Wednesday, November 30, 2011

Newt's Neocon Nattering Nabobs of Negativity

Newt's team, which has been working together informally for months, is led by Herman Pirchner, the founding president of a small, conservative think tank in Washington called the American Foreign Policy Council (AFPC). Also on Team Newt is AFPC Vice President Ilan Berman and AFPC Senior Fellow for Asian Studies Stephen Yates, a former staffer for Vice President Dick Cheney.

Cheney's top Middle East advisor David Wurmser is also part of the Newt campaign advisory team, along with former President Ronald Reagan's National Security Advisor Robert McFarlane, Reagan-era National Security Council (NSC) senior directors Norman Bailey and Ken deGraffenreid, Reagan-era Undersecretary of State for security assistance, science, and technology Bill Schneider, former CIA Director James Woolsey, and others. We're also told Newt is talking to former Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Peter Pace and former Central Command head Gen. John Abizaid.

The Left blows a gasket over the ‘neocon resurrection’

One of most entertaining reactions to last week’s AEI/Heritage/CNN debate has been the shock and horror of the left on discovering that the advocates of a robust conservative engagement in the world have not all disappeared. As they watched many of the Republican candidates answer questions from AEI scholars, it began to dawn on liberals that a GOP victory in 2012 could mean the return of many national security policies—from robust defense spending to enhanced interrogation and preemption—they thought they had assigned to the dustbin of history.

The liberal hand-wringing over the “return of the neocons” is fun to watch, but it is also a caricature of the state of the foreign policy discussion in the GOP. After all, it was just a few months ago that we were all debating the resurgence of Republican isolationism. Now, we are told, the GOP candidates (save Paul and Huntsman) are all Bush neocon retreads.

This of course ignores the fact that many neoconservatives were deeply critical of the Bush administration during its time in office (for coddling Mubarak and Putin and mishandling post-liberation Iraq, among other policies). And while liberal commentators were quick to point out that Paul Wolfowitz was a key architect of the Iraq war, his question to the candidates was about continuing the fight against AIDS and malaria in Africa—and he found some in the GOP field less than enthusiastic.

Newt’s Neocon Army

Here’s a taste of World Team Gingrich:

David Wurmser: Gingrich’s Middle East policy adviser was a notorious member of Vice President Cheney’s inner circle that pushed the U.S. into war in Iraq. Once he was questioned during an espionage probe while in the vice president’s office, and he was one of the names driving the initial support for the later disgraced Ahmed Chalabi. Asked by the Daily Telegraph in 2007 if he was a neocon, he offered this: “There’s nothing ‘neo’ about me. I’m a very medieval sort of guy.”

James Woosley: A former director of the CIA, Woolsey recently spoke at a panel hosted by the founder of Judicial Watch focused on President Obama’s “political jihad promoting Islam around the world.” Woolsey is a serious Iran hawk, warning that the way the West is dealing with the nation at the moment “rhymes with what was taking place in the 1930s [with Nazi Germany]”. Woolsey is a Democrat (of the Lieberman school) but he’s helped Republicans running for president before. In 2008, he advised John McCain.

Stephen Yates: Another ex-Cheney national security team member, Yates is known among other things for his work on China. One former U.S. ambassador to China familiar with Yates says he views “China as the solution to ‘enemy deprivation syndrome.’” As Counterpunch explained the theory, “You need some unifying enemy after the collapse of the Soviet Union.” Not exactly the most productive way to view one of America’s most important trading partner, perhaps.

Tuesday, November 29, 2011

CNN National Security Debate: Bring on the Neocons!

The debate was sponsored by the American Enterprise Institute and their fellow conservative think tank, The Heritage Foundation and rather than moderator Wolf Blitzer asking all of the questions, we got treated to a host of neoconservatives questioning the candidates.

Among them were Iraq surge architect, Frederick Kagan, PNAC member and Bush era war propagandist Danielle Pletka, Mr. 'Iraq can pay for its own reconstruction' and fellow chickenhawk Paul Wolfowitz, Cheney's Cheney and torture advocate David Addington, and they wrapped things up by taking a question from his fellow torture apologist and former Bush speechwriter, Marc Thiessen.

CNN would have had a hard time coming up with a much more discredited lineup of war mongering, torture apologists to ask these candidates questions, but I guess they could have asked the Cheney's, John Yoo, John Bolton and Bill Kristol to round things out. Nothing like them giving air time to try to rehabilitate these Bush era neocons.

