Mandela neither demanded nor received an entirely unconditional devotion; in power he expected his compatriots to behave as assertive citizens not genuflecting disciples
Quote of the day
 Email & RSSSign up to oD's editorial summaries email:
 NavigationOur writersPopular ArticlesRecent: |
 |
Deceiving American people
White House spokespersons describe Karazai, Musharraf and Tony Blair as dependable partners in war against terrorism but truth is otherwise. Hamid Karazai is a burden on USA. He is reluctant to eradicate poppy cultivation from Afghanistan but wants financial and physical protection from USA as a humbug. Similarly General Musharraf is playing double game with American policy makers. He is unwilling to control narcotics trafficking through tribal belt bordering Iran and Afghanistan but seek money just for his lip service to American president. Tony Blair was reelected as Prime Minister for his verbal support to US efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq but in reality is just defending his job. It shows that American people are being deceived and defrauded by its own government. Will this propensity go like this for ever?
Submitted on Mon, 2005-05-23 20:25
Re: Deceiving American people
"Will this propensity go like this for ever?"
well, i see very little in the way of the extreme right steamroller. ingorance is at an all time high in the US since the 1970's, and the right has been mobilized by political support unlike anything I can recall.
assuming the answer to your question is yes, i have a question for you:
what will you do if this is so?
Re: Deceiving American people
ittaskforce1,
Actually, the responsibilty for eradicating the poppy fields in Afghanistan was assigned to the BRITISH. They've made a mess of it. They were given the task of eradicating 19,000 acres in 2004. They eradicated 109.
The US recommended spraying the fields. The British thought that was too harsh. Karzai urges helping farmers plant something else.
Pakistan has arrested hundreds of Al Qaeda and killed more. There are some elements in Pakistani Intelligence that supported the Taliban in the 90's and still do today. Musharraf's government is trying to weed them out. Musharraf has survived two assassination attempts by Al Qaeda-- what kind of a "double game" is that?
Blair supports the rebuilding of Afghanistan and Iraq. He put his "job" on the line to do it. He won.
The "propensity" here is giveupitis on your part-- Something which Blair and Bush don't have.
Re: Deceiving American people
Sir Toejam,
You'll recall American "ignorance" won the Cold War and threw Saddam out of Kuwait was more ease than Hitler's "steamroller" through France.
You don't live in the US so "ignorance" on your part is understandable. The question is:
What will you do if this is so?
Re: Deceiving American people
The Poppy problem -- That's the ticket! Pass the buck to the Brits That's one thing you can say for W Bush -- he's the fastest buck-passer in the West. When someone asked him about job-losses, he first insisted he had inherited the recession, which was followed by 9-11, and then press coverage day after day saying "march to war, march to war" in 2002. Well there was a march to war and we are still in it -- but, hey. The point is that Opium is the base of the pyramid of Afghanistan's economy and as long as we have our pipeline (remember that nasty little Fahrenheit 9/11 film you trashed without engaging ANY of the issues from it that I cited?), and Karzai being an oil-company consultant in a native-looking hat, then the W Bush people are happy. Trying to palm this off without realizing that, as with most of what is palmed off as "Kofigate" involved smuggling that it was ALLIED policy to allow through Jordan and Turkey, there is a policy choice by the "allies" here, is what the British call poppycock. I believe I have the usage correct here. And of course, the merest suggestion that any of this has anything to do with imperialism is simply magical thinking, in your universe.
Blair put his career on the line in the elections?. Um, who was running as a peace candidate against him? Oh that's right, the other major party was pro-war too. It's a bit like Clinton, who failed to deliver on his promises to Democrats in 1993-4, alienated a huge proportion of the Democratic base, who then stayed home, and, along with a number of issues put front and center like GaysInTheMilitary to fire up the right, the result was predictably a massive gain for the conservatives! For Blair as for Clinton, although the conservative gains were less, it strengthens his hand as against his real enemies -- the peace movement and progressive demands!
As for 'GiveUpItis' -- the point is NOT to give up, on the peace movement that predated the Iraq War. As for Afghanistan, the issue is more complicated -- we are not doing what we should be (in my opinion), which is a major effort against Al-Qaeda and building up an economic alternative to poppies that isn't the oil pipeline, BUT the "allies" are busy pursuing an imperialist agenda instead. Oops! Beulah, peel me a Thorazine tablet!
Re: Deceiving American people
cloudy,
The poppy problem? The US would be tickled if the brits would pass the poppy problem over to them. That's the point Can't you face a British screwup without trying to change the subject? As for changing the subject, your clarity is fading again.
