David Thompson is in fine fettle today, writing of John Pilger, who’s been let go from the staff of the New Statesman, to the tune of Steam’s hit. A lefty blogress by the name of Sunny Hundal thinks that losing such a voice of conscience is a blow to the left, and David picks up the ball from there:
Wild imaginings are, of course, a signature of Mr Pilger’s rhetoric, along with the aforementioned anger and unrealism. As illustrated in December 2003 by his enthusiastic support of Ba’athist thugs and jihadist fantasists: “I think the resistance in Iraq is incredibly important for all of us. I think that we depend on the resistance to win so that other countries might not be attacked.†The precise nature of the “resistance†– its methods and lineage – didn’t seem to trouble Pilger; nor was he unduly concerned by the mismatch between that noble resistance and concepts of democracy, human rights, etc. One might, for instance, hesitate to champion the likes of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who in January 2005, a week before Iraq’s parliamentary election, said: “We have declared a bitter war against the principle of democracy and all those who seek to enact it.â€Â
What mattered to Pilger, and mattered a great deal, was “deal[ing] a blow to the US Empire†– a point on which he was later happy to elaborate. Asked in January 2004 whether the “anti-war†movement should really be supporting al-Zarqawi and his associates, the Voice Of Conscienceâ„¢ replied: “Yes, I do. We cannot afford to be choosy… We have no choice now but to support the resistance, for if the resistance fails, the Bush gang will attack another country. If they succeed, a grievous blow will be suffered by the Bush gang.†Two months later, Pilger described British, American and Australian troops as “legitimate targets†and revealed the true, fiendish scope of America’s ambitions: “Unless the United States is defeated [in Iraq], we’re likely to see an attack on Iran, we’re likely to see an attack on North Korea and all the way down the road it could be even an attack on China within a decade.â€Â
Read the whole thing, and please support the Empire’s effort to make Iraq the 55th state.
John Pilger, at New Statesman?
You mean he didn’t write at KOS?
serr8d, Pilger was Kos before Kos was Kos. He makes Robert Fisk look sensible.
People like Pilger stand in front of bulldozers holding bullhorns.
Pilger is one of the most vile America haters-good riddance to him from all publications…
I guess they couldn’t have him around anymore; he might inadvertantly criticize the one!…
Siding with, and cheering for, the enemies of our nation, and indeed our way of life, is the definition of traitorous…
I definately question Pilger’s patriotism, and invite him to move to Afghanistan, and to join the Taliban of AQ; in the hopes that we could put him out of our misery!
Then I’d be singing, “Na-na-na-na, hey-hey, goodbye…”
Or maybe, thoir, they’re named Tim Geither, “carelessly” and “unintentionally” owe $34,000 in back taxes dated to 2001, and get appointed w/i the O!bama Administration — the current MO!st AccO!untable Administration in HistO!ry — so they can lead really important stuff like say, the Treasury.
People like Pilger write fantasies. People like Pilger let other people stand in front of bulldozers with bullhorns. People like Pilger smoke clove cigarettes and have vaginas.
For a minute there, I thought you were referring to The One.
Yes, JHo, I’m aware of Geither. If you haven’t occasionally taken liberties with your tax bill then you’re not a good American capitalist. Hiring a tax attorney to assist you in not paying what you owe is the point of employing said individual. You’re feigning shock furthers my proffer that you’ve fallen repeatedly from a turnip truck.
My disappointment in Obama was bound to occur, and it has, many days back. Larry Summers? That’s the same fuck-head that teamed up with Anatoly Chubias to engineer Russia’s economic butchering. Summers caused their 60% decline in GDP and watched silently as Russian male life expectancy dropped below Liberian levels. If you wonder why a fascist like Putin rose to power in Russia you need to look no further than Summersnomics.
Yes, with Geither and Summers it will be Bushian business as usual, meaning corporate America assholes will continue to loot the Treasury.
