He goes around calling his opponents fascist and is applauded by sites including wikipedia as an "investigative journalist." The wikipedia list of investigative journalists includes this fringe conspiracy theorist Alex Constantne. Alex said:

Once again, the Conservative Voice, a mine of ringing right-wing propaganda, is taking me to task for debunking the "Islamo-fascism" red herring.

I'm debunking you, Alex and am showing the world that you're not at all an "investigative journalist" as sites like wikipedia claim. When it comes to investigative journalism, Alex is a fraud. He gives no proof that Islamo-fascism is a hoax, while I give piles of proof. I quoted Hassan Al-Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood. I quoted Mustafa Saied, a former member of the Muslim Brotherhood, from 1994-1998. Unlike Alex, instead of basless name calling, I give proof. Alex, you claim it's a hoax. Sites like United Copts for Great Britain have a section called radical Islam watch and a list of hardships and list of atrocities on Copts. Yet Alex will dismiss it as a fascist site because it gives facts instead of Alex's weird conspiracy theories. 
Alex claims:

Paul Krugman is correct: "There isn't actually any such thing as Islamofascism — it's not an ideology; it's a figment of the neocon imagination."
http://neveryetmelted.com/index.php/no-islamofascism/

Paul is not right one bit. Yea, Alex needs a quote, which is no match for my piles of proof that Islamo-fascism is real.

Alex may dismiss another Coptic writer Magdi Khalil as a fascist for exposing the Islamist threat. Magdi Khalil exposes the Muslim Brotherhood as part of the Islamo-fascist threat. Go read one of his articles ''The Muslim Brotherhood and the Copts.'' He is a courageous Arab fighting Islamo-fascism and opposes the terrorism that the Islamic world exports. An Islamic site Islamdaily has pasted a previous version of one of my articles the real war with Islam, which states that radical Islamists [also islamo-fascists] are fighting the real war on Islam. Islamo-fascism is also a revival movement that want to return to the days of the Islamic caliphate and impose it on the whole world [though the caliphate the Islamists seek to impose on the world would be even worse than the previous ones ].

 Coptic sites actually take articles exposing radical Islam, which the same thing as Islamo-fascism, something which Alex doesn't believe in.

Alex continues:

Neocons parroting Bush, badly in need of a dictionary, promote the "islamo-fascism" line, eg. Raymond Ibrahim, editor of the Al Qaeda Reader, an omelet of texts written by Islamic extremists, and compares the words of Al Qaeda to Mein Kampf. 

Ibrahim performs this service at David Horowitz's FrontPage site.
It's fairly well-known that Horowitz receives generous funding fromIt's fairly well-known that Horowitz receives generous funding from Richard Mellon Scaife - a CIA propagandist since the early days of the cold war. (The intelligence connection runs in the family: "During World War II, while Richard and Cordelia's father, Alan Scaife, served in Europe in the OSS, the forerunner to the CIA, the Scaife family lived in Washington."
- http://www.salon.com/news/1998/04/07news.html) - a CIA propagandist since the early days of the cold war. (The intelligence connection runs in the family: "During World War II, while Richard and Cordelia's father, Alan Scaife, served in Europe in the OSS, the forerunner to the CIA, the Scaife family lived in Washington."
- http://www.salon.com/news/1998/04/07news.html)

Alex alleges that Richard Scaife got was a CIA propagandist. I did a little bit of research on him. Alex provides no evidence that Scaife is a "CIA propagandist." He never was in the CIA. He quotes an article form the Salon, which says that his father Alan served in "Europe in the OSS, the forerunner of the CIA, the Scaife fmaily lived in Washington." Alex admits that the Al Quada reader is a list of texts by Islamic extremists.  He attacks Raymond Ibrahim, discrediting him because he "performs his service at Daivd Horowitz's Frontpage site." That's the most pethetic attmept to discredit Raymond Ibrahim that I have ever seen.So his pethetic attempt to discredit Raymond Ibrhahim was that he worked for David Horowtiz's fontpage magazine site and that David Horowitz was funded by Richard Scaife, the so-called CIA propagandist. That doesn't discredit Raymond, but shows more that Alex is makes baseless attacks on his opponenets.

Alex said:
Scaife supports a phalanx of organizations that, like the FrontPage site, distribute fascist propaganda. They all have ties to the CIA:

American Enterprise Institute
Atlas Economic Research Foundation
David Horowitz Freedom Center
Federalist Society
Foundation for Economic Education
Free Congress Foundation (headed by Paul Weyrich)
Freedom House
GOPAC (headed by Newt Gingrich)
Independent Women's Forum
Intercollegiate Studies Institute (which operates the Collegiate Network)
Judicial Watch
Landmark Legal Foundation
Media Research Center (headed by Brent Bozell)
Pacific Legal Foundation
Pittsburgh World Affairs Council
Reason Foundation

http://www.answers.com/topic/richard-scaife

.Here, Alex goes again, accusing organizations he dislikes of being "fascist" organizations connected to the CIA. That's our so-called investigative journalist Alex Constantine at work. By the way Alex, if you're going to pretend to be an investigative journalist, at least talk like one instead of saying that you're opponents are fascists, CIA fronts, CIA agents or CIA propagandists. Alex being an investigative journalist is as ridiculous and as laughable as Che Guevara being a heroic guerilla warrior. Alex said:

Most of these CIA-subsidized propagandists are towing the "Islamo-Fascism" clunker. Krugman: " ... a bunch of lightly armed terrorists and a fourth-rate military power — which aren't even allies — pose a greater danger than Hitler's panzers or the Soviet nuclear arsenal ever did. ... "
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/10/29/krugman-no-such-thing-as-islamofascism/.

Paul Krugman writes a distorted article in the NY Times stating that Islamo-fascism is a hoax. Alex cites it and pastes what Crooks and liars says about the article as well as the excerpt that appeared on it's site. Alex, Crooks and Liars is liberal propaganda. As I stated in my article ''Liberals deny threat from Iran'', it sponsored [though through a hyperlink to another site] that calls for normalizaiton of relations between the US and Iran and has a video arguing that America is the bad guy in Iran, even bringing in the 1953 coup to "prove" it.  Paul writes a distored aritcle, repeating the same liberal propaganda on Islamo-fascism, in the NY Times. It get's cited by Crooks and Liars, which is nototious for its liberal propaganda, and the fringe conspiracy theorist I'm exposing, Alex Constantine. Paul, it's not just neo-conservatives who make these claims. Liberals like to attack these "neo-conservaties," who expose the threat from radical Islam. It wasn't neo-conservaties who exposed the Muslim Brotherhood project, which was completed in 1982. It was exposed by the Swiss in 2001 after raiding the house of Youseff Nada, who was head of the Al-Taqwa bank, which funds radical Islamist terrorists including Al Quada. Nada is another member of the Muslim Brotherhood.Bin-ladin, in his letter to America, which was translated by and appeared in the Guardian, which is no way a Conservative site, called on America to convert to Islam. Bin ladin said:

(Q2) As for the second question that we want to answer: What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?
(1) The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam. 
(a) The religion of the Unification of God; of freedom from associating partners with Him, and rejection of this; of complete love of Him, the Exalted; of complete submission to His Laws; and of the discarding of all the opinions, orders, theories and religions which contradict with the religion He sent down to His Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Islam is the religion of all the prophets, and makes no distinction between them - peace be upon them all.
It is to this religion that we call you; the seal of all the previous religions. It is the religion of Unification of God, sincerity, the best of manners, righteousness, mercy, honour, purity, and piety. It is the religion of showing kindness to others, establishing justice between them, granting them their rights, and defending the oppressed and the persecuted. It is the religion of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil with the hand, tongue and heart. It is the religion of Jihad in the way of Allah so that Allah's Word and religion reign Supreme. And it is the religion of unity and agreement on the obedience to Allah, and total equality between all people, without regarding their colour, sex, or language.
(b) It is the religion whose book - the Quran - will remained preserved and unchanged, after the other Divine books and messages have been changed. The Quran is the miracle until the Day of Judgment. Allah has challenged anyone to bring a book like the Quran or even ten verses like it.

