1. Anonymous says:

    Hey Richard Perle: Liar! Liar! Pants on fire!

    You worthless piece of shit. Go die alone in the dark in the cold of a socially-unacceptable disease.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Let’s look at ratios. Our zone in post war Germany was roughly the size of Kentucky. Iraq is the size of California, but the population of Iraq is not all that different from our German Zone — about 20 million.

    For that George Marshall required a Military Government of 6000 specially trained officers. The training was at least 6 months, for some much more. The Officer Corps included all the specialities for proper civilian administration, professional engineers, public health officers, State and local judges, and much else. Each unit of three had NCO’s and a company of 120 troops, trained to constabulary duty. The Law of Occupation was printed on Wallpaper rolls and was to be glued on all walls. There was a timeline for restoring elected local government, (6 months) with restored political parties (3 months) but under the supervision of the Occupation Government. The entire population was disarmed. There was a cerfew, the Germans had to have a pass to travel. Once security was clear, much of the restriction was eliminated. It took less than 4 months to reach that point.

    Look, Perle needs to read George Marshall, who derived his ideas from the disaster of Post WW One, the rise of the Frie Korps, which led directly to the SA that helped bring the Nazi’s to power. Not wanting to repeat that scene, he worked hard to plan the alternative. Perle and his buddies repeated the post World War One version.

  3. Anonymous says:

    These people do not differentiate between ideology and profit because profit is an integral part of the ideology. Profit is the only method they have to measure success, profit is the only reason for participation at all, and they see that as a good thing, and will defend it, even tho they seem to have found a technical vocabulary in which it sounds less mercinary and amoral: Free Market (or, in this sense, RADICAL free market) theory. They don’t think of themselves as evil or devious, because profit is their god, and every move they make is for the glory of god. Okay, maybe they arent that bad, but close.

  4. Anonymous says:

    there is a certain elegance to using only money to keep score with, because then you know in clear terms who is winning.

    All the more reason we should freeze his assets before we hang him for treason.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Here! Here! and a friday night toast to the validity of the point made by empty wheel. But like the story about the emperor with no clothes, the gig is up. More americans than not understand that Bush is strutting around naked, thinking he looks â€just fabulousâ€. And now that the spell has been broken, the truth has been pronounced, it’s a ridiculous and scandalous scene. Thanks for the vision and the truth in this post. We need to keep speaking the truth.

  6. Anonymous says:

    Richard Perle has to live with what he created. He’s a social Dr. Frankenstein. And his monster is out of control. He should never be given safe harbor from this. He and all his little Neo-consolidator facist friends should be shunned – untouchable.

  7. Anonymous says:

    well who the fuck ordered all of these tririems in the first place ???

    that would be george bush

    shoulda coulda woulda ends up at the same place every time


    everything else is editorial

  8. Anonymous says:


    I just read the editorial on your girl Sharon Reiner in the Citizen Patriot.


    Only someone holding a masters degree in political science from Hamsher College could pull off such a stunning review. So few candidates these days can articulate the core essence of the democrat party, but Sharon seems to have the gift.

  9. Anonymous says:

    in speaking out now, i would guess that richard perle has two objectives in mind:

    – protect the brand (the perle brand, that is)


    – protect his neoconservative movement from being branded irresponsible.

    all the better, my dears, to initiate yet another great adventure in foreign policy in the near future, one probably not all that different from the iraq invasion he fathered and nurtured.

  10. Anonymous says:

    There is little difference in Triremes. The idea that there is a difference in Greek and Latin Triremes is not confusing, whether it be a Latin(pheonecian) or Greek Trireme. The creation of the Triremes is better understood when we look at the development of the Triremes without a Greek, Latin or other regional differences.

    The key to the development of the Triremes seems to be the third row or top, not looking too closely at the outrigger; there is little evidence of its existence or use other than a reference for being below the third row and above the second. Verticle, rather than horizontal, reference for the men (per verticle section) seems important when we consider the change in the lines of rowers when the marines were created to do battle on and from the Triremes, usually from the third row, on top, protecting the rowers from attack and also providing room for others than the rowers or marines.

    Lighter Triremes were invented with more marines. The problem with the concept of less rowers and lighter ships became evident when the heavier Triremes tried, of course, to ram the lighter ships. The logic here is that the lighter ships had more marines, but that only becomes significant during the process of ramming. So, if the lighter Triremes had more marines, the answer would be to allow the ramming, board, and take over the heavier Triremes and their rowers, unfortunatley located just below the outrigger and easily taken over from above when their marines were taken by larger forces, depending on the tactics used during the ramming process. The lighter Triremes may have, in fact, based on the assessment at the time, been the rammers not sacrificing thier lighter ship using tactics that easily over took the heavier Triremes.

    Piracy and slaves. Well, with all the ramming the Triremes captains may have been pirates and taken slaves from the other Triremes and this is were we must look at tactics of the captains at the time. Rowers may not have been in high demand because of the constant take over of other Triremes making them, in fact, slave rowers who were used like today’s fuels. Piracy by captains here, taking over another government’s ship, might be considered as it was by the British for unsavory acts that were done on behalf of the King, but one also has to consider the structures of government, regions, and languages of the Triremes that becomes confusing with the introduction of ’piracy’ in that time. All three structures have their own reference in what Triremes were actually doing at sea.

    Shipping and profit or war. They seem to all go had in hand and the theory is that it happened in those stages; explaining ’modern’ piracy under the British. Landing of Marines came into play later as the shipping profit; government, regional, and linguistic differences bacame less confusing to the historian.

  11. Anonymous says:

    That â€teaser†portends a record-setting compilation of lies to come at the mid-December publication date. Bloggers and commenters, get your quote lists ready.

  12. Anonymous says:

    I believe I recall from the Iran Contra hearings mention of Khashoggi as arms trader. It is also my impression I read several places about arms shipments from the US routed thru Pakistan into the Russia Afghanistan conflict as a second theater separate from the post Iraq Iran conflict, though I am unsure how above-table those shipments were or who the traders involved were.

    Since the announcement of the Baker-III redesign of Iraq after US occupation sooner rather than later (recently I hear no further mention of Kissinger in that project, but also have read Baker has a blue ribbon committee developing the plan), I notice another arms trader’s name in the news also named in the Iran Contra hearings, Ghorbanifar. There is carpetbagging profit in war and in the reconstruction; I have been wondering whether part of the postbellum for Iraq involves arms traders, and what controls are part of contracts to assure weapons are delivered legally. Given the illicit sales in Iran Contra from the US arsenal, and these two traders’ mentioned in the hearings as part of the arms export process, I wonder if those two arms merchants still are doing some of their export by contracts similar to the secret Iran Contra purchases.