But Now You Know

The search for truth in human action

The “Global War On Terror” is a Lie


The neocon philosophy of cowardice demands that we surrender our essential freedoms, in return for the promise of temporary safety

The neocon philosophy of cowardice demands that we surrender our essential freedoms, in return for the promise of temporary safety

The neocons are parroting Conservative words, loud and shrill, these days. Suddenly they’re against the very same socialism and police state that they defended when Bush was doing it. 

But you can be reminded that they’re neocon frauds, when they start fearmongering “terrorism”, which they seem unable to stop doing.

Recently, it’s been this insane pretense that the Somali pirates are terrorists.

Of course, you and I and every other rational person know:

Terrorists commit random acts of destruction/killing, to create an environment of fear, in order to work toward some political goal.

Pirates attack vessels in order to obtain wealth, either by looting or ransom. In a way, they are the opposite of terrorists.

The Somali ship-stealing guys are doing nothing but attacking vessels for loot/ransom. They are pirates, not terrorists.

Really, given the two definitions above, it takes a fool incompetent in the subject to confuse them.

Great way to identify some of the neocon fakes in talk shows and punditry.

But it doesn’t stop with the pirates.

They still pretend the resistance fighters in Iraq are terrorists.

Resistance fighters attack a foreign occupation force, in order to drive it from their country.

That’s what is happening in Iraq. 

But the charade isn’t just one of pretending anything they don’t like is terrorism. The neocons also have double standards about whether terrorism is bad.

They support, for example, the training and funding of terrorists, as long as their mass murder is useful to us.  

  • When we trained and supplied Al Qaeda in the 1980s in Afghanistan, it was at their behest.
  • When we supported Saudi Arabia’s building of Wahabi hate schools all around Asia in the 80s and 90s, the neocons were the reason.
  • When we backed, and funded, the Pakistani fundamentalist Islamic dictatorship’s overthrow of the Afghani government by the Taliban, it was to the joy of the neocons.

Of course this hypocrisy extends beyond terrorism…the neocons fought to keep us openly supplying Weapons of Mass Destruction technology to Saddam Hussein in the 80s. But we’re dealing with their fake Terror War here, not their general sociopathic nature.

So, getting back to the topic, the neocons have undermined democracy in the middle east, refusing to deal with the elected government of Palestine, claiming they won’t support former “terrorists” in government…and yet backing, no matter what war crimes they commit, the former terrorists who run the Israeli government.

Blowing up buildings full of innocents in a land where you were not even born, as the future rulers of Israel did in the 1940s, is OK, but blowing up soldiers occupying your homeland and keeping you in concentration-camp conditions today is “terrorism”

Actually, it’s not. They’re resistance fighters, of course. Whether the Jewish people who moved to Palestine in the 1940s and started killing people there count as resistance fighters (you’re supposed to be locals fighting foreigners) is debatable. But there’s no question the Palestinian fighters are resisting foreign occupation.

Side Note: Precedent

We were all disgusted when the mass-murdering Russian government started calling resistance fighters “terrorists”, to parrot Bush. The problem is that Bush set that precedent, by abusing the word just as laughably.

Precedent is one of the practical reasons to not blindly defend “your guy” when he’s doing something wrong. Bush built many of his abuses on Clinton’s precedents. Clinton coined the phrase “war on terror”, and attacked both Iraq and Afghanistan in order to distract from domestic problems, while claiming to fight terrorists…a perfect lead-in for Bush. Likewise, Obama’s current socialist agenda, nationalizing banks, spending trillions on fake “stimulus”, is identical to what Bush was doing before he left office.

But, getting back to terrorism, precedent is its most ugly with the case of Obama using the police state Bush created, for his own domestic agenda. Verbally supporting liberty is literally being described in official government  documents as terrorist, by the new, unconstitutional, and definitively police state Department of Homeland Security.

On the other hand, he has stopped referring to our inconsistent, hypocritical foreign policy as a “war on terror”, to the horror of the neocons, who are essentially saying this amounts to treason.

There is no actual Global War on Terror. Just a bunch of dishonest men advocating evils that they appear to believe will benefit themselves, while using fear to get you to submit to it. THAT is preying upon terror, as much as anything.


April 17, 2009 - Posted by | International, Politics | , , , , ,


  1. A very realistic article, I fully endorse and repeat your words: “There is no actual Global War on Terror. Just a bunch of dishonest men advocating evils that they appear to believe will benefit themselves, while using fear to get you to submit to it. THAT is preying upon terror, as much as anything.” Please also look in to: “Wake up America, You are being Cheated – by your own leaders”:http://peace-forum.blogspot.com/2011/01/wake-up-america-you-are-being-cheated.html , CIA Drone Attack in Pakistan:http://peace-forum.blogspot.com/2011/01/cia-drones-killed-over-2000-mostly.html

    Comment by A.Jak | February 8, 2011 | Reply

  2. […] The Global War on Terror is a Lie Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Bush On War On Terror, VetsWho's Scary Now? « The Cost of Free Health Care Government as a Joke <- Will Rogers » […]

    Pingback by Wagging the Dog <- Plato « Words of the Sentient | August 20, 2009 | Reply

  3. Going solely on the same information you have by looking at the pic, I figure it’s a voodoo staff.

    The original pic lacked the Osama beard and turban, and had a clock where the sign is. I don’t understand what the clock has to do with either bogey men, or voodoo witch doctor-looking guys.

    I, of course, would no more watch pro wrestling/WWE than I’d watch MMA/UFC.

    Oh, and the subsidy thing is counter-intuitive, because the instinct is “if it costs too much, have the government give us money to make it cheaper for us”.

    Intuition does not get so far as to connect “more money to buy it” with subsidy.

    Comment by kazvorpal | April 21, 2009 | Reply

  4. Nope I don’t recognize him – more specifically, I don’t recognize that thing in his hand. Is it someone’s leg?

    How is “if you subsidize it, it will grow” counter-intuitive?

    Comment by Daniel | April 21, 2009 | Reply

  5. Don’t you recognize The Boogeyman, from some professional wrestling network?


    RE “obvious”, should I stick to only OBSCURE counter-intuitive truths?

    Comment by kazvorpal | April 20, 2009 | Reply

  6. 1. Excellent article! It was very entertaining, made a lot of good points and wasn’t as obvious as your last one.

    2. What is that thing in your image’s left hand?

    Comment by Daniel | April 20, 2009 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: