Bush Shoe Defense

December 17, 2008

I knew a teacher in high school who would threaten to throw their shoe at students. I guess some people really do throw shoes at others. Why I don't feel sorry for Bush, and think the reporter should be freed, I am not quite sure.

We Are All Seduced (part 3)

First of all, I want you to watch Jon Stewart from last night. It continues to baffle me that we get the most reasonable news coverage from Comedy Central, but what are you gonna do?






I have had a thousand questions going through my head. If anyone would like to answer any of them, feel free?

1. How much do we have to lose before we stop trusting our politicians? How long before we stop saying, "Well...er, um...I think they have our best interests at heart."? How much do they have to screw up before we say that maybe it's more by design that just simple "incompetence?"

2. Why, why would you trust those who are responsible for the mess to then take your money and do something logical to clean up the mess? [No, it is not "big business" or "Wall Street" that are the only ones responsible. Yes, there are a lot of crooks. But what can we say for our representatives that knew it was going on for years - decades - and looked the other way?]

3. Why are you so afraid of Barack Obama, worried about what he can do with the economy? Aren't you more concerned about President Bush, the man you probably voted for, who has screwed up the economy more than anyone since the GREAT DEPRESSION? Why do you think this man is so much more virtuous than Obama?

4. Why will you vote for John McCain, not to vote for him, but to vote against Obama?
Why do I even have to bring Obama up? As someone in a forum I frequent said, "Would you like Amahlakiah, or Gadianton?"

5. Why do you support the war on terror? Another worthwhile quote, which I am unsure to whom I should attribute it: President Bush, and our Congress have done what 19 terrorists could not do, completely bring the U.S. economy to its knees. How much more damage do they have to do before you wake up and realize we are being destroyed from within, not by Osama bin Laden or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?

6. How long will you support troops in Iraq? How many trillions of dollars are you willing to spend while our economy is sputtering to a hault? How many more wars will the U.S. have to declare preemptively? How many more lives are you willing to see die for lies?

7. How do you not see the parallels? The Patriot Act was passed behind closed doors, in a time of unprecedented fear among everyone in this country. It is unconstitutional, and is an attack on the people. But how could you be against it? After all, it's called the "Patriot Act!" How long will you be seduced? Why do you think they are changing the name of their plan from "bailout" to "rescue?"

Just a few things to think about. Again, I iterate, and reiterate, we are all seduced at one level or another. It will be a long journey to wake up and stand up against the forces that have taken over so much of our government, and country. But choosing to be seduced when one knows better, is, in my estimation, a great sin. I cannot stay silent any longer. You may choose to go to sleep. You may choose to listen to what the mainstream-in-the-pockets-of-Washington-politicians-media are telling you.

I am going to do what it takes to start throwing off the chains.

Freedom: Drawing the Line in the Sand

Texas Congressman and Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul has shed light on a lot of issues facing the American people today. Of all the pressing matters in front of the people, the starkest is the fact that many Americans do not really understand or know what the meaning of freedom really actually is.

This can be attributed to a number of factors, including our lack of knowledge about our own history, our mental amnesia in connection with any world events preceding 9/11/2001, and our stubborn (arrogant) claim that we are the greatest nation in the world - not arrogant, just the greatest - and think the rest of the world should follow and be replicas of our government and system.

As stated, there are many other factors, but simple observation shows that those in control of the information and power channels in this country have gone out of their way to make sure our brains tend to function along the lines of the person or people just described above. If anyone criticizes America or its policies, they are "anti-American," "far left," etc., etc.

Author Naomi Klein puts it this way:

that shock came after "September 11, which, for millions of people, exploded 'the world that is familiar' and opened up a period of deep disorientation and regression that the Bush administration expertly exploited. Suddenly we found ourselves living in a kind of Year Zero, in which everything we knew of the world before could now be dismissed as 'pre-9/11 thinking.' Never strong in our knowledge of history, North Americans had become a blank slate - 'a clean sheet of paper' on which 'the newest and most beautiful words can be written' as Mao said of his people. A new army of experts instantly materialized to write new and beautiful words on the receptive canvas of our posttrauma consciousness: 'clash of civilizations,' they inscribed. 'Axis of evil,' 'Islamo-fascim,' 'homeland security.' With everyone preoccupied by the deadly new culture wars, the Bush administration was able to pull off what it could only have dreamed of doing before 9/11: wage privatized wars abroad and build a corporate security complex at home."
The Shock Doctrine (2007), p. 16

Repeated: we do not understand freedom. Thus the media continue to puzzle over the campaign of Ron Paul. He has no lobbyists breaking down his office door. He does not agree with most of the Republican party agenda. He does not have billion-dollar corporate donors padding his pockets. He has little chance to participate in the debates, and gets relatively little news coverage compared to the "legitimate" presidential candidates.

And yet the fact remains: supporters continue to flock to him by the thousands and dollars by the millions continue to amass without any real mechanism to drive the fundraising except Paul's followers at the grassroots level.

