The Kissinger Playbook Contains 2 Acts.
Mort Zuckerman
ca...@drcarolgoodheart.com, 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: The Kissinger Playbook Contains 2 Acts.
Date: Jun 17, 2010 11:07 AM
ARTICLE BELOW ABOUT THE RELATIVE VALUE
OF DEAD PEOPLE
=========================================
On 911, calling in to CNN TV from
Europe, at around 11:30 AM Eastern Time,
Henry Kissinger issued his jihad:
"Whatever countries are harboring
terrorists we will consider an enemy.
Whoever is not with us is against us."
He literally said that.
Then in 2007 in an interview with
Charlie Rose he revealed Step Two:
http://www.actionlyme.org/KISSINGER_TERROR.htm
"Sooner or later people will realize
that if they don't want chaos..." they
will submit to AmerIsraeli will.
SUMMARY:
1) Create the terrorists,
2) Chase em around and destroy all the
countries who resist our occupations and
control of their resources.
Kissinger also said years ago that
Pakistan was next. After the Putin
visit to Walker Island (which scared
the bejebus out of the Bushies), Kissinger
zoomed over to Moscow to complain to
Putin about how weapons could get into
the hands of bad guys. Apparently
this already happened in South Africa.
Israelis stole them.
See, ya gotta know their intent.
The previous 60 years of messing around
with other nations may have had some
serious goals. Now, however, the present
shenanigans are just about messing up Earth
for the fun of it. The US/UK/Israeli Axis of
Evil certainly can't claim *scholarly* merit
as their criteria for running Earth.
Kathleen M. Dickson
http://www.actionlyme.org
http://www.relapsingfever.org
========================================
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/06/17-7
Published on Thursday, June 17, 2010 by Foreign Policy In Focus
Are Foreign Lives of Equal Worth to Ours?
by Adil E. Shamoo
When a U.S. civilian is murdered in a foreign land or in the United
States, we rightfully feel angry, sad, and some of us demand
vengeance. These are normal, primordial, and instinctive feelings of
group loyalty and herd mentality that have bound communities and
countries for thousands of years. Should such human traits, which are
often beneficial, emotional and irrational, continue to justify the
retaliatory killing of innocent civilians in the 21st century?
After the tragic murder of nearly 3,000 U.S. citizens on 9/11, the
United States toppled the Taliban in Afghanistan and killed and
captured hundreds of al-Qaeda leaders and members. However,
Afghanistan lost as many as 32,000 citizens since the U.S. invasion in
2001.
The U.S. military involvement in Afghanistan was followed immediately
by a plan to invade Iraq and topple Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.
The invasion went ahead despite the inconclusive evidence that Iraq
posed any immediate threat to the United States or was involved in
9/11. In the years and months following the invasion, evidence that
Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction and was not involved
in the 9/11 attacks has become distressingly clear. Iraq by all
accounts has suffered a few hundred thousand deaths, a million
wounded, and the destruction of its infrastructure for economics,
health, and education.
The U.S. engagement in Afghanistan and Iraq continues on a massive
scale. We still have nearly 200,000 troops and contractors in the two
countries. The argument is that our enemy is still plotting to kill us
here in the United States and elsewhere. The plan seems to be to keep
retaliating and punishing the plotters in both countries to force them
to submit to our will. In the process, whether it is admitted or not,
we have killed and injured tens of thousands of civilians not involved
in trying to kill us.
More recently, the United States is trying to lessen the number of
civilians killed or injured.
How do Afghan and Iraqi civilians view the injuries or deaths of tens
of thousands of their countrymen and women? How do they view the
continued killing and wounding of hundreds or thousands of non-
combatants? How would we view this number deaths and injuries among
our own population As citizens of the United States, we face the moral
obligation to not only understand the tragedy of the loss of
civilians, as U.S. President Barak Obama declares, but to reduce to a
minimum or eliminate civilian deaths, if at all possible. Every
innocent civilian killed or wounded in Afghanistan and in Iraq has a
mother, father, sister, or brother, and in these close-knit tribal
communities many more who are considered very close relatives. The
families and friends of those harmed in these conflicts could carry
with them the need for vengeance for decades to come.
More recently, we have entered a covert and overt war against the
Taliban in Pakistan. In Pakistan, a country in which the United States
is not officially at war, U.S. actions and offensives have killed and
wounded a large number of Pakistani civilians. The high civilian death
toll is in part a consequence of the Taliban living and hiding with
the people of Pakistan in dense urban centers. The killing and
wounding of innocent Pakistanis is also troubling because Pakistan is
a large country with nuclear weapons. The killing of innocent
Pakistanis will result in increased hatred and cries for revenge that
is becoming a part of Pakistan cultural norms. This situation could
destabilize the country and put the safety of the nuclear arsenal at
risk.
The United States needs to face the moral paradox that stems from the
lack of regard for Afghan and Iraqi lives in comparison with the value
placed on the lives and safety of those living in the United States.
As U.S. citizens, we value the lives of our fellow countrymen many
fold over the lives of other citizens. How else could we allow our
government to continue this policy of killing and wounding our
opponents in such disproportion to the number of casualties of U.S.
troops and contractors for nearly nine years after 9/11.
I know that there will be loud protest of this view. However, we need
to remember that the 1948 UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights
emphasizes the equal worth of all human beings across the globe.
The U.S. military has achieved a killing machine that is less
encumbered by popular views of war than at other times in our history.
The military has mechanized and contracted out the war machinery in
order to minimize the impact on U.S. citizens. The mechanization of
the war can be potentially beneficial to individuals, but also very
dangerous to our democracy.
This mechanization of war has also resulted in treating other nations'
citizens as less than equal to citizens of the United States. U.S.
military actions kill innocent civilians in a repeated and almost
routine manner. However, modern communications are informing people
around the world that U.S. policies value other citizens less than its
own. The human instinct of herd mentality can't serve as justification
for the indiscriminate killing of civilians outside U.S. borders.
Adil E. Shamoo is a senior analyst at Foreign Policy In Focus, and a
professor at the University of Maryland School of Medicine. He writes
on ethics and public policy. He can be reached at:
ash...@umaryland.edu.
"[Real] scientists are *fiercely* independent. That's the good
news."-- NIH's Top Fool, Anthony Fauci