Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Guest shiloh357
Posted
Murder and horrible death, propagated and spread by a clique of Neo Con Ideologists.

Who precisely is in this "clique" of Neo Con Ideologists?

  • Replies 43
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  8
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  226
  • Content Per Day:  0.03
  • Reputation:   0
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/03/2004
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  04/24/1945

Posted

We can start with the P.N.A.C.

Where we finish who can tell? :emot-pray:

Guest shiloh357
Posted
We can start with the P.N.A.C.

Where we finish who can tell?  :emot-pray:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, I want names. Specific people. What makes a person a Neo Con?

Guest charlie
Posted

I think these "clips" from the encyclopedia pretty much cover what we're talking about.

Neoconservatism in the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

''Neoconservatism'' is a somewhat controversial term referring to the political goals and ideology of the "new conservatives" in the United States. The "newness" refers the term's origination as either describing converts new to American conservatism (sometimes coming from a liberal or big-government New Deal background) or to being part of a "new wave" of conservative thought and political organization.

Compared to other U.S. conservatives, neoconservatives may be characterized by an aggressive moralist stance on foreign policy, a lesser social conservatism, and weaker dedication to a policy of minimal government, and a greater acceptance of the welfare state, though none of these qualities are necessarily requisite.

In academia, the term refers more to journalists, pundits, policy analysts, and institutions affiliated with the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) and with Commentary and The Weekly Standard than to more traditional conservative policy think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation or periodicals such as Policy Review or National Review.

List of people described as neoconservatives

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

This is a list of prominent public figures frequently referred to as neoconservatives. Classifications of this sort are often disputed (see the neoconservative page for a discussion of the terms' controversies), so any listing here should not be taken as definitive.

Public Sector

* Elliott Abrams, Senior director, National Security Council; son-in-law of Norman Podhoretz.

* Kenneth Adelman, member of Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, former member of Reagan administration as hawkish arms control expert.

* John R. Bolton, Undersecretary of State. Candidate to be U.N. Ambassador. Accused during confirmation process of abusing subordinates and politicizing intelligence reports.

* Stephen Cambone, first Defense Undersecretary for Intelligence, Rumsfeld protege.

* Linda Chavez, Hispanic Republican Cabinet Appointee.

* Eliot Cohen, member Defense Policy Board.

* Douglas Feith, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy since 2001, responsible for planning the occupation of Iraq. Resignation announced in January 2005.

* Larry Franklin, Feith lieutenant being investigated for passing government secrets to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and Israeli Embassy Officials.

* Francis Fukuyama, author of The End of History and Our Posthuman Future, advocate of cautious and regulated approach to bio-technology on the President's Council on Bioethics. Critic of the Iraq war and some fellow neoconservatives - including Charles Krauthammer.

* I. Lewis Libby, a.k.a Scooter Libby, Chief of Staff to the Vice President. Suspected of revealing the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame as a political reprisal against her husband.

* William J. Luti, Deputy Undersecretary of Defense.

* Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Former Democratic Senator, controversial U.N. Ambassador, and advisor to Presidents Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, and Ford. Associated with the early days of the movement.

* Harold Rhode, Foreign Affairs Specialist, Office of Net Assessment, Office of the Secretary of Defense.

* Abram Shulsky, Director Office of Special Plans.

* Paul Wolfowitz, President of the World Bank as of June 2005. Deputy Secretary of Defense 2001-2005, a major advocate for the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

* David Wurmser, Office of the Vice President, Middle East Adviser.

* Dov Zakheim, former Comptroller, Department of Defense.

* Margaret Hilda Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher, LG, OM, PC (born 13 October 1925) Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1979 to 1990.

[edit]

Private Sector

* William F. Buckley, Jr.

* Ann Coulter

* David Frum, Canadian, newspaper columnist, and speechwriter.

* Donald Kagan, Yale Historian. Father of Robert Kagan.

* Frank Gaffney

* Nathan Glazer, co-editor of The Public Interest with Irving Kristol. Eschews the term "neoconservative" and had no public stanceon the Iraq War.

* Robert Kagan, co-founder, Project for the New American Century.

* Jeane Kirkpatrick, former Ambassador to the United Nations, famous for asserting the existence of a meaningful difference between totalitarianism and authoritarianism.

* Charles Krauthammer. Columnist and academic. Advocate of Democratic Realism as a wilsonian version of Realism in international affairs. Critic of Francis Fukuyama.

* Irving Kristol, founder of The Public Interest and The National Interest. Father of William Kristol.

* William Kristol, co-founder, Project for the New American Century.

* Michael Ledeen

* Rush Limbaugh

* Philip Merrill, Chairman of the Export-Import Bank since 2001.

* Richard Perle, Former Chairman of the Defense Policy Board. Stepped down in early 2003 due to alleged conflict of interest.

* R. James Woolsey, Director of Central Intelligence under President Clinton.

* Norman Podhoretz

* Daniel Pipes, journalist, author, academic, and expert on Islamism and terrorism

* Ronald D. Rotunda, law professor at conservative George Mason University, argued for prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay to be considered Enemy Combatants rather than Prisoners of War under the 1949 Geneva Conventions.

* Michael Rubin, lecturer; former Resident Scholar, American Enterprise Institute; Washington Institute for Near East Policy: Soref Fellow (1999-2000).

* Mark Steyn, author of several books, and politics, arts, and culture commentator for, most notably, the Chicago Sun-Times, the UK's Daily Telegraph, and The Irish Times.

[edit]

Debated as being neoconservatives

* George W. Bush, President of the United States. He has appointed many neoconservative leaders into various positions within the government, but his support of their ideals is questioned.

* Dick Cheney, Vice President of the United States. One of the founders of the PNAC, which is viewed by many as a neoconservative think tank. He supports foreign and national defense policies that seem to be influenced by the ideology (See the Bush Doctrine). This classification is argued by some who view Cheney as more of a moderate or classical Republican. Cheney has worked for many presidential administrations during the latter 20th Century.

* Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense under President G.W. Bush, also a founder of the PNAC. Rumsfeld's backing of a preemptive war policy during the second Gulf War between the United States of America and Iraq is considered by many to be the result of a neoconservative ideology. Some think otherwise.


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  276
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  7,474
  • Content Per Day:  0.92
  • Reputation:   52
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  02/25/2003
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  01/31/1966

Posted

Perhaps it only seems like there is a new wave of conservative because we were getting far away from some of the ideas that these people are bringing back to the spotlight?

t.

Guest charlie
Posted

Well I don't think big government and big spending is conservative or fighting wars for profit rather than defense.

I think a lot of people became conservative as a response to the extreme liberalism that seemed to take over the democratic party. Remember the slogan "I didn't leave the democratic party the democratic party left me".

Now I think an extreme element has taken over the republican party and forced the moderates to either conform or get punished my the republican leadership. For me and increasing numbers of other traditional republicans we need a bumper sticker that says "I didn't leave the republican party, the republican party left me".

The pendelum swings both ways in both parties in regards to extremism.


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  276
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  7,474
  • Content Per Day:  0.92
  • Reputation:   52
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  02/25/2003
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  01/31/1966

Posted

Very true, Charlie.

I think the spotlight was on the Democrats in the 90's due to the double term Presidency of Clinton and has now swung to the Republicans for much the same reasoning. Whoever is in charge at the time is an obvious choice for scrutiny.

Personally, I think it will swing back onto the backs of the Dems in 2008 with the election of Hillary as President, and then we start the whole process over again with different names.

Stupid is as stupid does. (taken from the movie Forrest Gump. Please, no one try to get me on the plagerism thing! :emot-pray::o )

Anyway, whoever is dumb enough to want to be President will always attract the worst of commentary. It goes with the job.

t.


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  8
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  226
  • Content Per Day:  0.03
  • Reputation:   0
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/03/2004
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  04/24/1945

Posted

Yoh shiloh357

Yeow!

A large portion of the present administration is made up of members, signators, and the people who formulated these Aggressive, P.N.A.C. policies.  Remember to that these policies where formulated before 911.  Indeed P.N.A.C. policy statements seems now to have become U.S. foreign policy .

We have now invaded the Middle East.

Why am I not surprised!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I identify the P.N.A.C. as the culprit because it is P.N.A.C. statements advocating that the United States aggressively pursue

Guest charlie
Posted

Wow <whistling thru my teeth> that's the first time I've seen it all written down.

Well, Pat Buchanan, a republican, said these two things on one of those Sunday morning talk shows within the past six months. :

3. In 1998, PNAC unsuccessfully lobbied President Clinton to attack Iraq and remove Saddam Hussein from power. The January letter from PNAC urged America to initiate that war even if the U.S. could not muster full support from the Security Council at the United Nations. Sound familiar? (President Clinton replied that he was focusing on dealing with al-Qaida terrorist cells.)

and

6. Mere hours after the 9/11 terrorist mass-murders, PNACer Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld ordered his aides to begin planning for an attack on Iraq, even though his intelligence officials told him it was an al-Qaida operation and there was no connection between Iraq and the attacks. "Go massive," the aides' notes quote him as saying. "Sweep it all up. Things related and not." Rumsfeld leaned heavily on the FBI and CIA to find any shred of evidence linking the Iraq government to 9/11, but they weren't able to. So he set up his own fact-finding group in the Pentagon that would provide him with whatever shaky connections it could find or surmise.


  • Group:  Soapbox - Members
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  68
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  962
  • Content Per Day:  0.13
  • Reputation:   52
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  05/18/2004
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  02/11/1932

Posted

Here's the latest from Rumsfeld on Iraq. We can't defeat the rebels. The Iraqis will do it although it will take decades.

U.S. says Iraqis may fight rebels for years

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Our picks

    • You are coming up higher in this season – above the assignments of character assassination and verbal arrows sent to manage you, contain you, and derail your purpose. Where you have had your dreams and sleep robbed, as well as your peace and clarity robbed – leaving you feeling foggy, confused, and heavy – God is, right now, bringing freedom back -- now you will clearly see the smoke and mirrors that were set to distract you and you will disengage.

      Right now God is declaring a "no access zone" around you, and your enemies will no longer have any entry point into your life. Oil is being poured over you to restore the years that the locust ate and give you back your passion. This is where you will feel a fresh roar begin to erupt from your inner being, and a call to leave the trenches behind and begin your odyssey in your Christ calling moving you to bear fruit that remains as you minister to and disciple others into their Christ identity.

      This is where you leave the trenches and scale the mountain to fight from a different place, from victory, from peace, and from rest. Now watch as God leads you up higher above all the noise, above all the chaos, and shows you where you have been seated all along with Him in heavenly places where you are UNTOUCHABLE. This is where you leave the soul fight, and the mind battle, and learn to fight differently.

      You will know how to live like an eagle and lead others to the same place of safety and protection that God led you to, which broke you out of the silent prison you were in. Put your war boots on and get ready to fight back! Refuse to lay down -- get out of bed and rebuke what is coming at you. Remember where you are seated and live from that place.

      Acts 1:8 - “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses … to the end of the earth.”

       

      ALBERT FINCH MINISTRY
        • Thanks
        • This is Worthy
        • Thumbs Up
      • 3 replies
    • George Whitten, the visionary behind Worthy Ministries and Worthy News, explores the timing of the Simchat Torah War in Israel. Is this a water-breaking moment? Does the timing of the conflict on October 7 with Hamas signify something more significant on the horizon?

       



      This was a message delivered at Eitz Chaim Congregation in Dallas Texas on February 3, 2024.

      To sign up for our Worthy Brief -- https://worthybrief.com

      Be sure to keep up to date with world events from a Christian perspective by visiting Worthy News -- https://www.worthynews.com

      Visit our live blogging channel on Telegram -- https://t.me/worthywatch
      • 0 replies
    • Understanding the Enemy!

      I thought I write about the flip side of a topic, and how to recognize the attempts of the enemy to destroy lives and how you can walk in His victory!

      For the Apostle Paul taught us not to be ignorant of enemy's tactics and strategies.

      2 Corinthians 2:112  Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices. 

      So often, we can learn lessons by learning and playing "devil's" advocate.  When we read this passage,

      Mar 3:26  And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end. 
      Mar 3:27  No man can enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he will first bind the strongman; and then he will spoil his house. 

      Here we learn a lesson that in order to plunder one's house you must first BIND up the strongman.  While we realize in this particular passage this is referring to God binding up the strongman (Satan) and this is how Satan's house is plundered.  But if you carefully analyze the enemy -- you realize that he uses the same tactics on us!  Your house cannot be plundered -- unless you are first bound.   And then Satan can plunder your house!

      ... read more
        • Praise God!
        • Brilliant!
        • Loved it!
        • This is Worthy
        • Thumbs Up
      • 230 replies
    • Daniel: Pictures of the Resurrection, Part 3

      Shalom everyone,

      As we continue this study, I'll be focusing on Daniel and his picture of the resurrection and its connection with Yeshua (Jesus). 

      ... read more
        • Thumbs Up
      • 13 replies
    • Abraham and Issac: Pictures of the Resurrection, Part 2
      Shalom everyone,

      As we continue this series the next obvious sign of the resurrection in the Old Testament is the sign of Isaac and Abraham.

      Gen 22:1  After these things God tested Abraham and said to him, "Abraham!" And he said, "Here I am."
      Gen 22:2  He said, "Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you."

      So God "tests" Abraham and as a perfect picture of the coming sacrifice of God's only begotten Son (Yeshua - Jesus) God instructs Issac to go and sacrifice his son, Issac.  Where does he say to offer him?  On Moriah -- the exact location of the Temple Mount.

      ...read more
      • 20 replies

×
×
  • Create New...