Glenn Greenwald: Is Obama Fulfilling the Neocon Dream of Mass Regime Change in Muslim World?

Monday, November 28, 2011

Manchester Union-Leader: Then and Now

Today’s endorsement of neocon Newt Gingrich further demonstrates that The Manchester Union-Leader has substantially changed for the worse since the death of long-time president and publisher William Loeb (an admirer of Old Right Republican Robert Taft) which can be illustrated by Mr. Loeb's personal response to this letter below.

Thank you for your good letter. It will be turned over to the editors for publication.

The problem is that the leaders of the American financial complex are such brilliant specialists in their own fields but so ignorant to the world as a whole and so isolated by their wealth that they think that they can make more money as Lenin once said, "manufacturing and selling the rope that will be used to hang them"; but they don't believe in the last apart of that equation.

Neoconservatives Planned Regime Change Throughout the Middle East and Northern Africa 20 Years Ago

I’ve repeatedly documented that the Neocons planned regime change in Iraq, Libya, Iran, Syria and a host of other countries right after 9/11 … if not before.

And that Obama is implementing these same plans – just with a “kindler, gentler” face.

Glenn Greenwald provides further documentation that the various Middle Eastern and North African wars were planned before 9/11:

General Wesley Clark … said the aim of this plot [to "destroy the governments in ... Iraq, ... Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran”] was this: “They wanted us to destabilize the Middle East, turn it upside down, make it under our control.” He then recounted a conversation he had had ten years earlier with Paul Wolfowitz — back in1991 — in which the then-number-3-Pentagon-official, after criticizing Bush 41 for not toppling Saddam, told Clark: “But one thing we did learn [from the Persian Gulf War] is that we can use our military in the region – in the Middle East – and the Soviets won’t stop us. And we’ve got about 5 or 10 years to clean up those old Soviet regimes – Syria, Iran [sic], Iraq – before the next great superpower comes on to challenge us.” Clark said he was shocked by Wolfowitz’s desires because, as Clark put it: “the purpose of the military is to start wars and change governments? It’s not to deter conflicts?”

Obama & Neo-Cons move to obliterate Posse Comitatus

America is a “battleground” says South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham.

​The US government has been slowly eradicating the Posse Commitatus Act of 1878. That act banned the US government from using the US military in domestic law enforcement. Over the past few decades the US government has repeatedly violated the act. However, many Republicans have insisted that the Posse Commitatus Act needs to be respected to protect the rights of American Citizens.

South Carolina’s left-wing Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, however, is supporting provisions to eradicate Posse Commitatus and dramatically expand the powers of the Federal government.

The US Senate Armed Forces Committee, led by Carl Levin (D-MI) and John McCain (R-AZ), held a secret closed door session to insert ominous new Federal powers into the Defense Authorization Bill. This is the annual bill to fund the US military. These new powers were requested by the Obama administration.

The provisions would give the Federal government the power to insert the military into domestic law enforce and detain suspects indefinitely. While they claim that it will help “fight terrorism,” there is no limits to how the new powers could be abused. Critics call it an explicit creation of a police state.

American citizens would be denied all constitutional protections and there would be no oversight to prevent abuse. This is the same Federal government that intervened on behalf of the “underwear bomber” to get him on a plane to the US, even after his own father warned that he was a terrorist. This is the same US government that shadowed two of the 911 highjackers all the way from Malaysia, yet did nothing to stop them. We would be trusting the same people to decide who’s constitutional rights to suspend.

Friday, November 25, 2011

Showdown at Neocon Central

The Republican "national security" debate sponsored by Neocon Central the American Enterprise Institute and the Heritage Foundation captured perfectly the intellectual and political bankruptcy of the Republican party when it comes to foreign policy. Here the party’s pandering demagoguery, reflexive ultra-nationalism, and visceral hostility to liberty was on full display in all its exhibitionistic belligerence. It was only natural, therefore, that the first question was asked by disgraced former US Attorney General Edwin Meese, who was forced to resign as Reagan’s AG as a result of his complicity in obtaining big defense contracts for a phony "minority"-owned company. Here is his "question":

"At least 42 terrorist attacks aimed at the United States have been thwarted since 9/11. Tools like the Patriot Act have been instrumental in finding and stopping terrorists. Shouldn’t we have a long range extension of the investigative powers contained in that act so that our law enforcement officers can have the tools that they need?"

Thursday, November 24, 2011

Israeli lobbies dragging US into wars

Press TV: Let's look at Ron Paul's comments about the situation in dealing with Israel and possibly attacking Iran. What makes Ron Paul able to speak in the way that he does? Because we know, in general, with anyone running for president in the United States, if they do not come a straight beeline in support of Tel Aviv policies, basically, they're finished. What makes the situation a little bit different for Ron Paul? And, thanks so much for being with us.

Morris: There's been a long running rift in the Republican Party, the neo-conservatives such as American Enterprise Institute which sponsored that debate tonight. And, mind you, it was hosted by the former AIPAC news letter editor, Wolf Blitzer, who use to be a correspondent for the hawkish Jerusalem Post whose issue really set the context for that too. And he's been pushing for war with Iran as well.

Iran Attack Dominates GOP Debate Sponsored by Neocon Institute

Prior to the GOP debate last night, the Obama administration sent adviser Tom Donilon to the Brookings Institute where he insisted Iran has been weakened under its sanctions regime. Donilon admitted, however, that sanctions have not led to Iran “fundamentally altering its behavior.”

Following the beating of the war drums at a debate sponsored by an organization responsible in large part for the illegal attack on Iraq under false pretense, Iranian General Yahya Rahim Safavi said his country is prepared “for the worst case scenario.”

Bush Officials Ask Questions At GOP Debate

A Question for the Bloodthirsty, Warmongering Neocon Strangelovians at AEI

What a spectacle the parade of bloodthirsty chickenhawks from the American Enterprise Institute and the Heritage Foundation at last nights presidential "debate" was. Every question was essentially: "Would you as president bomb _______________ (fill in the blank) with expected applause if the answer is "yes" and silence from the most constipated looking audience in the history of television if the answer was "no."

Here's a question I would have asked to all the appointed question askers: "Since Israel has hundreds of nuclear missiles and could vaporize the Iranian capitol in an instant, what makes you so confident that the Iranian politicians are hell bent on committing personal and national suicide by attacking Israel?"

What a joke that "AEI" still claims to study "enterprise." (And weren't the question askers the most unhealthy-looking group of people to appear on television in recent memory — especially Paul Wolfowitz, who looked like a ghost?)

A Neoconservative Thanksgiving Celebration

Scott Horton of joins Daily Paul Radio with Kurt Wallace for ‘A Neoconservative Thanksgiving Celebration’ to discuss the history of neoconservatism through today. Scott Horton exposes the people behind the neocon movement and how they have influenced war policy through think tanks, the media and ways they operate today to promote unconstitutional wars of aggression.

Monday, November 21, 2011

Neo Con Sites and Pro Israel Christians Still Trying to Find an Excuse to Attack Iran

The oligarchs need a war really bad. They need a distraction from the bad economy. The occupy movement has now become a thorn in their side. Seeing all those unemployed people with time on thier hands and great number does not bode well with the politicians. The corrupt scandals in the White House are making headlines. Congress being caught doing insider trading has lowered further the approval rating of congress that make them less popular than Fidel Castro. Ron Paul is gaining ground in Iowa and all the so called top tier candidates are floundering. Mit Romney is the next card to fall giving eh Texas congressmen more appeal.

We have become a war weary nation. We are not please with drone warfare in Pakistan, and Somalia. The wars keep spreading like a cancer in Uganda and in Libya. The Americans are not pleased because we have not consented to these wars. Congress is acting like a potted plants doing nothing to keep a check on the power of the commander and chief. The national discontent among the people is coming to a flash point were the other side fears losing everything. The people do not see a democrat or republican party. We only see the globalist party representing the one percent and not the 99 percent.

Sunday, November 20, 2011

How can you tell a neocon is lying?

Q: How can you tell a neocon is lying?
A: His lips are moving.

Esteemed right-wing intellectual Charles Krauthammer — winner of the Breindel Award, the Irving Kristol Award, and the Bradley Prize, which are among the various prizes available to right-wing apparatchiks, as well as the Pulitzer Prize, which is available to right and left alike — is outraged that President Obama thinks Americans are lazy. Krauthammer presents his evidence that Obama secretly hates America:

“When you call your own country 'lazy' when you are abroad and you call it unambitious and soft when you're home, I think what you are showing is not tough love, but ill-concealed contempt," Krauthammer said on FOX News' "Special Report."

"Obama is ready to blame everybody except himself for the lousy economy. … And now he blames Americans' laziness. I think it's unseemly."

Saturday, November 19, 2011

Latest Set of NeoCon Lies: Iran and Nuclear Weapons

The same set of neocon liars who brought you the “Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction” lies have surpassed themselves in introducing the new bogeyman: Iran and atom bombs.

As the war drums against Iran beat ever louder, a closer look at the International Atomic Energy Association’s recent report on Iran has revealed that its sources have not been named but are, according to Reuters, “widely believed to come from US, its European allies such Britain, France and Germany as well as Israel.”

It will be recalled that these are the very same “intelligence” sources which claimed in 2001 that Iraq had chemical and atom bombs, something which has long since been proven to have been an outright lie, based on forgeries and fabrications.

Thursday, November 17, 2011

CNBC Censorship, Dangerous Neocon Rising, and OWS

Neocon Romney Pushes for War with Iran

There were some amusing gaffes in Saturday night’s little watched Republican presidential debate on foreign policy, but “Establishment” candidate Mitt Romney provided perhaps the scariest moment in his comments about Iran’s nuclear program.

Said the former governor:

… President Obama’s greatest failing, from a foreign policy standpoint, …is he recognized the gravest threat that America and the world faces was a nuclear Iran and he did not do what was necessary to get Iran to be dissuaded from their nuclear folly…He should have put in place crippling sanctions against Iran.”

And in what he surely hoped would be his tagline, Romney said: “If we re-elect Barack Obama, Iran will have a nuclear weapon. And if you elect Mitt Romney, Iran will not have a nuclear weapon.”

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Progressive, Neocon, whatever – it’s all Big Government

We’ve been arguing for some time (see here and here) that there’s no philosophical or practical difference between the “Progressive” and Neocon agendas. Oh, how good it feels to see someone from the left validate that message. Here’s Glenn Greenwald:

As I pointed out just yesterday, many Democrats not only passively acquiesce to Obama’s continuation of core Bush/Cheney Terrorism policies, but enthusiastically cheer it as proof that they, too, can be Tough and Strong (manly virtues demonstrated by how many human beings their leader kills from afar). So here you have Think Progress heaping praise on Obama for seizing what is literally the most radical power a President can seize: the power to target — in total secrecy and with no checks or due process — their fellow citizens for execution: specifically, assassination-by-CIA.

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

So you want to be a neoconservative? C’est facile!

Recently I read that Robert Kagan is the smartest neocon around and, being enormously competitive, I bought a couple of his books-- skinny ones--to figure out what makes him so goddamn smart. And then it came to me: I have to spend more time in the south of France! A few of Kagan's mots juste:

Louis XIV remarked, "L'Etat c'est moi"

Napoleon attempted to promote egalite and fraternite with the sword

France's proposed defense budget increase will prove, like the force de frappe

Hubert Vedrine coined the term hyperpuissance to describe an American behemoth
But leaving aside French amour propre

Some Frenchmen still yearn for la gloire

Joschka Fischer's volte face was the most striking

Neocon Graham on Iran: "Destroy their Air force, sink their Navy"

Monday, November 14, 2011

The Neocon Playbook

“If we re-elect Barack Obama, Iran will get a nuclear weapon,” he said. “If we elect Mitt Romney, Iran will not.” -Mitt Romney during last night’s GOP debate

Nook-uh-lur weapons! Mushrooms clouds! Booga booga!

Dick Cheney and Condoleezza Rice would be so proud.

The ironic thing is, President Obama is already doing everything the GOP nominees claimed they would do if they were in charge during last night’s debate. A wide range of economic sanctions and diplomatic measures have been deployed against Iran in an attempt to dissuade them from pursuing advanced weaponry.