While they can't explain it, Ron Paul's opponents generally find ways to demean and mock his messengers. This obvious notion reinforces the greater truth: they do not understand freedom.

They do not understand the blessing of being free to read and learn without worrying about being eavesdropped upon. They do not understand the meaning of freedom as pertaining to talking on the phone without being spied upon. They do not understand the freedom, privilege and honor very few other people in the world have to be suspicious and fearful of large government and excesses of power. They do not understand the importance to citizens of the whole world to be free from torture. They do not understand that freedom is not expecting our president to "fix Washington" or "fix the country." They do not understand that freedom is getting out of the way to the greatest extent possible and letting the people participate in the remediation.

They just do not understand.

This is not really written to help them understand. For that which might have been incredible to the founders of our great nation is too common today: we don't understand, we don't know, and we don't care that we don't understand and don't know. After all, we have the freedom to be arrogant, and pride doesn't really walk hand-in-hand with seeing things from a different perspective.

Some of the "mainstream" say they agree with just about everything Ron Paul is saying. They know in their hearts that the "legitimate" candidates are nothing more than what continues to emerge in election after election as picking the lesser of two evils because we don't believe most of what any of them say. Yet they say they will not support Ron Paul because he has no chance of winning. Still just another show of the of the lack of appreciation they feel for the freedoms they enjoy.

This election could turn out to be one of the most important and historical elections in a long, long time. The line is being drawn, and more than ever those who love and embrace freedom are coming out in support of Ron Paul and his message. They are not anti-American. They do not despise freedom or our troops. In fact, it is more likely the other way around. Those who oppose Ron Paul, his message, and his followers, are simply (whether inadvertently or knowingly) displaying their lack of understanding of what freedom is.

Freedom is having a say in what government does. Freedom is speaking out, asking questions, reading, learning, protesting, fighting for the rights of not only men and women of this country, but those in the wide world, our brothers and sisters. Freedom is letting our counterparts in other countries live under the form of government of their choosing. Just as a civil war was necessary to free men from slavery, so it may take another war to tell government leaders to back off and give return our freedom to us. For much of the reason we don't know what freedom really is is due to the fact that we didn't really have as much freedom as we previously assumed. Fortunately, it is our gift and obligation to stand up and defend that which only God can give. It is time the government stepped back and realized that it does not give us our freedom; rather it exists simply to protect our freedom.

Ron Paul and his followers represent the hopes of all men to have freedom and liberty, not just promises and wishful blindness. God willing, the Ron Paul "miracle" may not be as inconceivable as his detractors seem to think. Keep loving America and what it really stands for, and keep cherishing your freedom to fight for what's most important. If you haven't joined the revolution, think about it. Freedom is the most contagious idea around.

Freedom: the power to act or speak or think without externally imposed restraints.

Freedom: Liberty of the person from slavery, detention, or oppression.

a. Political independence.

b. Exemption from the arbitrary exercise of authority in the performance of a specific action; civil liberty: freedom of assembly.

Ron Paul: Fundamental Questions

It is time to return to the basics for a moment. What is the appeal of Ron Paul, and why does this scare the mainstream to death?

I will only speak for myself, but I imagine there are many out there like me, republican, democrat, libertarian, and so on, who are drawn to the campaign for similar reasons.

The main "problem" with Ron Paul's campaign is he got me asking important questions. I had wondered about some of them before, but he gave a voice and a confirmation to those doubts and concerns. These are questions such as: why do we threaten Iran not to develop nuclear weapons when we refuse to follow non-proliferation ourselves? Is it acceptable to torture a person, no matter how "evil" they may be? Is it acceptable to arrest people without a cause and to hold them in prison indefinitely without formal charges, no matter who the person may be?

Knowing what we know now, why do our leaders not shoulder any responsibility for inadvertently if not purposely leading us into a war in Iraq on cherry-picked intelligence and false claims?

The questions could go on. I will stay away from the ones I've asked about the handling of the 9/11 tragedy. Whether you think it's obvious what happened that day, I do not think we have ever gotten the whole story. One thing is certain: our politicians have very successfully exploited our fear following the tragedy to make cheap political points. So it then follows: did the world really experience marked change on 9/11?

I will not be able to answer all of the questions I have already pronounced, especially since there are hardly easy answers to many of them. The point is more about actually asking the question in the first place, and then looking into the matter further yourself. This is the simple explanation for why the media are frightened by Ron Paul. He is bringing up issues that the mainstream media (MSM) do not want us to think about. These corporate-run institutions along with our paid-for-and-sold politicians want us to accept their words at face value and not question their motives, their intent, or least of all their character. Most if not all of these questions will never be asked to the "legitimate" presidential candidates, and if they were, the candidates would not be able to give a straight answer. This blatant exhibition of mind control has gone on too long, and Ron Paul is jarring people loose of these shackles one by one.