Yea, just another so-called neo-conservative hoax. Robert Leiken joined in, using the label neo-conservative when the article on the Muslim Brotherhood by him and Steven Brookes on the Foreign Affairs was debunked. Robert Leiken and Steven Brook whitewash the Muslim Brotherhood. It get's worse. The State Department asked Leiken on what US policy should be toward the Muslim Brotherhood. He, along with Steven Brooke, calls for the US to cooperate with the Muslim Brotherhood, which to them, rejects global jihad while embracing "defensive" jihad against the Soviets in Afghanistan, Americans in Iraq and against Israel. Leiken believes that attacking the Muslim Brotherhood is an "odd" way to support democracy because it is the main opposition to Hosni Mubarak [I'm no supporter of Mubarak but plenty of totalitarian groups are opposition groups in other dictatorships].

Leiken and brooke believe that the US should seperate radical Islam form the Muslim brotherhood, the father of that movement. By arguing that, they're worse than those who claimed Castro's Cuba wasn't Communist because even though Fidel Castro was a Communist, he wasn't the father of the Communist movment, like the Mulim Brotherhood is the father of the radical Islamist movement.

We have another guy named Paul who attacks these "neo-conservtives" supposedly trying to spread fear and believes that Iran does not want global Islamist domination. Ayatollah Khomeini said,"Establishing the Islamic state world-wide belong to the great goals of the revolution." He also said, "We will export our revolution throughout the world, and must abandon all idea of not doing so, for not only does Islam refuse to recognize any difference between Muslim countries, it is the champion of all oppressed people." He also said, "We are at war with infidels. Jihad must triumph."

 The Iranian terrorist reigme sponsoring demonstrations that call for the death of America and the death of Israel are real, not just "neo-conservative" propaganda. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's radical Islamist worldview is in a book, which calls for jihad on infidels, called "Al-Jihad," which was one of the books based on Iran's worldview that Hezbollah used as their manuel. Those books were exposed during the 2006 seocnd Lebanon war between Israel and Hezbollah. 

Ali Khamaenei spoke at a demonstration that said:

Allah Akbar, Allah Akbar, Allah Akbar, Khamenei is the leader. Death to the opposers of the rule of jurisprudent. Death to America. Death to England. Death to the hypocrites (Mujaheedin-E Khalq) and Saddam. Death to Israel.

Ali Khamenei spoke at that demonstration, saying that saying death to America is like saying that you want refuge from satan. The terrorist regime in Iran views America as the great satan and Israel as the small satan. Ali Khamenei, in 2001, told Jose Maria Aznar that Iran seeks to eliminate Israel and America. According to what Ali khamenei told Aznar, Iran's agenda is "setting Israel in fire."

Ali Khamenei called for spreading  "religious rites and beliefs throughout the world."

The constitution of the Islamic Republic on Iran said that the "Leadership shall continue the revolution of Islam.''

 Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called on Islam to conquer the mountain tops of the world and that the Islamic revolution is global. Iran is developing nuclear weapons to fight Israel and America and to help impose radical Islamist rule on the whole world. The Iranian regime promotes martyrdom.

The Middle East expert Bernard Lewis said that "Europe will become Islamic by the end of the century."

He also said:

It seems increasingly likely that the Iranians either have or very soon will have nuclear weapons at their disposal, thanks to their own researches (which began some 15 years ago), to some of their obliging neighbors, and to the ever-helpful rulers of North Korea. The language used by Iranian President Ahmadinejad would seem to indicate the reality and indeed the imminence of this threat.
Would the same constraints, the same fear of mutual assured destruction, restrain a nuclear-armed Iran from using such weapons against the U.S. or against Israel?

There is a radical difference between the Islamic Republic of Iran and other governments with nuclear weapons. This difference is expressed in what can only be described as the apocalyptic worldview of Iran's present rulers. This worldview and expectation, vividly expressed in speeches, articles and even schoolbooks, clearly shape the perception and therefore the policies of Ahmadinejad and his disciples.
Even in the past it was clear that terrorists claiming to act in the name of Islam had no compunction in slaughtering large numbers of fellow Muslims. A notable example was the blowing up of the American embassies in East Africa in 1998, killing a few American diplomats and a much larger number of uninvolved local passersby, many of them Muslims. There were numerous other Muslim victims in the various terrorist attacks of the last 15 years.
The phrase "Allah will know his own" is usually used to explain such apparently callous unconcern; it means that while infidel, i.e., non-Muslim, victims will go to a well-deserved punishment in hell, Muslims will be sent straight to heaven. According to this view, the bombers are in fact doing their Muslim victims a favor by giving them a quick pass to heaven and its delights--the rewards without the struggles of martyrdom. School textbooks tell young Iranians to be ready for a final global struggle against an evil enemy, named as the U.S., and to prepare themselves for the privileges of martyrdom.
A direct attack on the U.S., though possible, is less likely in the immediate future. Israel is a nearer and easier target, and Mr. Ahmadinejad has given indication of thinking along these lines. The Western observer would immediately think of two possible deterrents. The first is that an attack that wipes out Israel would almost certainly wipe out the Palestinians too. The second is that such an attack would evoke a devastating reprisal from Israel against Iran, since one may surely assume that the Israelis have made the necessary arrangements for a counterstrike even after a nuclear holocaust in Israel.*

Supreme Guide of the Muslim brotherhood Mohammad Madhi Akef 

said:

 I have complete faith that Islam will invade Europe and America, because Islam has logic and a mission.

Islamonline has two fatwa by the spiritual guide of the Muslim Brotherhood Yusuf Qaradawi [Qaradawi supports the Palestinian suicide bombings and other terror attacks on Israel and the insurgents in Iraq], one of which calls for the killing of apostates and the other calling for Islam to conquer the world. 

Crooks and liars, Paul and Alex, do you want me to go on with my "neo-conservative" facts?

Alex said:

Blogger Steve Benen comments, "The politics of fear might be more effective if it were grounded in reality."

Steve wrote that for the notorious liberal propaganda piece Crooks and liars. Steve, the "politics of fear" Islamo-fascism is "grounded in reality." Islamo-fascism is the biggest threat to the world. All of my proof about it will make this article a very long one, as I stated a lot of documented cases from above. Alex, here can only provide a few columnists who claim that Islamo-fascism is a hoax, without using actual evidence.

Alex said:

Why point the finger at the Middle East, when actual fascism is corporate and would probably not exist without the capitalistic impetus that flows internationally from the United States? 

Because the Middle East is full of totalitarian fascists such as Arab nationalists and radical Islamists, both of whom collaborated with the nazis.

The documentary ''Saddam and the Third Reich'' documents the Nazi influence of the Baath party, which is really a fascist party. One book you should read is ''The Nazi Connection to Islamic Terrorism'' by Chuck Morris. Islamists and Arab nationalists use the Nazi salute, while people who Alex calls fascist doesn't use the Nazi salute. There is no evidene that they're fascist. The "capitalist impus" in America is not fascist one bit. Alex claims:

Fascism is unbridled capitalism - it is a feature of American life. It elevates thugs and criminals to positions of power. It is inherently conspiratorial and engages in acts of destruction to advance itself. Scapegoating "Islamo-fascists" - when American corporations in league with their corallaries in Germany, Japan, Italy, etc., make fascism possible and feed the geo-genocidal beast. The Arabs may have had Nazi collaborators, as did America itself, many more, but make no mistake about it, the U.S. is the beating heart of it all. 

• IBM counted the Jews at Auschwitz - not shieks from Araby.

• GM mechanized the Blitzkrieg - not desert camel drivers.

• Standard Oil had a secret pact with the Reich - not fig farmers in Iraq.

• Coca-Cola had Nazi contracts - not the water-carrier out on the oasis.

The Arabs may have had Nazi connections claims Alex Constantine. Palestinian leader Al-Husseini commanded two Bosnian SS. divisions. There was never a pro-Nazi coup in America. Fascism is all American claims Alex. Then I guess the Nazis were not fascists because last time I checked, they were German. This "expert" on fascism Alex Constantine has never provided a definition for fascism. I read a lot [though not all] of the article that alleges that Coca-cola collaborates with Nazi Germany. All it mainly talked about was Coca-cola doing some advertising and selling cokes in Germany. That article claims that coke is ''useless.'' If coca-cola collbaorated with Nazi Germany, they would've done more. The Islamo-fascists and Arab fascists collaboration with the Nazis was actually fighting alongside them, having a pro-Nazi coup [in Iraq] and commanding two Bosnian Muslim SS divisions [the two Bosnian Muslim SS divisons were commanded by Al-Husseini], not simply selling cokes. As the article admits, coco-cola sold coke to America. Yea, the Nazis really needed their coke to achieve their totalitarian and genocidal goals. Coca Cola was selling coke in Nazi Germany. The nazis won't become more powerful because of a Coca Cola. Alex, the head of the "fascist" Coca Cola Max Keith kept rejecting offers to become a Nazi. The Nazis gave him a hard time for his refusal.Compare that to Arab nationalist and Islamist collaboration with Nazi Germany. The anti-Semitism in the Arab and Muslim world and in radical Islam has many features of Nazi anti-semitism. For example, the anti-Semitic cartoons in Arab and Middle Eastern newspapers are similar to the ones in Nazi Germany. Obsession shows the similarities [to see that part and the nazi influence in radical islam in the Obsession movie go to http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=FZOn7WYxxxc]. between Islamism and Nazism.The Arab nationalists and Islamo-fascists got the Nazi salute from the Nazis. The History Channel documentary ''Saddam and the Third Reich'' documents that the Baath party got many practices from the Nazis. Mein Kompf is a best-seller in the Arab world, not in any of these corporations that Alex alleges to have collaborated with Nazi Germany. Holocaust denial is powerful in the Arab and Muslim world. Akef said, "Western democracies have denounced all those who don't see eye to eye with the Zionists regarding the myth of the Holocaust."  The terror war on Israel is really a Nazified fascist  totalitarian war on Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East. Israel is a true friend to America.Alex accuses other companies of also collaborating with Nazi Germany.  One of them is the IBM. Though there was a book called IBM and the Holocaust [it was by Edwin Black who knows well about Arab collaboration with the Nazis and called the Baath party on the History Channel documentary Saddam and the Third Reich "a fascist party"], IBM denied it and said that the one in Germany was under Nazi control. IBM said:

IBM and its employees around the world find the atrocities committed by the Nazi regime abhorrent and categorically condemn any actions which aided their unspeakable acts.
It has been known for decades that the Nazis used Hollerith equipment and that IBM's German subsidiary during the 1930s -- Deutsche Hollerith Maschinen GmbH (Dehomag) -- supplied Hollerith equipment. As with hundreds of foreign-owned companies that did business in Germany at that time, Dehomag came under the control of Nazi authorities prior to and during World War II. It is also widely known that Thomas J. Watson, Sr., received and subsequently repudiated and returned a medal presented to him by the German government for his role in global economic relations. These well-known facts appear to be the primary underpinning for these recent allegations.
IBM does not have much information about this period or the operations of Dehomag. Most documents were destroyed or lost during the war. 

Though if the charges were true, it would've been a horrible thing they did. At least they called  the Nazi atrocities "abhorrent and categorically condemn any action which aided their unspeakable acts." However, compare that to the Nazis in the Arab [and Muslim] world. The Nazis in the Arab world including the Islamo-fascist show the aspects of Nazism that they picked up at least to the Arab and Islamic world. Mein Kompf is a best seller in the Arab world, not in an IBM office. By the way, the Nazis did nationalize private property because they were Socialists.The History Channel documentary "Brotherhood of Terror" talked a little bit about the Muslim Brotherhood's collaboration with the Nazis. "The Nazis early on really sort of influenced that totalitarian impulse, the totalitarian streak in the Muslim Brotherhood, said Mahmoud Fandy, author of "America and the Arab world after 9/11", on that History Channel documentary. That's right, an Arab commentator, Mahmoun Fandy, said that the Nazism influenced the "totalitarian streak" in the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the father of radical Islam. The state controlled Egyptian newspaper Al-Akhbar said:

“Our thanks go the late hitler who wrought, in advance, the 

vengeance of the Palestinians upon the most despicable villains on 
the face of the earth. however, we rebuke hitler for the fact that the 
vengeance was insufficient.” 

 Another company Alex accused of collaborating with the Nazi is GM. It's true that former American GM vice president Graeme K. Howward wrote a book defending the Nazis. Another GM member James D. Mooney got the first class German eagle from Nazi Germany. However, GM then president Willian P. Knudson served as head for the wartime production for the Franklin Roosvelt Administration. The GM supplied enemies of Nazi Germany such as America and Britain. The GM UK division Vauxhall motors supplied the allies. The GM alleges that the German wing [opel] was outside its control during WWII. The GM is a car company, not an ideological, political or religious movement. However, the Arab nationalists, which is a political movement, and radical Islamists, which is a political and religious movement, collaborated with Hitler. Another company Alex attacks as having allegedly had ties with Nazi Germany is standard oil.  Though I did find some sites that accuse that company of supplying the nazis, the Nazis also attacked a Standard oil refinery in Aruba, a Caribbean island.I agree it would be horrible if those companies collaborated with the Nazis. I say that for different reasons, especially because I'm a Jew myself.

Even if these organizations did [it would still be terrible if they did], they viewed it for business reasons. This is not giving them the justification to do it. I'm not saying that they did.But still, the Arab nationalists and radical Islamists did, to fight the Americans, the British and to annihilate the Jews. Al-Husseini said to "kill the jews wherever you find them."Alfons Heck served in the Hitler youth. He is married to a Holocaust surviver. He did research on radical Islam and fully understands that radical Islam is a nazi-like ideology.

"There is no shame in Arab media, in the degree they are ready to cover hate speech and lies, outright lies against the west and Israel," said Nonie Darwish on the movie Obsession. Who is she? She was born in Egypt and raised in the Gaza Strip, back when it was under Egyptian control. Her father Hafez served in the Egyptian intellience and led the Fedayeen, which was controlled by Egyptian then President Gamal Abdel Nasser. The Fedayeen committed terrorist attacks on Israel and sought to eliminate Israel. Eliminating Israel was an obsession of the Nasser regime. The Israeli government assassinated Hafez. She moved back to Cairo, with her family, and then to the US. She is founder of Arabs for Israel, a group of Arabs that want real peace with the Jewish state. Arabs for Israel fights the hate propaganda in the Arab world that spreads misinformation against the west [especially America] and Israel. She seeks to expose the threat of radical Islam and seeks to free the Arab [and Muslim] world form tyranny.She said,"The propaganda of Islam is very similar to the propaganda of Nazism. It's the same hate speech, paranoia and us against them."

  "This is a war propaganda, in which the same techniques of subversion that we saw earlier in the challenge both by Fascism and Nazism, are repeating themselves," said Robert S. Wistrich, head of the Sassoon center for anti-semitism.On the Obsession documentary, Alfons Heck said ,"It is absolutely correct to say if you can't learn from the events of Nazi Germany, you will not be able to grasp the true intent of the danger of the radical Muslim world today. You're simply hiding."Alfons Heck said on that documentary,"The idea that radical Muslims have and that Nazis had is demonize the Jews. You know, they just turn into demons. And this is exactly what happened in Germany. Can you imagine? We were enlightened people and we fell for this. Why wouldn't Muslims fall for this?'' "I watch anti-semitism since I was a young kid. And now, the world is reaping. These eggs are hatching. And what's coming out is literally something that comes out of Nazi Germany,'' said Walid Shoebat, a former PLO terrorist, on the documentary Obsession. Though it is true that that he's an eveangelical Christian and that it was the bible that rid him of his radical Islamist and pro-terrorist views. I, as a secular Jew, disagree with his evangelical Christian positions. Unlike him, I don't believe that Islam is the anti-Christ. I attack the radical Islamist movement, not the Islamic religion.However, he was a former PLO terrorist and did experience first hand what it was like to be an anti-Israel barbarian. Notice how Alex says it, like "not farmers in iraq" or "not water carriers out of the oasis." It's basically to emphasize it was the American corporations, not Arabs, who collaborated with the Nazis [I don't think all Arabs did collaborate with nazis, just the arab nationalists and Islamo-fascists and even some Islamo-fascists who aren't Arab]. After all, it's funny of Alex to include these claims like "not farmers in Iraq" because Alex himself admitted that "the Arabs may have had Nazi collaborators." Seems like my proof of Arab nationalists and Islamist collaboration with Hitler is just too much for Alex to refute. So he says they "may have had Nazi collaborators."Here is just more proof that radical Islam is a Nazi like ideology and that Islamists and Arab nationalists collaborated with the Nazis. Even the shah's father in Iran collaborated with the Nazis and was called on by the Allies to give the throne to his son for collaborating with the Axis. The threat from radical Islam is history repeating itself. The world was silent when Nazis threatened the free world and tried to achieve world domination. They were silent even while the Nazis expressed their anti-Semitic views and put Jews in concentration camps, in a plan to wipe out Jews. Hitler killed six million Jewish people in cold-blood. The same thing is true about radical Islam. Islamists are public [at least in the Arab and Muslim world] about their goals for world domination, their hatred for non-Muslims, homosexuals and apostates, their call to force non-Muslims to pay jizya [Jizya is a tax for non-Muslims in the Islamic world] and their call to force women to be veiled. They publicly show their executions and stoning of their victims. Even the Nazis didn't film and show to the world their killings of the Jewish people. Both the Nazis and Islamists are threatening the world, with their fascist intolerant totalitarian views. Hitler and Nazis sought to place on the whole world a totalitarian Aryan empire, where non-Aryans would be treated as second-class citizens. The radical Islamists seek to impose on the whole world their caliphate where non-Muslims and women would be treated as second-class citizens. Alex said:

• BTW, what kind of shoes do "conservatives" wear at Conservative Voice? What music do they listen to? Could be pertinent ...

 What's your point Alex? Guess what, when you click on his hyperlink, you get some of alex's allegations about the shoe comporaiton's ties to Nazis. Weather any of these corporations collaborated with the nazis or not, that was a long time ago. I agree it would've been terrible if they did. Also, if you click on the hyperlink for music, then you'll see allegations about ABBA singer Frida having a father who was a Nazi officer. That "evidence" is also weak. It doesn't make Frida or her music including Mama Mia Nazi music. If these corporations did, they viewed Nazi Germany as a trading parter [I'm not saying whether their policy to Germany in WWII was justified, in the middle or abohorrant]. The farhud was committed by the Arab nationalists and Al-Husseini in their attempt to impose on Iraq a pro-Nazi regime and not by IBM, coca-cola or any other American corporation. Guess what? Not even by anybody in the Bush family. The two Bosnian Muslim SS divisions were commanded by Al-Husseini, not by an American shoe salesman. Hitler told Al-Husseini, not a Coka-Cola employee, that he seeks to eliminate the Jewish people. The documentary, "Saddam and the Third Reich" documented that Al-Husseini, along with Heimrich Himnler and Joachim von Ribentrof, two notorious Nazis in Hitler's government, stopped Hungary, Romania and Bolgaria from allowing Jews to flee to Palestine, which resulted in those Jews being sent to concentration camps. Saddam and the Third Reich said:

In 1943, the grand mufti learns of plans by Hungary, Romania and Bolgaria, countries allied to Germany, to let thousands of Jews leave for the safety of Palestine. Through his influence with Himner and Von Ribentrof, the mufti immediately has the programs cancelled. Among the planned emigrants are 4,000 children. Their fate in Nazi controlled Europe is almost certain death.

That documentary shows footage of people held at the concentration camps, while at the end of narrating that factual claim. While I bring all of this evidence, my opponent Alex, the "investigative journalist" and "expert" on fascism [who by the way doesn't have a definition of the word] is too occupied with cokes being sold to Nazi Germany and what kind of shoes "'conservatives' wear at the Conservative Voice wear." Alex said:

Fascism is all-American - all-capitalist, corporate. Those who babble about "Islamo-fascism" echo George Bush, who hails from a family with reasonably well-known Nazi financial connections. 

I stated that I don't love President Bush in my articles ''Liberal's Blind Hatred of Bush,'' "Allende was more Guilty than Bush" and in my article "Alex Constantine Returns." I don't "echo" President Bush. Exposing Islamo-Nazism and the nazi influence and ways of Arab nationalism and Islamo-fascism is not echoing President Bush. Alex states that President Bush's family comes from "a family with reasonably well-known Nazi financial connections." As I said, President Bush is no Nazi. Though his grandfather Prescott Bush is accused of having Nazi ties, which is something I won't discuss in this article.Alex said:

The finger-pointers are turned in the wrong direction. America's ruling elite are the fascists, and they are bringing the country to its ragged knees.

 No, Alex, it is you who's pointing fingers in the wrong direction. Who exactly are "America's ruling elite?" The US government is no where close to fascism. The media and corporations are no where close to fascism. I just documented the Nazism in the Arab and Muslim world. The Arab nationalists and Islamists are the real Nazis. The Arab nationalists seek to create a fascist Nazified Arab state all over the Middle East. They set up their dictatorship in the name of the Arab race. The Islamists seek to replace the whole world with their fascist nazified caliphate. The Islamists seek to set up their dictatorship in the name of Islam. The Nazis sought to have an Aryan empire dominate the world.As I said, fascism is a dictatorship that controls every aspect of your life based on a religion, nationality or race. That's what makes the Nazis, Islamists and Arab nationalists fascist.Based on huge piles of proof, we "fingerpointers" are pointing our fingers in the right place. It is Alex who's pointing his finger in the wrong place. The fascists in America are the Islamists who seek to turn America into an Islamic state from terrorism, from within and/or from any other means necessary. Here's what Robert Wistrich also said in the documentary Obsession:

Here is a critical point that is generally overlooked. The anti-Semitism of the Nazis had a great appeal already in the mid 1930's to many Arab nationalists and Islamic Fundamentalists. 