Friday, November 11, 2011

What Ends Nuclear Weapons Programs

A recurring canard, which neoconservatives are especially fond of perpetuating, is that the late Libyan ruler Muammar Qadhafi gave up his unconventional weapons programs (and his involvement in international terrorism) because the war in Iraq scared him into thinking he would also be a target of regime-changing U.S. military force. This notion serves the dual neocon purposes of suggesting that military force is the fail-safe solution to nuclear proliferation problems and salvaging some supposed value from the blunder known as the Iraq War. Joshua Muravchik repeats the notion in a piece this week (although Muravchik, unlike most other neocons, has in the past acknowledged that the Iraq War may have been a bad idea to begin with). The trouble with this notion is that Qadhafi had made his decision about ending his weapons programs and getting out of international terrorism years earlier, when the Iraq War was still only an out-of-reach dream in the fevered minds of out-of-power neocons. Following the Libyan dictator's decision, secret talks with the United States began in 1999 (which I know first-hand, because I participated in the initial rounds of the talks). At most, later events in Iraq might have helped to give the later rounds of negotiations a final nudge; they certainly were not a cause of Qadhafi's drastic redirection of policy, which he had decided on previously.

The Iraq liars target Iran

Over the past several weeks, neoconservative hawks were gleefully predicting that the International Atomic Energy Agency’s new report on Iran’s nuclear program would provide the spark needed to ignite and justify a U.S. or Israeli attack.

But apparently some people still take these warhawk neocons seriously. After all, if it weren’t for them, no one here would be contemplating a third war in the Middle East, one far more dangerous than the other two. In fact, it is impossible to find a single politician or journalist advocating war with Iran who is not a neocon or an AIPAC cutout. (They’re often both.) And even when not specifically advocating war, they ratchet up the tension by predicting it, as if, by definition, an Iran with or on the verge of developing nuclear weapons means war. (This, obviously, has not been the case with the seven other nations that have gone nuclear since the United States bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.)

Thursday, November 10, 2011

Tough guys: GOP’s Rick Perry and Rick Santorum go neocon on Iran

In their desperate bid to avoid any of the really critical issues that are affecting the United States of America, most runners in the GOP presidential race have opted instead to play the fear card, and build-up those crucial neoconservative credentials before the 2012 primaries.

Bilderberg candidate Rick Perry (TX) and rear guard runner Rick Santorum (PA) took the opportunity during their recent Iowa campaign trail to hop on the war hawk’s bandwagon ahead of today’s IAEA’s intelligence assessment on Iran’s allegedly nuclear weapons program.

The New York Times reported today that both men have taken clear pro-war stances, pledging their support for both joint and unilateral pre-emptive military strikes against the Islamic Republic.

Paul Craig Roberts: Neo-Cons want war with Iran just like Iraq

Iran is being targeted by The International Atomic Energy Agency. The IAEA is claiming Iran is gathering essential materials to build a nuclear warhead. Some critics feel this is reminiscent to the situation when the US had “concrete” evidence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction but were never found. Is Iran trying to acquire nuclear weapons or is this another ploy by the Western powers? Paul Craig Roberts, former Reagan administration official and columnist, helps us answer some of these questions.

Tuesday, November 08, 2011

Why I don't care if Herman's squirmin'

And then there's the fact that this ardent advocate of the "neo" conservative cause is not even aware there's a difference between that left-wing ideology and genuine conservatism:

On "Meet the Press" Sunday morning, host David Gregory asked Cain who has shaped his views on foreign policy.

"I've looked at the writings of people like Ambassador John Bolton," replied Cain. "I've looked at the writings of Dr. Henry Kissinger -- KT McFarland, someone I respect."

John Bolton? That Captain Kangaroo clone is perhaps the single most clueless exemplar of neoconservatism in America. If we'd followed Bolton's advice, we'd be in several more wars at the moment, none of which would be accomplishing anything whatsoever for our national interest.

Sunday, November 06, 2011

Michael Jansen: Beating the war drums

Israel and its neoconservative champions in the US and elsewhere are, once again, playing a dangerous game by threatening to bomb Iran. The aim, say Israel and its allies, is to destroy Tehran’s nuclear facilities before it is able to, to quote Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak, “achieve nuclear [weapons] capability,” i.e., the ability to build nuclear bombs rather than actual possession of bombs. Barak can count on an arsenal of at least 200 nuclear devices and advanced delivery systems, thanks to French and US support.

This time the Israelis began beating the war drums ahead of a report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Iran’s past attempts to achieve the capability to manufacture nuclear weapons. This report is expected to prompt the US and France to step up pressure on members of the UN Security Council to agree to toughen sanctions against Iran.

