I agree with the article over-all but it should be pointed out that the “openning” of Japan, intervention in China, the Hawaii coup d’etat, and the war against Spain and conquest of the Filipines were early adventures in trans-Pacific imperialism which seemed like a good idea at the time but eventually led to well over 100,000 American deaths in the Pacific theater of WWII, Korea, and Vietnam.

The “isolationism” of america’s founders is a bit questionable. The diverse lot had differences of opinion. Some really did want to go to war on behalf of revolutionary France, or help “liberate” the Spanish colonies.

Our Navy from the get go was imperialist, rasing the flag in Pacific Nations and in some cases improperly accepting petitions by islands like Samoa to join the United States. We fought a Quasi War with France to protect our independence, a series of conflicts with Barbary Pirates, and took on Britain in 1812.

From the moment we declared independence, we were an empire, controling the native tribes. These were either tolerated or displaced brutally.

The idea of a united isolationist Amreica at its birth is a myth.
It is a dangerous one since leftist so easily prove it false to enshrine multi-culturalism or grievence politics.

I have a problem with the statistics for “military” deaths in WWII.  If what is meant is battlefield deaths, it is my understanding that WWI killed more men. Could you cite your source for WWII? (you might be correct)

Also, I urge that the same criteria of judgement used by Mr. LaTulippe be applied to Lincoln’s War, as bloody and unnecessary as any other Gringo war, with results that left the country worse off.  I myself wish to be isolated from “Massachoosits”, inasmuch as I have nothing in common with its citizens.

Otherwise, a fine article. Let’s all keep bashing our four worst presidents, in order from least worst to worst worst:
1. JFK
2. FDR
3. Lincoln
4. Woodrow the Worst.

I obtained the casualty statistics from here:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties. I
I elected to cite only military deaths.

Mr. Lewenberg wrote,

We fought a Quasi War with France to protect our independence, a series of conflicts with Barbary Pirates, and took on Britain in 1812.

From the moment we declared independence, we were an empire, controling the native tribes. These were either tolerated or displaced brutally.

But this is what isolationism is.  Fighting for ones own interests only.  If we are attacked then we fight to preserve our own selfish interests wether they be defending shipping from piracy, conscription, or having an internal policy for dealing with native tribes.

Isolationists miss the big picture. American isolationism was possible because the British Navy controlled the oceans. The Monroe doctrine worked because it was in Britain’s interest to keep European powers out of the Western hemisphere. It is not possible to go back to a world in which the majority of Americans do not live on farms. They depend on an industrialized economy based on foreign oil.

I meant “It is not possible to go back to a world in which the majority of Americans live on farms. “

Now Sid, I know how painful that it can be to think that the Republica de Masachusetts is a civilized place for independent thinkers but there are likely more than one or two folks from that state who heartily agree with you and even place their fellow citizen JFK in the top spot of infamy. However, JFK was not given the chance to create as much mayhem as we have aforded the current President from Texaconnetibunkport and so I would toss Jack in favor of Deeciderputshut I, George W as the champeen worser President and heres why:

Interesting how the higher death rates expressed in this article were experienced by
the proactive and pre-emptive war statists and their chief antagonists. 

The U.S. wants it both ways. We have a long history of conducting ourselves as internationalists while thinking and acting like isolationists. A sobering manifestation of this today is our current President who asserts that we need to fight “over there” to keep the “evildoers” from “coming here”. Meanwhile, with media-enhanced asymmetrical warfare, we stock the arsenal of the terrorist by weakening our own civil rights law here at home. By granting the President the power, as we have done...and continue to do..... to suspend habeas corpus and the posse comitatus laws in the event of an emergency of his determination, we have added an efficient tool to the asymmetric arsenal of the terrorist. With another event like 9/11, the President can do the terrorist’s work for them by curtailing our liberties here at home… literally by attacking ourselves. This is a vicious cycle that both adds incentive for the terrorist to conduct strategic asymmetric attacks while insuring that we project ourselves militarily abroad in order to keep the terrorist occupied. The Terrorist can simultaneously kill the people they purport to support in foreign suicide or cell-phone bombings thus continuing to enflame the psychological atmosphere of fear that causes people to grant the President unprecedented and unconstitutional powers.

Neither isolationism nor internationalism alone is an answer but when one conducts one’s country in a kind of schizophrenic manner that expresses isolationism through belligerent internationalism and preemptive warfare, then the ultimate nihilistic isolationist’s creed of suicide is met.

Eisenhower remarked in his autobiography how Taft was misunderstood as an “isolationist” . As I understand it, he was less an isolationist than a skeptical pragmatist who used history to guide his understanding that power may be demonstrated but sometimes the demonstration of it results in compromises that can only lead to weakness. More importantly, the descent into Big Government Conservatism vs. Big Government Liberalism has eliminated the kind of informed debate that validates and nourishes the Constitution.

Needless to say, the Main Street of this “think globally, act locally” unilateral form of government is that trusty home of Corporate Sponsored Thinktankery, K Street. Would that they were isolationists and left us all the hell alone.

We lose ourselves to either-or arguments only to find out our choice of “either” has led to “or”.

This whole business about “dependence on oil” is to me quire remarkable. Take the first Gulf War. Hussein didn’t want to interrupt the flow of Middle Eastern oil- he just wanted to be the one collecting the profits by selling it to us! Most oil-rich countries have no other source of revenue (oil aside, the exports of the whole Arab world are less than those of Finland). They can’t effectively withold it from us.

Why, then, it is suddenly necessary for Americans to go overseas to “protect” oil supplies or “protect” the global economy (which develops because people seek profit, not because governments enforce it) is beyond me.

Dear Mr. Cundiff,

When it comes to worst, sorry, FDR takes the cake:
longest reign; most damage done politically,
economically, and culturally; and absolutely the
worst “influence” re the Supreme Court and its
decision-making process.

Even our current leader of the free world can’t
claim such accomplishments.

If American intervention is justfied by the oil grab, why don’t we invade Canada? Just askin’

How in the world did LBJ avoid making the “worse” Presidents list?
His actions destroyed an entire culture, where other Presidents
donated body count abroad only. He still managed his share of
Vietnam casualties, and until Clinton was the nearest thing to
Al Capone to ever sit in the oval office!

As for our current POTUS, or Jimmy Carter, or Bill Clinton being counted among the worst, I’ll grant a 30 years rule in those cases. And a good case could be made indeed that FDR was our worst. His program was basically Hoover’s; let’s call him (sorry, those of you in wheelchairs) “Hoover on wheels”. LBJ was the son of FDR, so his badness was inherited.

...avalanche of debt -Steven LaTulippe

Its quite intentional. The World Bank and the IMF function as tools of the interventionist [informal empire] that was to be based first on credit and then after 1973 or so on debt. And that is so, we have gone from a creditor nation to a debtor nation in the last 25 years.

Very good piece by mr LaTulippe. How rare to read
an American observer who does not push the Hollywood
version of WWII, in which the US takes on Hitler and
liberates Europe, while provided airstrips by the
Brits. Of course, for a Finn it is not to praise the
Red Army, who cost us 95,000 of our finest to hold
back. Still, Stalin´s army was the one to grind down
the Wehrmacht, tying up 3/4 of it´s forces.

Minor quibble: Hitler would have had to launch an
attack on the Russians in any case, since Stalin was
gearing up to do the same on him, and Hitler was
nothing if not pre-emptive.

Had the US not entered the war, the Brits might
not have had the strength to challenge Hitler on the
continent, and the war in the East would have been
even bloodier. Who would have been exhausted first,
is anybody’s guess. There never was a happy
end in sight for WWII in Europe.

The American presence in Europe during the Cold war is
still a success, and this interventionism has served
us all well. Containment is not a glorious struggle
with lots of medals, but it keeps people and nations
alive, and comes at a reasonable price.

The figures of killed soldiers are staggering. These numbers, however, do not reflect the killed civilians as innocent bystanders, in these conflicts.
I was an innicent bystander in Holland during the German occupation.
The deaths in Holland during WW2 amounted to 216,000 (half the military deaths of the USA) However, the percentage of civilians killed during thast time was approx. 95%!!!

Our “dependence on foreign oil” is a red herring.  OPEC countries on the whole are neither industrialized nor nations.  Without people in industrialized nations to buy it, it’s just so much stinky black muck in the ground.  They depend on us to buy it as much as we depend on them to supply it.

@ Henk,

Wiki lists WWII casualties for the Netherlands as
follows: Military deaths 7,900, civilian deaths 88,900,
Jewish Holocaust deaths 106,000, adds up to 202,800
deaths or 2,32% of the population. Did you mean that
civilian deaths make up 95% of the total death toll?

I’m not arguing here, just like to
know what you are referring to, alstublieft…

The article omits the basic causes of international
“involvement” by the US. Until recently, 90% of such
involvement was caused by US Business interests. 
However, the dynamic has changed.  Nowadays, while
Corporate interests are greater than ever to force
“taypayer Capitalism” on the US citizen, another,
perhaps insane, dictum has surfaced.  Quasi-domestic
Ethnic pressures, brought own by dual or multi-held
“citizenships” by large groups of so-called “Americans”
to act for other nations’ interests that have little
or nothing to do with traditional Amarican interests.
The greatest, and first such group are the Israeli-
americans, (small “a” intentional), whose love for
Israel manifestly is far greater than any “love” or
patriotism they might feel towards the Republic of ]
the United States, which has cost us much in blood and
treasure as well as the scorn of the world and the
hatred of 2 billion other persons around the globe.
However, this group of Pollardites is only the first
of a growing plague of such entities. With the coming
of the 707 in the ‘Sixties, and the allowing of dual
multi-held citizenships, (I know one person with five
citizenships),and With rapid and inexpensive air
travel and instant worldwide communications, there is
now no need to foreswear old citizenships and
loyalties in favor of newer ones.  Inevitably,
conflicts of interests will arise.  This, more than
any other single factor today, makes for a dangerous
and troubled United States, where any ethnic or
nationalistic group can hold the Republic for ransom
and force foreign policy planning that is deleterious
to our National interests, however much such
activities might aid Israel, or Poland, or Mexico…
the list goes on and on. What is to be done?

“This version of ‘isolationism’ is a self-serving fabrication invented by interventionists to make minding our own business sound like an evil idea.”

A beautiful line, sir—and encapsulates the situation perfectly.

Neocons & their fellow-travelers try to trick us into a false dichotomy.  As if the only two choices are to

A) Let society lapse into a state of Cro-Magnon xenophobia

or

B) Elect Captain Ahab as president with Napoleon as his VP, declare ourselves God & Supreme Judge of all peoples everywhere, and then set out to conquer the world.

Wow.  Minding our own business. 

What a radical concept.

The key is:

1. Helping Ted Kennedy understand that windmills on the horizon
of his coastal home want kill him.

2. Helping Floridians understand that oil rigs(Like Alabama,Mississippi, and Lousiana)on their horizon want kill them.

3. Helping Alaska and others understand that drilling in Anwar is not the decision of the reindeer.

4. Helping States understand that if they allow refineries in their states their cost of fuel will be significantly lower than other states.

5. Building safe nuklear plants as the French have done.

6. And telling OPEC to eat their oil!

As I recall, Jefferson was hell-bent to join revolutionary France in its war with Britain and the other European monarchies. America has been an expansionist power from the get-go. When this expansion was at the expense of our continental neighbors Mexico and the Indian tribes we paid only a small price. When we decided to take on major powers outside of America the price got steeper. Now that our overlords want to rule the world, we are bankrupt.