Blair's re-election? You're complaining that no peace candidate ran against him. Could it be no peace candidate thought he could win? Again, your clarity trails off at the end.
"Giveupitis"? Who's talking about the peace movement giving up. It wasn't mentionned. This kid is seeing something that isn't there and giving up. He needs backbone-- like others around here.
Thorazine? Are you on thorazine?
Re: Deceiving American people
"Sir Toejam,
You'll recall American "ignorance" won the Cold War and threw Saddam out of Kuwait was more ease than Hitler's "steamroller" through France.
You don't live in the US so "ignorance" on your part is understandable. The question is:
What will you do if this is so?"
oh, if only i had more time to chase your tail around this board to constantly point out your lies and ignorance.
your conclusion that I am not american is telling. I actually am, in fact, many generations back.
I have no clue what you mean by ignorance winning the cold war. the cold war itself was mostly based on the ignorance of folks like yourself to begin with.
Eisenhower after WWII tried to warn folks like your parents (are they american?) about the military industrial machine. but ignorant folks like yourself didn't listen.
I suppose you join the rest of the ignorant masses in thinking that Ronald Reagan ended the cold war all by himself, eh? LOL.
as to the rest of your first babblings:
"... and threw Saddam out of Kuwait was more ease than Hitler's "steamroller" through France"
er, what the hell did you mean here? it makes absolutely no sense, just like you do 99% of the time.
and no, i don't give you permission to answer or ask me the question i asked of someone else. you haven't a clue as to why i even asked it.
I used to post on this forum quite a lot before you showed up, and started posting all your idiocy around about, as well as having absolutely inane arguments with Brolly.
I see your posts plastered all over this forum, and yet i see maybe 5% actual content to them; the rest is absolute drivel.
I'm still debating whether to pursure actually getting you banned or not. However, since I'm certainly not the only one here, I'll leave it to a vote.
anyone who thinks like i do that you should be banned can feel free to voice your opinion to me via email, along with your post name, and i will tally the votes after a couple of weeks.
if i get a response in favor of booting you, I'll post the number here in a new thread, and open the voting up wider.
if, after 2 weeks, i don't get ANY responses (since this is just a post on one thread, i don't expect everyone to see it), then I'll just leave you to it.
here's the email to use:
fisheyephotosAThotmailDOTcom
you could always choose to actually do some research before you actually post something, rather than just farting missives over and over again. If you really care about the issues involved, you really should, you know.
just because you listen to fox news doesn't make you an expert.
Re: Deceiving American people
STj,
You're American? The "Sir" fooled me. I didn't think any American would be pompous enough to call himself "Sir"
Sorry
As an American, you should be familiar our humor.
Our "ignorance" which won the Cold War... really means our strength.
Glad to be of help.
Ike spoke of the "Military-Industrial COMPLEX" not the "machine". He was referring to runaway spending on defense, not conquest. He was very pro-defense and anti- Communist. Sorry you got that mixed up.
Glad to be of help--again
Why do hysterics always assume people who disagree with them watch fox news? Must be a side-effect of being pompous.
Remember:
If you can't beat them
ban them.
Re: Deceiving American people
Ttrryosborn ‘corrected’ sir_toejam on the subject of Eisenhower and the military-industrial complex in the flowing statement:
[“Ike spoke of the "Military-Industrial COMPLEX" not the "machine". He was referring to runaway spending on defense, not conquest.”]
I quote below Ike’s exact words from his famous 1961 sppech.
“This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together”.
I would draw particular attention to the second paragraph, which refers to ‘the acquisition of unwarranted influence by the military-industrial complex’ and goes on to say ‘ the potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist’.
After reading Ttrryosborn’s statement, one could be forgiven for wondering whether he has ever read this part of Eisenhower’s speech and if he has, whether he understood its implications. When the British and French launched a military action against Egypt after President Nasser nationalised the Suez Canal, Ike was the fist to condemn the action and applied tremendous pressure, which forced the Anglo-French withdrawal. The invasion was a colonial exercise in power for economic interests and this is exactly what the invasion of Iraq was all about – a part of a strategy to dominate the region and control the oil supply via puppet regimes. It was also an exercise, which has served the various purposes of the military-industrial complex and contractors like Haliburton and an increasing number of other private companies, who are now also part of this complex.
Only a knave like Ttrryosborn can put an anodyne interpretation on what was a stark warning by Eisenhower of ‘grave implications’.
Message was edited by: brolly3
Re: Deceiving American people
"Our "ignorance" which won the Cold War... really means our strength."
hmmm. ignorance is strength. now where have i heard THAT before...
perhaps you have never read any of George Orwell's works? it wouldn't surprise me a bit. You do seem to be singularly unread.
anybody reading the rest of your statement should be able to see the inannity of it, the failure of logic.
How does one support runaway spending on defense, eh?
btw, the reason i assume you of being a fox-news watcher is the simple lack of correct information and substance in just about every one of your comments, including the one i am repsonding to now.
I won't be responding any more for about 10 days, so enjoy your break. make sure to keep up the string of useless drivel for me, please?
Re: Deceiving American people
Bolly3,
Trying to apply a speech made in l961(approximately) to a different situation today takes a "knave". He was not talking about the Mid East or anyone's desire to conquer the world. This is a new cloud in your wet dream.
The full quote was"Unwarranted Influence, whether sought or unsought". He meant unwarranted influence as in LOBBYING by the defense industry for bigger and better weapons systems. Ike was always for a strong defence at home and abroad. His own Secretary of State (Dulles) was ex-OSS and believed in "brinksmanship" with the Soviets around the world. The try and insinuate that Ike was a somehow a peace activist warning against the fight against communism is ludicrous. the Industrial complex did not then, nor does now, set foreign policy. The Pentagon does not set policy in a government run by civilians.
Re: Deceiving American people
I quote Professor DOUGLAS BRINKLEY (of the Eisenhower Center for American Studies)in connection with the meaning of Eisenhower's use of the phrase 'military-industrial complex' and his farewell address in 1961.
'The problem of militarism--for the first time in its history, the United States has a permanent war-based industry. Not only that, but flag and general officers retiring at an early age take positions in the war-based industrial complex, shaping its decisions and guiding the direction of its tremendous thrust. We must be very careful to ensure that the merchants of death do not come to dictate national policy.'
So the idea that US foreign policy is decided by civilians must be considered in the light of the accession of military men to positions of great influence in the private defence sector and in Washington, in terms of employment and funding.
Most people mouth the words "military-industrial complex" and think it must be some kind of bad thing, but they don't really know why or what it means. They don't see it is the same as the Krupp-Farben-Siemens-Bayer-Complex working with Hitler's Nazi government. And we all know how that turned out.
The military-industrial complex is about the dynamic that can build up and which pushes a nation to seek war in order to maintain the interests of those that are feeding off its profits and which leads them to foster further defence investment. If there were no wars started, there would not be a need for the military-industrial complex which works works through its economic and politicl connections to engineer one.
Re: Deceiving American people
brolly3,
"The problem of militarism" is another smile in your wet dream by the simple fact that the United States government has always remained controlled by a civilian government called the United States Congress and the President. I have read his speech. He talked nothing about militarism. His "Military-Industrial Complex" remark had to do with choosing between guns and butter in the US economy.
Ike himself was the first general elected president since US Grant. He was the last.Thel961 speech,he talked about how well he and congress, NOT THE PENTAGON, worked together on national defense. Our national defense didn't exist before l940. It only became necessary because of the failure of the European powers, including Britain, to keep militarism in check. As the European powers, including Britain,declinedto second-rate status, the US became leader of the free world by default-- a responsibility which the US has always upheld to the benefit of the world, especially Western Europe.
In his speech Ike touched MANY issues. He predicted future "crises" along with "the need to maintain balance in and among national programs--balance between the "PRIVATE and PUBLIC economy."
Ike talked of two "threats" in maintaining this balance.
One the one hand he said "Our arms must be mighty" and that the nation could "no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense." Onthe other hand he warned against "unwarranted INFLUENCE, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex." Notice the word "INFLUENCE". It is a far stretch for anyone to think that Ike would have used the word "INFLUENCE" if he had meant anything more. He was referring to LOBBYING by the defense industry for more "PUBLIC" dollars at the expense of the "PRIVATE" sector of the economy. This is the problem the Soviets faced also. They spent too much of the money in their PUBLIC sector (defense) at the expense of their "PRIVATE" sector. The result was an economic crash which shattered their empire.
"The accession of military men to positions of great influence in the private defense sector and in Washington"? Another smile in that long wet dream of yours. "Military men" don't go to work in the defense industry to control US foreign policy. They go to work in the defense industry for money. An officer in the US army can expect regular promotions to the rank of major. If they are passed over twice for colonel, their careers are finished. Their experience becomes far more valuable in private industry than in the military. They become SALESMEN, not power brokers. General officers make about $75,000 per year. In the defense industry they can make $250,000 and more. They have families too. If passed over for higher general rank they all ask themselves which is more important-- a few productive years in a dead-end military career, or their last few good years making big bucks. The majority RESIGN THEIR COMMISSIONS AS GENERALS WITH THOUSANDS OF MEN AT THEIR COMMAND to become SALESMEN IN MANY INDUSTRIES-- NOT JUST DEFENSE. THEY ARE NO LONGER IN COMMAND OF ANYTHING. When interviewed after his retirement as commander of Desert Storm, Arnold Schwartzkopf said "Last year I had 500,000 men under my command to do whatever I said. Yesterday I got into an argument when the man who collects my trash-- and I lost"
So much for "Flag Officers" controlling US foreign policy from the private sector.
Re: Deceiving American people
The problem that Ttrryosborn has in his interpretation of Eisenhower's 1961 speech is that he places superficial and anodyne constructions on significant aspects of it. It is impossible for anyone to say exactly what Eisenhower intended it to mean in part or whole but we can all put our own meaning to the words, phrases, sentences and paragraphs. I choose to do this and give my reasons, in the belief that they confer a more accurate interpretation rather than less so.I have applied some of the points to the recent history of US foreign policy and also economic developments.
Eisnehower says: "Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties.
A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research -- these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel".
The neocon 'Project for the New American Century' corresponds exactly to the implicit warning that the Eisenhower's words carry of the futility and waste "that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties".
The PNAC is largely an attempt to ensure US military dominance and thus to gain security in a world that is seeing the rise of India and China as potential superpowers and rivals to the US economically and eventually militarily. "A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research -- these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel".
The enormous defence expenditure with its focus on newer and smarter weapons incuding new types of nuclear bomb and an aggressive policy of pre-emptive attack on the grounds of the need to fight the 'war on terror' and to spread democracy, is the cover for securing military bases throughout the world and being in a position to intimidate and defeat all rivals. This is all spelt out in the military policy of the New American Century. It is being constantly pushed in front of the US public by the neocon leaning media as the "only way to the road we wish to travel".
"This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society".
Here the use of the phrase "grave implications" must surely be given a more serious interpretation than that given by Ttrryosborn, which is of the 'guns for butter' variety. It relates to "the very structure of our society".This is a reference to a society that could become militaristic because of the overwhelming importance assigned to military preparedness and the consequent changes in the economy in order to produce such an outcome. When so much of an economy depends for employment and living standards on the renewal of countless military hardware (and software) programs, and service and supply contracts,the political representatives of the people in each constituency that harbours the military-industrial factories and warehouses,will be driven to seeking the continuance of such programs and employment. In fact they will seek to bring even more of the same to their patch in order to curry even further favour with their electors. This is one of the inherent implications of the insidious type of democratic institutions that have arisen.
"The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of stress and threat. But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise. I mention two only".
The war against teror has been hyped up far beyond its potential to damage the US, if proper policing and international co-operation had been the main policy of the US administration. There is no doubt that post 9/11 most of the nations of the world would have co-operated in providing intelligence and effective assistance bilaterally and through the UN. It was the high handed and unilateralist, neocon plicy to lauch a pr-meptive attack on Iraq, whihc most of the world acquitted of any involvement in 9/11, that led to the draining away fo support for the US anit-terror
The military itself is always keen to see the performance of its latest weaponry demonstrated on the battlefield or in a war zone. No one can say how much subtle influence this has on producing pressures on the politicians to launch interventions or actions that achieve this aim, although the reasons they are given may be that it is a vital part of defence policy or that it will achieve some political goal.
Re: Deceiving American people
Im an American and I just read Eisenhowers speech and Im going to have to say that I think Brolly is correct. We should be aware of what our military does. That's usually how coup d'etat happen. It was a wise warning.
We have been blessed as a country and as blessings go ... they should be shared not lorded over.
I will admit that im not as well read as most of you, but even I have a hard time making sense of what your trying to say Ttrryosborn.
Ghandi and Mother Teresa showed us a path, why dont we all just take it?
The path less traveled ...
Just a thought-joeanna nee
Re: Deceiving American people
Joeanna Nee,
i know this is a bit of topic but what path did Mother Teresa show us?? How to bribe poor people to convert to christinanity?? Fact is that she was paid for every poor person she converted to christinanty, so whats so holy about that? it just shows that she was just another materialstic person who was glorified and even spoken holy be the pope John Paul 2. Quiet sad how the church gets followers...