Alex, in your next response to me, what is your definition of fascism? He uses it as simply a derogatory throw away word. Yes, in other words, he's a name-caller. Yet what is the "investigative journalist's" definition of fascism? Something Alex opposes? Because Alex calls his oppoenets including me fascist without evidence because he can't prove that we're fascist. I finished quoting his article and giving my commentary. I will conclude part I with what David Meir Levi said in his publication "The Nazi roots of Palestinian Nationalism and Islamic Jihad":

 Long before the war, al-Banna 
had developed an Islamic religious ideology which previewed hitler’s 
Nazism. Both movements sought world conquest and domination. 
Both were triumphalist and supremacist: in Nazism the Aryan 
must rule, while in al-Banna’s Islam, the muslim religion must hold 
dominion. Both advocated subordination of the individual to a folkish 
central power. Both were explicitly anti-nationalist in the sense that 
they believed in the liquidation of the nation-state in favor of a 
trans-national unifying community: in Islam the umma (community 
of all believers); and in Nazism the herrenvolk (master race). Both 
worshipped the unifying totalitarian figure of the caliph or führer. 
And both rabidly hated the Jews and sought their destruction. [page 7]

*Same article by Bernard Lewis as the one cited in my article Kristof's tough suicide Israel Policy

So, when you hear that AIG has 1 trillion dollars worth of assets, you may wonder why they need a bailout and ask :“Why don't they just sell their own assets?” The key word when you are talking about assets is, liquid. The companies in crisis have illiquid assets. An illiquid asset is not readily saleable due to uncertainty about it's value or it lacks a market in which it can be traded. In other words, no one is going to buy mortgage company assets because the value is uncertain and there are not buyers for the troubled loans.

When a large company is on the verge of a failure that will have vast long term effects, the government views this as “too big to fail.” They will step in for a bailout in order to stop wide spread economic repercussions and panic that result in depressions. What the U.S government is proposing to do in the mortgage bailout will be the largest since the Great Depression. Some may view this government intervention as too far reaching. Others may see it as preservation of the economy. Either way it is happening and the best thing American citizens can do is arm themselves with knowledge.

Right now, President Bush has a 700 billion dollar bailout plan laid out for Congress to approve. Ironically, the plan is on three pieces of paper. The specific details are not being released, but Republicans and Democrats alike are ripping the plan apart. Mainly they are criticizing the plan for it's heavy emphasis on private sector intervention, the tremendous dollar amount, and the lack of check and balance system r/t who is getting this money and where it is going.

Democrats are concerned about the home owners behind these bad loans and are insisting that the plan help more borrowers stay in their homes. They also want a condition to the bailout that will put limits on executive compensation. Where as, Republicans seem more concerned with who, what, when, and where all this money will go. Some Senators are pushing for a committee to oversee where all this money goes, instead of giving the Secretary of Treasury full responsibility of 700 billion dollars. Regardless of the specific disagreements, one thing is agreed upon…..something has to be done now to prevent economic collapse. But, words are only as valuable as the action behind them. Each side is holding out for their specific interests, despite admitting the essentialness of expediency. What both parties seem to be forgetting is that a bailout's purpose is not to help the specific companies and especially not the customers of the companies. It is simply to prevent the specific parties from effecting the entire economy.

Lastly, I will give you my brief opinion on what I think should happen. The bail out is necessary to prevent worldwide economic turmoil. Normally, I say the government should not intervene when a business is in trouble. However, the wide spread results of what will happen if these businesses fail is a matter of national security . It should be regulated by a committee, not just one man. Allowing one man to dole out billions, is asking for disaster. It should be passed now, without any of the added bonuses that each party wants to stick into it. The bill should not include individual home owners. 95% of homeowners are paying their notes on time. Most of the 5% that are in trouble, are in a bind because they bought something that they couldn't pay for. I sympathize with their plight. Still, it is unfair to take tax dollars from the people who didn't buy what they needed or wanted, but rather what they could afford, to bail out people who bought beyond what they could afford. Personal responsibility is part of life. If someone bought a big screen TV, but then couldn't afford to buy food, would you buy them food….. or tell them to sell their big screen? So, if you can not afford a 500,000 dollar house, sell it and buy or rent what you can afford.

Today it is 15th. August 2008. This is exactly two months and two weeks since my prediction. I estimate that my prediction is off by two to three weeks. Sorry, I got it slightly wrong. I am off by two weeks. Here is what is happening in Pakistan today.

Reuters reports from London are now pouring in. The reports state that:

1. President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan will resign soon rather than face impeachment by Pakistan’s parliament. Musharraf was a close ally of the US who helped in the Regime Change in Afghanistan.
2. Senior Pakistani government officials are saying the a deal has been struck between the elected Government and Dictator Musharraf.
3. Dictator Musharraf had three requests. First, he requested that he be allowed to stay in Pakistan. Then he requested to be allowed to retire to his farm in Islamabad. Finally, he requested that there be no moves to prosecute him once he is out of office. This is very sad. This is very ironical. President Pervez Musharraf now expects the same rights as other ordinary citizens. The very rights he did not give to others like ex-Prime Minister Mr. Nawaz Sharif (elected) and former chief justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry.

I predicted his downfall on 2nd. June 2008.

I am now predicting that his requests will be granted initially. Once he has retired he will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. This is the state of Democracy in Pakistan. His fate will now be decided by a Former Prime Minister (Sharif) who was swept back into power by popular elections and by the former Chief Justice (Chowdhary). The former chief Justice is now flying to be in Islamabad to see the downfall of Musharraf.

President Musharraf did not deliver justice to the former Prime Minister and the former Chief Justice when he was in power. He will not get justice from them either. If President Musharraf wants to live a full life it will be best for him to leave Pakistan. He has too many enemies and they all want revenge “An eye for an eye”. They are now in power. Will they have the sense of “social justice and fairness” which Mr. Musharraf did not have when he was in power? My gut feeling is that “individually” each and every member has a social conscience but “collectively” people make more unjust and more risky decisions.

Picture 2 Mr. Nawaz Sharif waving good-bye to President Musharraf?

The background to this story: President Musharraf was a supporter of the Taliban in Pakistan. Under American pressure he stopped supporting the Taliban and joined the US in the War against Terrorism. He subsequently lost the elections in Pakistan. His enemies won. They now want revenge.

The current government of Pakistan is led by the party of assassinated Former Prime Minister Ms. Benazir Bhutto. She too was forced into exile by Mr. Musharraf. Now, that party is led by Ms. Bhutto’s son. I do not expect him or his party members to shed any tears over the predicaments of Mr. Musharraf.

Mr. Musharraf is a former army chief. He seized power in a 1999 coup from an elected Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. Mr. Sharif’s party too made substantial gains in the free and fair elections. Mr. Musharraf has been politically isolated since his allies lost the so called free and fair elections. Mr. Musharraf wanted to cancel these elections but the Americans forced him to honour his pledge to the people of Pakistan. These elections were held in February 2008. Though Mr. Musharraf’s party was routed in the elections Mr. Musharraf has managed to cling onto power with US support. The US would obviously deny this as this will amount to meddling in the internal affairs of another country.

Dictator Musharraf’s declining political fortunes have heightened concerns in the United States and among its allies about the stability of Pakistan. Pakistan and India became nuclear powers recently against US wishes. I have predicting that Iran will become a nuclear power against US wishes in the next six years. The article I am referencing to can be read here The US have been furthering their own interests in that region by granting India the rights to buy nuclear material even though India has not signed the “Nuclear Non-proliferation treaty”. It has given Pakistan billions of dollars in aid because Pakistan (through Dictator Musharraf) supported the American led, anti-Islam, war on terror.

Conclusion: President Bush and Prime Minister Blair cooked up the Weapons of mass destruction theory. They wrongly estimated that the people of Pakistan would support their ideas. The people of Pakistan have voted. Now it is time for America to sit back and respect the wishes of the people of Pakistan.

