com &
> on facebook http://www.facebook.com/pages/Join-Pakistan/125610937483197
>

JP AAJ K COLUMN 29 AUGUST'2011

ASSALAAM-O-ALAIKUM

AUR

SUBAH BAKHAIR.

Kashif Chatha

Sheikhupura

JP EID MUBARAK

for all respected members

very happy eid to u n ur family.

Allah aapko esi hazaron Eiden naseeb farmaae Aameeen.

eid muba_0.tmp

With Best Regards,

Mohammad Iqbal,

Labour Department ,

Nass The Group,

Manama,Kingdom Of Bahrain.

Phone : +97317725522

mobile : +97339056265

Fax : +97317826037

iqbal@aanass.net

iqbalyat@gmail.com

www.nassgroup.com

__._,_.___

جاري البحث والترجمه......

Re: Ron Paul: The GOP’s Henry Wallace

Hey Mark!

At least you responded to these two articles! Note that the avid Paul supporters didn't! <Grin>!

We need to touch base.....Geesh, time flies so fast. I have to go back to Germany in just two weeks!

Hope you are doing well!

Keith

On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 1:48 PM, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:

Funny that Congressman Paul fancies himself a new Ronald Reagan,
because it
was Reagan's pro-military investments which made the Bin Laden raid

possible<http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/
571447/201105061854/...>,

plus much more. In fact, when Russert asked Dr. Paul about a 1988
statement
made by Paul against Reagan, when Paul had proclaimed, "I want to
totally
disassociate myself from the Reagan administration," the congressman
didn't
back off. Paul declared Reagan had been "a failure."

It was Reagans policies that created, trained and armed bin Laden...
that is an undeniable fact. Every country involved in the treasonous
yet all too easily dismissed Iran - Contra affair is doing better
today than then with one exception.... the USA.

Preemptive strikes whether overt or covert always have been and always
will be eventual failures. People just don't like them. Yes, they may
not like their dictator.... but he is THEIR dictator...one of them.

As far as Iran, Paul has it right... just what part of the fact that
the word SOVEREIGN applies to every country just as it does to the USA
don't you get??????????????????????????? They can do and or produce
what they want within their borders, they can trade with who they want
just as the USA can.

Most countries have a far better grasp of trade and foreign affairs
and all the lasting implications than the USA does. Very few knee jerk
like gringos.

Ever since the Germans ill-fated foray into Romania oil has been at
the forefront of every conflict including Vietnam (herbert hoover,
french indo-china reports) yet the USA does nothing to alleviate its
out of country dependence. (2/3 of all US imported oil comes from
Canadians ((2/3 of this same oil field is located in the US)) using a
process that the US companies claim is too expensive.... yet the gain
of the Canadian Dollar against US currency says it all)

Paul has it right.... most are just too blind to see it.

On Aug 28, 9:39 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> *Ron Paul: The GOP's Henry Wallace*
> **http://bigpeace.com/smitsotakis/2011/08/15/ron-paul-the-gops-henry-wa...

>
> The conspiracy-minded John Birch Society, long ago expelled from the
> conservative movement by Ronald Reagan and William F. Buckley, Jr., is

> abuzz<http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/foreign-policy/8572-ames-iowa-go...>over

> Congressman Ron Paul's "Blame America First" performance at Thursday
> night's Republican presidential debate.
>
> Oddly, it was Paul's bizarre assessment of a nuclear Iran that impressed
> Birchers—and his many devoted supporters. "Just think of how many nuclear
> weapons surround Iran," said Paul. "The Chinese are there. The Indians are
> there. The Pakistanis are there. The Israelis are there. The United States
> is there. All these countries … Why wouldn't it be natural if they might
> want a weapon? Internationally, they might be given more respect. Why should
> we write people off?"
> After arguing for Iran—the world's leading terror state for 30 years and
> counting—to have nukes, Paul next implored America to negotiate with these
> terrorists, citing examples from the Cold War, invoking Eisenhower in the
> 1950s and Reagan in the 1980s: "In the fifties, we at least talked to them
> [the Soviets]. At least our leaders and Reagan talked to the Soviets. What's
> so terribly bad about this? And countries you put sanctions on you are more
> likely to fight them. I say a policy of peace is free trade, stay out of
> their internal business, don't get involved in these wars and just bring our
> troops home."
>
> This disdain for strong action against America's enemies is nothing new for
> Ron Paul. A few months ago, he was asked his reaction to the elimination of
> Osama Bin Laden. His response? He stated that that the Navy SEAL raid on Bin
> Laden's hideout in Pakistan "was absolutely not necessary." Why? Because of
> the violation (alleged) of Pakistani sovereignty. Paul asked rhetorically
> "What if he [Osama] had been in a hotel in London?"
>
> Of course, Thursday was hardly the first time the libertarian congressman
> went out of his way to make excuses for America's enemies, or blame America
> first. In 2007, when asked by Tim Russert, "How have we, the United States,
> provoked al-Qaeda?" Paul responded: "Well, read what the lead—the ringleader
> says. Read what Osama bin Laden said. We had, we had a base, you know, in
> Saudi Arabia that was an affront to their religion, that was blasphemy as
> far as they were concerned."
>
> Funny that Congressman Paul fancies himself a new Ronald Reagan, because it
> was Reagan's pro-military investments which made the Bin Laden raid

> possible<http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/571447/201105061854/...>,