Re: Deceiving American people
oh pupri,
she gave her money to the orphanages in india, which she loved. She left her wealthy life to stay in india to help the poor. She spoke out in a quiet way. I watched her biography, she forced no one to become a christian nor did she turn them away, either. Im so sorry thats the only lesson you learned from her. She gave tirelessly until the day she died. She only wanted to show love. How can you bash that, just because she was a christian, by the way the pope ... he's a catholic-orthodox. There is a huge difference.
Should it matter what you call your higher power? Jeepers, it could be a codfish if thats what you want to think. I dont agree with the way certain groups believe that women are chattle but doesnt make me want to hate them for it. I may not like it, but that is not my place to say. Those are there beliefs and Im ok with that. I din't grow up with those beliefs so of course they would be foreign to me, even kind of repulsive being a woman and all, but that is what they believe. Would I shun them for that ... hell no. In Maine, we have such a large migration of Somalians, Iranians, Sudanese, ethiopians. We treat them and their cultures with respect. Atleast up here in Maine anyways. If it can be done here (which unfortunately alot of people think we are unintelligent) it can be done everywhere. We have a summer camp to bring children from warring nations together, to show them that they are just kids having summer fun, not jewish or palestinian. We are trying to create change ... so tell me what are you all doin?
Joeanna Nee-just a Mainer
Re: Deceiving American people
I am happy to report that Bush has disavowed the politics of deceipt, and will now level with American people about his agenda. I've just seen unedited version opf his last State of the Union message, and I certainly impressed with his brave forthright honesty.
We should all support our COmmander In Chief.
All true patriots should listen to his words:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/audiovideo/presaddress.mov
Re: Deceiving American people
well your not even seeing it from an objective perspective- you seem a devoted christian. I don't have a problem with christians, but it quiet obvious how christian missionaries go around India and Africa trying to convert people by bribing them with a home, food and money. Normally people should be converted because they have faith in god and that religion and not because of materialistic matters. You watched a biography? who was it from- a christian?? You might know about all her positive traits- but every person has good and bad sides, and here in the western world she is completly golrified, so maybe take a look at the other side- which is more objective! She bribed people to convert!! Its a FACT, so accept it!!
O ya and John Paul the 2nd who spoke her holy- o let me remind you what he called indians- "heavens" and India is a great source of land where they can convert heavens into christians!! So huh whats your next comeback??
your whole second paragraph is so irrelevant, i never said i hated her or christians- so wats that all about? you entbitterd because the world doesnt have respect for americans?? well ya its wrong, because its the bush administration which is doing wrong, not ordinary americans!! But ya your whole story with being respective to all those differnt cultures might happen in Maine, but not everyhwere in america. Soo many americans are just so ignorant and think that every brown person is a muslim- well ever heard of hinduism? After 9/11 my friend was shund by all the people in her school- why? because without even asking her origin she was suspected to be muslim. O ya america is NOT that liberal! Let me tell you something else when i went to america 6 month ago, we were taken into a special room to get the whole "special" security because they thought we muslim!! so pls give me a BREAK!!
Re: Deceiving American people
erinleonard2,
Thanks very much for this most illuminating and well sourced posting that gives the authentic background to the 'war on terror' and the invasion of Iraq.
Like the sources you quote, I always thought that the pre-emptive war with Iraq was due to the fusing of two aims, the US's strategically vital control of the Middle East oil region because of its capacity to upend the US economy and the aims of the Likudite representatives in Washington .i.e. the Jewish neoconservatives,who insinuated their way into the upper echelons of power, to see the enemies of Israel intimidated by the US military presence and to have regime changes that would put in place puppet governments friendly to Israel.
I also take the very important point you have made about control of the Middle East oil region giving the US a stranglehold in due course on the supply of oil to China, India and others in line with the PNAC aims.We can assume that the Chinese are well aware of the PNAC and the US moves to implement it and that they are fashioning a long term plan to counteract it.This in itself could be the most likely cause of large scale future conflict for as long as oil remains the chief energy resource.
I will no doubt be accused of anti-semitism by the usual suspects on OD who have an absolute inability to see what is so clear to the rest of the world and a wilful short sightedness to the dangers it is creating for the 21st Century.
The charges of anti-semitism will be made even though I have explained on a number of occasions in the past that I am not surprised that the Jewish neocons are bent on supporting Israel's security for understandable reasons to do with their religious identification and the history of persecution the Jewish people have endured. Israel for them was the country that was meant to provide a haven if largescale persecution arose again anywhere in the world.
