Veena Malik As Reham Khan

By | December 6, 2016

Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., in an intense re-race battle, drew parallels on Monday between World War II and the present war against ‘Islamic one party rule,’ saying they both require battling a typical adversary in numerous nations. It’s an expression Santorum has been utilizing for a considerable length of time.What’s more, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on Tuesday made it a stride encourage in a discourse to an American Legion tradition in Salt Lake City, blaming commentators for the organization’s Iraq and hostile to psychological warfare arrangements of attempting to mollify ‘another sort of dictatorship.'”

Sponsors and Advertisements

So as per this, we now are battling not simply fear mongers, but rather “Islamic radical totalitarian political reasoning that consolidates components of corporatism, tyranny, outrageous patriotism, militarism, hostile to disorder, against socialism and hostile to progressivism.” Hmmm, when was the last time the world was debilitated by Islamic Corporate covetousness and the religious pioneers just likewise happened to be the pioneers of multinational organizations that were draining the life blood out of the economy and the person? This meaning of Islamic Fascism sounds a terrible parcel like a decent meaning of America under the Republican party motivation as played out in the course of recent years to all our damage. Aren’t these the folks who used to keep running for less government and capable spending? No, we are not one piece preferable off today over we were five years ago…a entire parcel more awful with anguish over the loss of where the spirit of America went.

Video Link

We should see, we have a President that said he wouldn’t fret despots the length of “I am the dicatator.” You see I have this premonition that when individuals say clever things like that, it’s truly not all that amusing and their intuitive personality is running the show. That must be a type of a radical totalitarian political theory. He is unquestionably “the decider,” so that meets all requirements for the same. I’d feel that letting most partnerships off one snare or the other in the course of recent years, alongside giving the few divinely selected individuals that by and by advantage numerous in the present organization every one of the agreements from Iraq, to Afghanistan and New Orleans, may meet all requirements for corporatism. Also, aren’t all the genuine pioneers in this organization the once heads of huge partnerships? Furthermore, am I wrong, or are these not men that were ever inclined to the draft, war or military administration of any sort, however know how to make war against the planet? What’s more, would it say it wasn’t simply yesterday that Don Rumsfeld suggested that to take a stand in opposition to the war or the President was a sort of unfaithfulness and nearly favoring the fear based oppressors themselves? Sounds like extraordinary patriotism and against rebellion to me. I don’t have the foggiest idea. I wasn’t too political until around five years prior so I may misjudge. I used to implore only for the Kingdom of God to come however now it’s more “God spare me from your adherents!” Well to me at any rate, yet I don’t generally know much.

And after that there is this thing we call projection. That is the place one tends to mark others the very things that they fear they may be included in themselves. It resembles a priest railing on the philanderers in the assemblage, just to discover later, he was, well you know. He laid on them his own weaknesses and sins. I have seen priests fly off the handle against gay people and “queers”, just to discover, well you know.. So when George Bush Sr. calls Sadaam the “new hitler,” it makes me ponder. At the point when George Bush Jr does likewise or tosses that at the present authority in Iran, it makes me feel that there is some projection going ahead here. Perhaps it’s just me. What do I know?