Zeev's Turnips Talk Politics (ZTTP)

[kashasha]

>>Irving Kristol, the "god-father" and one of the founders of neoconservatism...<<

Kurt Nimmo
Truth News
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2008/010108Kristol.htm


It’s the height of mediocrity. No, scratch that. It’s a prime example of the continuing effort to push the false right-left paradigm.

Bill Kristol, neocon wunderkind, is now a “conservative” voice over at the New York Times. Paul Mulshine, writing for NJ.com, gets it right. “Kristol is in fact a neoconservative,” he declares, although this is also a misrepresentation, as there is no room for the word “conservative” in “neoconservatism.”

As Paul Craig Roberts notes, there “is nothing conservative about neoconservatives. Neocons hide behind ‘conservative’ but they are in fact Jacobins.”

Roberts cites the observation made by Claes Ryn, who conclusively shows that neocons are, in truth, neo-Jacobins on par with the 18th century French revolutionaries who were, when put in historical context, nothing more than psychopathic murderers. “More dangerous an enemy of the US and its traditional values than Muslims, neo-Jacobins have seized control of the Bush presidency and US foreign policy. They will stop at nothing to achieve their goal of World War IV in the Middle East,” Roberts warns.

Now we have these updated and thoroughly modern Jacobins spilling their venom from the “newspaper of record,” the Gray Lady. Naturally, it makes perfect sense.

“Far from providing balance to the Times’ editorial policy, Kristol fits squarely within it,” writes Mulshine. “The fight between the neocons and the liberals has always been an insiders’ game between Manhattanites. Long before Kristol came along, the Times published the work of a neocon who had an even bigger role in leading us into the Iraq War than Kristol and his cohorts at the Weekly Standard.”

Indeed, as the plan is total war, or rather total destruction of Muslim and Arab society, a plan shared by both neocons and neolibs, who disagree on tactics but agree on serial murder.

It should be noted that there is no such thing as either a “liberal” or “conservative” media, only a corporate media with a corporate agenda, that is to say a fascist agenda, as corporatism is fascism, as Mussolini knew. Sure, we are offered “liberal” and “conservative” window dressing on a few more or less irrelevant social issues, but when the rubber meets the road both sides of the false paradigm join the same chorus line.

Inviting Kristol to jump aboard the New York Times demonstrates all too well there is basically no difference between neocons and neolibs, as should be obvious in hindsight with the invasion of Iraq smoldering in the foreground. “His hiring represents a continuation of a tradition that has been prominent at the paper since before the Iraq invasion. It wasn’t just [Judith] Miller. Neocon columnist William Safire was one of the biggest cheerleaders for the invasion.” Of course, any significant opposition to this was disallowed by the Gray Lady.

“As a real conservative commentator, one of the few non-neocons at a major newspaper, I for one don’t mind in the least if the Times wants to hire another big-government left-winger for its opinion page. But don’t call a radical a conservative,” Mr. Mulshine concludes.

Sort of, although I’d drop that archaic “left-wing” descriptor.

Again, at the sake of coming off as redundant, there is no difference between neocons and neolibs, or little difference. And that’s why Bill Kristol is a perfect fit at the New York Times.

For the neocons, it is a step in the right direction, as Kristol’s rag, the Weekly Standard, consistently loses an astounding one million per year and would be flotsam headed for a landfill if not for the benevolence of Rupert Murdoch, who apparently likes to fund losing ventures.