Brooks ; NeoCon Special-Ed Foreign Policy *Intended* for Attacks on America
Mort Zuckerman
lPick...@cdc.gov, Durlan...@yale.edu, Aa...@columbia.edu,
gary_w...@nymc.edu, scientifi...@ostp.gov,
pkru...@princeton.edu, Stanle...@fiu.edu,
emcsw...@niaid.nih.gov, afa...@niaid.nih.gov,
Spin...@yahoogroups.com, kshe...@calea.org, fit...@gmail.com,
patrick.f...@usdoj.gov, model...@sbcglobal.net,
jdr...@nejm.org, let...@courant.com, Jgerb...@cdc.gov,
michae...@po.state.ct.us, con...@po.state.ct.us, executive-
edi...@nytimes.com, managin...@nytimes.com, news-
ti...@nytimes.com, biz...@nytimes.com, for...@nytimes.com,
nati...@nytimes.com, dv...@cdc.gov, brigidc...@optonline.net,
tr...@hotmail.com, illino...@aol.com, jle...@courant.com,
tinaj...@yahoo.com, jhorn...@fff.org, thomas...@usdoj.gov,
thoma...@po.state.ct.us, kur...@washpost.com,
georg...@washpost.com, p...@allegorypress.com,
commissi...@po.state.ct.us, brans...@comcast.net,
vts...@comcast.net, o...@po.state.ct.us, freet...@charter.net,
scott....@po.state.ct.us, govern...@po.state.ct.us,
attorney...@po.state.ct.us, randall...@usdoj.gov,
Robert....@yale.edu, edi...@greenwich-post.com,
harol...@yale.edu, sedm...@nswbc.org, rrmcg...@aol.com,
fr...@nytimes.com, dpr...@stmartin.edu, saint....@sbcglobal.net
Cc: fra...@ucia.gov, dr-ahma...@president.ir,
eugener...@washpost.com, afa...@niaid.nih.gov,
bmi...@newstimes.com, tr...@hotmail.com, rast...@aol.com,
billc...@gmail.com, amcg...@rms-law.com, rjmu...@aol.com,
paulcrai...@yahoo.com, criminal...@usdoj.gov,
karla.d...@usdoj.gov, christophe...@usdoj.gov,
richar...@yale.edu, harol...@yale.edu, james.p...@yale.edu,
inq...@aldf.com, ly...@idsociety.org, meganm...@theatlantic.com
Subject: Brooks ; NeoCon Special-Ed Foreign Policy *Intended* for
Attacks on America
Date: Jun 4, 2010 8:10 AM
BROOKS INSULTS US ONCE AGAIN
======================================
DSM-VI: Selective Memory Impairment
formerly known as hypocrisy:
Whistleblowers against The AmerIsraeli Bigs'
Government and dissenters were trashed. Whoever
rebelled against AmerIsraeli foreign (Oil/Property
theft repackaged as "exportiong democracy," except
in Palestine) policy is a "terrorist" or a "traitor."
What kind of a *pussy* would call me a "Dangerously
Intelligent Chemist like Ted Kascynski" for
having solved the biggest medical crime and
medical riddle in the last 500 years?
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/01/slides/3680s2_11.pdf
^^^ Revolting. Just plain grotesque. Foul.
A *putrid,* disgusting excuse for manhood, much
less an American.
Gore beat Bush running on a New Energy
Platform and every single outcome of
BigOil/Federal Reserve Econothermodynamic
Management was predictable and predicted:
http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.diseases.lyme/msg/8591b95e0ece47f7%3Fdmode%3Dsource&usg=AFQjCNFCcsFU1UjOz2B0OAJjFPDE44_-jQ
http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.diseases.lyme/msg/e066f6566802741e%3Fdmode%3Dsource&usg=AFQjCNEFCyNc5fehw1Kip7YLGZjYCXf36w
We can have no "Race to Sanity" with this
AmerIsraeli Dogma where whatever *we* do is
correct [despite the millions maimed, raped, and
deprived of their self-supporting assets (the demise
of the fake Euro is a perfect example)], good, great
and wonderful!, but whenever any other government
performs a slight-of-justice, they're demonized
if not worse.
