
Friday, March 30, 2018
Bedtime for Bonzo

Saturday, February 20, 2010
Tuesday, February 09, 2010
And in the distance, we can still hear the shrill voices of the neocons....
Monday, October 26, 2009
Past nightmares to haunt your Halloween
And this undead torture-loving guy:
And don't forget this moron:
And I wish we could forget this creep:
But then Halloween dress-up time passes:
And we all wake up to a big mess the day after:
And get back to work:
Friday, June 26, 2009
Eliminate! Eliminate!
But he sure sounds like one...
The Los Angeles Times prints Bolton's cry for Regime Change! Not diplomacy! Regime Change!
To date at least, the Obama administration's answer remains a resounding no. Obama wants negotiations with Tehran, not regime change. Given that the Revolutionary Guard and the hard-line mullahs -- and not the people -- are increasingly likely to be the short-term winners of the current Battle for Iran, supporters of regime change must now make longer-term plans.um... Mr. Bolton? With what? Support them with what? You and your Neocon buddies in the Bush administration broke the military. You now want to bomb and invade Iran too? Haven't you Neocons done enough damage, caused enough wreckage, destroyed enough lives and property to content you? Is that all you guys can think of? The world will worship in shock and awe the US because we're the biggest baddest bullies nuked up and willing to use them?
We have missed a huge opportunity because of Obama's error (and that of his predecessors), but the continuing threat of Iranian nuclear weapons and support for international terrorism make the imperative of regime change no less compelling. The Iranian people will continue their opposition no matter how inconvenient it is for Obama's hoped-for negotiations. We should support them, and not just by rhetoric.
Well, invading Afghanistan AND Iraq kinda blew a hole in your plans for world domination, didn't it? Things looked really good on paper: kick Saddam out, pop Chalabi in, and then you're wedged in tight right in the middle of the biggest oil fields of them all. Then you could threaten and harass Iran and maybe even bomb them into submission, right?
But Afghanistan did what it always does when invaded, changed hats to the invaders colors and waited to see what promises were kept. Which turned out to be very little, because you guys were in such a hurry to invade Iraq. Strangely, Iraq didn't like being invaded and getting rid of Saddam started a veritable bloodbath of epic proportions.
The wreckage you have caused in these two countries will never be fixed. You have stained the ground with blood, depleted uranium, destroyed infrastructure, lies, and broken promises. No one will trust the US ever again. And we owe this all to you.
Just why are you being given print space anyway?
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
From the group that promised Iraq would be a cakewalk
It wasn't really Iraq they wanted to go to war with, but with Iran. Iraq was supposed to fall in six weeks or so, pop Chalabi into Hussein's chair, and then attack Iran. Didn't work out that way. But the neocons still can't let go of the wonderful plan they had to take over all the oil fields and control the world.
John Bolton dreams on:
Yesterday, on Fox’s Hannity and Colmes, Iran war hawk John Bolton said that Israel’s recent bombing campaign in Gaza is all the more reason for the United States to bomb Iran now. “So while our focus obviously is on Gaza right now, this could turn out to be a much larger conflict,” he said, adding that “we’re looking at potentially a multi-front war here.” “You would strike Iran right now?” asked host Alan Colmes. “I would have done it before this,” Bolton responded. Colmes asked whether tensions and war across Middle East would escalate if the U.S. or Israel were to bomb Iran. Bolton said that the many Arab countries would secretly be cheering if Iran were attackedIt's hard to leave your own comfortable reality for the biting cold slap of truth....
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
John Bolton uses his training as a diplomat
HEMMER: One final step here, too, that I want to take with you. You told one of our producers earlier today that you don’t know if it’s true — and you’ve made that clear in our interview here, that you don’t know what the odds are or are not against that — but you hope it’s true. Why do you hope it’s true?Very serious, hmm? So, will you be very seriously dealing with the aftermath of a 'surgical strike' in Iran? Will this set off the World War that you guys are literally hell bent on starting?
BOLTON: Absolutely. I hope Iran understands that we are very serious, that we are determined they are not going to get a nuclear weapon capability, and unless they change the strategic decision they’ve been pursuing for close to 20 years, that that’s something they better factor into their calculations.
WTF. Seriously.
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
'Create a wasteland and call it peace'
The war trolls would have us believe that they are the grown-ups, defending us from the coming barbarism. But watch out next time you see them on Newsnight. Behind the oily gravitas of the prince of darkness lies a different kind of barbarism. And look closely at the gleaming eyes of the ex-UN ambassador with his walrus moustache. You might just detect a big kid, living out a fantasy of violence and control, while he operates the PlayStation game that just happens to be the world the rest of us live in.And speaking of looking into the eyes and into the minds of the Bush Administration, you have to read Morse's latest masterpiece at The Republic of Sestakastan.
Look carefully at the last frame of Bolton's glasses....
Friday, January 05, 2007
John Bolton was behind Rehnquist's nomination push
"In 1986, the Reagan administration was eager to protect its nomination of Rehnquist to be chief justice the Supreme Court. Officials learned that at his confirmation hearings, Democrats in Congress planned to bring out witnesses who would testify that Rehnquist had intimidated minority voters as a Republican Party official in Arizona.
Intimidation? Now there's an idea. So the administration enlisted the FBI to do background checks on the witnesses -- and pushed the bureau to send special agents to "interview" them prior to their testimony. That's not a usual practice, mind you. At the time, at least one FBI official warned that the Justice Department "should be sensitive to the possibility that Democrats could charge the Republicans of misusing the FBI and intimidating the Democrats' witnesses."
Despite that warning, the order was approved.
Who would have rubber-stamped such a horrendous idea?
Legal Times reports:
[T]hen-Assistant Attorney General John Bolton -- who more recently served as ambassador to the United Nations -- signed off on the request and said he would "accept responsibility should concerns be raised about the role of the FBI.""
Monday, December 25, 2006
The circular blame squad
Sinfonian has more of the whining.
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
Moral clarity?
Think Progress has the quote:
"JOHN BOLTON, who was U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, has joined Washington Speakers Bureau for exclusive representation. Last week, the “Wall Street Journal” described him as someone who “saw the world as it really was” and spoke “with moral clarity about it.”"
Wouldn't 'fanatical focus' be more appropriate?
You in the back! I've seen you at Plato's Retreat!
Monday, December 04, 2006
Bolton's resignation accepted.
Bolton, 58, submitted a resignation letter Friday after it became clear that he was unlikely to win a new confirmation battle in the Senate, where Democrats won a narrow majority in the Nov. 7 midterm elections."
Gee....wonder what lobbyist he's going to go to work for now?