Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Michael Scheuer: Why Are Limbaugh, Levin, and Hannity So Eager To See More Dead Americans?

  1. #1

    Michael Scheuer: Why Are Limbaugh, Levin, and Hannity So Eager To See More Dead Americans?

    Why Are Limbaugh, Levin, and Hannity So Eager To See More Dead Americans?
    http://lewrockwell.com/scheuer/scheuer21.1.html

    Last week on FOX, I spoke about the reasons why America is losing the war with the mujahedin and it seems to have rattled and angered Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, and Sean Hannity. I know this not because I regularly tune into them, but because acquaintances of mine, who have a much higher tolerance than I do for that trio’s vacuity and deceit on this issue, have sent me video clips and transcripts. So to follow up more fully on what I said on FOX, here are few things to remember about the war in which the United States is engaged with an increasing portion of the Islamic world. I will try to keep this as simple as possible to assist Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, and Sean Hannity.

    a.) America’s war with the mujahedin is preeminently a religious war. The Islamist mujahedin we are fighting – especially the late-Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda and its allies – are "good Muslims," in that they are following religious injunctions that demand Muslims resist foreign intervention, invasion, occupation, and domination. When you hear spokesman for many Muslim organizations in the United States and governments like those in Egypt and Saudi Arabia say that the mujahedin are not "good Muslims" and have "hijacked" the Islamic faith – oddly, the same phrases you hear from Obama, his CIA Director Brennan, Mrs. Clinton, and Senators Graham, Lieberman, and McCain – they are lying and trying to lure Americans into complacency, for they, even more than the mujahedin, dream of forcing the entire world to be Islamic.

    b.) Therefore, the mujahedin are the "bad guys" from the perspective of the United States and – as always – from mine; that is, they attacked us first, they caused the war. The mujahdein, their infrastructure, and their supporters merit destruction as complete as we can possibly inflict for starting a war with us.

    c.) But here is where Rush, Mark, and Sean deliberately cock-up chances for Americans to understand the enemy they face and must defeat; none of the three celebrities seem to know the difference between the words "cause" and "motivate." Instead of understanding the very simple concept that the Islamists who attack us are reacting to what the U.S. government does and following the duties imposed on them by their faith, Democrats, Republicans, Israeli officials and their U.S.-citizen champions, Neo-Conservatives, and Rush, Mark, Sean, and others of their ilk depict the mujahedin as acting on a religion that demands they attack the United States because of the way we vote, drink, and send girls to school. Although insane, this explanation conveniently makes all Muslims crazy, and gets the United States off the hook; to wit, America did not do anything to offend anyone.
    [...]
    7.) Now, Rush, Mark, and Sean are reputed to be smart and patriotic men. If the foregoing is correct – and it is – why are they not smart or patriotic enough to help Americans understand why their soldier-children are being killed overseas; why they and their little kids are being killed at marathons at home; and why their civil liberties are being whittled away by a cowardly bipartisan governing elite – corrupted by Arab princes, pro-Israeli U.S. citizens, and political correctness – which is conducting a self-defeating effort to defeat the Islamists while knowingly hiding the fact that they themselves are motivating our Islamist enemies. In short, why are Rush, Mark, and Sean so eager to get more Americans killed, and to keep cultivating Islamist enemies who ultimately will bleed America to death in terms of money, lives, and the growth of tyrannical central government acting in the name of homeland security?

    8.) The answer of course is that Rush, Mark, and Sean have no intention of educating Americans about the Islamist threat they face if they must acknowledge the fact that Washington’s foreign policy motivates the mujahedin to attack us.

    a.) Never from their deceitful mouths will you ever hear that Washington’s unquestioning support for Israel motivates the mujahedin to kill Americans, and that activities of pro-Israel groups in the United States have corrupted not only our politics but also are media. (NB: On this last point, think about Rush, Mark, and Sean.)

    b.) You will never hear from their mouths the truth that almost all people – be they Muslims, Christians, Jews, or Buddhists – dislike being invaded, bombed, or occupied, and more often then not react to such events with justifiable violence, not unlike our Founders did when the British Army invaded and occupied Boston and sought to disarm Americans.