The latest bouncy rumor is England’s financial system may fully collapse, again. I wish I would have profited from the battle axe hitting the Pound Sterling, but I’m no Soros.
“…my disappointment with Obama was bound to occur…?
You’re kidding; I wish I had put money on that. But I am, as you say, no Soros.
Comment by thor on 1/22 @ 7:28 am #
That’s nice, hor, now go take your meds and have a nice long nap.
If that’s not “uniquely qualified” to be in charge of The Best, Most Transparent Administration Evah’s financial policy, if that doesn’t qualify you to oversee the gifting of billions of taxpayer dollars, I don’t know what does. Not just anyone can get divine absolution. This couldn’t possibly go wrong… as long as he doesn’t use TurboBailout.
A lefty blogress by the name of Sunny Hundal
I’m pretty sure Sunny Hundal is a bloke. But you’re correct about the “lefty” bit.
Because if that’s what blogresses look like now, I’m staying single.
By the standards with which you railed against Karl during the 2008 Campaign, I’m sorry, thor, but I must denounce you as RACIST!.
Disappointment with The One! is not allowed, and speaks volumes on your continuing efforts to keep the Black Man down.
the geither thing is a fart from the back of a classroom–an amusing distraction, but little more.
pilger getting sacked is fine news. a legitimately insane moonbat whom even Thor cant defend.
the day starts out well enough.
Yes, Pilger was/is the sort that stands in front of bulldozers shouting through a bullhorn.
The current, never-spoken, always-made assumption is that that makes him right.
It’s bullshit in his case, and in many others.
Regards,
Ric
2004: Attacks on NK, Iran and China.
Bold, FEARLESS, bullhorn-worthy predictions!
I guess being a moonbat never means admitting you were dead wrong?
I see Pilger is still only almost as useful to his countrymen as Guy Fawkes was.
OT – Ric, awhile back you mentioned an author who wrote Sci-Fi novels and short stories. The short story you mentioned had something to do with bureacracy. Vague, I know but for the life of me, I can’t remember the author’s name, but I do remember the story sounding very interesting. Thanks.
True, because it’s an Obama appointment and not a Bush appointment. Otherwise, we’d be hearing calls for prosecution.
“If you haven’t occasionally taken liberties with your tax bill then you’re not a good American capitalist.”
No, that makes you dishonest, a cheat, a liar and a criminal.
“No, that makes you dishonest, a cheat, a liar and a criminal.”
Yeah, the attempts at rationalizing thor will do for his big O! is kind of funny. Plus, ahem, I ain’t being asked to be the Secretary of the Treasury. And of course what Pablo said, kind of goes without saying.
#19 OI — The author’s name is Eric Frank Russell. The particular story I was mentioning is one of my favorites, a long short story or possibly a novella entitled “A Study in Still Life”. If you have ever worked in or with a substantial bureaucracy you will recognize all the players. If you can read it without breaking out into guffaws at least once you have no understanding :-)
The same author has some extremely gloomy novels. Stay away.
Regards,
Ric
How about Keith Laumer’s “Retief” stories, and the way he eviscerates the lace pantie diplomatic corps.
Or a lawyer.
There have been times when I’ve made mistakes on my taxes. Oddly, though, for me: the IRS was kind enough to inform me only a year or so after the fact, which notification came stapled to a demand for payment plus penalties, plus a nice, easy-to-read explanation of further steps the IRS could take to recover their money, should I prove to be recalcitrant in coughing it up in the first place. Oh, and the demand was payment NOW, before I appealed my case. They’d be glad to promptly refund any chunk of money that it turned out that I’d repaid wrongly, were I able to make a case to that effect.
Odd, that the IRS failed to note certain things. It’s almost as if Geither forgot to report that income altogether.
Yeah, Ric. Unfortunately I am intimately familiar with large bureaucracies. I think that’s what piqued my interest. Thanks. I’ll look it up.
“Or a lawyer.”
Then add “someone who should be disbarred” to the list. Anything you need to confess about cheating on your taxes?
One day when you’re a reputable enough
liarlawyer to open your own practice you’ll learn what jiggling the expenses means, counselor.“Taking liberties” implies cheating/acting unlawfully. Acting cleverly within the law is not “taking liberties”.
I take it that you DO cheat on your taxes then, if the above is what you mean by “taking liberties”.
Joe Biden wept.
John, when you have a lot of itemized deductions you don’t want them to be red-flaggy looking. Your attorney or accountant customarily agrees to handle the additional work if you’re audited at no extra cost. In other words, both parties have a vested interest in fashioning a tax return in they way the I.R.S. prefers. Outside of that look, why in the fuck would you pay a tax consultant if they didn’t help you save money on your taxes? Every attorney in the accounting dept. of that insurance
scamcompany you work for is reducing your company’s tax bill in a amount greater than their salary or they’d be laid off.I always assume you’re just acting dumb.
Stop being coy – as I said above, following the law, but being very good at finding deductions is not criminal, unethical, etc. You seemed to be saying that if you didn’t cheat (“take liberties”), you weren’t a good American capitalist. So, I will put it bluntly – do you cheat on your taxes? And by cheat, I mean that you knowingly do not pay that which you do owe.
I don’t have to assume you are acting dumb. You are simply being disingenuous. Deliberately so.
So, either you were posturing/hinting about cheating (to look OUTLAW?)or you do cheat.
Do tell.
What you owe is the lowest amount you can legally get away.
My accountant is obligated to pay any I.R.S. penalties for my tax returns and so far he hasn’t had to pay any penalties and I’ve never been audited.
I’d say that means I’m OK.
away with.
“What you owe is the lowest amount you can legally get away with”
That means ‘clever but lawful’.
“My accountant is obligated to pay any I.R.S. penalties for my tax returns and so far he hasn’t had to pay any penalties and I’ve never been audited.
I’d say that means I’m OK.”
That is vague.
A simple “I do not cheat on my taxes” would clear that right up. Should you care to answer.
What it means, Maj. John is “I have no idea what my taxes actually are because an accountant takes care of that. He hasn’t had to pay any fines so I guess I’ve paid all of the taxes I am legally obligated to pay.”
In other owrds, the ‘taking liberties’ phrase was just bombast. Cause of the rebellion.
Hold on a moment Mikey – wait to see what he says first. You may be right, but not necessarily.
Is that what he told you? I think the IRS is probably going to come after you, should your accountant’s skills be found lacking, and leave it up to you to extract penalties from your accountant. You’re free to present them with your accountant’s guarantees, and they’re equally free to laugh in your face and tell you to pony up.
#38 – true. I took it to mean that he had a contractual relationship with the accountant and since he was on the hook to indemnify his client, should he be found wanting, that he felt safe. Naturally, you cannot use an accountant to shield yourself from the IRS or criminal liability. The ghost of Al Capone would be displeased.
Well, maybe you can avoid the IRS if you blame TurboTax… heh.
Obstreperous Infidel —
As it turns out there are two E. F. Russel pieces available on line, a (long) short story entitled “Allamagoosa” that everyone but me seems highly fond of, and an early piece called And Then There Were None. If you enjoy the latter, you might also hunt down a more complete (but to my mind less filling) treatment called A Voyage from Yesteryear by James P. Hogan.
Regards,
Ric
Regards,
Ric
Ric,
I remember that book (“Voyage from Yesteryear”). I’ve read most of Hogan’s stuff over the years, and IMNSHO that one is about the best thing he ever wrote.
The author’s name is Eric Frank Russell.
I think very highly of Wasp, by the same author.
I’ve never been audited.
Yet…
You have no evidence to ask such an accusatory question of me, John. You are supposedly a man of corporate America who should know that G.A.A.P. means Generally Accepted Accounting Principals, which implies there’s different ways to account for expenses and persons are extended an allowance to use the methods that are most tax-advantageous to themselves.
Ha.