Neocon angst over Iraq

Krauthammer today bemoans BO's "failure" to pressure Maliki into granting American troops permanent legal extraterritoriality in Iraq. He clearly believes that Iraq was willing and eager to be a satrapy of a growing American/Israeli imperium. That imperium has always been the desired end state envisioned in neocon efforts over the last decade. All their protestations concerning modernity, democracy, etc. are just chaff. These lies are and have been distractions, dust thrown in the eyes of the gullible.

The Iraqi Shia Arabs have now asserted the ownership of the country that the US neocons bestowed on them. Proof of that ownership has been delivered in the form of effective expulsion of US forces.

Assessing Obama’s ‘Peace’ Moves

American neocons are accusing President Barack Obama of “losing” Iraq with his final troop withdrawal – and some anti-war activists are encouraged by his possible strategy shift away from combat in Afghanistan. So, is there a sea change underway in the course of the U.S. ship of state, asks Robert Parry.

The two developments represent a defeat for the neocons, who have long advocated an unapologetic American imperialism especially in Muslim lands, and a victory for the American anti-war movement, which has joined with the Occupy Wall Street protests in calling for a redirection of budget priorities away from coddling bankers and spending on wars to programs to create jobs and rebuild the middle-class.

Saturday, November 05, 2011

Bill Bennet Responds to Feedback, Ignores Men, Bashes them Again

Bennet remarked that he received a fair amount of reader response from his recent piece excoriating young men for failing to “man up.” He says that he received responses from both men and women, and then proceeded to ignore what men had to say in favor of listening to the females:

My first CNN column on this subject identified what I think are the common problems with some men today: deficiencies in work, marriage and faith. The overwhelming response I received, from men and women alike, worries me.

Many women told me the problems are much worse than I described. They explained to me how they have to lower their standards to find a man. Young women, in particular, complained that men are dragging them down and holding them back. As one woman told me, if 60 is the new 40 for men, then 25 is the new 13…

Wednesday, November 02, 2011

Neocon Lamentations on Iraq

Neocons are attacking President Obama for his plan to end the U.S. occupation of Iraq by the end of December. Never mind that Obama is operating under the contractual agreement entered into between former President Bush and the Iraqi regime his invasion installed into power. And never mind that there will still be thousands of U.S. diplomats, military personnel, security people, contractors, and CIA spies and assassins in the vast Vatican-sized U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. What matters is that Obama had a moral duty, the neocons say, of continuing the U.S. occupation of Iraq indefinitely into the future.

Why do the neocons want to continue the U.S. occupation of Iraq? Because they know that 9 years of military invasion, war of aggression, undeclared war, and occupation have produced nothing but failure, and hope springs eternal. Neocons think that another 9 years of occupation, and perhaps another 9 years after that (a 9-9-9 plan for the occupation of Iraq) will finally produce an economic paradise, one with peace and stability, governed by a loyal member of the U.S. Empire.

Tuesday, November 01, 2011

Neocon TV Personality: Disarm the Citizenry

Has Charles Krauthammer, who tells us Ron Paul and his budget are terrible and “extreme,” revised his position on this? From “Disarm the Citizenry, But Not Yet,” Washington Post, April 5, 1996 (with thanks to J.M.):

Ultimately, a civilized society must disarm its citizenry if it is to have a modicum of domestic tranquility of the kind enjoyed in sister democracies like Canada and Britain….

Passing a law like the assault weapons ban is a symbolic — purely symbolic — move in that direction. Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the public to the regulation of weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation….

Yes, in the end America must follow the way of other democracies and disarm.

Occupy is NOT anti-capitalist. That is sloppy NeoCon propaganda.

"There are indeed some anti-capitalist protesters among the people at Occupy Wall Street, just as there are protesters who are against the death penalty, or want to combat climate change, or any number of other causes, which is the norm at most mass protests. Some of the protesters are even supporters of the ultra-capitalist REP. RON PAUL (R-TX).

But the actual organizing principle of the demonstrations is to speak with moral clarity of the economic inequality of our current system. The purpose is not to attack capitalism but rather an industry whose wealth was guarded to the hilt by government intervention — backed up by trillons of dollars of taxpayer money through programs like the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and near-zero interest Federal Reserve lending."