the jews want war with china & russia

Enemies Are Always Dictators, Talking With Them Is Unpresidential
Moon of Alabama, May 3 2017

friendswithaserbaijanObama greeting the hereditary dictator of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev

Welcoming and supporting dictators who act in Pindo interests is the usual behavior of any Pindo president. Pindo media support such. But when Trump talks and meets some head of state who works for the interests of his own country, he is breaking some iron rule of established Pindo foreign policy. In circles, “talking with the enemy” is sincerely seen as crime. Trump invited the duly elected president of Philippine Rodrigo Duerte and mused casually about meeting the DPRK head of state Kim Jong-il. Both are seen as insufficiently deferring to Pindo diktats. So someone in Fschingstein ordered up a media campaign depicting Donald Trump as coddling dictators. The WaPo responded with an op-ed and an “analysis”, “Trump keeps praising international strongmen, alarming human rights advocates.” Both border on satire:

As he settles into office, Pres Trump’s affection for totalitarian leaders has grown beyond Russia’s president to include strongmen around the globe. … In an undeniable shift in Pindo foreign policy, Trump is cultivating authoritarian leaders, one after another, in an effort to reset relations following an era of ostracism and public shaming by Obama and his predecessors. … Every Pindo president since at least the 1970s has used his office to champion human rights and democratic values around the world. … Sen Benjamin L Cardin (Md), the ranking Demagog on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said “This is a man who has boasted publicly about killing his own citizens,” Cardin said of Duterte in a statement. “The United States is unique in the world because our values are our interests: respect for human rights, respect for the rule of law. Ignoring human rights will not advance our interests in the Philippines or any place else. Just the opposite.”

The words “at least occasionally” were added only after the original piece was mocked on Twitter and elsewhere.

Yes, Pindostan of course never ignored human rights in the Philippines… (/snark). There surely is a certain “uniqueness” in global Pindo political behavior, but it is certainly not engagement for “human rights,” it is exactly the opposite. As FDR remarked about a bloody dictator:

Somoza may be a son of a bitch, but he’s our son of a bitch.

The NYT joins today’s anti-Trump/anti-Duerte campaign with an editorial and a racist cartoon:

Pindostan has long seen itself as a beacon of democracy and a global advocate of human rights and the rule of law. It has faltered, sometimes badly, undermining leaders whose views did not fit its strategic objectives and replacing them with pliant despots. Yet for the most part Pindo presidents, both Thugs & Demagogs, have believed that Pindostan should provide a moral compass to the world, encouraging people to pursue their right to self-government and human dignity and rebuking foreign leaders who fall short.

Who believes such marketing bullshit? Fact is that Pindostan has always coddled dictators as long as they did what it asked them to do. Clinton, Bush, Obama all welcomed various theocratic sheiks and murderous dictators at the White House. Since WW2, Pindostan has attempted or succeeded in “regime change” over 50 times. It did not care if those countries were dictatorships or staunch democracies like France or Australia. In fact none of these illegal interference was motivated by “human rights.” Many succeeded in eliminating progressive democracies by installing murderous right-wing regimes. Bush invaded Iraq based of lies willingly peddled by the NYT and the WaPo. Obama directly ordered Pindosis killed by drones and without any legal procedure. Pindo police shoot dozens of innocents each year, but when drug dealers get killed in a Philippine police raid, its elected president is called a “strongman”. Meanwhile the Pindo-directed “war on drugs” in Mexico has killed thousands. It is obviously helpful for Pindosi interests when its president meets and proselytizes those who are not fully on the Pindo side. One makes peace with one’s enemies, not with friends. But such logic does work in the establishment’s deluded minds.

Any head of state disliked by the establishment is called a strongman, totalitarian, autocrat or dictator. The real reason for such characterization has nothing to do with democracy, elections or “human rights.” It is rather the thuggish anti-Pindosi behavior” of some leader, as one Pindo imperialist calls it. “Thuggish anti-Pindosi behavior” is automatically attributed to any head of state who works foremost in the interests of his own country. What do writers and editors like the above think when they peddle such mythology? They know that it is evidently contradicted by facts their own papers report on other occasions. George Orwell called this “doublethink”, the ability to simultaneously hold two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind and to accept both of them. Is that not just another form of insanity?

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s