Trackbacked at the Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler:
The House on Friday handily rejected a timetable for pulling U.S. forces out of Iraq, culminating a fiercely partisan debate between Republicans and Democrats feeling the public’s apprehension about war and the onrushing midterm campaign season.
In a 256-153 vote that mirrored the position taken by the Senate earlier, the GOP-led House approved a nonbinding resolution that praises U.S. troops, labels the Iraq war part of the larger global fight against terrorism and says an “arbitrary date for the withdrawal or redeployment” of troops is not in the national interest.
“Retreat is not an option in Iraq,” declared House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio. “Achieving victory is our only option … We have no choice but to confront these terrorists, win the war on terror and spread freedom and democracy around the world.”
Soon after Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) appeared on CNN’s “The Situation Room” to talk about the Iraq resolution that passed in the House earlier. He spoke against the resolution and advocated withdrawing the troops like Clinton did in Somalia.
The thing that disturbed me and worries me about this whole thing is we can’t get them to change direction.
Huh? This former Marine is advocating cutting and running? Not surprising coming from the first person on this planet to make the accusation that fellow Marines “killed innocent civilians in cold blood” before an investigation could be started.
But let’s look at the facts here (something the Liberals hate doing on their own). US Forces were once in Somalia, and then-President Clinton, in 1993, had them cut and run (just like what Murtha wants the US forces in Iraq to do today). You do remember the the Black Hawk down attack, don’t you?
So what did the leaders of the opposition forces in Somalia have to say about US forces leaving the battle? Would it amaze you to know that one of the key players then was someone named Osama bin Laden?
After leaving Afghanistan, the Muslim fighters headed for Somalia and prepared for a long battle, thinking that the Americans were like the Russians,” bin Laden said. “The youth were surprised at the low morale of the American soldiers and realized more than before that the American soldier was a paper tiger and after a few blows ran in defeat. And America forgot all the hoopla and media propaganda … about being the world leader and the leader of the New World Order, and after a few blows they forgot about this title and left, dragging their corpses and their shameful defeat.
So Murtha is wanting us to do again what we once did in Somalia – and that was to embarass the US and embolden the Islamofascists? After all Somalia is seen by some to be al Qaeda’s new safe haven. Somalia’s U.N.-backed government is close to falling (but, then, when have you ever heard of the UN ever saving anyone?).
And this is what Murtha wants for Iraq? The “change of direction” in Somalia led to 9/11. Bin Laden believed, based largely on our behavior in Somalia, that we would not fight back if attacked, or that would not sustain the fight if we did decide to strike out at him. Somalia showed bin Laden that the US was a paper tiger with no will to fight. And that’s what Murtha is suggesting for Iraq.
When does it become legitimate to question not only Murtha’s patriotism, but also his loyalty, and even his sanity? This humanoid is becomming unhinged, and yet he remains an elected Congressman. But it gets even better.
Murtha was on “Meet the Press” this past weekend. Here he humbly shared his wisdom with all the great unwashed of the world: Redeploy our troops outside Iraq and base our air power for that war in Okinawa.
Okinawa. As in Okinawa, Japan. Over 4,000 nautical miles away from Iraq, and completely on the other side of Iran and China.
Forget the “minor detail” that a team of military intelligence operatives, counterterrorism commandos of the Delta Force, and the Navy’s SEAL Team 6, plus Army Rangers, were on the ground watching Zarqawi. We could have just sent a pair of F-16′s 4000 miles from Okinawa, with no “eyes on target”, and could have accomplished the mission (the fact that the operational range of an F-16 is only 740 nautical miles should not enter into the equation).
But Murtha has been calling for a cut-and-run to Okinawa since late 2005. Murtha called the Iraq War “unwinnable” back in May of 2004. This does not sound like a former Marine. This does not even sound like an American. It does sound like the voice of a deranged anti-American terrorist.
Is John Murtha a member of an al Qaeda sleeper cell?
John Murtha, Somalia, cut and run, Iraq, Okinawa, cut-and-run
1 response so far ↓
1 Colonel Angus Longinus // Jun 23, 2006 at 11:52 pm
David Ernst Duke is a malignant narcissist and a Domestic Terrorist.
Dr. Duke invents and then projects a false, fictitious, self for the world to fear, or to admire. Dr. Duke maintains a tenuous grasp on reality to start with and the trappings of power further exacerbate this. Real life authority and David Ernst Duke’s predilection to surround him with obsequious sycophants support David Ernst Duke’s grandiose self-delusions and fantasies of omnipotence and omniscience.
David Ernst Duke’s personality is so precariously balanced that Dr. Duke cannot tolerate even a hint of criticism and disagreement. Most narcissists are paranoid and suffer from ideas of reference, the delusion that they are being mocked or discussed when they are not. Thus, narcissists often regard themselves as “victims of persecution”.
Duke fosters and encourages a personality cult with all the hallmarks of an institutional religion: priesthood, rites, rituals, temples, worship, catechism, and mythology. The leader is this religion’s ascetic saint. Dr. Duke monastically denies himself earthly pleasures, or so Dr. Duke claims in order to be able to dedicate himself fully to his calling.
Duke is a monstrously inverted Jesus, sacrificing his life and denying himself so that his people – or humanity at large – should benefit. By surpassing and suppressing his humanity, Duke became a distorted version of Nietzsche’s “superman”. But being a-human or super-human also means being a-sexual and a-moral.