    c.) You will never hear from their mouths that their cheer-leading for Washington’s bipartisan campaign to impose-by-bayonet secular democracy on Muslims is helping to realize Professor Huntington’s "clash of civilizations." What Dr. Huntington never expected is today’s reality, one that sees the clash he predicted being instigated by secular (pagan?) clerics from Harvard, Yale, and the rest of the Ivy League and not from Islamic universities in Mecca and Cairo.

    d.) You will never hear from their mouths any condemnation of the many tens of billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars that have been wasted – much of it flowing to flim-flamming psychiatrists and the venal hucksters of social science – in trying to figure out what "radicalizes" people like the Boston bombers. The answer is obvious and available for free: U.S. interventionist foreign policy = the motivation that radicalizes Muslims.

    And most of all, you will never hear directly from the mouths of Rush, Mark, and Sean what they are implicitly telling Americans; that is, that they hate virtually everything the Founding Fathers thought and prescribed for U.S. foreign policy – in short hand, do not stick your nose in other peoples’ affairs in which you have no interest – and that they do not mind how many Americans get killed as long as Washington keeps pursuing the interventionist foreign policy they believe benefits their friends overseas and their benefactors at home. Indeed, if you reflect on their words, it would not be a surprise to find the fingerprints of Rush, Mark, and Sean – like those of so many U.S. politicians from both parties – on the detonators of those pressure-cooker bombs in Boston.
    Last edited by Lucille; 05-01-2013 at 11:30 AM.
    Based on the idea of natural rights, government secures those rights to the individual by strictly negative intervention, making justice costless and easy of access; and beyond that it does not go. The State, on the other hand, both in its genesis and by its primary intention, is purely anti-social. It is not based on the idea of natural rights, but on the idea that the individual has no rights except those that the State may provisionally grant him. It has always made justice costly and difficult of access, and has invariably held itself above justice and common morality whenever it could advantage itself by so doing.
    --Albert J. Nock



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    And the dead foreign civilians.
    //////////////////

  4. #3
    Excellent article by Mike. Kicked those asshats in the teeth.
    ...but when the trumpets blew again and the knights charged, the name they cried was "Stannis! Stannis! STANNIS!"

  5. #4

  6. #5
    Word... word....
    There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.
    -Major General Smedley Butler, USMC,
    Two-Time Congressional Medal of Honor Winner
    Author of, War is a Racket!

    It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours.
    - Diogenes of Sinope

  7. #6
    Wow. Great read and great job Michael
    Get your bitcoin hat at www.gettoknowbitcoin.com Learn about bitcoin and get updated news.

  8. #7
    There is an awakening. Savage comes out and calls Hannity a fake conservative for wanting more Americans dead. Great stuff here. Must listen.

    http://www.mediaite.com/online/micha...-men-in-media/


    Unbeknownst to those Americans who do not listen to conservative talk radio, there exists a long-standing feud between some of the most well-known names in the business. The most widely-known battle has been between Mark Levin and The Savage Nation host Michael Savage — the two have had it out over a variety of issues, including claims of who has greater listenership.

    It seems as though Savage also has beef with Levin’s good friend Sean Hannity, mostly on the grounds that the Fox News host is a “fake conservative.” On his Monday evening show, Savage took to bashing Hannity for what he believes is the cable news host’s desire to go to war with Syria.

    “Some of the so-called conservatives are in favor of American men dying,” Savage began. “For example… Sean Hannity — who is known to be one of the, let us say, most shallow men in the America media, who gives conservatism its reputation of being shallow — back in 2012, called for war in Syria.”

    Reacting to the old Fox clip in which Hannity decried the “prescription for disaster” seen in Syria now that the regime has the capabilities to use chemical weapons, Savage said: “You’re like a bad pharmacist. And if anyone takes your pill, they’re liable to get poisoned rather than cured. Because what you’re doing there is putting out so many ideas that are fraudulent that it gives true conservatives a bad name.”

    Savage then went on to lambast “another fake conservative” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), and mock him as a “gun for hire” and “super-lobbyist” for “American boys dying” in a potential conflict with Syria.

