The Shotgun Blog
« “Shakedown” by Ezra Levant | Main | Fathers 4 Justice: Michael Ignatieff supports equal parenting, but will he act? »
Monday, September 22, 2008
If American foreign policy had a gift shop, what would it sell?
That's the question photographer Philip Toledano attempts to answer in his new online project America: The Gift Shop.
I'll let the images speak for themselves:
Abu Ghraib coffee table
Abu Ghraib Bobble-head
Choc and Awe chocolate bar
Choc and Awe chocolate bar, unwrapped
T-shirt: I was rendered
T-shirt: Pre-emptive strikes
Snow globe: Cheney shredding secret documents
For more, take a look at Toledano's website, and to watch a man in command of the facts debate against the "sophisticated" case for American foreign intervention, take a look at this.
Posted by Kalim Kassam on September 22, 2008 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e2010534c7e65b970c
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference If American foreign policy had a gift shop, what would it sell?:
Comments
"If American foreign policy had a gift shop, what would it sell?"
Her freedom ?
Her reputation ?
Her prosperity ?
Posted by: Marc | 2008-09-23 9:38:29 AM
"If Canadian foreign policy had a gift shop, what would IT sell?"
Nothing.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-23 9:43:38 AM
What a "clever" post! What next, praise for the UN?
Posted by: John Chittick | 2008-09-23 10:11:33 AM
Why would any freedom-minded person praise the UN, John?
Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 2008-09-23 10:13:34 AM
"Her prosperity ?"
No, that's domestic policy, Marc.
It would look like a Subprime Minority Borrower. :)
http://www.vdare.com/misc/080922_seiyo.htm
Posted by: DJ | 2008-09-23 10:25:50 AM
It may not be that obvious, Matthew, but I was trying to be sarcastic. Belittling US foreign policy efforts may be good fun for the liberal media but I find it offensive. I'm sure we agree on the usefulness of the UN.
Posted by: John Chittick | 2008-09-23 10:38:53 AM
I'm sorry DJ,
I was under the impression the US was also sending truckloads of taxpayers’ money across the planet to secure their imperialistic agenda.
Posted by: Marc | 2008-09-23 10:40:01 AM
"I was under the impression the US was also sending truckloads of taxpayers’ money across the planet to secure their imperialistic agenda."
It's peanuts compared to what they're sending and will send to Wall Street, Marc. :)
Posted by: DJ | 2008-09-23 10:47:52 AM
I know.
Tx for the exchange.
Posted by: Marc | 2008-09-23 11:03:19 AM
Great - yet another blog post about the evils of American imperialism.
Am I the only WS reader who is sick of this "Ron Paulification" of what used to be a good, libertarian-conservative web site.
Posted by: Craig | 2008-09-23 9:09:17 PM
What, you don't like Ron Paul, Craig?
Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-09-23 9:14:04 PM
"Great - yet another blog post about the evils of American imperialism."
And all of it based on the usual far left, unprovable, ridiculous talking points.
To support and encourage this far left drivel has made this blog laughable.
Posted by: deepblue | 2008-09-23 9:41:51 PM
If it could sell off the dependency of so much of the world on the US military, the whole world would be better off.
But hey, I guess choc-and-awe bars are funny anyway.
Posted by: Janet | 2008-09-23 10:05:17 PM
Marc wrote: "I was under the impression the US was also sending truckloads of taxpayers’ money across the planet to secure their imperialistic agenda."
It's not imperialism, Marc. America has no intention of securing foreign colonies. They deign to think that putting a stop to the endless bloodletting in the Middle East (and, since 9/11, elsewhere), and the consequent worldwide economic turmoil, might be nice. But you go ahead and truck forth the same old demons if it makes you feel important, even if you don't have a workable alternative plan to offer.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-23 10:05:56 PM
"What, you don't like Ron Paul, Craig?"
Let's see:
Anti-abortion. Anti-NAFTA. Against liberating people from tyranny. Accepts the crudest form of the 'blowback' thesis. Possibly a racist. And makes libertarians look like wing-nuts.
What's not to like?
Posted by: Craig | 2008-09-23 10:23:52 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.