Side Comment on the US casualties in WWI.  Half of the
117,000 were disease deaths, with many occuring
among troops who never left their American bases- which were
often little more than hastily constructed tent cities
without anything approaching proper sanitation.  Hundreds of of fresh faced volunteers filled with the first ever organized propaganda
campaign under George Creel- signed up to fight only to die
from cholera or dysentery on bases that were little more
than mud fields with open ditches for latrines.

Due to the welcomed spirit of Sothron’s to the paleo-thing, the War of 1812 typically gets short thrift.

Mr.Madison’s War, urged on by the Southern War Hawks, destroyed the balance of power, and yet still, “non-interventionists” continue to offer the lies that made up the “self-defense case” for the aggression of 1812 which began with a “simple march” into Canada, and went worse than the current adventure in Iraq.

The ‘impressments’ charge was the WMDs of its day, and John Henry, who duped Mr. Madison, was the Chalabi of his day.

Very interesting article.  I would make one correction though, namely that it was not “Austria” who suffered those casualties, but the “Habsburg Empire” during the Napoleonic wars, which became “Austria-Hungary” after the Compromise of 1867. 

I am an European who left the US, because I found much of the warmongering and arrogance (more precisely the mentality that the US has every right to its bloody interventions) repulsive.  On the other hand websites like Taki Mag, antiwar.com, Lew Rockwell are American and excellent.  I hope the line of thinking they represent will have influence on US politics.

C.Bowen wrote;

The ‘impressments’ charge was the WMDs of its day, and John Henry, who duped Mr. Madison, was the Chalabi of his day.

I had never heard that the charge of impressments was a lie but then it doesn’t surprise me.  Nevertheless the War of 1812 was mostly fought on American soil or is that also a lie?

The oil and diamond cartels are two monopolies that are successful. The American economy depends on cheap oil. America is in the Gulf to protect cheap oil from falling into the hands of arab dictators.

MN.;

--With New England accounting for half of United States shipping, it was simply not an issue of import with New Englanders so that should say something alone.  Congressman John Lloyd, Massachusetts 1807-1813 testified that not one time had one of his constituents raised a complaint. 

My take is that the issue of impressments was little more than a bone to attempt New England support.

-The War of 1812 began in earnest with the invasion of Canada in July 1812.  Thomas Jefferson infamously was quoted saying that conquering Canada, was a “matter of marching” akin to the rose petals awaiting the liberation of Iraq from Saddam.  The American invaders were repulsed and the Brits, in turn, invaded and took Detroit.

“But this is what isolationism is.  Fighting for one’s own interests only.  If we are attacked then we fight to preserve our own selfish interests whether they be defending shipping from piracy, conscription, or having an internal policy for dealing with native tribes. “
Well put, Mr. Nucci. Isolationism doesn’t mean “conflict-free.” We are, after all, humans living on the earth.
Leftists attack America’s conflicts – all of them – as imperialist-based and, thus, immoral; their corkscrew vision of “Morality” has always been the bait in their political ponzi scheme. Sure, there have been, for a long time, feints at building an American Empire, but it’s a mistake to combine, say, American 19th-century Manifest Destiny and post-Spanish-American War imperialism. Prior to 1848, the continental North America (Canada included) west of the Missouri River had a population of less than 300,000 – including Native Americans, Mexican laborers, post-Revolutionary Spanish landowners, and a handful of trappers and Russian settlers.

Far the most populous of all these groups, American Indians were a Stone Age culture just waiting to be bumped off. If Northern Europeans hadn’t displaced them, another group would. A hunter-gatherer people, gently free-holding some of the richest agricultural land on earth, they couldn’t – COULDN’T - last in the age of the steam engine and chemical high explosive.

Despite all the jackass pontificating and tub-thumping from leftist academicians, right and wrong account for little when the sweep of history is that lop-sided. Sorry: Noble savages finish last. We might as well apply morality to… weather conditions.

And it will not be a moral question when our children and our children’s children, broken and dispirited by the Ghetto Moralists, are swept into a destiny of mule lines and stoop labor.

Regarding Sid’s comment about my home state, there are, in fact, some of us Top Drawer types living in Massachusetts.  We view the Kennedy dynasty with something between amusement and disgust and focus on what’s wonderful about the state - the history, the old villages, our colleges and universities (liberal to leftist, yes, but I still received wonderful educations from two of them), the mountains and seacoast and, lest I forget, our sports teams.  I may feel like I’m living in Gomorrah at times, but I wouldn’t want to be anywhere else.

Balfour Declaration dated 11/2/17 which apparently played a significant role in bringing the USA into WWI

Bunk.  The Balfour declaration was issued 17 Nov 1917.  The US enter the war in April 1917.  And there was no country in 1933 named “Judea”.  More bunk. Our Judeophobes and Antisemites are back to their transparent lies.

The US lost the War of 1812.  At the Ghent treaty we gave the Brits everything they wanted.

Anglo-Americans usually lose wars (1) when they fight someone bigger or (2) fight against 4th Generation warriors.  So usually the Anglo-American either picks on small countries or takes a gang with him into battle. Truth be told, Gringos and Brits really aren’t a military people. When they’ve won one (with their gang), it’s by being bigger, not smarter.

Proudly:Islamic Khelafah is coming back.

Wait till the Chinese, Japanese, and Saudi stop servicing our debt and the U.S. economy begins to collapse entirely. No more money for U.S. Imperialism and occupation abroad. No more NATO, Kosovo and Bosnian mis-named “peacekeepers,” No more War for Israel and Big Oil in Iraq. What then? The American Empire goes the way of all previous ones. Without an external threat such as evil nazis, Commies, or Muslims, U.S. Society begins its final implosion from within.

intervationalists is another name-to hide the real truth-of a policy to come one behalf of British interests int he world and fight britian.s dirty wars in the world.

year--1997
Irak is right in demanding ouster of anglo-saxon spies from hollowed Iraki’s soil.In name of uno, and before that leage of friends ,and now Amnesty International, this heyena country called england has installed a lot bof speis all over World and has virtually hijacked Americans to do their domestic and foreign policies for furtherance of british (england’s ) interest than even American ‘s interest.