  9. #8
    Great article but I am having a hard time understanding this paragraph...

    –b.) Therefore, the mujahedin are the “bad guys” from the perspective of the United States and — as always — from mine; that is, they attacked us first, they caused the war. The mujahdein, their infrastructure, and their supporters merit destruction as complete as we can possibly inflict for starting a war with us.
    Any help will be kindly appreciated.
    Rand Paul for Peace



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    needs someone to proofread before publish.
    United States have corrupted not only our politics but also are media.
    are=our?
    rewritten history with armies of their crooks - invented memories, did burn all the books... Mark Knopfler

  12. #10
    I think Michael writes like he speaks. This almost reads like a transcript from one of his many interviews.


    Quote Originally Posted by LatinsforPaul View Post
    Great article but I am having a hard time understanding this paragraph...



    Any help will be kindly appreciated.
    I'll take a shot.

    I think he is saying that these 3 guys, Limbaugh, Levin, and Hannity, take this stance time and time again, that it's these Islamist extremists that start these wars and America must retaliate by eradicating them from existence for daring to do such a thing. Americans generally nod their head in agreement to this line of thought and thus the problem we have, failing to understand why these attacks occur when the evidence of why they are happening is right there in our face, which Scheuer illustrates towards the end of the article: our foreign policy.

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Lucille View Post
    America’s war with the mujahedin is preeminently a religious war. The Islamist mujahedin we are fighting – especially the late-Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda and its allies – are "good Muslims," in that they are following religious injunctions that demand Muslims resist foreign intervention, invasion, occupation, and domination. When you hear spokesman for many Muslim organizations in the United States and governments like those in Egypt and Saudi Arabia say that the mujahedin are not "good Muslims" and have "hijacked" the Islamic faith – oddly, the same phrases you hear from Obama, his CIA Director Brennan, Mrs. Clinton, and Senators Graham, Lieberman, and McCain – they are lying and trying to lure Americans into complacency, for they, even more than the mujahedin, dream of forcing the entire world to be Islamic.
    This sentence confuses me. Who is trying to force the entire world to be Islamic?

    1. Brennan, Clinton, Graham, Liberman, McCain

    or

    2. American Muslims
    Ron Paul: "For those who have asked, I freely confess that Jesus Christ is my personal Savior, and that I seek His guidance in all that I do."

  14. #12
    Sometimes I wonder if some bloggers and article writers are using "speech to text" software. They really need to "proof read" their stuff.

    "..and more often then not react to such events.." it's THAN damnit !

    edit: Good article though, except b. (like @LatinsforPaul said)
    Last edited by ClydeCoulter; 05-01-2013 at 08:20 PM.
    "When a portion of wealth is transferred from the person who owns it—without his consent and without compensation, and whether by force or by fraud—to anyone who does not own it, then I say that property is violated; that an act of plunder is committed." - Bastiat : The Law

    "nothing evil grows in alcohol" ~ @presence

    "I mean can you imagine what it would be like if firemen acted like police officers? They would only go into a burning house only if there's a 100% chance they won't get any burns. I mean, you've got to fully protect thy self first." ~ juleswin

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by LatinsforPaul View Post
    Great article but I am having a hard time understanding this paragraph...



    Any help will be kindly appreciated.
    It seems to be a riff on the government = us line. "They attack the government, so they're attacking me!!! Kill em all!!!"
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul
    Perhaps the most important lesson from Obamacare is that while liberty is lost incrementally, it cannot be regained incrementally. The federal leviathan continues its steady growth; sometimes boldly and sometimes quietly. Obamacare is just the latest example, but make no mistake: the statists are winning. So advocates of liberty must reject incremental approaches and fight boldly for bedrock principles.
    The epitome of libertarian populism

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Feeding the Abscess View Post
    It seems to be a riff on the government = us line. "They attack the government, so they're attacking me!!! Kill em all!!!"
    He needed to add a /sarc then because "...from the perspective of the United States and – as always – from mine;" sounds like agreement to me, even though it didn't seem to "jive" with the rest of the article.
    Last edited by ClydeCoulter; 05-01-2013 at 08:30 PM.
    "When a portion of wealth is transferred from the person who owns it—without his consent and without compensation, and whether by force or by fraud—to anyone who does not own it, then I say that property is violated; that an act of plunder is committed." - Bastiat : The Law