Re: Deceiving American people by self deceiption
Well, in your case Brolly I think it obvious that the name-calling and labeling is to discredit whatever you have to say. Let’s just consider it done to save ourselves energy and time…I have my doubts that this will work as I think for some on these boards, wasting our time is what they are all about. Hollow words reflect hollow lives—why allow them precious time?
Yes it is very interesting to look and trace back the alliances and personal histories of the founding members of the PNAC. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Perle, Wofowitz, Abrams, Jeb Bush, Kristol…”fusing of two aims” as you say—forced peace in the Middle East and keep the pipelines flowing. Invite the Lockheed Martin and Rand boys to make damn sure it happens.
Somewhere I read mention of the famous dinner parties the Rumsfelds are known for having. Richard Perle especially was fond of his invitations. And with all the research that I’ve done over the last few years, it is very easy to conjure up a guest list in my head and their after dinner conversations because looking back at what was written, proposed is what was played out. Most likely present dinner parties still are trying to hammer out some of these pronounced details—Yes to the Kagan family, since history is your thing go ahead and write it before it happens…permanent military bases in Iraq are part of military logistic planning now.
I agree with your “wilful short sightedness to the dangers it is creating for the 21st Century.” Pandora’s Box has been opened and will remain open until truths are told and accountability made to happen so we can shove these vile paradigms back in the box where they belong. I take heart that this Bush Administration has little credibility with much of the earth’s population because the simple core truth is they are a pack of dangerous liars who continue to justify their lies while blood flows in consequence of it. And I think it obvious which Nations, because of oil consumption or whatever, have a sock shoved down their throat and leaders glad-hand this Administration. But it seems the average citizen in those countries does not.
On the flip side, I am extremely worried for the future of my country. And I’m becoming more and more convinced that the only way to fix what is wrong is complete election reform in very radical ways. Those who chose public service to uphold our laws and Constitution cannot be beholding to corporations or special interests with fat wallets. Ditto with the media. We seem to become placid here in the USA in our evolution to a nation of the deaf, dumb, and blind. Fear seems to be the only motivator to capture the average citizen’s attention.
Re: Deceiving American people
erinleonard2,
["And I think it obvious which Nations, because of oil consumption or whatever, have a sock shoved down their throat and leaders glad-hand this Administration. But it seems the average citizen in those countries does not".]
I like your expression 'sock shoved down their throat', which exactly depicts Tony Blair and John Howard of Australia, who are two of the foremost glad-handers.
Blair has paid the price with most of the Britsih people for his glad-handing and has become extremely discredited.The only reason his party gained a 'majority' in Parliament, at last month's election, is because of the unfair and decidely undemocratic 'first past the post' voting system we have in Britain. The New Labour Party of Blair received only 36% of total votes cast and if those that didn't vote are taken into account, New Labour got the support of just 22% of the electorate - a small fraction over one in five supported them.
The major opposition Party in the UK, which is the Conservative Party, were sabotaged by their own support for the war. It was a very important issue in this election and those people that opposed Blair's support of Bush ( millions) were not going to vote for a Party that traditionally favours the Republican side of the US political spectrum. The Party that did profit from their opposition to the war - the Liberal Democrats got a substantial increase in votes but,as I said earlier, our anomolous electoral system, which on a proportion of votes cast for them, should have given the Liberal Democrats 140 seats, in fact only delivered 62.
From what I saw of your presidential election both 2004 and 2000, doesn't encourage me to think that there are nearly enough Americans who have the elasticity of mind to see through and beyond the fog of spin and sheer lies, as you put it, of the neoconservatives or whatever else one wishes to call the people in and around the Bush administration that are now calling the tune. I am led to believe that the most powerul and influential media are in the pocket of big business and the Bush circle.The one person who does impress me as a campaigner for genuine democratic reform (and I don't mean John McCain, however much he talks about campagin finance reform) is Ralph Nader. Unfortunately he probably cost Al Gore the previous election.
These dinner parties that you mention must have been quite something to witness. Leading hawks planning ever increasing military expenditure and activity and,no doubt, defence industry CEO's, all sitting side by side.
Richard Perle I read has his fingers in several defence related consultancies and financial pies.I do not doubt that most of the others at the tables had much to gain from the blood of others in far away places.
Message was edited by: brolly3
Re: Deceiving American people
Joanee Nee seems like you don't have a comeback
Re: Deceiving American people
Wow Pupri hun, you really need to reread my post darlin. At no point did I say I was a christian, or a catholic, muslim or Jew. I said I have seen her biography (read and watched) And I do believe it was Pope John Paul the sixth that heralded her as a true woman of God. She never forced anyone to convert, all she ever did was try to point out that the children of India were starving. You seem extremely hostile and assumptive, which can only believe me to think you wish to pick a fight with someone.
At no point in time did I reference "Glorify the West" if you took your time to read it, you would have noticed the name "Ghandi" (it was listed first, so I dont know how you missed it) Who also fought for change in India with a peace movement against violence.
That was my point there buddy. I dont really care at this point what anyone thinks of america, or iraq, iran or even afghanistan at this point. Ya'll just like to berate others as snappy as you can. Why should I need a "comeback"? Im not a 12 year old. You really should read more before you jump on my ass buddy.
Yes I have heard of hinduism, it was once the main religion in that region, but do to clashes of government it was no longer held as the countries main religion.
After 9/11 we were scared, and we had right to be. Just like a rape victim, your always scared. Just like the children living in the projects, they are always scared.
I live in Maine, but I grew up around Boston. They were a diverse group as well-the irish, italians, the greeks. We all had our side. Then we started to mix. My whole point pupri, is that change has to start somewhere and if thats just one state, no matter where of earth it is, its at least a start.
Alot of islamic countries, as well as the palestinians and the jews, check each others papers and perceives one another as a threat. This is nothing new. Distrust of one another has been and will always be the defect of the human condition.
In closing, I say Pupri if you want someone to shred darlin, I will not rant and rave. Ive lost too many people I love and felt to much sorrow for those who have died, everywhere. I never voted for bush so can you drop that one too.
Good luck to you Pupri, I hope that you can find a place of peace on your heart.
JOeanna
Re: Deceiving American people
"Ghandi" (it was listed first, so I dont know how you missed it) Who also fought for change in India with a peace movement against violence"He fought for India in a total differnt context you can't compare that to Mother Theresa.
"Yes I have heard of hinduism, it was once the main religion in that region, but do to clashes of government it was no longer held as the countries main religion"No thats wrong, after partition India decided to be a secular state and is still the main religion In India- i dunno where you got that weird conclusion from!
Message was edited by: *Pupri*
Re: Deceiving American people
Well Pupri,
Ghandi was also fighting to end the hunger of his people. Sounds to me that you might be a bigot, you posess the anger against a woman who only tried to feed orphaned children. She was a woman of wealth and went to india for a visit. Shocked and appauled at the starving children, she gave up her life in her country of origin and stayed.
If acts of kindness by someone who isnt muslim means that they are "converting" them or they get no food, then why dont you just slap a white hood on your head and contact the muslim KKK.
Im sorry that you seem to want to pick a fight over acts of kindness and focus on acts of hate. That is how alot of these events turn to acts of violence. I notice that you only picked two things out of the whole post and jumped on that. You claimed that I must be a christiam and so on and so forth.
I just am a believer, I refuse to belong to any organized religion. I believe in faith and prayer to my God. I believe that we are given indeterminable amount of time on this planet, and we are to learn and evolve. Maybe one day to evolve past racism, in every form. Not just color, but status, what country is better than another one, that one person is more superior to another.
So, if your want someone to fight with pupri it wont be me. All I care about is that people wake up and realize we are on this planet together, and if we are not careful, no one gets out unscathed or alive for that matter. The world was designed to be interconnected and interdependent. My six year old asked me "I hate bugs! Why do we have to have bugs!" as we were getting bitten badly by black flies, I explained to him how interconnected nature was and that we too were woven in to it, as best I could so his six year old mind could understand it.
As for being a country that gets deceived, sure, and so do alot of other countries. Usually, by powerful minority who wish to remain that way. Now, do you have anything on a positive note you would like to post on how to bridge these gaps and change this corrent dilemma?
Or are you just going to waste my time? I like to learn from people pupri, I dont bash people. Instead, I ask questions and then I go research. OH, the hindu thing I watched on the discovery channel. It was a week long special, I am afraid that I missed a couple of shows though tending to my children. So, if it was reinstated as the major religion GREAT. I dont have an issue with hinduism, or buddist, or evangelics (except for all their screaming they do) or catholics, protestants, athiests, santarians .... I am a woman of faith. My Faith and prayers have given me great strength in the most horrible and weakest points of my life. Do I expect you to do it, no.