These days for last few years a lot of Kurdish refugees(who by the way are more aryans than all the europeans combined-though it is irrelevant here)are escaping from Turkey because of Turkish pressure. But nobody has ever stopped Turkey from having her air space nor has anyone bobed them. and why should anyone?Who has given right to a handfull of countries to be a policeman? Could they dare demand such thing at time of so called cold war? Every december,ever since gulf war there is a show of bullying tactics by anglo-saxons in middle east. There is really no ground but excuse is created because this race feels uplifted when others are insultated. Also there is a low cost exercise in bullying any other nation by military postures. Why should Iraq not have weapons as he desires?in 1981, when the israelis had bombed the iraqui nuclear reacto(a few days before going critical) it was britain)govt, and british media) who had vwhemently opposed Israeli daring action and did a lot of anti-jewish propaganda. Atleast Begin had a reason to fear from the arab enemy of israel. even in ‘82 Lebanon war it was britain which was most vociferous in criticizing Isreali militay action at the same time minimizing the Isreali Airforce’s achievement in destroying Bacca’s valley missiles through high tech method.In fact What americans did in gulf war was what Isreali had achieved way back in ‘82 in Lebanon war and America obtained that military know-how from Israelis after Lebanon war. But gulf war is justifiable on basis of military superirity but not Lebanon war. In fact when an american general said that america learned a lot from Israelis’ achievement then the american defense minister Winnberg said that itAmerica learned not from Israeli but from British. Ofcourse we all know that Wnnberg was (awarded sir) more of anbritish defense minister than american one. He was pro-british and anti-jewish (and antirussian and all others aswell). In fact in lebanon war the american foreign secratary was changed because the british did not like Hague’s attitude. This much britain exercises influence in american affairs. Now having installed all the stooges in Arab world britain has discarded her sham veil of Arabists and openly insults(through america ofcouse because on own britain is not even a fourh grade power)the arab world.Talking about the stooge, have you wondered why these days even Yeltsin’s bad health no longer makes any headline news in anglosaxon world?Before any cold that Yeltsin had was niticed and still before that any peon from Russia had a headline news ‘ material. The reaon is simple. Britain has installed in Russia not only a mad man likes yelstin but also a second line of stooge successor to him. After Yelstin usefullness is over then he will be replaced by those second line of british stooge who at the moment are already controlling Russia and destroying her everyday. Democracy ,as understood today, basically means any system which gives free hand to britain to exploit other races. If their is one example of what an evil this so called capitalism is and what a saviour communism(britain does not dislike communism, she dislikes other’s prosperity and independence whether it comes from communism, nationalism or what ever)is: this ruinous example of Russia is the real lesson. China is right to hold on to her nationalistic pursuit. It really is a war between anglo-saxons and the rest of the world. It is a race war.Sooner the rest of the world realizes that better it would be and this danger would be sorted out.

You remember that at the height of cold war in mid 80’s there was a lot of activities of C.N.D. You would expect that with so called cold war finished, this C.N.D. would be asking to the british peoples to leave the nuclear weopons given to her,out of pity and filiaty, by the United states. But exactly opposite happened. C.N.D. has been defunct since than. It is as if that was a front of the british govt. to show by way of propaganda that that country had some moral voice.In other words, C.N.D. was a sham created by the british to give them respectability. Ofcourse when a non-anglosaxon country aould perfect their nuclear weopon,as France rightly did, then there would be a lot of hue and cry by the anglo-saxons’ media. France and china are right in strenghtening their independent military power. The real danger to world comes from england and her anglosaxons agents. France understand that and Germany was a fool in not supporting France in Nato meeting this Summer. Just as Cnd has been proved a sham of british propaganda, more so is the sham which goes by the name of amnesty international. It is interesting that as soon falkland war started, within a few weeks this amnesty international presented a dozier on Argentina. In the same way as soon gulf war started(soon after Iraqui’s intervention in kuwait) the same amnesty international presented a dozier and report on Iraqui’s atrocities. an fact many of the amnesty allegations were just a copy of what british media was saying and which later on proved to be fabrication and great big lies. But bthis did not dent the reputation of amnesty international. british propaganda ensured that. IN ‘88 when Dalia lama,at the height of Tibetan disturbances, visited west, the then british prime minister refused to meet Him. Later on with the demise of Russia and usefullness of China gone and with manipulation to keep power in Hongkong somehow intact, the same british media and government ,like dog, started barking at China. It is interesting that amnesty international selectively targets those very countries(as it did china after cold war) who are out of faviour(because they would not be a brtish sttoge)of the british media and govt. This is not surprizing as amnesty international is the creation of british govt, and british media. england with the most appaling record of human rights in last 200 years of her evil rule, needed some organisation to keep the others from chrging england off her past and current evil practices. In other words it went for aggresive posture in propaganda war so that others can be demoralized and stopped from ponting out the real evil which is england. That is why amnesty international is one armour of the british lies to exploit the rest of the world. Amnesty international must be ignored and an independent human watchdog (which england will simply ignore) created. One purpose of amnesty international is to create an atmosphere for hatred towards the would be vitims of british exploitation so that a victim could be blamed to have deserved the consequences. That is why ,now amnesty international sometimes threatens China, sometimes India and etc. India because india needs to be cowed down and also so that India does not make nuclear wepon and thus feel free from future american(read english and anglosaxon)aggression. This is all to create an atmoshphere of mis information. The other countries are also responsible(out of sheer inferority complex) for giving these instuments of british propaganda so much imporatance. If they simply ignore and then the british lies and then themselves go in offensive(they can do it-no problem)against british exploitation and propaganda then tose countries would not in such dire strait as they are now. Think, this deteriration has happened in only last 20 years(thogh the british have been at this game for a long time but they were not always succesful when others have been vigilant).Ignoring and fighting all this anglosaxons propaganda, the other races(yes it comes to that) must unite and support each other against this common enemy england. The other nations should also go nuclear and assemble as much arm as possible ,collaborate on it and ignoring this anglosaxon race they must be prepared for war which tjhen would be prevented otherwise it would come inevitably. The other nations need to arm themselves to protect themselves from anglo saxon race. Thinking any other way is simply kidding oneself. And it can be done and will be done.