Once you start to awake, you can then ask even more important questions: are we really safer after 9/11? Does killing terrorists (along with an occasional ten or hundred or thousand innocents) abroad stop terrorists from trying to kill us on the domestic front? Is the MSM really slanted by a liberal bias? Are terrorists really born evil and inherently hate freedom and liberty?

If any of these concern you, you are heading in the right direction. I suggest you go to your local library and start looking into these matters. That is unless you are worried about who is looking at your library records, in the which case you may want to go to your nearest Barnes and Noble and buy some of these books with cold hard cash. While I am not that frightened by our monstrous government, I can understand why you might feel that way.

I have been particularly surprised at the amount of information that can be found that actually points to the U.S. being involved in, directly or indirectly, terrorist plots and activities. Not plotting with al-Qaeda of course, but with repressive governments in order to help them limit the amount of national/popular activity in certain countries and regions of the world. This will lead us to the last and probably most fundamental question of all: when you are "good" and they are "evil," is it okay for you to resort to terrorism when it is wrong for them?

To those who will continue to question and learn. The world elite fear you even more than bin Laden.

Blowback: Unintended Consequences of Empire

I have been voraciously reading Chalmers Johnson's Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire. I originally came to an awareness of the term Blowback while listening to Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul talk about why we need to get our troops out of Iraq, as well as why we were attacked on 9/11/2001. His comments came during a debate on Fox News several months ago, and was widely publicized due to former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani taking umbrage to Paul's stance.

Immediately following the debate, Fox News spun Paul's words into him blaming Americans for the attacks. Over and over again, the representative from Texas had his words misrepresented. The noise machine had done its job well: instead of American people actually listening and questioning whether our foreign policy over the years has had or could have any negative unintended repercussions, they simply branded Paul as a "loon." Name calling is quite often a preferred alternative to actually discussing real issues.

However, my interest was piqued; I proceeded to look into the matter further. What could the United States have possibly done in the past that would incite such hatred that people might actually fight back? Before Paul brought up the issue I thought, much like many in this country undoubtedly have, that if our nation had committed any serious atrocities, we would have heard about it. After all, Abu Ghraib was splattered all over the mainstream news media for quite awhile while admittedly some of us thought those crimes were not nearly as egregious as some of the horrific acts perpetrated by dictators like Saddam Hussein.

Not surprisingly, examples were not in short supply. In fact, I would proffer that they are so abundant that making the argument that our policies do not impact foreign relations has about as much utility as arguing that Phoenix is not in the desert. For some reason we expect these facts to be out in the open when they in fact must be kept secret as much as possible - for if they were made public knowledge, many might actually be concerned. Just slightly less startling is the amount that has been published while a good number of "great Americans" turn a blind eye, either because they couldn't care less, or due to the fact that they will not believe America could ever be in the wrong no matter where the information comes from. Understandably, it is difficult to separate the fact that this nation, which I believe was divinely organized, has done so much good in the world while concurrently being capable of doing so much evil.

Regardless, I also believe that we cannot move forward unless we acknowledge the error of our ways and correct them. Denying a doctor's diagnosis will not help the patient heal his ailment.

Enter Chalmer's contribution, which foreshadowed 9/11 by little over year. This text examines the United States' often secret involvement with so many of the world's power players since World War II ended as well as U.S. foreign policy toward these countries following the end of the Cold War. Needless to say, Johnson offers much that makes one sit and wonder. Generally, the United States has been involved with staging uprisings in various nations against leaders whom the U.S. opposed in order to create instability that would lead to installing a political figure that could pull in the reins and whom the U.S. supported. Often these involvements take place behind the scenes, but large scale destruction and serious human rights violations are the norm.

One of the most glaringly awful incidents that we seem to ignore is that Iraq sanctions imposed by the United Nations (due mainly to US pressure) from 1991-98 likely caused the deaths of close to half a million Iraqis due to "disease, malnutrition, and inadequate health care (p. 9)." While the U.S. government will justify these deaths and say Saddam deserves responsibility, it is doubtful the Iraqi people will see it that way. Causing the deaths of tens of thousands of the innocent while failing to take Saddam down is a pretty serious offense. And while we may forget and diminish the fact that we (the U.S. government) placed Saddam in power initially, no doubt Iraqis still remember painfully. To maintain that only al-Qaeda terrorists are fighting our troops in Iraq is asinine. No doubt many of the "insurgents" are those who are seeking vengeance for the harsh consequences suffered by them and their families while the U.S. tinkered with them during decades of despicable foreign policy toward the Middle East.

While this example may be on the extreme end of the spectrum, similar findings are available in countries on every continent of the globe. From Okinawa, Japan, to Chile, to Guatemala, to Turkey, to the Sudan, the United States has organized countless operations that to us may have seemed in our best interest, while not even considering the impact on the country in question or its citizens.

What is the bottom line here? Secret societies which were formed to increase security have actually made the world less safe.

Another issue for another time: why is the mainstream media, as well as government leaders, republican and democrat, so scared of Dr. Paul?