When we get rid of pundits who can't tell us
anything useful (which is the reason such pundits
are given a platform by the Dead Gray Lady), THEN
we have a chance of redemption. We do not need this,
Brooks' poisoned mind, telling us *we* have no minds.
We do (have minds) and we *did* and for that we got
kicked in the teeth by America, the Death-is-Becoming-Her.
What right does this tard, Brooks, have to repeatedly
accuse *us* of sucking up to *his* own fouled
insight and consistently WRONG calls?
That we have to suffer it is exactly like
what the entire world suffers from insane
Israelis whether they're here in America
or in Palestine - INSANITY.
"While Israel had a right to build a wall to protect her people from
terror attack, did she have a right to build it on Palestinian land?"
http://original.antiwar.com/buchanan/2010/06/03/lift-the-siege-of-gaza/
C O W A R D I C E is the source of
this stupidity. God's Chosen People don't
have much faith in Him, do they? And we,
by the constant exposure to these kinds of
LIES, insults and trashing by Israelis like
Brooks - when we failed *BECAUSE* we drank that
Israeli Kool-Aid - are to be called STUPID,
for doing so?
The Perles-and-Swine Foreign Policy:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.diseases.lyme/browse_thread/thread/77dbaa68f7d74fca?hl=en#
"Doug Feith's International Advisors Inc, a registered agent for
Turkey in 1989 - 1994, netted $600,000 per year from Turkey, with
Richard Perle taking $48,000 annually as a consultant. Other noted
neoconservatives linked to Turkey are former State Department number
three, Marc Grossman, current Pentagon Undersecretary of Defense for
Policy Eric Edelman, Paul Wolfowitz and former congressman Stephen
Solarz. The money involved does not appear to come from the Turkish
government, and FBI investigators are trying to determine its source
and how it is distributed. Some of it may come from criminal activity,
possibly drug trafficking, but much more might come from arms dealing.
Contracts in the hundreds of millions, or even billions of dollars
provide considerable fat for those well placed to benefit.
Investigators are also looking at Israel's particular expertise in the
illegal sale of US military technology to countries like China and
India. Fraudulent end-user certificates produced by Defense Ministries
in Israel and Turkey are all that is needed to divert military
technology to other, less benign, consumers. The military-industrial-
complex/neocon network is also well attested. Doug Feith has been
associated with Northrup Grumman for years, while defense contractors
fund many neocon-linked think tanks and "information" services. Feith,
Perle and a number of other neocons have long had beneficial
relationships with various Israeli defense contractors."
Marketing the Market:
http://www.actionlyme.org/PNAC.pdf
I think what we are witnessing is Israelis performing
all of their terrorist stunts for the specific purpose
of having Americans/America attacked in response.
Then, of course, we were to respond by trashing
the hell out of all of Arabia.
Then, these particular Israelis not only make
even more money from arms sales, in the end, when
Iran as the emerging Arab superpower in the Middle
East is wiped off the map, they, our Israelis, get a
personal piece of the pipelines-and-oil-refinery-action
on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean, whereas,
Russia had plans for overland routes, AKA, Securing
the Realm:
http://www.iasps.org/strat1.htm
How else are Israelis going to Break Away from
America, than to be the re-sellers of Arab oil
once we hand it to them?
Allow me to reveal also, and once again, how
stupid our local un-scientific, unintellectual
Israelis are:
http://www.relapsingfever.org/index.htm
Basic Science?
Allen Steere knew nothing about it, says
Willy Burgdorfer:
http://underourskin.com/blog/?p=191
"Throw all of Allen Steere's insane crap out
and start over."
Kathleen M. Dickson
http://www.actionlyme.org
============================================
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/04/opinion/04brooks.html?hp=&pagewanted=print
June 3, 2010
Race to Sanity
By DAVID BROOKS
Sometimes it seems as if we’re doomed to fight a new culture war
between orthodox liberals who have lavish faith in the power of
government and orthodox conservatives who have almost no faith at all.