WE throw a challenge to these low lifes-if the English feel themselves
ao powerful them let them attack and win even Irak(already weaken by u.n.sanctions)without the help of u.n.sanctioins(that means Irak would have same freedom to acquire arms and means and Arabs and Israeli had in thier war)
and with out u.s.a. England is neither Isreal of today nor Sparta of yesterday.Let them be reminded that at height of thier empire in 1917, England was almost defeated
by Germans when German army’s 3/4 th division was concentrated on Eastern front. These english are that weak and coward people.But thir mouth will have to shut for ever
when all the whites ,European and Thirld world unite against this english disese.
There is no point in telling them truth, they understand only one thing which they will soon get-tatal beating physically-the only language these animals understand. Hitler,who these worship
was wrong about the jews who were only british agents-what Hitler said about jews applied not to jews but to the english(anglo-saxons).race-pity he did not do the the british what should have been done instead. Well It is never too late.

For all those who talk of globalization and protection of intellectual property right, a small news which was never in prominent place in any of english speaking papers or news but was very much reported in French media. In the last weeks of October 98 was reported in French papers that 4 different French members of European Parliament were going to raise the question of industrial espionage of some 100 each of French and German companies by england in collaboration with u.s.a. and other anglo-saxon countries like Autralia and new zealand. In other words they same countries who made a lot of hue and cry over Indias nuclear test and who are the ones pushing for intellectual property rights and globalization. Thier modus operandi? Checking all satellite bases communication(telephone, fax, internet,etc)with help of klistening devices in anglosaxon countries and spying ao all the talks and messages all over world.This illegal activity is cordinated in england. European countries are loosins billions of dollars each years through leak of confidential techiqe and discovery. Apart form the fact that for tea,china, spices and plants this thief country england never paid anything for others’ intellectual property right(why does royal doulton or british tea company not pay royalty to China?) this thief country england has done theft of German technology like urea making ang consequently ammunition making. In fact Standarsd oil company of america made a lot of theft of BAAs. a Germany company and many of the bombs which fell on Germany came from german tech. stolen by anglosaxon thieves england and america. That is not counting stolen from germans the tech. to make nuclear bomb and rockets. With these stolen technology has this anglo-american race been able to bully the rest of the world. And it wants to freeze the DIFFERENCE between it and other races in stone-for ever so that it can rule others unhindered. By the same mechanism it destroyed japanes and other Asian econmis. That is why India and others need very badly neclear deterence against enemies of the rest of the world.And the rest of world wants to break from ythier cluthes but has no courage because most of thirld world is governed by the likes of traitors like manmohan singh and Ahulliavala and spineless people like Jaswant Singh and Gujral and Atal bihari Vajpaye types

HOW THE JEWS HAVE BEEN USED AND AllOWED THEMSELVES TO BE USED FOR BENEFIT OF PARAISITC ANGLOSAXON RACE.

very true -in fact so called jewish’s lobby” power is a propaganda done by the english race to hide thier nefarious iterference in the american policy to influnce american domestic and foreing policy for the benefit of england.

Usually jews are kept as a front for every potentially unlikeable act by unkil and certain vested interests(mainly the english race). This diverts attention from real culprits(the english race). the players who are pulling their strings are the ones who need to be tracked.

“It’s not the U.S. government, it’s a very specific faction of the U.S. government. It’s the “Israeli faction,” so-called. When the British want to do something in the United States, they always tie it to the Israeli right wing...”

1999.

how england has used jews for the benfit of english race only and for deliberatily creating disruption in Europe. 

England had threatened israel in 1948 during israeli war of indepdence that england would use atom bomb agaisnt israel unless israel stop ddrowning royal air foarce palnes and pilots who were helping Jordan against israel.
the same england was in upsroar in july 1981 when isrea;l attakced iraq’s nuclear reactor-just check out theier papers of the time
the same ngland was leading charge agasint isreal in june 82 when isreal attacked palestinain terrorists inside lebanon-that was at t time when england was in illegal occupation for malvinas island.
that is short glimpse of how much england and anglosaxon race care about jews and israel.
look at editorails of the times, the newsweek during those crucial perios of june 82 and see how they(the TImes, the gaurdian, BBC, ITV) were suggesting that israel or atleast tel aviv should be bombed.-just chek the british papers and bbc clips from april 82 to august 82.Also check those british bastrds joutrnlism hist in the month of summer 1981 when iraqi nuclear planty was bombed by the isralis and the british were the first-along with iraq -to protest agasint the israeli action.