Let's look at what was said by the FBI on the topic of the planes hitting the buildings: The FBI told the public that on September the eleventh two thousand and one, two Boeing 767s hit the twin towers; one each. Maybe they did, we may never know. But what we do know is that these planes were not piloted by suicide bombers but controlled completely by radio control. Where from? Building seven, this collapsed a mysteriously few hours after the other two. The many companies and organisations that had floors in the building included: the United States Secret Service, New York City Office of Emergency Management, NAIC Securities, Department of Defence (DOD) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) shared the 25th floor with the IRS. Does this not suggest to you they just may have controlled the whole thing from here? Because as far I could tell it simply fell for no reason. I say no reason. That is apart from controlled demolition.

Evidence shows that all three of the towers were brought down by controlled demolition. The FBI said that it was the shear heat of the inferno that brought these building crashing to the ground, but scientists have conducted experiments which prove this impossible. And as anyone who has watched the videos in detail can see small plumes of smoke billowing out of the each floor as it collapses. This is a sure sign of controlled demolition.

Only two companies would have been able too carry out controlled demolition on this scale, one of which was the John Galt Corporation. Strangely it was the John Galt Corporation who where hired to clear up ground zero after 9/11. Suspicious?

Which path do you choose intelligent person who can see through the rubbish George Bush throws at us or stupid person who believes anything they see on the news?

Still not convinced? Have a look at this.

Barack Obama was born in Hawaii on the 4th day of August 1961. He graduated from Columbia University in 1983 and moved to Chicago in 1985 where he worked to help the poor improve their living conditions. He graduated from Harvard Law School in 1991 and became the first African American president of the Harvard Law Review.

Barack and Michelle are the spouses of one another and they have two school aged daughters from their marriage.

In 2004 he was elected to the Senate and was sworn into office on the 4th. Day of January 2005. He serves on many committees but I have selected to mention the few which will help propel him into the presidency later this year. He serves on the Health, Education, Labour and Pensions Committee. This committee oversees America's health care system and policies, education, (schools), employment, and retirement programs. He is a member of the Foreign Relations Committee. This committee oversees and directs American Foreign policy. Senator Barak Obama also serves on the Veterans' Affairs Committee which focuses on providing veterans the care and services they deserve for serving the US. From 2005 to 2006 he served on the Environment and Public Works Committee. This committee safeguards environmental interests and provides funding for highways.

Barack Obama won a grueling nomination process of the Democratic Party against my favourite candidate Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton. Barack has dedicated his life to public service at different levels. He was community organizer and a civil rights attorney. He is still fighting for working families from his position of Senator of the State of Illinois.

Barack Obama was born on August 4th, 1961, in Hawaii to Barack Obama, Sr. and Ann Dunham. Obama graduated from Columbia University in 1983, and moved to Chicago in 1985 to work for a church-based group seeking to improve living conditions in poor neighbourhoods plagued with crime and high unemployment. In 1991, Obama graduated from Harvard Law School where he was the first African American president of the Harvard Law Review.

Senator Barack Obama will be the next President of the United States due to a combination of skills, the failures of President Bush, a weak and old Republican nominee who is entrenched in Viet Nam Era Politics.

Senator Obama will be elected as President of the United States this November unless he is assassinated. If he is assassinated then Senator McCain will be president of the United States.

At the start of the nomination process Senator Obama was just one of many candidates who had filed his papers to contest for nomination by the Democratic Party. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton was the clear favourite. She had the largest amount of money, name recognition, a well lubricated election machinery, an ex-President of the United States, good looks, political connections, insider information and clout needed to clinch the nomination of the Democratic Party. In the end all this came to nothing because Senator Obama was able to better on each of these issues and had extra “political capital” to spare.

Political capital is a new term which means the goodwill, the emotional and dollar investment of the ordinary voter in a candidate standing for election. The key word “ordinary voter” as opposed to corporate supporters, lobbyists, and special interest groups. There is no direct data of this type which would support that Senator Obama will win the elections. However a review of incidental data like number of ordinary contributors and total dollars contribute suggest that Senator Obama is slightly ahead on this measure.

I note that both candidates are distancing themselves from lobbyists and special interest groups.

History of Age Factor

Average ages of elected presidents ranged from 55 to 59 years. Younger presidents were elected in turbulent times (for change) and older presidents were elected in economically stable times (for stability).

Senator Obama was born in 1961. He is now 47 years old. By comparison Senator McCain was born in 1936. He is now a fit 72 years old who is well past his prime and the legal retiring age. Will this be a factor during the voting process. My gut feeling is that it will be. I would not want a one term president. What age would he be when he comes up for re-election. Yes, he has lots of experience, connections and talks well in town hall formats. Do these abilities make him equivalent to a 47 year old?

My conclusion is that Senator Obama is more electable at this time. If the economy was good and the times were stable then Senator McCain may have a slight edge even though he is well past his prime. Right now the economy is not stable and the world is in political turmoil so Senator Obama is definitely more electable.

Senator McCain. Victim of connectedness to President Bush's Policies. If the economy was thriving and the world was politically stable then Senator McCain would have been more electable despite his age.

Political Connectedness

Today's voters are looking for the internet communicator, who can think of the future; is not connected to the past failures or a present failed president with a rating of the low thirties. Gunboat diplomacy worked in the Vietnam Era now is the time for nano diplomacy. Senator McCain has supported the failed policies of President Bush and Washington insiders. He has promised more of the same. This connectedness makes Senator McCain less electable even though he has more experience. In this context “the experience” and maturity are working against senator McCain.

Race Factor

Senator Obama is of mixed parentage. His father is a Black Kenyan from Nyangoma-Kogelo and his mother a White American form Wichita, Kansas. If the voting population voted along colour lines then Senator McCain is a clear winner. This is not likely to happen because American Society is becoming colour blind. The evidence for this is in the shopping complexes and in the fact that Senator Obama has reached where he has.

A cursory look at the people in shopping plazas will show that the numbers of mixed marriages, the number of Hispanics and the numbers of Black people is on the increase. This translates into acceptance of mixed marriages by the masses and more particularly by the younger American population. It is true that a “black” person has never been elected to office of the President of the United States. However, the changing demographics make it a real possibility for a Black person to be elected to this Office for the first time. Hence, on this factor I score Senator Obama as electable but Senator McCain the clear winner.

Senator McCain was born to both White parents in Panama an area under US Occupation. This is not an issue. Yes, being White gives him a significant advantage in a white “dominant society.” Senator McCain wins on this measure.

No US president has even been black or of black parentage. So Senator McCain is more electable. Given the changing demographics and the fact that “White US” is going to change to “Hispanic US” it is time for the top office to change hands to reflect the population demographics.

US Citizenship

If one were to follow what left wing and right wing media are reporting then both candidates would be ineligible to run for the presidency of the United States. Both candidates are eligible for this office and both have proven their credentials to the satisfaction of the average voter.

Both candidates satisfy this criterion but of course senator McCain now qualifies to be a senior citizen and will be entitled to discounts associated with being senior.

Honesty and Integrity

One does not need to be a psychologist to identify good behaviour and bad behaviours. Both candidates have shown maturity, integrity and honesty when dealing with substantial issues. The supporters of both candidates have gone a little beyond a reasonable call of duty (sometimes). My feeling is that these behaviours were due to over enthusiasm as opposed to deliberate manipulative intents.

Both teams have done well and continue to do a good job Both campaigns have been well run with good managers and crew.

Popular Support

Senator Obama is better received by bigger crowds of persons. Senator McCain's campaign has labelled this “celebrity status.” Senator McCain has been campaigning for a long time, he has lost the “celebrity status” because he has run out of new ideas. I conced I am guessing because I do not have statistics to support this view.

My conclusion is that Senator Obama has more new ideas, enthusiasm, and has nont sold out yet. Hence, he continues to get lots of popular support.

Popular Financial Contributors

Many people who honestly support a candidate are willing to make a small contribution to their chosen candidate. Both candidates have surpassed previous limits of political donations. Neither candidate is relying on government money to finance the election campaign.

Senator McCain has raised less money than Senator Obama. This is a good indicator of who has more support. Senator McCain has fewer supporters but his supporters have deep pockets. Obviously they will expect some form of payback.

Senator Obama's supporters are the masses and they too will expect a payback. Nothing is ever free. However, it is clear that Senator Obama has more grass roots support.

Voter Turnout

Poorer voters tend to vote less frequently than well heeled voters. So Senator McCain's supporters are more likely to vote. My conclusion on this point is that if senator Obama's election machinery can get the vote out then he can win the election because he has more grass roots support.

Drive and Enthusiasm

Senator Obama has more of this popular appeal. I guess this is due to the fact that he is new on the campaign trail and is comfortable talking with the masses. His job as a Lecturer in the Law School must be helping him in this area. Senator McCain has run out of steam and is not able to draw crowds.

Conclusion

This will be a closely contested election. There will be many ups and downs before the final count and the announcement. If Senator Obama is not assassinated then he will win and move into the White House next year. He will become the First Black President of the United States. With the shifting demographics he could be the first in a line of Black / Hispanic presidents. From another perspective, President George Bush will be the last White President in the White House of a White America. This is the beginning of a major demographic shift.

God Bless America!

 

President Bush sent the US army into Iraq stating that there were weapons of mass destruction. He successfully convinced many governments that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. It turned out to be a big lie, the biggest lie of modern times. I believe history will reflect upon it kindly. He has successfully manipulated that it was the fault of the CIA. Now, the whole truth is beginning to unravel. More truths will come out as his term comes to an end. His followers will be willing to speak out as he is losing power to become an ordinary citizen.

President Bush formed an unholy alliance with the UK, Australia, Pakistan, Poland, Japan, Italy, South Korea and a collection of other countries eager to win favour with the president. The BIG lie was sold to the United Nations in the guise of spreading democracy. Now let us look at the second goal for the Invasion of Iraq - To Promote Democracy. America has never supported true democracy. Can we trust the "kinder, gentler, conservative" to deliver democracy?

The second goal of the invasion was to promote democracy according to President Bush and Prime Minister Blair. This is what they said to the public and the United Nations. A closer look at these actions does not support the notion of democracy either. When Mr. Bush's fiends win, then it is democracy. When his foes win they are part of the "axis of evil". In the Gaza strip Hamas won the elections. President Bush does not support Hamas therefore they are a "terrorist organization".

Pakistanis Seeking Democracy

President Bush's sense of democracy is skewed. It is democracy when he agrees with it and it is not democracy when he does not agree with it. The people of Pakistan have chosen a new Government. President Bush conveniently continues to support President Pervez Musharraf. The results of the elections were clear. The people spoke but Mr. Bush seems to have not listened. American foreign policy has always paid lip service to democracy but it has continued to support Dictators like Pinochet of Chilli and Musharraf of Pakistan. It is for reasons like this that Americans are probably one of the most disliked people in the world. This is despite the fact that they send the largest amount of aid to the poor countries and are the only superpower.

The Big lie is now known to all. With the advent of improved communications other big lies will come to the open. It is only a matter of time. My prediction is that Musharraf will seek refuge in the US or UK within two months if not sooner. He has not been elected by the people and he has not right to govern in a democracy. If American support was not there he would have had the fate as of other dictators sooner.

 

The recession America is now facing not only affects the American country itself but also those overseas workers from other nations that depend on dollar currency rate. Just like in my country Philippines, many people are also facing financial problems because of the lowering value of dollar to peso. Although there are some good arguments on both sides, I am in no one side. If you are asked, are you still going to support the war of America against Iraq and Why? Please leave a comment. Thank you and God Bless!

There are many special interest groups in each and every country. They have useful functions in society. However, when these special interest groups are able to use their power to manipulate foreign policies of a major power then something needs to be done about it. This type of behavior is pathological i.e. like a cancer. Doing something or anything is not easy. First, the power concerned needs to be able to recognize that a problem exists. This is not likely to happen because America does not see anything wrong with its foreign policy. The scenario is not unlike a depressed person. The depressed person does not see that he/she is depressed even though every one else sees it (the depressed look). So it is not likely that American Foreign Policy will change in the near future.

To obtain a greater understanding of this point of view please see:

Face of Depression

Depression Two

Face of Depression Three

Picture: A Depressed President Bush. Failed foreign policies.

During the 1970s the fear of Communism took priority over all else. Human Rights and Human dignity were violated by both the Pro-communist lobby (mainly Russia, China and Cuba) and the American Armed Forces in the name of Democracy. Washington could not see that the entire country side was sympathetic toward the Viet Cong and the Communists. They were content with occupying their bases in big cities. Now too the Americans are not seeing that. Somehow, other countries and other people saw it then and are seeing it. Many countries that joined the war against “Weapons of Mass Destruction/ Saddam Hussein Regime/Lack of Democracy” have pulled out of the Coalition. Mr. Bush still does not see any error in his ways or any error in American Foreign Policy. Senator McCain actually says that The War CAN be won.

American Public opinion is against the war. British Public opinion is against the war. The writing is on the wall. It has been a long time since the Republicans won any seats but they still do not get the message. Lobbying of Senators and Congressmen must be stopped to give American foreign policy a fair chance at success. Some would argue that the opponents of special interest groups should form their own lobby and advance their point of view.

In the 1960s special interest groups including many US presidents were convinced that “the Communists” had to be stopped at all costs. American, British, and French might was not able to stop Communism. Yes, communism did fall eventually. Many groups and individuals in America would like to take credit for the fall of communism. However, I do not feel that any special person or group deserves any credit for the fall of communism, not even President Ronald Regan who is credited with ending the “Cold War”. I strongly feel that ordinary people were responsible for the demise of communism. The ordinary people of Viet Nam were responsible for the demise of America in Viet Nam. My prediction is the same for American Forces in Iraq. America is winning the big cities, the bases and the Green Zones. It is losing the hearts and souls of ordinary people. Eventually it is the ordinary people who will decide the outcome.

America is an occupying force in Iraq. The American Government is trying to say that they have been invited there by a democratically elected government. Ordinary people know the truth. Eventually, they will decide. The Americans did the same in Viet Nam. Somehow, American Presidents always think that ordinary people do not have brains and that they can manipulate them through the use of Press Conferences and the Media.

Manipulation takes many forms. The use of salaried soldiers and then saying that they volunteered to fight in the Middle East is a highly refined form of manipulation. Yes, paid soldiers are highly trained to fight wars using highly technical techniques. In the past occupation of land was the main goal. The present reality is that minds have to won too. Otherwise the war will be lost. America is winning the war of real estate but is losing the hearts and soles of ordinary people. I am predicting that America will lose the war in Iraq because it has lost the “Hearts and Souls of Ordinary People”. The Ordinary People of Iraq are intelligent people. They do not have military might to force the American Forces out of Iraq but they have more commitment then the American Forces have to win. They will use all other means to drive them out - just like the Vietnamese / Communists because they were born there and had loyalty to the land. The paid soldier works for (more or less) eight hours then clocks off and counts his dollars. The Freedom fighter is dedicated 24 hours each day, does not get paid and does not clock off. He waits and strikes at the right moment. Time is always on his side. Loyalty does not come from a pledge or from a certificate of competence to kill or shoot.

When a paid soldier dies the family mourns because it is a loss to the family and the country. Friends and family will think of avoiding war. Even if they felt that they supported the cause they may not be allowed to join the war for many other reasons. When a freedom fighter dies the situation is different. Friends and family members are often willing to take his place because they do not want his sacrifice to be in vain. So each time an innocent Iraqi dies there are others who are willing to take his place. Each time an American soldier dies others are put off by the thought of dying in a far-away-land. President Bush chose not to serve in Viet Nam for this very reason. However, he is now the commander in chief and is comfortable sending others to fight for the “?freedom” of others. In the long run it is the ordinary people who are going to win the war not the paid soldier.

Picture: American foreign policy in need of resuscitation. Nosocomial infections are killing it?

In order to predict the outcome of a war many analysists look at numbers of trained personnel, support staff, supply lines, tanks, ammunitions, numbers of fighter aircrafts, spying ability and night vision equipment and other capabilities. I concede that my analysis is completely different. Some will call my method insane. However, the proof is in the pudding, the result.

The world was led to believe that the war in Iraq was started to get rid of the Weapons of Mass destruction. There were none so there was nothing to get rid off. My analysis is that the war was started to protect the long term interests of Israel. Tel Aviv, using it's special interest groups, managed to convince Washington that the survival of Israel was at stake. Washington then went about manufacturing excuses to invade Iraq. Now they need to make a similar case against Iran. Iran is openly building the nuclear power stations with the view to manufacturing the atom bomb. However, my view is that Tel Aviv has overplayed it strength and will not succeed this time.

In conclusion, I am predicting that the following will be the end results of a faulty American foreign policy. The disasters could have easily been prevented by working on humanitarian issues (winning the minds of people) as opposed to winning wars and real estate. Human Minds are the where the power of the future will be not in real estate.

My Predictions

1. America will withdraw from Iraq within three years. They will do it in style, just like the British. First they will declare that they have achieved their objectives in Iraq. The world will be able to see the fall from grace. Popular press will not report it as a fall. They will be reporting as a planned draw down of forces.
2. The withdrawal will make Iran stronger in that region and it will damage America's global standing as a Global Power. New additional players in the Region will be Syria, Iran and Lebanon.
3. Iran and Iraq will become allies within five years to the detriment of American Foreign Policy and to the detriment of Israel.
4. Hezbollah has been gaining strength and will continue to gain strength. It will become the major player in the Middle East and subsequent negotiations with Israel.
5. Iran will make the Atom Bomb within six years and will not threaten Israel. It will not attack Israel.
6. After acquisition of the bomb Iran will become more reasonable will follow most main stream policies because there will be nothing to “proof”. The Atom Bomb is just another big boy's toy. It will allow Iran to be on equal footing with the big boys.
7. Israel will (at last) consider giving back lands to the Palestinians and allowing them to return to their lands. This will only happen when there is no other alternative or Israel. Prior to that I expect Israel to continue killing Palestinians and I expect the Palestinians to continue fighting for their lands.
8. There will be no peace in the Middle East until the rights of the Palestinian People are restored. The United Nations, President Bush or Mr. Abbas do not have the right to give away lands which they do not own.
9. Israel will have to change its policy to one of friendly coexistence or non-existence. White South Africa became a Black South Africa without any adverse effects.
10. Israel will become a Middle East Country in the Middle East. It will cease to be a satellite of Washington. This will happen within twelve years.

• Over 600, 000 Iraqi men and women (the population of the entire country of Luxembourg is under 500,000)
• More than 4,000 American servicemen and women
• British forces; 175 lives
• The injured stands at more than 20,000 American soldiers, and more than 1,400 British soldiers with numbers rising constantly

The Real Cost to the Living

In 2006, the US had set aside 315 billion dollars for the Iraqi and the Afghanistan wars, but the cost of the Iraqi war alone has since been estimated at about 3 trillion US dollars or 1.5 trillion British pounds.

It was said then, that if 315 was stored in 1 dollar notes, the stack would be the height and thickness of a 38 story building, and if you were to line the notes up side by side, they would be long enough to wrap the Moon around its middle almost 3 times. But that was 315 billion.

On the other hand, I couldn't really understand what 3 trillion dollars (£ 1.5 trillion) was, but apparently it's a million times a million and looks like this when written out, 3,000,000,000,000 (12 zeros).

I still could not comprehend such a large amount, so I tried to put it in terms that would make its literal meaning it more easily understood. To put it in perspective, if I could somehow manage to stay alive for about 3,000 years, I would have to spend a million dollars a day in order to spend 3 trillion. So way before Jesus Christ's mother Mary was born, I would've been spending a million dollars a day, and would still be spending as we speak.

What could this money be spent on instead of the war

• $3 trillion would provide clean drinking water for every last individual who needs it
• Totally eradicate world poverty
• Buy gas for every driver in the US for 10 years
• Educate, house and feed every last Aids orphaned child in Africa for 10 years
• Provide Primary education for every child on earth
• Provide free medical care for 16 million Americans (money spent on the war each day)
• Send 43 million students to University in England

Taxpayers in the UK and in the US are paying out more than £2,000 (nearly $4,000) a second into the war (so in the time it took you to read from the top of this page to here, you've spent £ 240, 000 on the war). Every day more is being spent, and when America pledged £18million (nearly $36million) into the United Nations' refugee agency, the public did not realise that this very amount is spent in less than three hours in Iraq to sustain a steadily failing war.

The obvious cost of mental and physical rehabilitation of soldiers would mean that steadily, more money has to be allocated. Money that wouldn't have to be spent in the first place if there was no war, but that's a different story.

Meanwhile, Mr Bush below has got to answer to the families of the dead soldiers whose pictures so poignantly make up the mural of his face.

Faced with the agonising choice of feeding the poor and providing water for millions of children who walk half a day to obtain one bucket for their families' needs, our governments have taken the path of war. We and our children meanwhile, live with the consequences

This is how the New York times so succinctly summarised it in this accompanying chart. Based on the hefty difference between the smallest (a necessary way to save lives) and the largest (a certain way to lose lives), it is up to you to decide where the human life places on the governments' list of importance.

It is estimated that The war is costing $720 million a day or $500,000 a minute, according to an analysis of the work of Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph E. Stiglitz and Harvard public finance lecturer Linda J. Bilmes

Admittedly, nobody thinks things have gone well in Iraq. Not even knee-jerk support-the-Prez people like me. As things have dragged on and the body count has mounted and progress has been hard to see, the President has increasingly been catching hell from all sides. Even taking friendly fire. More and more you hear criticism that he's stubborn, pig-headed, got blinders on, etc. It sounds logical ... but it ain't so.

The President is NOT just being stubborn ... he is being RESOLUTE. As resolute as the enemy. Whether anybody else in big, fat, soft America has realized it, he has: victory requires that we match, and exceed, the resolve of the enemy. The Islamists are not people you can reason with. They are not interested in dialogue. They are not open to compromise. They actively practice child sacrifice in their homicide-bombing holy war. How you gonna reason with people like that? Match their resolve -- or capitulate.

How did another Sean say it in The Untouchables? Something like, "They cut one of yours, you shoot one of theirs. They put one of yours in the hospital, you put one of theirs in the cemetery." My quote may not be exact, but I think my President exactly understands the principal involved. He is resolved to win. Okay, he's not very articulate, but he's modeling what every American is going to need more and more as we confront our enemies and the future -- how to be resolute.

God bless America. God bless our President. God help us if we lose.