But occasionally a politician comes along with a more measured vision
of a limited but energetic government. Recently, for example, I read a
speech by a politician who gave examples of both when government had
failed (the old welfare system) and when it had succeeded (the
railroad legislation under Lincoln, the bank reforms under F.D.R. and
the highway system under Eisenhower). “Our government shouldn’t try to
guarantee results,” this politician said, “but it should guarantee a
shot at opportunity for every American who’s willing to work hard.”
That sentence struck me as a pretty good foundation for a political
philosophy. It was delivered by President Obama at the University of
Michigan commencement last month.
Obama administration policies haven’t always hewed to this limited but
energetic approach. But there is one area where they sure have:
education. The Obama approach to education could serve as a model for
anybody who wants to build a center-out governing majority.
Over the past decades, federal education policy has veered between the
incredibly intrusive to the appallingly supine. The Obama
administration, however, has used federal power to incite reform,
without dictating it from the top.
First, Obama and the education secretary, Arne Duncan, set up a
contest. They put down $4.5 billion in Race to the Top money. They
issued some general guidelines about what kind of reforms states would
have to adopt to get the money. And then they fired the starting gun.
Reformers in at least 23 states have passed reform laws in hopes of
getting some of the dough. Some of the state laws represent
incremental progress and some represent substantial change. The
administration has hung tough, demanding real reform in exchange for
dollars. Over all, there’s been a tremendous amount of movement in a
brief time.
This is not heavy-handed Washington command-and-control. This is
Washington energizing diverse communities of reformers, locality by
locality, and giving them more leverage in their struggles against the
defenders of the status quo.
Second, the Obama administration used the power of the presidency to
break through partisan gridlock. Over the past decade, teacher unions
and their allies have become proficient in beating back Republican
demands for more charters, accountability and choice. But Obama has
swung behind a series of bipartisan reformers who are also confronting
union rigidity.
In Rhode Island, the Central Falls superintendent, Frances Gallo,
fired all the teachers at one failing school. The unions fought back.
Obama sided with Gallo, sending shock waves nationwide. If the
president had the guts to confront a sacred Democratic interest group
in order to jolt a failing school, then change was truly in the air.
Gallo got the concessions she needed to try to improve that school.
Third, the president has better aligned the education system with
American values. In every other job in this country, people are
measured by whether they produce results. For decades, that didn’t
apply to schools, where people were rewarded even as student
achievement stagnated. This administration has sided with reformers
who want to change that — by measuring teacher performance. In the
District of Columbia, for example, Chancellor Michelle Rhee is on the
verge of getting a teacher contract that would enable her to better
measure teacher performance and do something about those teachers who
lag behind.
Fourth, the administration has encouraged local officials to raise
educational standards. The feds are not imposing national standards.
But the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State
School Officers have come up with blueprints of what kids should be
learning in math and English. According to the Thomas Fordham
Foundation, an authoritative source on these things, these new
standards are tough, rigorous and practical. The feds are offering
incentives to states to embrace these goals.
Fifth, the administration is opening the door for more fundamental
reform. Andy Smarick of the American Enterprise Institute and others
have piled up data showing that it’s nearly impossible to turn around
failing schools. Once mediocrity infects a school culture, it’s nearly
always best to simply replace the existing school with another. The
administration has a program called School Improvement Grants, which
is helping a few remarkable local reformers, like Joel Klein of New
York City, to close miserable schools and put new ones in their place.
In short, Obama’s activism isn’t overbearing. It’s catalytic. The
administration hasn’t defeated the forces of the status quo, but in
state after state, you’re seeing reformers moving forward.
So why don’t we use a similarly light but energetic, decentralized but
forceful reform approach when it comes to health care, transportation,
energy or environmental policy? Good question.
"[Real] scientists are *fiercely* independent. That's the good
news."-- NIH's Top Fool, Anthony Fauci