In this restricted sense, narcissistic leaders are post-modernist and moral relativists. They project to the masses an androgynous figure and enhance it by engendering the adoration of nudity and all things “natural” – or by strongly repressing these feelings. But what they refer to, as “nature” is not natural at all.
Duke invariably proffers an aesthetic of decadence and evil carefully orchestrated and artificial – though it is not perceived this way by him or by his followers. Narcissistic leadership is about reproduced copies, not about originals. It is about the manipulation of symbols – not about veritable atavism or true conservatism.
In short: narcissistic leadership is about theatre, not about life. To enjoy the spectacle, and be subsumed by it, the leader demands the suspension of judgment, depersonalization, and de-realization. Catharsis is tantamount, in this narcissistic dramaturgy, to self-annulment.
Narcissism is nihilistic not only operationally, or ideologically. Its very language and narratives are nihilistic. Narcissism is conspicuous nihilism – and the cult’s leader serves as a role model, annihilating the Man, only to re-appear as a pre-ordained and irresistible force of nature.
Narcissistic leadership often poses as a rebellion against the “old ways” – against the hegemonic culture, the upper classes, the established religions, the superpowers, the corrupt order. Narcissistic movements are puerile, a reaction to narcissistic injuries inflicted upon David Ernst Duke like, and rather psychopathic, toddler nation-state, or group, or upon the leader.
Minorities or “others” – often arbitrarily selected – constitute a perfect, easily identifiable, embodiment of all that is “wrong”. They are accused of being old, they are eerily disembodied, they are cosmopolitan, they are part of the establishment, they are “decadent”, they are hated on religious and socio-economic grounds, or because of their race, sexual orientation, origin … They are different, they are narcissistic, feel and act as morally superior, they are everywhere, they are defenseless, they are credulous, they are adaptable, and thus can be co-opted to collaborate in their own destruction. They are the perfect hate figure. Narcissists thrive on hatred and pathological envy by relishing in their aspirations by masking anarchy with a well-developed smokescreen of order.
This is precisely the source of the fascination with Hitler, diagnosed by Erich Fromm – together with Stalin – as a malignant narcissist. Dr. Duke was an inverted human. His unconscious was his conscious. Dr. Duke acted out our most repressed drives, fantasies, and wishes. Dr. Duke provides us with a glimpse of the horrors that lie beneath the veneer, the barbarians at our personal gates, and what it was like before we invented civilization. Hitler forced us all through a time warp and many did not emerge. Dr. Duke was not the devil. Dr. Duke was one of us. Dr. Duke was what Hannah Arendt aptly called the banality of evil. Just an ordinary, mentally disturbed, failure, a member of a mentally disturbed and failing nation, who lived through disturbed and failing times. Dr. Duke was the perfect mirror, a channel, a voice, and the very depth of our souls.
Duke prefers the sparkle and glamour of well-orchestrated illusions to the tedium and method of real accomplishments. His reign is all smoke and mirrors, devoid of substances, consisting of mere appearances and mass delusions. In the aftermath of his regime – Duke having died, been deposed, or voted out of office – it all unravels. The tireless and constant prestidigitation ceases and the entire edifice crumbles. What looked like an economic miracle turns out to have been a fraud-laced bubble. Loosely held empires disintegrate. Laboriously assembled business conglomerates go to pieces. “Earth shattering” and “revolutionary” scientific discoveries and theories are discredited. Social experiments end in mayhem exposing the voracious jealousy and covert treason.
It is important to understand that the use of violence must be ego-syntonic. It must accord with the self-image of David Ernst Duke. It must abet and sustain his grandiose fantasies and feed his sense of entitlement. It must conform David Ernst Duke like narrative. Thus, David Duke who regards himself as the benefactor of the poor, a member of the common folk, the representative of the disenfranchised, the champion of the dispossessed against the corrupt elite – is highly unlikely to use violence at first. The pacific mask crumbles when David Ernst Duke has become convinced that the very people Dr. Duke purported to speak for, his constituency, his grassroots fans, and the prime sources of his narcissistic supply – have turned against him. At first, in a desperate effort to maintain the fiction underlying his chaotic personality, David Duke strives to explain away the sudden reversal of sentiment. “The people are being duped by, the media, big industry, the military, and the elite,” “they don’t really know what they are doing,” “following a rude awakening, they will revert to form,” when these flimsy attempts to patch a tattered personal mythology fail, David Duke becomes mortally injured. Narcissistic injury inevitably leads to narcissistic rage and to a terrifying display of unbridled aggression. The pent-up frustration and hurt translate into devaluation. That which was previously idealized – is now discarded with contempt and hatred. This primitive defense mechanism is called “splitting”. To David Ernst Duke, things and people are either entirely bad, evil, or entirely good. Dr. Duke projects onto others his own shortcomings and negative emotions, thus becoming a totally good object. Duke is likely to justify the butchering of his own people by claiming that they intended to kill him, undo the revolution, devastate the economy, or the country.
The “small people”, the “rank and file”, and the “loyal soldiers” of David Ernst Duke – his flock, his nation, and his employees – they pay the price.
The disillusionment and disenchantment are agonizing. The process of reconstruction, of rising from the ashes, of overcoming the trauma of having been deceived, exploited and manipulated – is drawn-out. It is difficult to trust again, to have faith, to love, to be led, to collaborate. Feelings of shame and guilt engulf the erstwhile followers of David Ernst Duke. This is his sole legacy: a massive post-traumatic stress disorder.