    "nothing evil grows in alcohol" ~ @presence

    "I mean can you imagine what it would be like if firemen acted like police officers? They would only go into a burning house only if there's a 100% chance they won't get any burns. I mean, you've got to fully protect thy self first." ~ juleswin

  17. #15
    It's not just those guys Scheuer listed, it's also the liberals at CNN and Christiane Amanpour, and last but not least, John McCain.


  18. #16
    Christiane Amanpour is dangerous, you should have heard her talk about guns.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by KingNothing View Post
    Goddam, Mike is awesome!
    You got that right!!




    both Mike Sheuer and Mike Church!

    TMike
    Last edited by TruckinMike; 05-02-2013 at 12:54 PM.
    “No people will tamely surrender their Liberties, nor can any be easily subdued, when knowledge is diffused and virtue is preserved. On the Contrary, when People are universally ignorant, and debauched in their Manners, they will sink under their own weight without the Aid of foreign Invaders.”
    ― Samuel Adams

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by BlackTerrel View Post
    This sentence confuses me. Who is trying to force the entire world to be Islamic?

    1. Brennan, Clinton, Graham, Liberman, McCain

    or

    2. American Muslims

    I believe he means the "governments like those in Egypt and Saudi Arabia".
    Rand Paul for Peace

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by supermario21 View Post
    Christiane Amanpour is dangerous, you should have heard her talk about guns.
    She's absolutely horrid.

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by BlackTerrel View Post
    This sentence confuses me. Who is trying to force the entire world to be Islamic?

    1. Brennan, Clinton, Graham, Liberman, McCain

    or

    2. American Muslims

    I believe he means the "governments like those in Egypt and Saudi Arabia".
    Rand Paul for Peace

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by LatinsforPaul View Post
    I believe he means the "governments like those in Egypt and Saudi Arabia".
    Do the posters praising the article in the OP agree with that? Do you think the governments of Egypt and Saudi Arabia have it as their goal to force the entire world to be Islamic?

    That's a pretty strong statement.
    Ron Paul: "For those who have asked, I freely confess that Jesus Christ is my personal Savior, and that I seek His guidance in all that I do."

  25. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by BlackTerrel View Post
    Do the posters praising the article in the OP agree with that? Do you think the governments of Egypt and Saudi Arabia have it as their goal to force the entire world to be Islamic?

    That's a pretty strong statement.
    I don't know about Egypt. It's government keeps changing. But the Saudis fund much of the effort to Islamize the world, both the militant wing (much of ISIS funding comes from Saudi "charities") and the "missionary" wing (they fund building of Wahabi mosques that spread their brand of Islam.)

    Old thread but good one. Here is the million dollar question. Who will Donald Trump listen to? He talks about non-interventionism but the marine general he's picked for SOD sounds interventionist.

    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  26. #23
    Every other week rightwinger Steve King from Iowa is doing photo ops with Egypt officials.

    Last edited by RandallFan; 12-26-2016 at 07:16 PM.
    BOWLING GREEN, Kentucky – Washington liberals are trying to push through the so-called DREAM Act, which creates an official path to Democrat voter registration for 2 million college-age illegal immigrants.
    Rand Paul 2010

    Booker T. Washington:
    Cast it down among the eight millions of Negroes whose habits you know, whose
    fidelity and love you have tested in days when to have proved treacherous meant the ruin of your firesides.



Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 48
    Last Post: 12-20-2013, 12:04 AM
  2. Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin eyed as 2016 GOP debate moderators
    By RonPaulFanInGA in forum Rand Paul Forum
    Replies: 67
    Last Post: 08-16-2013, 09:57 AM
  3. Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin eyed as 2016 GOP debate moderators
    By jFico89 in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 08-15-2013, 04:16 PM
  4. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-14-2013, 05:14 PM
  5. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-16-2011, 03:15 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •