Unhypnotized
Truth feeder
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
December 17, 2009
Peter Schiff, the stock broker, Libertarian economist, and the son of imprisoned tax protester Irwin Schiff, has come out in favor of attacking the state of Iran if it has nuclear weapons in its possession.
“I might have gone into Afghanistan to get Bin Laden,” Schiff admits in an interview taped last month. “But I wouldn’t have been there to occupy the country. I might have gone into Iraq if I thought there was weapons of mass destruction there. If we had intelligence that we knew where they were I might have gone in to take them out, just like we think Iran might be building nuclear weapons. Well, if we really believe that, if we really think that, we tell the Iranians: ‘This is where we think those weapons are, you need to let our inspectors in there.’ If they don’t let us in, just blow the place up.”
Schiff is advocating the same foreign policy as the Bush administration neocons. If he sincerely believes in neocon gunboat diplomacy, the people should not allow him to enter government.
He also repeats the neocon myth that ex-CIA asset Osama Bin Laden was responsible for the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States.
In May of this year, Schiff told his followers that he plans to challenge incumbent Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd in 2010. Schiff told the Washington Post that a run against Dodd is “better than 50-50.” He also told The Daily Show with Jon Stewart in June that he was considering a challenge. In September on MSNBC’s Morning Joe Show, Schiff officially announced his candidacy as a Republican. He also announced his intention to run in a vblog posted on
.
“I plan to bring my dedication and experience to the taxpayers of Connecticut. I may make mistakes in this campaign — but I will not make mistakes in representing you in the Senate. I look forward to an exciting race where I can share my vision with the people of Connecticut,” he stated in a press release dated November 17.
Peter Schiff has already made the biggest mistake of his campaign by embracing a neocon foreign policy.
Mr. Schiff has apparently not studied the issues surrounding the Iraq invasion. Prior to the illegal invasion of Iraq, numerous researchers and experts disputed the neocon claim there were WMDs in Iraq. In the wake of the invasion, a 1,700-member group organized by the Pentagon and CIA to hunt for the alleged stockpiles of WMD reported that Saddam ordered his arsenal (sold to him by the U.S. and European countries as I documented in 2002) of chemical and biological weapons destroyed in 1991 and 1992 and halted nuclear weapons development in the hope this would help lift murderous sanctions imposed on the county by the United Nations and largely enforced by the United States and Britain.
Additional findings published in the report by arms inspector Charles Duelfer and presented to the Senate Armed Services Committee in October of 2004 revealed that 1) aluminum tubes that the Bush administration alleged were for nuclear weapons production were for making conventional artillery rockets, 2) Iraq did not try to buy uranium overseas, and 3) there was absolutely no evidence that Iraq was developing biological weapons trailers or rail cars (the trailers touted by the Bush neocons and Secretary of State Colin Powell were in fact for producing hydrogen gas for weather balloons).
Is it possible Mr. Schiff is unaware that the neocons concocted all of this as a flimsy pretext to invade Iraq? If so, he certainly does not deserve to be Connecticut’s next senator.
Chris Dodd may be a minion of the New World Order, but he is not advocating invading Iran or making excuses for the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq (current death toll: well over a million innocent Iraqis). It should be noted, however, Dodd advocates sanctions against Iran. In February of 2007, he opposed Bush administration rhetoric against Iran and advocated “robust diplomacy and direct negotiations coupled with economic pressures on Iran’s financial and energy sectors.”
Schiff, on the other hand, simply wants to blow the hell out of the country if “inspectors” (and by this he must mean United Nations inspectors) find evidence the country is developing nuclear weapons.
Meanwhile, Peter Schiff says nothing about Israel, a country in the region with a documented nuclear weapons program and a sizable weapons stockpile (currently estimated at around 400 warheads). As noted by award winning journalist Seymour Hersh and others, Israel has, under the direction of its radical Zionist leadership, modified its so-called “Samson Option” of nuclear deterrence to one of nuclear intimidation in order “to redraw the political map of the Middle East.” According to Israel Shahak, “Israel clearly prepares itself to seek overtly a hegemony over the entire Middle East…without hesitating to use for the purpose all means available, including nuclear ones.”
In September, Mohamed ElBaradei, the outgoing director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, once again stated he had seen “no credible evidence” that Iran is developing nuclear weapons. In early December, Russian Prime Minister and possible 2012 Presidential contender, Vladimir Putin, said his government has no evidence of Iran trying to build a nuclear weapon.
Again, it should be stated that Schiff did not say in his interview that Iran has nuclear weapons. He said that if it is discovered the country has nuclear weapons it should be attacked in defiance of international law.
On economic issues, Peter Schiff is spot on. As an adherent of Austrian economics, he has correctly observed that government and Federal Reserve economic policies are the problem, not the solution. He advocates the gold standard and sound money.
However, his neocon foreign policy ideas overshadow his economic philosophy and make him a dangerous political candidate. If elected, Peter Schiff may indeed turn out to be another crazed neocon calling for the United States to invade small and defenseless countries on cooked up pretense.
In 2010, the people of Connecticut need to reject Mr. Schiff’s bid for a Senate seat unless he denounces the comments made in the above interview and promises the people of Connecticut and the United States he will not act as a warmonger and international outlaw if elected to serve.
Source...
Infowars.com
December 17, 2009
Peter Schiff, the stock broker, Libertarian economist, and the son of imprisoned tax protester Irwin Schiff, has come out in favor of attacking the state of Iran if it has nuclear weapons in its possession.
“I might have gone into Afghanistan to get Bin Laden,” Schiff admits in an interview taped last month. “But I wouldn’t have been there to occupy the country. I might have gone into Iraq if I thought there was weapons of mass destruction there. If we had intelligence that we knew where they were I might have gone in to take them out, just like we think Iran might be building nuclear weapons. Well, if we really believe that, if we really think that, we tell the Iranians: ‘This is where we think those weapons are, you need to let our inspectors in there.’ If they don’t let us in, just blow the place up.”
Schiff is advocating the same foreign policy as the Bush administration neocons. If he sincerely believes in neocon gunboat diplomacy, the people should not allow him to enter government.
He also repeats the neocon myth that ex-CIA asset Osama Bin Laden was responsible for the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States.
In May of this year, Schiff told his followers that he plans to challenge incumbent Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd in 2010. Schiff told the Washington Post that a run against Dodd is “better than 50-50.” He also told The Daily Show with Jon Stewart in June that he was considering a challenge. In September on MSNBC’s Morning Joe Show, Schiff officially announced his candidacy as a Republican. He also announced his intention to run in a vblog posted on
“I plan to bring my dedication and experience to the taxpayers of Connecticut. I may make mistakes in this campaign — but I will not make mistakes in representing you in the Senate. I look forward to an exciting race where I can share my vision with the people of Connecticut,” he stated in a press release dated November 17.
Peter Schiff has already made the biggest mistake of his campaign by embracing a neocon foreign policy.
Mr. Schiff has apparently not studied the issues surrounding the Iraq invasion. Prior to the illegal invasion of Iraq, numerous researchers and experts disputed the neocon claim there were WMDs in Iraq. In the wake of the invasion, a 1,700-member group organized by the Pentagon and CIA to hunt for the alleged stockpiles of WMD reported that Saddam ordered his arsenal (sold to him by the U.S. and European countries as I documented in 2002) of chemical and biological weapons destroyed in 1991 and 1992 and halted nuclear weapons development in the hope this would help lift murderous sanctions imposed on the county by the United Nations and largely enforced by the United States and Britain.
Additional findings published in the report by arms inspector Charles Duelfer and presented to the Senate Armed Services Committee in October of 2004 revealed that 1) aluminum tubes that the Bush administration alleged were for nuclear weapons production were for making conventional artillery rockets, 2) Iraq did not try to buy uranium overseas, and 3) there was absolutely no evidence that Iraq was developing biological weapons trailers or rail cars (the trailers touted by the Bush neocons and Secretary of State Colin Powell were in fact for producing hydrogen gas for weather balloons).
Is it possible Mr. Schiff is unaware that the neocons concocted all of this as a flimsy pretext to invade Iraq? If so, he certainly does not deserve to be Connecticut’s next senator.
Chris Dodd may be a minion of the New World Order, but he is not advocating invading Iran or making excuses for the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq (current death toll: well over a million innocent Iraqis). It should be noted, however, Dodd advocates sanctions against Iran. In February of 2007, he opposed Bush administration rhetoric against Iran and advocated “robust diplomacy and direct negotiations coupled with economic pressures on Iran’s financial and energy sectors.”
Schiff, on the other hand, simply wants to blow the hell out of the country if “inspectors” (and by this he must mean United Nations inspectors) find evidence the country is developing nuclear weapons.
Meanwhile, Peter Schiff says nothing about Israel, a country in the region with a documented nuclear weapons program and a sizable weapons stockpile (currently estimated at around 400 warheads). As noted by award winning journalist Seymour Hersh and others, Israel has, under the direction of its radical Zionist leadership, modified its so-called “Samson Option” of nuclear deterrence to one of nuclear intimidation in order “to redraw the political map of the Middle East.” According to Israel Shahak, “Israel clearly prepares itself to seek overtly a hegemony over the entire Middle East…without hesitating to use for the purpose all means available, including nuclear ones.”
In September, Mohamed ElBaradei, the outgoing director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, once again stated he had seen “no credible evidence” that Iran is developing nuclear weapons. In early December, Russian Prime Minister and possible 2012 Presidential contender, Vladimir Putin, said his government has no evidence of Iran trying to build a nuclear weapon.
Again, it should be stated that Schiff did not say in his interview that Iran has nuclear weapons. He said that if it is discovered the country has nuclear weapons it should be attacked in defiance of international law.
On economic issues, Peter Schiff is spot on. As an adherent of Austrian economics, he has correctly observed that government and Federal Reserve economic policies are the problem, not the solution. He advocates the gold standard and sound money.
However, his neocon foreign policy ideas overshadow his economic philosophy and make him a dangerous political candidate. If elected, Peter Schiff may indeed turn out to be another crazed neocon calling for the United States to invade small and defenseless countries on cooked up pretense.
In 2010, the people of Connecticut need to reject Mr. Schiff’s bid for a Senate seat unless he denounces the comments made in the above interview and promises the people of Connecticut and the United States he will not act as a warmonger and international outlaw if elected to serve.
Source...