So, hopefully now, you have a better understanding of who I am. It could also be a language thing. Sometimes people from other countries have such differences in what they mean by what they say, that it causes walls to go up. If that is the case, I would be happy to discuss any questions you may have, really.
Truly,
Joeanna
Re: Deceiving American people
"If acts of kindness by someone who isnt muslim means that they are "converting" them or they get no food, then why dont you just slap a white hood on your head and contact the muslim KKK."What the hell are you on about?? i never said i was muslim soo READ more carfully!! I don't hate Mother Theresa, im just being realstic about her. Ghandiji fought for Indias independence- a part of this was to get rid of racism and treating everyone equal!
seriously just stop acting soo holy and this trying to give this image god your all soo immature.Your such a tape recorder, come up with something new! I am not trying to start a fight im just pointing out THE TRUTH!! And lastly stop putting words into my mouth that i never said!
"So, if it was reinstated as the major religion GREAT."This just shows the lack of knowledge in people!
Anyways no point havin a debate with you because you not willing to see the point...
Re: Deceiving American people
ok Pupri,
apparently you arent even reading your own posts, so whatever.
No, I cant leave it like this. My whole point was that you were slamming christians, and you did assume that I was one, but all that aside, if you want to get to know me, my suggestion is to read all the post, not just get hung up on some of it.
I have the right to voice my opinions just the same as you do. I distictly recall that the closing was that if we have some sort of barrier then lets work on changing it. Do you think you can manage that? (and I am not saying it with any mean connotation, either)
Joeanna
Message was edited by: Joeanna Nee
Re: Deceiving American people
The Californian said:
"I write a few original posts; but mostly I prefer to read the thoughts of others".
You call your posts ORIGINAL, so there must be another meaning to the word that I have not heard about yet.
"Most of it is tired old hack writing that I've read by other internuts on other websites. Very little original thinking is written here."
So why do you persist in reading the posts here. One would think that you would look for more exalted forums. Could it be that you are completely out of your depth here and would sink without trace on anything more sophisticated. Your statement is that of a complete fool,who gives away his lowly intellectual status by what he has said and doesn't even realize how he has done it done.
Re: Deceiving American people
brolly3,
I have written a few posts. Others have written many more. These posts are "original" in that they originate a debate. Have you ever heard the meaning of that?
Did you just imply that your posts were "sophisticated"
Chalk up another "brolly folly".
Re: Deceiving American people
ttrryosborn,
["I have written a few posts. Others have written many more. These posts are "original" in that they originate a debate."]
You have posted over 300 times and that doesn't sound like a 'few' to me. I have posted more but I don't describe my posts as being 'few'.
When I used the word 'sophisticated' it was in response to your denigrating the quality of the contributions of many of us here and I suggested if something is not up to the standard one wants, it is sensible to go elsewhere, where it is more sophisticated. You obviously fear to do that becuase it would be far above your own level of intellect and debate. I made no claim as to the quality of my own posts. To use an English expression,
you've got your reasons 'arse about face' as usual.
Message was edited by: brolly3
Re: Deceiving American people
Wow, and here I thought Itaskforce was asking if the american people were deceived about poppy fields.
And if it takes an exaulted level of intelligence to be here than I guess I am shit out of luck. I still havent even finished by Associates degree.(pregnancy doesnt afford one the ability to work a 47hr work week, care for a six yr old, tend to a home and bury their father while I was five months pregnant.) But, does that mean I am a mindless sheep? NO. That's the kind of thinking that got us attacked in the first place.
So, as for being deceived, hard tellin about this poppy thing, one report form one agency says one thing while another says the complete opposite. If Karazai likes his damn poppies, he can keep his damn poppies. It is up to our police force to keep them from coming to our country.
Cuz if ya really wanna know somethin scary-look closely at an article done in a magazine called "high times" (it was published during the iran/contr hearings)which has actual photos of George Bush shakin hands with the conta guerillas in the middle of a cache of weapons and alot of bricks of cocaine. I loved Reagans reply, I cant recall" (well no shit, he had alzheimers but nobody said a word until it was to late and then lied and said it never effected him during his term in the white house) If it wasn't for poor scapegoat Ollie, I wonder what our country would be like now.
So, do I believe American people are being deceived? HHHMMM... I dont know whether to laugh or cry.
Joeanna
Post new comment |
|
Elections Most discussed articles...16 days blogJust published:
Podcast - Afaf Jabiri takes on the Jordanian government Articles - Jameen Kaur, India's silent tragedy Rebecca Barlow, women and conflict Blog:
|
Posts: 2
Joined: 2005-05-21