It is very interesting that the same type of english people(who are anti-communists, anti-blacks, anti-muslims, anti-catolics) started the same sort of propaganda(like used against russians and communists) against The Germans.the Frenchs and Europeans in general. First England did not want germany united(though during cold war it suggested that only Russians are against it). soon after German reunification and even before disintegration of Soviet union ,England changed the lie-tactics(through media and government) against Europe. There is one more thing. nato was supposed to counter warsaw pact, with the latter gone there was no discussion as to nato should be wound uop or not. Europe does not need nato. Europe can have and should have her own defence system as is the Germo-Franco_Italian_Spanish collaboration. that European defence pact must be stengthened rather than germany supporting nato. Actually england needs nato to prop up its nasty influence in military matters. With the help of usa and nato has england been able to prop up her influence. In fact england is ant-Europe and through nato it wants to keep a tab on european affairs and not let Europe get strong on her own. As england can not do this own her own it has let America involved in it(during empire days england hardly shared power with America but it needs America now). Germany or Europe does not need nato. In fact nato is the greatest enemy(through england)of germany and europe. How can england be so much anti-Germany,working dso much against German interests and be a major parterner in common defence pact?It is a ludicrous situation. England manipulates financial market(in last8 years through recession and what not london market has risen 3 fold while far Eastern markets-who are the main producers of consumer goods-has fallen drastically.). That is why it pumped up the value of pound before joing european sustem-ofcourse it was unsustainable but for devaluation of pounds the Germans and some jews(as said by bbc) were blamed. As england does not want German or any other European country to get economically strong and be financially independent of london market, it opposed Single currency vehemently.Even a so called left-paper like Guardian was suggesting that if Shroeder(of german spd party) were the chancellor than he would give more say(than others in europe) to England-so it would have been good. In other word they want special treatment for themselves. Why? When they talk of sovereignity is england not the main country pushing, threatning and cajoling the thirld world to accept World bank and IMF(created by america for englands interest) so called structral reform regardless of people’s wishes. If other countries’s destiny can be controlled by bureacrats in IMF. then why not England’s by European’s bureacrats? England is the most bureactic and centralised country in europe with all the regional making machinery smashed by the government with the help of bbc and all other propaganda machinery. And that England talks of local development and burocracy of European commission.Single european currency is a must for Europe not only for european economic advantage and stability but also because it will smash england’s power of financial market manipulation. In Fact the rest of Europe should actively discourage england to join Euro, because then englnd@s financial power will be smashed and it will be good news for Europe and the rest of the world. Not only England want to eat rotten, viral infected meat but also wants to force feed the the rotten thing to the Europeans. When germany resists this nasty move on part of england to take rotten meat ,then germany-already a villain in their eyes -becomes a super villain. As soon as the news leaked out of viral infevted meats, the first reaction of bbc was not as to why it happened but ‘’Can Europe ban the xport legally?-has it got the right?’’. there was never a hue and cry about cruel treatment of cows who were forced fed on infected animal meats(cows are vegetarian). This sort of so called commercial farming is the thing which has been pushed down the through of rest of world through GAT. which was made to suit anglo00saxons’ interest.France was right to oppose gat in this form. If the similar thing happened in any other country in the world then this the same british media including bbc would hape said a cruel, primitive practice for rotten meat with no regard for peoples health or animals@ welfare. In fact for showing so much cruelty to animals in this case it is not the animals which should be killed but the peoples(british farmers and their media propagandists). There was and is always a support for such disgusting affairs by the british peoples and it shows what sort of people they are. we will british meat even if it is rotten. in fact there was hardly a influx of foreign meats followinf disclosure. This phenomenan of using rotten british product is not confined to beaf-it extends to everything . in fact protectionism at home and forced infiltration abroad is the name of game in england. And this is the country talking about liberalization. That is why british products,thogh rotten in quality are high in price. All this because of underlying protectionism. That is also why you will not only not get fresh ,healthy products but also you do not find variety in british life. In the name of traditional(to prect the internal market) britain sells to own people and a few foreign stooges, the same rotten cheese, the same low quality high priced car and same rotten but high price arms(Saudis and others are fed with it). Actually this clone like cancerous feature is very much english way of life. the english live in ame only 4 or 5 varieties of house, their furniture is the same 4 to five varietis their cothes are they same rotten unsmart types and their food is the sme rotten type with rotten ingediants. Then why do the englisjh live? for extacting money for money sake. this ia feature of parasitic and cancerous race. the same thing they have exported to where they went. that is why all anglo saxons countries show lack of variety.and it is the engl;ish who accused Russians of imposing their culture destroying variety in soviet union. As to talk of this supporting own rotten meat and drug industry(tobacco) for the sake of jobs, why can not the thirld world support her own industry for their jobs and prosperity. atlest thirld world still produces better quality food and clothes and even car than the general british joe is used to. When agitation was going on in South Africa in ‘86 against apartheid, the bbc reprted in support of apartheid that otherwise in case of sanctions against s.africa it would be british profits and jobs which would be lost.Such peoples who benefit by others misery should be made jobless. In fact capitalism and so called freedom for them means freedom to exploit other nations and give them misery. For themselves english never practice free market-it is for foreign suckers. England is a protected and market for themselves and their rotten products. For example, Honda(which rescued b.l.) and rovers are the same cars but rovers cost more because it is british car and because they sometimes put a thin veneer of wood in it. Bearing in mind the british homes have hardly got a furniture of solid good wood, the english are selling their cars not on engineering but on carpentry and tatty presentation. And as these shopkeepers never have class, they make a lot of noise about class too. in fact what british media says and what truth is 180 degreee apart.For foregn goods(car, consumer items etc) the english would be very fussy and wanrt to get at least price abut for british goods they would create all lies and excuses to pump up the price and sell. That ids why the advanced countries in Europe and far east are in recession and britain and other anglo-saxon countries (which except america is only primary producers of land-oil.timbers. etc-land stolen from others in last 250 years)are in boom. It is not even alive and let live. english like to wreck others ‘ prospect of prosperity or happiness. For example.england knew that it had no outside chance of staging soccer world cup.but it put forward proposal nevertheless at last minute at a time when Germany was well favourite for that. Why?-to wreck chances for GERmany to stage one.So Germany lost not only that glory but also a lot of money to immense satisfaction of english press and people. unemployment in Germany could have eased up if it had got the ofeerr to stage world cup, but no. And it is this Germany who agreed to british request to delay monetary union for 2 years (When britain is not going to be part of it even) . Had that monetary union come about earlier, German chancellor would not have been facing this problem as nhe is now. But then england has always survived on folly of these suckers who do not know who thier real friend or enemy are.nato which ia realyy an agent for english interest(and broadly anglosaxon interest) should have been rejected by Germany and also euro-fighter in place of truelly european (excluding britain ofcourse)military alliance. but Germany lost that chance and new cold war(egland has always done cold wars,it is too coward to enter in direct confontration without firsat weakening enemy with lies and propaganda machinery likebbc and others)has begun. For those who do not belive this let me give an example. Soon after fall of Berlin war, the editor of Sunday times(who is reknowned racist, anti communist and anti poor,pro capitalist and later came out to be anti Germans and antiFrench aswell) said on bbc that to protect nato and english interests ineurope ,may be americans should get out of germany and than british garrison can stay there because americans would be resented as occupying foreign forces while britain can simply say that they are european aswell and so stay. This from a man who is European hater and is one of leading propagandists against Germany (as he was against russia).So there you are-cat is out. The english are a foreign intusive element in europe through nato. In fact england should not have been allowed in european community ,barring this england must not be allowed to join european single currency if one wants to insure stability and cohesive stength of Euro.It is very interesting that the same editor of sundays times who rave about like a mad dog against germans ,French, Europe in general and ofcourse against blacks and socialists was also a sort of adviser to lady diana. That lady diana@s most of the friends during her fame have been what can be described, for lack of better word, a representative of greedy ‘80s is significant. Diana was a representative of that greedy shomful period called 80s and her main freinds were the same exploters which made 80s’climate of greed and shelfishness possible. Diana was minly liked by lower class shopkeepers and plumbers class -in other word whose forefatehrs were lumpen proletariat only a generation or two. She was neither aristocratic in taste nor her freinds were. but the same diana -a darling of greedy exploters with no class_ is being pumpep up by british people as some angel. This is all to give themselves importance. While bbc and british media always ignore others countries’important and good news, the other countries should also ignore british media and operate the same volantary blanket on british news(which in reality are not important anyway). Therew is no point in giving exposure and importance to the very propaganda machinery(british media) which though belonging to not even a 4th leage in military is a dangerous adeversary for spreading lies and demoralisation (they call it cold war-the only war they are effective at).Even you see what happened after cold war then you realize that what a shame the cold war was adn only for the benefit of britain. Since then soviet empire is gone but britain still boasts of evil empire called british empire which existed before soviet empire. If it was all right for russins (as was advisedby britain ) to exchange pltanks for tracters, to exchange empire for so called freedom the why did not britain disban empire in 1880(the same level of power as enjoyed by Russia in 1970): why britain not stop forcefully imposing a sell of arms on saudi arabia?propaganda was that soveit union was governed by a select few without any say of parliament. Who were those western media peoples advising Yelstin to storm the parliaments and if possible kill the parlimentarians if they do not approve of yelstil plan to sell Russia to English tobacco and liquers interests and english pimps?

