US ramps up bipartisan war on Islam

No matter who wins the "vote" tonight, one thing is clear. Going forward, the war on Islam is going to be ramped up rather than toned down.

At this moment US emissaries are scouring Libya for "good" jihadists who can be relied on to do battle with the "bad" jihadists, like the ones who killed Ambassador Stevens.

These lads will get top-flight yankee training, lots of yankee green-backs, plenty of heavy-duty support from the drone-meisters and the US military establishment, and of course the latest guns and hand-held missiles.

Everybody except the numb-nuts putting this program together already knows how it will end up.

They'll take the money and the training and the weapons.

They'll even take out some of their rivals in Libya, which will garner them tons of attention in the Western media. They might even have their spokes-people on CNN and Fox basking in the glory of it all!

Then they'll be taking out the next US Ambassador and using their Stinger stockpile to take out airliners at Ben Gurion Airport.

While this is going on we've got the Syrian Salvation Symposium continuing in Doha. The big news there is that the farcical Syrian National Council hasn't been diligent enough in keeping "bad" jihadists out of the fray, and Hillary herself has decreed that "we" need a new leadership for the Syrian resistance.

Everybody except the numb-nuts in the State Department can see where this will end up... (see above)

Finally, the numb-nuts who steer the Empire are putting together a team of brigands, war-profiteers, opportunists, and ne're-do-wells of all stripes to take back Mali. We have never in history given a solitary shit about Mali until it became evident that there might be oily wealth under that sand.

Everybody except the idiots putting this plan together already knows how it will end up...

So there's one thing that we know for sure. Regardless of who wins the White House tonight, America is committed to at least three more losing conflicts in the years ahead.

Canada ready for war in Mali

Mali? Why not? Now that we've cut and run in Afghanistan maybe we're due for an easier target.

Here's what Canada's newspaper of record has to say.

Canada must respond to Mali's call to arms. In a tidy opinion piece Campbell Clark makes the case for our "responsibility" to participate in the pending AFRICOM-engineered invasion of Mali. After all, we were pumping 100 million a year into that country right up until the moment the house of cards collapsed, and therefore we owe it to ourselves to throw good money after bad.

Nowhere in Mr. Clark's article is there any hint of a connection between the glorious campaign to free the people of Libya and what has happened in Mali since, which is a curious oversight. The reality is that, high-minded rhetoric about freedom and democracy aside, the mess in Mali is the direct result of our meddling in Libya.

Only the future will tell what the results of our meddling in Mali will be.

Propaganda ramps up as Nations of Virtue prepare to invade Mali

Here's a prime example.

Note the urgent tone. Action is required to save the lives of these poor innocents from the depraved Islamists.

The victims are women and their babies. Who can be against saving babies? The baby-bait worked so well back in the lead-up to the first Gulf war that it gets run up the flagpole in pretty much every propaganda campaign since.

The horrible fate that awaits these innocent women and babies is too gruesome to contemplate, but will involve stuffing them into holes in the ground and stoning them to a slow and excruciatingly painful death if we don't hurry up and save them.

Save those babies!

Invade Mali now!

What is of course much more muted in this discourse is the fact that all of this upheaval in Mali is the direct result of these same Nations of Virtue delivering "freedom" to the people of Libya last year.

For practical purposes you could say that we must now invade Mali to save those people from the consequences of our last bout of African meddling.

Does it never occur to the think-tankers and neo-Colonialists that everybody might be better off if we stayed home to mind our business and let those people get on with minding theirs?