The argument that America has to be less moral than its enemies is paving the way for the American government to be less moral to its own people.
Harvey’s sentiments go against everything America is supposed to stand for. Does the biblical philosophy of treat others as you wish to be treated mean anything to Harvey?
From: Prison Planet
Veteran Radio Host Paul Harvey Triumphs Smallpox Blankets To Native Americans, Black Slavery: Advocates Genocide, Ethnic Cleansing, Biological Warfare To Fight War On Terror
Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones/PRISON PLANET.com | July 5 2005
83-year-old veteran talk show host Paul Harvey, whose show is syndicated by ABC to over 1,000 radio stations, has reached further into the abyss of zealotry and extremism by suggesting America should be less moral than its enemies in the war on terror and resort to carnal genocide in order to succeed.
In comments broadcast to over 18 million listeners, Harvey stated the following.
After the attack on Pearl Harbor, Winston Churchill said that the American people…he said, the American people, he said, and this is a direct quote, “We didn’t come this far because we are made of sugar candy.”
That was his response to the attack on Pearl Harbor. That we didn’t come this far because we are made of sugar candy.
And that reminder was taken seriously. And we proceeded to develop and deliver the bomb, even though roughly 150,000 men, women and children perished in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. With a single blow, World War II was over.
Following New York, Sept. 11, Winston Churchill was not here to remind us that we didn’t come this far because we’re made of sugar candy.
So, following the New York disaster, we mustered our humanity.
We gave old pals a pass, even though men and money from Saudi Arabia were largely responsible for the devastation of New York and Pennsylvania and our Pentagon.
We called Saudi Arabians our partners against terrorism and we sent men with rifles into Afghanistan and Iraq, and we kept our best weapons in our silos.
Even now we’re standing there dying, daring to do nothing decisive, because we’ve declared ourselves to be better than our terrorist enemies — more moral, more civilized.
Our image is at stake, we insist.
But we didn’t come this far because we’re made of sugar candy.
Once upon a time, we elbowed our way onto and into this continent by giving small pox infected blankets to native Americans.
Yes, that was biological warfare!
And we used every other weapon we could get our hands on to grab this land from whomever. And we grew prosperous.
And, yes, we greased the skids with the sweat of slaves.
And so it goes with most nation states, which, feeling guilty about their savage pasts, eventually civilize themselves out of business and wind up invaded, and ultimately dominated by the lean, hungry and up and coming who are not made of sugar candy.
Click here for an audio clip of the dialogue.
The disgusting bigotry and Nazi-like nature of these comments are the furthest yet that any Neo-Con has gone in attempting to justify harsher prosecution of the war on terror.
The scale of this sickness dwarfs even previous comments by Michael Savage and Rush Limbaugh.
Rush Limbaugh suggested that the Abu Ghraib prison guards were “just having fun” and “blowing off some steam.”
The official official US Army report into Abu Ghraib lists the activities that Limbaugh defines as harmless fun. They include;
– Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees.
– Sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light.
– Positioning a naked detainee on a MRE Box, with a sandbag on his head, and attaching wires to his fingers, toes, and penis to simulate electric torture.
– Raping children.
– A male MP guard having sex with a female detainee (rape)
– Beating detainees to death.
All of the above are great ways to relax according to Rush Limbaugh. Raping children and beating people to death is “harmless fraternity fun.”
Limbaugh then equalled his depravity last month when he released a line of merchandise that depicted the Guantanamo Bay detention camp in Cuba as a holiday home.
Harvey has gone even further, advocating what amounts to mass genocide and ethnic cleansing. Does giving smallpox infected blankets to native Americans epitomise President Bush’s vision of spreading freedom and democracy around the world?
In the 18th century, the British fought France and its Indian allies for possession of what was to become Canada during the French and Indian Wars (1754-63).
At the time of the Pontiac rebellion in 1763, Sir Jeffrey Amherst, the Commander-in-Chief of the British forces in North America, wrote to Colonel Henry Bouquet: ‘Could it not be contrived to send smallpox among these disaffected tribes of Indians? We must use every stratagem in our power to reduce them.’ The colonel replied: ‘I will try to inoculate the [Native American tribe] with some blankets that may fall in their hands, and take care not to get the disease myself.’ Smallpox decimated the Native Americans, who had never been exposed to the disease before and had no immunity.
Harvey is seen by many as the conscience of America, having been on the radio since 1933.
To have an individual of that gravitas openly advocate black slavery and genocide as a necessary tool tells us one of two things. Either Mr. Harvey has gone completely senile in his old age or he represents a growing trend of perversion amongst Neo-Conservatives who have gleefully proclaimed themselves to be morally bankrupt and have urged the US government to do the same and apply it to the construction of a decadent empire.
And to conservatives reading this article, we are by no means saying that those on the extreme left are any different. During Clinton’s tenure, many liberals tried to justify the brutal siege on the Waco Church in 1993. This represents the same mindset, the specific targeting and elimination of minority groups to further a jackboot agenda. The Muslims are just the latest victims of this crusade and they certainly won’t be the last.
The liberals couldn’t ram through the entirety of their police state agenda, so they just put on sheep’s clothing and returned as self-proclaimed conservatives and are now attempting to destroy America.
One of Paul Harvey’s peers, Michael Savage has continually advocated the arrest of anyone who criticizes the government. Last year he called for the arrest of a New York Times journalist for publishing an anti-US photograph under the reasoning that the editor was committing sedition by promoting enemy propaganda.
On several occasions, Savage has even gone as far as to call for anti-government dissenters to be put in forced labor camps. The danger of this is all the more immediate when one considers the fact that three years ago FEMA began work on constructing entire mini-cities for purposes of internment.
It is common knowledge that this ‘bastion of conservatism’ was once a liberal hippy. He still advocates the books and philosophy of literary beatniks Jack Kerouac and William Burroughs, whose books included glorification of drug use.
Mr. Wiener, like a plethora of other so-called right-wing talk show hosts, is a dangerous anti-American who hates freedom and what the founding fathers created. While he has a first amendment right to voice his comments, we feel the need to challenge them and will continue to monitor his subversive and extremist activities.
Paul Harvey is an even greater threat to liberty and he will likewise be scrutinized.
The argument that America has to be less moral than its enemies is paving the way for the American government to be less moral to its own people.
Harvey’s sentiments go against everything America is supposed to stand for. Does the biblical philosophy of treat others as you wish to be treated mean anything to Harvey?
Harvey’s argument lacks further credibility in light of the fact that the so-called ‘terrorists’ who would be at the brunt of Harvey’s ire are in the vast majority of cases no terrorists at all.
Consistent figures have indicated that as high as 90% of Iraqis arrested at checkpoints and hauled away to prison camps have no connection to car bombings. In most cases they don’t have their papers in order or are accused of stealing wood. Do these crimes justify the use of biological warfare and nuking entire countries?
The LA Times reported that no leaders of Al-Qaeda were identified as being at Guantanamo. That’s because the US government ordered all the poor cavemen who were shoved onto the front lines by the Taliban to be arrested, while they safely evacuated 8,000 Al-Qaeda and Taliban cream (by accident of course) from Kunduz in Afghanistan.
The justification of dropping nuclear bombs on countries is also a mindless argument. Many Neo-Cons called for ‘levelling Fallujah’ after American contractors were killed in the city. So next time there are a handful of murders in your city the government should solve the problem by letting loose a few A-Bombs?
Entire Article Here
Related:
Paul Harvey in cahoots with J. Edgar Hoover