=========================================================
these protestant baptists((and so callled religious fundamentalists and evnagalicals bastards)) are the agents of england inside america and have always been.
thse baptists are the ones who created civil war for the benefit of british to reconquer america and during attack of britian in 1812 these baptists were acting as enemy agents inside amaerica.
these baptisat are called patrioit--now what a shame? the southern flag is sympbol of american patriotism when it was really an instrument of treachery to the american independence.

“ I am afraid the meddling small minded, fearful white boy is indicative of a large group of the amerikan types who still support a corrupt regieme of neo-con syncopants. He and those like him live in suspicion and fear of anyone different from themselves.
He was once a settler who cut down and burned the forest of New England because he was afraid of the wildlife. He was once a trader who passed out smallpox blankets to the Indians. Then later a buffalo hunter who decimated entire herds and left them to rot on the plains. His grandfather herded Japanese into camps, his father was at MyLai. His brothers are at Abu Graib and Gitmo. Where will he be tommorrow?”

“ but all non-WASP got (and still get) their time as scapegoat-du-jour: Native, Black, Chinese, Irish, Italian, Jew, Japanese, Catholic, Latino, and now Middle-Eastern, just to name a few. Along with the scapegoating goes the profiling, which is little more than prejudice and stereotypes made legal.”

The recent director of Harvard’s Carr Center for Human Rights, Michael Ignatieff, proposed in the New York Times in May 2004 that we should give U.S. presidents the authority to preventively detain U.S. citizens and to engage in “coercive interrogations” should the United States experience another terrorist attack like 9/11. Ignatieff argued that “defeating terror requires violence” and “might also require coercion, secrecy, deception, even violation of rights.” “Sticking too firmly to the rule of law simply allows terrorists too much leeway to exploit our freedoms,” he said.[1]

In addition to Harvard’s top human rights academic arguing on behalf of “torture lite,” Harvard Law School’s Alan Dershowitz supports “torture warrants” so that U.S. presidents can torture detainees in so-called “ticking bomb” cases.

==================================================================
britain is the number one parasite nation of this world and is the main eviul brain behind american offensive (perpetual war) everywhere in the world.  Why? Because only through american military might can a fourth rate country like england hope to have some influnce in the world.
and the rest of the world is resopibnsible for this-why has aljarreza engagesd the british journalists like frost in the english version?lokk how much propaganda english eversion al zareeja is making agasint irana nd zimbawe -in otherworlds doing the bidding for british media and british govermnet lies.
it is high time that thr british are removed forcibly or killed from evrywhere outside britian or may be even inside if they are not goign to stop destrying other nations.
britian must be deafeated militarily-not a great diffciluty with a coward nation-and must be eliminated as serious challnege to humanity
6th march,2007.

BBC comment(atleast her washingtons correspondent’s comments) on scooter LibBy’s gulity verdit on 6th march,2007--"it does not matter to white house as long as iraq war turns out to be all right”!! for BBc illegal occupation of iraq and killing of million civilians does not matter -it will be al r ight for american occupation. This is human rights and democracy ala BBc and british propaganda.
see and watch todays bbc and realize how much bbc and other british propaganda machinary is responsible for bush war crimes.
He also assuredly told that this “white house is quite safe"as wished for by the british ofocurse. during gore-bush florida tussle bbc was advocating gore to leave bush alone as britian was waiting for american missile defence to come her shore soon and so no delay in small matter of who should be presidentof usa be allowed.d-bit belicve it? look at all british propaganda between 1st novembr till 20th novembr of 2000.
it is high time that engish spies in american establishment be eliminated..

it is high time that these english spies in usa are taken care of .
from -----http://www.larouchepub.com/lar/2007/3416where_the_future.html

This article appears in the April 20, 2007 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.