> plus much more. In fact, when Russert asked Dr. Paul about a 1988 statement
> made by Paul against Reagan, when Paul had proclaimed, "I want to totally
> disassociate myself from the Reagan administration," the congressman didn't
> back off. Paul declared Reagan had been "a failure."
>
> It is distressing to see such silliness having an appeal, especially among
> many college students, but, alas, it does.
>
> And yet, in an ironic twist of fate, what we as Republicans are experiencing
> has happened before, but it happened to Democrats. The Democrats of the
> post-war 1940s had to deal with their own version of Ron Paul: Henry
> Wallace.
>
> Like Dr. Paul, Wallace was a man of many great ideas. He was, in the words
> of Cold War historian Ronald Radosh, "an agricultural genius—a man who
> believed in the concept of scientific agriculture, and in the diligent
> agronomic use of statistical research; and in the diligent agronomic use of
> statistical research; and a scientist whose own research led him to develop
> and spread the process of hybrid corn—a process that revolutionized the
> yield of corn and led to an agricultural revolution."
>
> In short, agriculture was to Wallace what monetary policy is to Paul.
>
> Wallace served as secretary of agriculture and later vice president in the
> Roosevelt administration; that is, he did so until his weirdness and
> remarkable reverence for Stalin's Soviet Union prompted FDR to switch him
> with Harry Truman in the 1944 election, making Wallace his secretary of
> commerce.
>
> After FDR died, the new president, Truman, kept Wallace as secretary of
> commerce. With the war over, however, Wallace found himself in a tough spot.
> Troubled by the onset of the Cold War, he was driven to speak out on
> September 1946, and denounce the new threat to world peace: that is, the
> threat posed by America and *Truman* to that amiable peacenik Joe Stalin.
> Shortly thereafter, Wallace was removed from his position.
>
> Importantly, Wallace was far from finished. Like Ron Paul, Wallace steadily
> denounced American foreign policy, as pursued by both Democrats and
> Republicans—and he pursued the presidency.
>
> Like Ron Paul, Wallace would not let those World War III seeking
> "Imperialists" working in the interests of "British Colonialism" get off
> easy. (For Paul today, replace the words "Imperialists" with "Neo-cons" and
> "British Colonialism" with "Israel.") And when Stalin would do something
> unpleasant, such as take over Czechoslovakia in February of 1948, Wallace
> would explain that it was Truman's fault. Wallace blamed America first, in
> spite of the blatantly aggressive actions of an obvious external enemy.
>
> Thus, Wallace and some of his old friends from the Department of Agriculture
> started their own version of Paul's "Campaign for Liberty." They called
> themselves "Progressive Citizens of America." Wallace's supporters believed
> that the U.S. government was behind a conspiracy to create worldwide crises
> in order to subvert and dominate other nations for American imperial
> purposes. They insisted that "innocent" people, like Alger Hiss, were being
> unjustly persecuted. This group later morphed into the Progressive Party,
> from which Wallace would challange Truman for the presidency in 1948.
>
> In 1948, presidential candidate Wallace proclaimed: "There is no real fight
> between a Truman and a Republican. Both stand for a policy which opens the
> door to war in our lifetime and makes war certain for our children. … The
> American people read of the fantastic appropriations that are being made for
> military adventures in Greece, Turkey, China—and billions for armaments here
> at home. … Two years ago I denounced those who were talking up World War III
> as criminals. Of course, the bulk of our people are not criminals, but it is
> possible for a little handful of warmongers to stampede them."
>
> And with his comrades, men like Harry Magdoff, Victor Perlo, and Charles
> Kramer, Wallace set out to win the presidency in 1948. His comrades failed
> to disclose to Wallace their other names, to wit: KANT (Magdoff), RAIDER
> (Perlo), and PLUMB (Kramer)—their code names as Soviet agents.
>
> If it isn't obvious by now, what had happened was that Wallace had been
> duped, and much to most of his party was controlled or influenced by the
> Communist Party. It took Wallace two more years after suffering a
> humiliating defeat in that election, and watching as the so-called
> Progressive Party backed the communists against American troops in Korea,
> for him to realize what was going on, whereby he denounced his own party and
> resigned.
>
> But the impact of that campaign went far beyond its time. In a review on the
> back cover of a first edition copy of Curtis Macdougall's "Gideon's Army," a

> KGB-published <http://www.usasurvival.org/docs/Marzani&Munsell-rpt.pdf> book
> (1965) about the Progressive Party, radical left-wing academic StaughtonLynd wrote: "There might have been no Bay of Pigs, no Vietnam, no Santo

>
> Domingo if the ideas of the third party of 1948 had prevailed … those ideas
> of 1948 are alive today." Just as Ron Paul, when asked by Tim Russert,
> "Under President Paul, if North Korea invaded South Korea, would we
> respond?" Paul promised he would not have. "Why should we unless the
> Congress declared war?" responded Paul. "I mean, why are we there? South
> Korea, they're begging and pleading to unify their country, and we get in
> their way. They want to build bridges and go back and forth. Vietnam, we
> left under the worst of circumstances. The country is unified. They have
> become Westernized. We trade with them. Their president comes here. And
> Korea, we stayed there and look at the mess."
>
> Needless to say, Ron Paul's commendable embrace of free-market principles in
> no way makes him sympathetic to Soviet communism, as was the case for Henry
> Wallace. Ron Paul is obviously not pro-Soviet or pro-communist—quite the
> contrary. The commonality is each man's breathtakingly bad positions on
> foreign policy and America's enemies. And unfortunately for Ron Paul, it
> will be that twisted view of foreign policy that forever keeps him from his
> party's nomination and the White House—just as it did Henry Wallace.
>
> *Spyridon Mitsotakis is a student at New York University, and an aspiring

> Cold War researcher.*
>
> HenryWallace.jpg
> 39KViewDownload
>
> RonPaul.Iowa..jpg
> 22KViewDownload

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.