Besides, my CPA graduated from Baylor. He’s a fine Christian man! It’s to witness God’s own fury whenever he chooses more aggressive interpretations of the tax code.
Do you cheat on your taxes?
Pretty simple question, isn’t it? You are sure spending a lot of pixels not answering.
Per Generally Accepted definition – No. Have you ever cheated on your 1040 EZ?
Still evasive. Without qualification, spin, evasion or the like – have you ever cheated on your taxes?
I have never filed a 1040 EZ, and I have never cheated on my taxes.
It’s a matter of how aggressive you and your CPA want to defend the accounting of your expenses should you get audited, dork.
If you’re too stupid to know these things then obviously you’ve never owned a small business.
My God man, worry about the financial health of that company you work for. These are days of corporate lay-offs and downsizing.
So you refuse to give a yes or no answer?
I think we both know that I am well aware of all the stuff you keep obfuscating with and about.
Why won’t you give a simple “No, I do not cheat on my taxes” answer?
If you’re aware of the “stuff,” which I hope means the differing methods of accounting for expenses, then why do you keep asking such a juvenile question?
Why don’t you go ask them in your accounting dept. if they’re cheating on the taxes?
Wear a flag-pin too.
My accountant would describe my choices as moderately aggressive as I’m one of those people who is too afraid to be too aggressive, which is why I’ve never been audited, I believe. You ought to hear him talk of the small home builders and others who are uber-aggressive that he works for. I simply choose not to waste time in a dispute with the I.R.S., which, if you know so much, there’s no law against going into the gray areas as long as you abide by the eventual I.R.S. audit results. Your company has plenty of experience resolving disputes with the I.R.S., trust me, so quit bellowing of cheating (!!elevanty!!).
You ought to hear him talk of the small home builders and others who are uber-aggressive that he works for.
Our accountant told us the biggest tax cheats were teachers.
I’ll add they are the worst tippers.
Just saying.
Yes or no – do you cheat on your taxes. It really isn’t a difficult question. Your (non) answers are hinting at a “yes, but I won’t admit it.” That might indicate you are a basically honest person who is uncomfortable admitting a hypocracy. Or you are honest on your taxes and do not want to admit that because of some odd desire to maintian an edgy internet image.
Yes or no, do you cheat on your taxes?
It depends on what the definition of is is.
Is it cheating to claim $500 in charitable contributions once you exceed a certain level of income?
No, because the I.R.S. had set a precedent that it doesn’t dispute up to $500 in charitable contributions because any one can claim their time as a donation, meaning attending any form of charitable event could be considered a donation to charity. It is, in fact, standard to claim $500 in charitable contributions without any proof of actual charitable giving.
Your question, of course, is juvenile and leading, counselor.
And your answers quite revealing. I guess I’ll have to assume that you do cheat – but balm your conscience with the above type excuse making.
You could simply say “I do not cheat on my taxes” or “I do cheat on my taxes, but haven’t been caught”.
Well then I’ll assume you are a liar and a bigger tax cheater than I!!!
Touche!
And why could you not simply say that “the available evidence suggests that you pay your fair share of taxes since you have satisfied the I.R.S., thor?”
What was your motive in performing this line of questioning, counselor?
From my experience in dealing with first time criminals – the one who usually did something as an opportunity, your original statements rang that bell. Your subsequent twisting and turning started to more and more resemble that type of behavior.
Either one does cheat, or they do not. You will not place yourself in either category. That is revelatory.
The whole thing could have been over with a “sure I said everyone who doesn’t ‘take liberties’ with their taxes wasn’t a good American capitalist. But I don’t. It was just a bit of bravado.”
Instead, it appears that was a bit of bluster you don’t want to retract, or it was an admission against interest.
And why could you not simply say that “the available evidence suggests that you pay your fair share of taxes since you have satisfied the I.R.S., thor?â€Â
That is like saying, I haven’t been pulled over for speeding, so I am an honest driver – as you look down and pat your radar detector…