Where the Future Lies
by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

British evil designs.

“ since the days of foolish Louis XIV, it has been a persisting, pro-imperial, Anglo-Dutch Liberal “geopolitical” strategy, sometimes called a Fabian strategy, to lure targeted rivals into wars by which they ruin themselves to Anglo-Dutch Liberal strategic advantage. This was the way in which the British East India Company acquired its private world empire, through the so-called “Seven Years War” culminating in the February 1763 Peace of Paris, and the London determination, from 1763 on, to crush those American colonies which had been crucial in Britain’s war to wrest Canada from France.

The U.S. War in Indo-China and the current U.S. military operations and postures in Southwest Asia, are typical of the ways in which London has induced the U.S. government to, repeatedly, play the fool in this way. Indeed, many among our Baby Boomers in the U.S. Congress are still playing the role of official dupes of that strategic game.

World War Three, or its equivalent, is a proposition now on the table, a policy to be openly rejected now, or to be adopted by default. The London-centered, still-as-always-geopolitical intention, is to pit the U.S.A. into a virtual, even an actual, nuclear war against Russia, China, and India. The number of suckers ready to bite that bait, within the U.S. Senate, for example, is more disgusting than it should be considered surprising. A Baby-Boomer fish, running for President or otherwise, that would swallow Gore’s “Global Warming” swindle, is clearly prepared to swallow almost any similarly baited hook.

The brief, but crucial role of that de facto political boss of the British East India Company, the Eighteenth Century’s Lord Shelburne, in his 1782 accession to the post of Prime Minister, was not only a crucial turning-point of inflection in course of world history; it has crucial relevance for any competent understanding of the strategic crisis of this planet today.

Not only did Shelburne maneuver the Americans’ allies, the U.S.A., France, and Spain, into separate peace negotiations, but, with the assistance of relevant freemasons under British control, notably the Martinist freemasonry, orchestrated the series of 1782-1789 developments leading into the self-destruction of U.S. ally France, that in a series of events which began with the atrocious farce which the British orchestrated as Philippe Egalité’s July 14, 1789 assault, armed and directed by him personally, at the Bastille. This was the assault conducted ostensibly on behalf of Philippe’s crony Jacques Necker’s candidacy for Prime Minister of Louis XVI’s France.[2] These events included such delicacies as the succession of that Reign of Terror, and that Bonaparte tyranny which Count Joseph de Maistre’s Martinist freemasonry orchestrated as the economic spoiling of continental Europe for British imperial advantage.

Heavens to Betsy!  NANR said something I agree with!

Mr. Singh:  I thought that I was an Anglophobe. Compared to you I’m John Bull himself.

Empire, Interventionism, and the Wall Street Journal
by Jacob G. Hornberger

On January 15, the Wall Street Journal carried a strange article entitled “Ron Paul and Foreign Policy” by Bret Stephens, a member of the Journal’s editorial board, which criticized Ron Paul’s libertarian foreign-policy views.

Taking libertarians to task for embracing a policy of non-intervention in the Middle East (and the rest of the world), Stephens pointed to 18th-century attacks by Barbary Pirates to make his case against noninterventionism. He claimed that private shippers would have been unable to hire or provide protection from piracy and, therefore, had to rely on the federal government to protect them from the pirates

So, after reading through so frightfully much, I got to the nub of Avatar Singh’s great screed.  It’s all England’s fault, just as Lyndon LaRouche has been claiming for decades.  Right.  And Elizabeth II is the world’s head drug kingpin (or is that queenpin?).  And I suppose Averill Harriman was her chief accomplice, just as Mr. LaRouche identified him.  Wheeeee!  I rather wish my forbears had remained in good old Anglo-Saxony.

Sally,
Was that parody or an attempt to prove my point that some seem to hate Israel/Jews more than they love America.
The only document important in bringing America into the war was the Zimmermann Telegram.
As for Jews in general, more Jews volunteeered for and died fighting for Germany and Austria-Hungary than for the allies, and that includes conscripted Jews used as human-waves by the antisemitic Russian Empire.

The idea that “Judea declared war on Germany” is absurd. After the Nazi came to power and started anti-Jewish actions, Jews in the US chose to voluntarily boycott German goods.
Sounds like a peaceful act to me.

I wish all libertarians would read Olaf Caroe’s “Wells of power, the oilfields of south-western Asia; a regional and global study”. It is obvious from the writings of libertarians that they have difficulty understanding world power politics.

Sid Cundiff,

I think the most damaging president on your (and likely many other) list is Woodrow Wilson.  He tied the USA to the Anglo-Saxon biased foreign politics, which seems to be perpetual war, colonisation, and the coveting of the unearned.  His politics was extremely one-sided in these matters, even though the US was a multi-ethnic state.  The US entry into WWI brought enormous destruction to the European continent: cultural, artistic, and scientific powerhouses were destroyed (mainly Germany and Austria-Hungary) due to the war itself, and prevented from regenerating due to the peace treaties in the war’s aftermath.  It is not entirely Wilson’s fault what happened in the aftermath of the war, the blame also goes to Lloyd George and Clemenceau, who insisted on destroying Germany and Central Europe for many decades to come, perhaps because they feared
competition.

Wilson’s internal politics corresponded to his visions of foreign affairs.  This can be seen not only from the establishment of the Federal Reserve system, but also from smaller issues like banning the film Spirit of ‘76, which gave a negative role to British Soldiers (considering that it was about the American Revolution, it is hard to fathom a positive role for British soldiers).

Maruska, now a believer in the “knife in the back” thesis, needs to tell us who wrote the Wiki article, and who edited it.  He continues to ignore the Balfour declaration’s date. Another “dangerous simplifier”.