Question Everything

US still torturing prisoners

Despite what a lot of leftists have deluded themselves into believing John Kerry is no antiwar candidate but an advocate of world domination by the US.

John Kerry will make his adoring anti-war groupies look like fools

to support him in the hope that he would make American military policy more doveish is absurd. All the evidence is that he will do the exact opposite.

Kerry's Plan for World Domination

Many of those on the liberal "left" who have jumped on board the "Anybody But Bush" bandwagon cite the current administration's non-stop saber-rattling and war-mongering as a justification for their doing so - as if such behavior was the private preserve of the Republican right. In particular, they point to the "neo-cons", who serve as Bush's brain trust, and whose "Project for the New American Century" (PNAC) for "maintaining global US pre-eminence and shaping the international security order in line with American principals and interests" has served as Bush's blue-print for further imperial expansion. The already infamous Democratic Leadership Council, which master-minded the Democrats right ward lurch during the Clinton-Gore years, has its own think tank, the "Progressive Policy Institute" (PPI), which calls for virtually all of the same things the PNAC does, and in language that is almost identical to that used by their Republican "rivals." a 19-page manifesto for the "New Democrats" calls for "the bold exercise of American power" as the central point in "a new Democratic strategy, grounded in the party's tradition of muscular internationalism that would keep Americans safer than the Republican's go-it-alone policy." "Muscular internationalism" is nothing more than a polite parlor term for what used to be known as "gunboat diplomacy," i.e., aggressive imperialism.

Kerry is a warmonger

Democratic skeptics of Bush's procedural and logistical missteps in the Iraq war, and especially of his unilateralism, have yet to answer an important but rarely raised question: Is waging a non-defensive, imperialistic war okay if you have more people on your side? The Iraq war is a war of aggression. Although Kerry laments that the United States is absorbing "90% of the casualties" (not true – both Kerry and Bush ignore the civilian "collateral damage," which dwarfs military casualties), the war would not magically become justified if more of the people doing the dying were subjects of other governments, cajoled by John Kerry into participating. This war doesn't need more participants. It needs fewer participants. It doesn't need more countries assisting the U.S. government's mass slaughter of innocent people. The U.S. government and all occupying invading forces must withdraw.

The current Iraqi government is made up mainly by Iraqi exiles who haven't been in the country for decades. They're collaborators. There has been no election, these people were appointed by the US or by people the US appointed. The Prime Minister, Iyad Allawi, has a long history of working with the CIA & Mi6. The US admitted that it really controls Iraq, that it isn't truly independant. Even polls funded by the state department say that most Iraqis want the US out and that most support the resistance. The government is doing what the US wants, not what the Iraqi people want.

Capitalists Defend Slavery

Americans cross Canadian border for flu shots
And wer'e supposed to believe that Canada's single payer "socialistic" health care system is inferior and inefficient.