Some influent people want Iran at war with Israel at any cost, whatever the motive, ideally before the end of this year but anyway before the end of George W. Bush's mandate.
Don't look for rational explanations for this war.
Just like with Iraq, this war has nothing to do with WMDs, nor with removing a despot and spreading democracy. And just like with Iraq, this even isn't about oil.
No wonder we see exactly the same pattern : Cheney preparing false flag scenarios, Weapons of Mass Disinformation brainwashing US minds to turn Iran into the Evil Kingdom, hawks forging "proofs" including illegal smuggling of nuclear designs while the intelligence community tells the opposite, the local leader dubbed "the new Hitler", a clear and immediate danger of nuclear attack denied by the international agency in charge of the inspections... and of course the same warnings by experts : be careful, such a war would be a terrible mistake for the Iranian people, for the future of democracy in the region, for the international fight on terror, and to the contrary a perfect boost for the enemies of democracy.
Because this war is about religion. Or kind of. And the people most eager to ignite it are fundamentalists : Islamist fundamentalists who believe in the return of the Mahdi, Christian fundamentalists who believe in the second coming of the Christ. According to their crazy prophecies, Israel must face Iran in a final war that will lead to these joyful events and the rule of God himself*. Never mind the fact that the bulk of the World's population gets erased from the map in the process.
So here we are, John and Jane Smith, sitting on a sofa and watching madhatters pretending to take care of the countries that put them in charge : Ahmadinejad praying the same prayer as George W. Bush, both wanting the same bloodbath for similar reasons.
Here are John and Jane Smith, complaining about the way Bush deals with Iraq and ready to follow him in another crusade, even crazier and more suicidal.
Here are John and Jane Smith, horrified by a President having an affair with an intern but not at all alarmed by a President ready to cause a human tragedy thousands of times more catastrophic than the war in Iraq.
Here are John and Jane Smith, with the only weapon able to stop this mess : impeachment.
Will John and Jane Smith be found guilty for not doing anything ?
* see : "Jesus vs Mahdi prophecy"
Showing posts with label iran. Show all posts
Showing posts with label iran. Show all posts
20070925
20070830
Forging another case for Iran
Model democracy Amerika abducted some more citizens illegally on a foreign soil. Iranians in Irak. Just the kind of peace initiatives that region needs...
Bush-Cheney already forged a case for the invasion of Irak, and they're at it again. If America doesn't wake up, something really nasty is bound to happen. Time to impeach both of those enemies of peace and democracy.
Elsewhere : the Kremlin said Anna Politkovskaya was killed by Chechen terrorists, and Russian Prosecutor - General Yury Chaika said Anna Politkovskaya could only be killed by foreign-based ennemies of the Kremlin. Does it mean that the Kremlin considers Chechnya a foreign country ? Or more simply that in this FSB dreamland, the Putin clique doesn't care anymore about the credibility of their lies ?
Hope ? Some echoes of my "Universal Declaration of Independence from Fundamentalism" in Nablus...
Bush-Cheney already forged a case for the invasion of Irak, and they're at it again. If America doesn't wake up, something really nasty is bound to happen. Time to impeach both of those enemies of peace and democracy.
Elsewhere : the Kremlin said Anna Politkovskaya was killed by Chechen terrorists, and Russian Prosecutor - General Yury Chaika said Anna Politkovskaya could only be killed by foreign-based ennemies of the Kremlin. Does it mean that the Kremlin considers Chechnya a foreign country ? Or more simply that in this FSB dreamland, the Putin clique doesn't care anymore about the credibility of their lies ?
Hope ? Some echoes of my "Universal Declaration of Independence from Fundamentalism" in Nablus...
20070809
Universal Declaration of Independence From Fundamentalism
1 - What is fundamentalism ?
At the beginning, the word used to designate a deviant Protestant movement but now, it can be applied to trends found in all major religions.
Fundamentalism means the total submission of a people to a strict set of principles.
Fundamentalism is not about religion (the pretext behind the means), but about politics (the actual aim of the game) ; ultimately, fundamentalism is about the total control of society in a caricature of theocracy.
Fundamentalists are humans who build the set of strict rules and define what is true and what isn't, generally developing a simplistic doctrine based on their own biased interpretation of ancient religious scriptures that can be interpreted in as many ways as there are human beings. Since fundamentalists consider their doctrine as absolute, perfect, good and unfailable, anything growing out of it is necessarily wrong, corrupt and evil, and thus has to be eradicated in order to purify the world. Beyond what people do or say, fundamentalists intend to control and judge what people think.
Fundamentalism is totalitarian because all human activities should abid to the rules, starting with the pilars of democracy : political debate, science, education, justice, information... any field where intelligence can bloom and expose the limits of a basic propaganda.
The same logic can be found in the Discovery Institute’s Wedge strategy : the ultimate goal of Intelligent Design is to undermine science and education, key entry points for fundamentalists. ID has nothing to do with science but everything to do with politics, starting with the artificial legitimation of religion at the root of the social system, and ultimately the restoration of theocracy.
The worst enemy of a fundamentalist is a person from the same religion who preaches tolerance, reason, and respect of the differences between individuals and cultures. Charismatic pro-peace leaders who happen to be people of faith, sometimes even former respected warriors : Yitzhak Rabin, Ahmad Shah Massoud…
The most embarrassing enemy of a fundamentalist is a "competing" fundamentalist from the same religion. The sales pitches are basically similar, but it brings the notion that there is not only one good answer to the question. At least one is necessarily wrong, it is more difficult to claim the true version. The best way is to either destroy this enemy or find a way to merge both franchises into a more powerful band.
The best ally of a fundamentalist is a fundamentalist from a "competing" religion. Each one becomes the "evil" of the other one, feeding him with new arguments. The more radical the opponent, the better : fear makes propaganda sound more credible and moderates less audible.
2 - Why did fundamentalisms gain momentum recently ?
Fundamentalist movements have always existed in most religions, but were traditionally limited to small circles around isolated radical doomsayers. They tend to blossom in periods of materialist decadence and crises because they leverage on basic fears : fear for one's own life and future, fear for the loss of identity and values of a whole society... In times of uncertainties, fundamentalists offer simple answers, clear visions of a brighter afterlife… and order. With a full set of golden rules.
Like fascism, fundamentalism feeds from the failures of democracy, from the intolerable gaps between peoples kept in poverty and underdevelopment on one hand, and rich corrupt regimes on the other. "Ideally", people must be fed up with their rulers, and not believe anymore in the rules supposed to hold the society altogether. An ailing dictatorship will provide a perfect background, but the fundamentalists' best moments come when self-proclaimed model democracies give the worst examples to the world. Most islamist fundamentalisms find their roots in the abuses of colonization, the failures of decolonization (not to mention the disastrous management of the creation of Israel or India / Pakistan), and many were infuriated by the aberrations of the Cold War. They usually reach power when Western democracies start sending the wrong signals at the wrong moment.
For fundamentalists from all religions, George W. Bush turned out to be the best person at the best place at the best moment.
His strategy should look like a total failure to whoever considers the Iraq quagmire, the Palestinian fiasco, or the worldwide surge in terror. But to the contrary, Bush's strategy proved a complete success.
Because George W. Bush didn't act as a President of The United States of America in the interest of his country.
And George W. Bush didn't even act as a Republican in the interest of his party.
George W. Bush acted as a fundamentalist in the interest of fundamentalism.
Right after 9/11, the whole world was behind him and the USA, but this man refused to lead the world towards peace and mutual respect. Instead, he decided to send the worst signals to the worst people, deliberately triggering a sick race between fundamentalisms. Bush's first speech after 9/11 was meant to clarify the framework for his fellow fundamentalists thanks to one single word : "crusade". In other words : let's go back to the good old times when people fought for religion, we fundamentalists are ruling the show, and I will play on the very ground Bin Laden hoped I would.
Because "the Sheik" new perfectly what kind of leader he was facing : a (stub)born again Christian fan of fundamentalist Billy Graham, a man who set from the start his mandate in a theocratic frame by saying some Higher Being was in charge and driving his decisions. Dubya not only made Bin Laden the official "evil" figure of his crusade, but he happily obliged by becoming the official "evil" figure for Islamists. Everything he did was meant to fuel hatred, sideline the moderates (ie those coward weasels in the West, promoters of the Israeli-Palestinian peace agenda in the Middle East...), and sabotage all attempts of peace or reconciliation. Where multilateralism and pragmatism was the answer, he avoided all forms of debates and sticked to his radical black vs white, us vs them, good vs evil rhetoric.
During the 2004 US presidential campaign, I raised a few eyebrows a couple of years ago by dubbing Bush a fascist, pointing out the disturbingly accurate echoes of Benito Mussolini’s definition of fascism in BC00’s Amerika. The propaganda reacted with a karlrovishy counterattack on the weak point : all of a sudden, Bush was facing “Islamofascists”. The actual fascists were at the other end of the spectrum… but that other end is a mirror, and fundamentalism fueling fundamentalism, propaganda feeding counter-propaganda, extremists ideas became mainstream. Beyond fundamentalism, other forms of radicalism could gain momentum across the world. In Far-East Asia, ultra-nationalists took over Japan, and state revisionism became common in the Archipelago as well as in China.
Bush did not wage a war on terror but in favor of it : instead of focusing on terrorist networks and reducing their ground (ie by fighting injustice and poverty, promoting peace in the region and especially between Israel and Palestine), he deliberately infuriated the muslim world and helped fundamentalists recruit new flocks of followers. And he targeted a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 but everything to do with peace in the region. A new playground for international terrorism, the end of Iraq as a united country, civil war here, the rise of a new form of fundamentalism in Iran when reformers were "threatening" the Khomeini generation, the failure of Fatah and the victory of Hamas... all this was not collateral damage but the very aim of his sick game.
The war in Iraq has been misunderstood as a war for oil led by neocons. The fact is theocons used neocons because they could sell the war to SIGs and thus to Congress. The hidden agenda was not about securing energy sources but about spreading fundamentalism, and if hardcore neocons truly believed in the democracy spreading agenda, theocons knew perfectly the outcome of this madness.
Paleocons followed because money flew from the budget surplus to the hands of greedy SIGs, with significant crumbs ending up on their own laps. Paleocons followed because the official propaganda combined with Karl Rove’s witchcraft made sure 2004 elections would be a landslide victory for Bush. Paleocons were fooled because they thought it would be a victory for the GOP.
I warned Republican voters before November 2004 : if Bush wins, the Republican party loses its soul and is bound to implode. Letting this man invade Iraq was criminal negligence, (re)electing him a strict liability crime by the American people against American values.
The 2004 elections celebrated the rise of Christian fundamentalism across the US at a level never reached before. If not mainstream at this stage, it gained significant social and political power in areas where demographic tides are changing the very shape of the country. Whatever the outcome of the 2008 elections, the USA are shifting towards more internal and self-centered dynamics, and theocons are more likely to bloom in such an environment.
Bush has been isolating the US from external influences, refusing any kind of accountability for his acts but for the dialogs he pretends to hold permanently with The Lord Almighty. At home, he shunted the Congress and his not so fellow Republicans. Away, he switched off the Kyoto protocol, unplugged the Geneva Convention (with the benediction of his Chief Torture Officer Alberto Gonzales), and tried to destroy the UN from the inside (with the help of Bolton the UN bomber). He even bypassed the WTO with series of bilateral FTAs or rather unilateral PTAs (Protectionist Trade Agreements).
A dedicated fundamentalist, Bush has been methodically destroying America from the inside, corrupting justice, science and education with a caricature of religion and paving the way for theocracy. This man is a total fake : a New England brat pretending to be a Texas hunk, a coward pretending to be a soldier, an amoral fundamentalist pretending to be a compassionate saint, a theocrat pretending to spread democracy, a weak wannabe who should never have been the most powerful man on Earth.
If you think the worst happened in Iraq, consider this : this man is planning an even craziest sequel in Iran.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wrote to George W. Bush he shared the same approach of religion. The fact is both are fanatics who expect important visits in a near future ; respectively the return of the Mahdi and the second coming of the Christ. And along with by a bunch of fundamentalists from all confessions (Christian, Muslim and Jewish), they share a more than weird doomsday scenario: the final clash between Iran and Israel will lead to those much awaited visits.
This Commander in Thief only has a few months before giving up power. He is working on peace all right, but rather of the eternal kind.
Compared to such madhatters, Islamist fundamentalists who kicked the Shah out of Iran back in 1979 look like moderates. No wonder Bush does his best to help Ahmadinejad stay in power.
3 - What can be done to undermine fundamentalism ?
Like fascism, fundamentalism needs a permanent state of fear, war and propaganda to survive, and is defeated by democracy at its best : exemplary, fair, just and respectful.
America cannot be respected if it doesn’t respect its own values ; those of a model democracy.
The war on terror should be waged at its roots : helping Afghanistan out of despair and out of the reach of Talibans, converging towards a fair resolution of the Israel / Palestine crisis, focusing on poverty and injustice across the World.
The only way out of Iraq is to fire those who deliberately misfired. Bush and Cheney should be prevented from spreading more chaos and impeached… Easier said than done, but removing Gonzales would be a significant first step forward.
Moderates should speak up across the political spectrum : Dems or Reps, we share certain values and think our leaders betrayed them. We may not overpower them as quickly as we’d like to, but we want to tell the world that we want America back on track, we are not going to let that happen again, and we will do our best to get rid of fundamentalists among us.
Humility will make America stronger : it takes courage to give up arrogance. Besides, there is no other way to get out of what is basically a moral collapse (not to mention to claim any kind of leadership back in the future).
The aim is not to please atheists and condemn believers but to expose fundamentalists, especially among those who are supposed to defend justice, education or democracy. You don’t want to ignite a witch hunt the McCarthy way (are you or have you ever been a fundamentalist ?), but rather to promote transparency over the hypocrisy and confusion fundamentalists are feeding upon.
I’m asking for a much needed reverse burden of proof : nowadays, lawmakers are terrorized by fundamentalists and it should be the other way round. Instead of harassing the bulk of the candidates with questions regarding their private life, we should be forcing fundamentalists to come out in the open, give democracy the lead over the theocratic agenda. Lawmakers shouldn’t be compelled to demonstrate confusingly why they are good believers, they just should clearly tell that they don’t support fundamentalism and that, whatever they believe in, religion should not mix with politics in this country. Ultimately, if some people want religion to rule politics, let them found their own party like they do in other countries.
Once again, I’m not promoting atheism, but defending democracy. And in the US, a cultural change is needed. The fact is America has always allowed too much confusion between the religious and political spheres ; been too tolerant with sects and fanatics that are not compatible with democracy (partly because it was built by people who sometimes fled Europe for religious reasons - ie the Mayflower pilgrims). For a European such as me, it can be upsetting to hear the leader of a supposedly model democracy finish his acceptance speech with “so help me God”. And it is upsetting to see secular democracies under the pervasive threat of fundamentalists in the EU as well (lobbying for the mention of the Christian heritage in the Constitution, for the promotion of creationism and ID… with the benediction of a rather ambiguous Pope ; Benedict XVI).
Beyond the US and EU political microcosms, all moderates should voice their hope for a sounder and more transparent system. This new “we the people” should reach across the world, wherever moderates are threatened by fundamentalists, and not only in the usual hot spots : the race for juicy market shares is raging all over Asia.
Why not A Universal Declaration of Independence from fundamentalism, that perennial enemy of peace, freedom and democracy ?
blogules 2007
---
ADDENDUM 20090117
"What is required is a new declaration of independence, not just in our nation, but in our own lives -- from ideology and small thinking, prejudice and bigotry" - Barack Hussein Obama (Baltimore, January 17, 2009).
Change has come to America.
---
digg this
At the beginning, the word used to designate a deviant Protestant movement but now, it can be applied to trends found in all major religions.
Fundamentalism means the total submission of a people to a strict set of principles.
Fundamentalism is not about religion (the pretext behind the means), but about politics (the actual aim of the game) ; ultimately, fundamentalism is about the total control of society in a caricature of theocracy.
Fundamentalists are humans who build the set of strict rules and define what is true and what isn't, generally developing a simplistic doctrine based on their own biased interpretation of ancient religious scriptures that can be interpreted in as many ways as there are human beings. Since fundamentalists consider their doctrine as absolute, perfect, good and unfailable, anything growing out of it is necessarily wrong, corrupt and evil, and thus has to be eradicated in order to purify the world. Beyond what people do or say, fundamentalists intend to control and judge what people think.
Fundamentalism is totalitarian because all human activities should abid to the rules, starting with the pilars of democracy : political debate, science, education, justice, information... any field where intelligence can bloom and expose the limits of a basic propaganda.
The same logic can be found in the Discovery Institute’s Wedge strategy : the ultimate goal of Intelligent Design is to undermine science and education, key entry points for fundamentalists. ID has nothing to do with science but everything to do with politics, starting with the artificial legitimation of religion at the root of the social system, and ultimately the restoration of theocracy.
The worst enemy of a fundamentalist is a person from the same religion who preaches tolerance, reason, and respect of the differences between individuals and cultures. Charismatic pro-peace leaders who happen to be people of faith, sometimes even former respected warriors : Yitzhak Rabin, Ahmad Shah Massoud…
The most embarrassing enemy of a fundamentalist is a "competing" fundamentalist from the same religion. The sales pitches are basically similar, but it brings the notion that there is not only one good answer to the question. At least one is necessarily wrong, it is more difficult to claim the true version. The best way is to either destroy this enemy or find a way to merge both franchises into a more powerful band.
The best ally of a fundamentalist is a fundamentalist from a "competing" religion. Each one becomes the "evil" of the other one, feeding him with new arguments. The more radical the opponent, the better : fear makes propaganda sound more credible and moderates less audible.
2 - Why did fundamentalisms gain momentum recently ?
Fundamentalist movements have always existed in most religions, but were traditionally limited to small circles around isolated radical doomsayers. They tend to blossom in periods of materialist decadence and crises because they leverage on basic fears : fear for one's own life and future, fear for the loss of identity and values of a whole society... In times of uncertainties, fundamentalists offer simple answers, clear visions of a brighter afterlife… and order. With a full set of golden rules.
Like fascism, fundamentalism feeds from the failures of democracy, from the intolerable gaps between peoples kept in poverty and underdevelopment on one hand, and rich corrupt regimes on the other. "Ideally", people must be fed up with their rulers, and not believe anymore in the rules supposed to hold the society altogether. An ailing dictatorship will provide a perfect background, but the fundamentalists' best moments come when self-proclaimed model democracies give the worst examples to the world. Most islamist fundamentalisms find their roots in the abuses of colonization, the failures of decolonization (not to mention the disastrous management of the creation of Israel or India / Pakistan), and many were infuriated by the aberrations of the Cold War. They usually reach power when Western democracies start sending the wrong signals at the wrong moment.
For fundamentalists from all religions, George W. Bush turned out to be the best person at the best place at the best moment.
His strategy should look like a total failure to whoever considers the Iraq quagmire, the Palestinian fiasco, or the worldwide surge in terror. But to the contrary, Bush's strategy proved a complete success.
Because George W. Bush didn't act as a President of The United States of America in the interest of his country.
And George W. Bush didn't even act as a Republican in the interest of his party.
George W. Bush acted as a fundamentalist in the interest of fundamentalism.
Right after 9/11, the whole world was behind him and the USA, but this man refused to lead the world towards peace and mutual respect. Instead, he decided to send the worst signals to the worst people, deliberately triggering a sick race between fundamentalisms. Bush's first speech after 9/11 was meant to clarify the framework for his fellow fundamentalists thanks to one single word : "crusade". In other words : let's go back to the good old times when people fought for religion, we fundamentalists are ruling the show, and I will play on the very ground Bin Laden hoped I would.
Because "the Sheik" new perfectly what kind of leader he was facing : a (stub)born again Christian fan of fundamentalist Billy Graham, a man who set from the start his mandate in a theocratic frame by saying some Higher Being was in charge and driving his decisions. Dubya not only made Bin Laden the official "evil" figure of his crusade, but he happily obliged by becoming the official "evil" figure for Islamists. Everything he did was meant to fuel hatred, sideline the moderates (ie those coward weasels in the West, promoters of the Israeli-Palestinian peace agenda in the Middle East...), and sabotage all attempts of peace or reconciliation. Where multilateralism and pragmatism was the answer, he avoided all forms of debates and sticked to his radical black vs white, us vs them, good vs evil rhetoric.
During the 2004 US presidential campaign, I raised a few eyebrows a couple of years ago by dubbing Bush a fascist, pointing out the disturbingly accurate echoes of Benito Mussolini’s definition of fascism in BC00’s Amerika. The propaganda reacted with a karlrovishy counterattack on the weak point : all of a sudden, Bush was facing “Islamofascists”. The actual fascists were at the other end of the spectrum… but that other end is a mirror, and fundamentalism fueling fundamentalism, propaganda feeding counter-propaganda, extremists ideas became mainstream. Beyond fundamentalism, other forms of radicalism could gain momentum across the world. In Far-East Asia, ultra-nationalists took over Japan, and state revisionism became common in the Archipelago as well as in China.
Bush did not wage a war on terror but in favor of it : instead of focusing on terrorist networks and reducing their ground (ie by fighting injustice and poverty, promoting peace in the region and especially between Israel and Palestine), he deliberately infuriated the muslim world and helped fundamentalists recruit new flocks of followers. And he targeted a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 but everything to do with peace in the region. A new playground for international terrorism, the end of Iraq as a united country, civil war here, the rise of a new form of fundamentalism in Iran when reformers were "threatening" the Khomeini generation, the failure of Fatah and the victory of Hamas... all this was not collateral damage but the very aim of his sick game.
The war in Iraq has been misunderstood as a war for oil led by neocons. The fact is theocons used neocons because they could sell the war to SIGs and thus to Congress. The hidden agenda was not about securing energy sources but about spreading fundamentalism, and if hardcore neocons truly believed in the democracy spreading agenda, theocons knew perfectly the outcome of this madness.
Paleocons followed because money flew from the budget surplus to the hands of greedy SIGs, with significant crumbs ending up on their own laps. Paleocons followed because the official propaganda combined with Karl Rove’s witchcraft made sure 2004 elections would be a landslide victory for Bush. Paleocons were fooled because they thought it would be a victory for the GOP.
I warned Republican voters before November 2004 : if Bush wins, the Republican party loses its soul and is bound to implode. Letting this man invade Iraq was criminal negligence, (re)electing him a strict liability crime by the American people against American values.
The 2004 elections celebrated the rise of Christian fundamentalism across the US at a level never reached before. If not mainstream at this stage, it gained significant social and political power in areas where demographic tides are changing the very shape of the country. Whatever the outcome of the 2008 elections, the USA are shifting towards more internal and self-centered dynamics, and theocons are more likely to bloom in such an environment.
Bush has been isolating the US from external influences, refusing any kind of accountability for his acts but for the dialogs he pretends to hold permanently with The Lord Almighty. At home, he shunted the Congress and his not so fellow Republicans. Away, he switched off the Kyoto protocol, unplugged the Geneva Convention (with the benediction of his Chief Torture Officer Alberto Gonzales), and tried to destroy the UN from the inside (with the help of Bolton the UN bomber). He even bypassed the WTO with series of bilateral FTAs or rather unilateral PTAs (Protectionist Trade Agreements).
A dedicated fundamentalist, Bush has been methodically destroying America from the inside, corrupting justice, science and education with a caricature of religion and paving the way for theocracy. This man is a total fake : a New England brat pretending to be a Texas hunk, a coward pretending to be a soldier, an amoral fundamentalist pretending to be a compassionate saint, a theocrat pretending to spread democracy, a weak wannabe who should never have been the most powerful man on Earth.
If you think the worst happened in Iraq, consider this : this man is planning an even craziest sequel in Iran.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wrote to George W. Bush he shared the same approach of religion. The fact is both are fanatics who expect important visits in a near future ; respectively the return of the Mahdi and the second coming of the Christ. And along with by a bunch of fundamentalists from all confessions (Christian, Muslim and Jewish), they share a more than weird doomsday scenario: the final clash between Iran and Israel will lead to those much awaited visits.
This Commander in Thief only has a few months before giving up power. He is working on peace all right, but rather of the eternal kind.
Compared to such madhatters, Islamist fundamentalists who kicked the Shah out of Iran back in 1979 look like moderates. No wonder Bush does his best to help Ahmadinejad stay in power.
3 - What can be done to undermine fundamentalism ?
Like fascism, fundamentalism needs a permanent state of fear, war and propaganda to survive, and is defeated by democracy at its best : exemplary, fair, just and respectful.
America cannot be respected if it doesn’t respect its own values ; those of a model democracy.
The war on terror should be waged at its roots : helping Afghanistan out of despair and out of the reach of Talibans, converging towards a fair resolution of the Israel / Palestine crisis, focusing on poverty and injustice across the World.
The only way out of Iraq is to fire those who deliberately misfired. Bush and Cheney should be prevented from spreading more chaos and impeached… Easier said than done, but removing Gonzales would be a significant first step forward.
Moderates should speak up across the political spectrum : Dems or Reps, we share certain values and think our leaders betrayed them. We may not overpower them as quickly as we’d like to, but we want to tell the world that we want America back on track, we are not going to let that happen again, and we will do our best to get rid of fundamentalists among us.
Humility will make America stronger : it takes courage to give up arrogance. Besides, there is no other way to get out of what is basically a moral collapse (not to mention to claim any kind of leadership back in the future).
The aim is not to please atheists and condemn believers but to expose fundamentalists, especially among those who are supposed to defend justice, education or democracy. You don’t want to ignite a witch hunt the McCarthy way (are you or have you ever been a fundamentalist ?), but rather to promote transparency over the hypocrisy and confusion fundamentalists are feeding upon.
I’m asking for a much needed reverse burden of proof : nowadays, lawmakers are terrorized by fundamentalists and it should be the other way round. Instead of harassing the bulk of the candidates with questions regarding their private life, we should be forcing fundamentalists to come out in the open, give democracy the lead over the theocratic agenda. Lawmakers shouldn’t be compelled to demonstrate confusingly why they are good believers, they just should clearly tell that they don’t support fundamentalism and that, whatever they believe in, religion should not mix with politics in this country. Ultimately, if some people want religion to rule politics, let them found their own party like they do in other countries.
Once again, I’m not promoting atheism, but defending democracy. And in the US, a cultural change is needed. The fact is America has always allowed too much confusion between the religious and political spheres ; been too tolerant with sects and fanatics that are not compatible with democracy (partly because it was built by people who sometimes fled Europe for religious reasons - ie the Mayflower pilgrims). For a European such as me, it can be upsetting to hear the leader of a supposedly model democracy finish his acceptance speech with “so help me God”. And it is upsetting to see secular democracies under the pervasive threat of fundamentalists in the EU as well (lobbying for the mention of the Christian heritage in the Constitution, for the promotion of creationism and ID… with the benediction of a rather ambiguous Pope ; Benedict XVI).
Beyond the US and EU political microcosms, all moderates should voice their hope for a sounder and more transparent system. This new “we the people” should reach across the world, wherever moderates are threatened by fundamentalists, and not only in the usual hot spots : the race for juicy market shares is raging all over Asia.
Why not A Universal Declaration of Independence from fundamentalism, that perennial enemy of peace, freedom and democracy ?
blogules 2007
---
ADDENDUM 20090117
"What is required is a new declaration of independence, not just in our nation, but in our own lives -- from ideology and small thinking, prejudice and bigotry" - Barack Hussein Obama (Baltimore, January 17, 2009).
Change has come to America.
---
digg this
20070607
The Vladubyan summit : who gives a Heiligendamm ?
Vladimir Putin and George W. Bush are great democrats.
Vlad will have a puppet elected next year, change the constitution, and keep His seat warm till He returns as a perennial czar. Pharaoh may then rename the planets after Himself, ressuscite Gandhi to have a serious discussion with Himself, and shoot some journalists.
Dubya managed to get a nod from the Congress for his errands in Baghdad. Now pumped up to the max, Our Dear Compassionate Leader feels like spreading democracy in Iran (flame throwers, napalm, torture, pick your weapon).
God forbid, Persians won't have to wait for another earthquake to have Bam and other national treasures flattened to the ground. Fundamentalists are great and Bush is their prophet.
Vladimir Putin and George W. Bush are great environmentalists.
This G8 was supposed to tackle such issues as global warming or hedge funds ? Both leaders decided to change the agenda thanks to a clear and immediate threat of nuclear war. Ennemies come in handy when you are cornered by tricky questions...
Both XXth Century superpowers act as if nothing happened after the Cold War. The problem is they are not dictating the world's agenda anymore. Both Vlad and Dubya are mere dictators over their own countries, period.
Vlad will have a puppet elected next year, change the constitution, and keep His seat warm till He returns as a perennial czar. Pharaoh may then rename the planets after Himself, ressuscite Gandhi to have a serious discussion with Himself, and shoot some journalists.
Dubya managed to get a nod from the Congress for his errands in Baghdad. Now pumped up to the max, Our Dear Compassionate Leader feels like spreading democracy in Iran (flame throwers, napalm, torture, pick your weapon).
God forbid, Persians won't have to wait for another earthquake to have Bam and other national treasures flattened to the ground. Fundamentalists are great and Bush is their prophet.
Vladimir Putin and George W. Bush are great environmentalists.
This G8 was supposed to tackle such issues as global warming or hedge funds ? Both leaders decided to change the agenda thanks to a clear and immediate threat of nuclear war. Ennemies come in handy when you are cornered by tricky questions...
Both XXth Century superpowers act as if nothing happened after the Cold War. The problem is they are not dictating the world's agenda anymore. Both Vlad and Dubya are mere dictators over their own countries, period.
20070315
"Kurdistan, the other Iraq"... or "Kurdistan, the other other Vietnam" ?
Iraq's Kurdistan region opened, through the Kurdistan Development Corporation, a lobbying office in Washington, DC*. Headed by Qubad al-Talabani, son of Jalal Talabani, the President of Iraq as a whole (a black hole some may say), this unit officially promotes investments and tourism in the region. Autonomy and independance could be part of the discussions.
I do feel some sympathy for Kurds in general and I do wish them a peaceful future. Yet, I'm not so sure this is the way everybody wants it and even if Talabani were honest, other players would join the lobbying frenzy.
I remember the intense Iraqi lobbying between the two wars. Who could forget Ahmed Chalabi and his Iraqi National Congress ? Among the different approaches for the liberation of Iraq, US theocons deliberately favored the factions that were bound to cause maximum damage. The parting of Iraq and the strengthening of fundamentalists across the region (especially and Iran and Israel) was not only expected but planned from the start.
If I were a US fundamentalist, I surely wouldn't want a democratic and peaceful Kurdistan to emerge in the dead middle of my playground.
A failed proof of concept Kurdistan could not only strengthen radicals in Iran but also infuriate and exacerbate fundamentalists in Turkey. To the contrary, I would seize the opportunity to bring chaos in this relatively protected part of the country, and to exacerbate radicalism everywhere. I would especially infuriate Turkish nationalists and fundamentalists, because as anybody can see these days, the radicalization of Turkey is key to the revival of Christian fundamentalism in Europe.
Don't mistake this initiative as an attempt to put a lock on Kirkuk oil fields : the aim of the game is to get rid of secularism in Turkey.
* see CMD's "The "Other Iraq" Opens a DC Lobbying Office" (20070302)
I do feel some sympathy for Kurds in general and I do wish them a peaceful future. Yet, I'm not so sure this is the way everybody wants it and even if Talabani were honest, other players would join the lobbying frenzy.
I remember the intense Iraqi lobbying between the two wars. Who could forget Ahmed Chalabi and his Iraqi National Congress ? Among the different approaches for the liberation of Iraq, US theocons deliberately favored the factions that were bound to cause maximum damage. The parting of Iraq and the strengthening of fundamentalists across the region (especially and Iran and Israel) was not only expected but planned from the start.
If I were a US fundamentalist, I surely wouldn't want a democratic and peaceful Kurdistan to emerge in the dead middle of my playground.
A failed proof of concept Kurdistan could not only strengthen radicals in Iran but also infuriate and exacerbate fundamentalists in Turkey. To the contrary, I would seize the opportunity to bring chaos in this relatively protected part of the country, and to exacerbate radicalism everywhere. I would especially infuriate Turkish nationalists and fundamentalists, because as anybody can see these days, the radicalization of Turkey is key to the revival of Christian fundamentalism in Europe.
Don't mistake this initiative as an attempt to put a lock on Kirkuk oil fields : the aim of the game is to get rid of secularism in Turkey.
* see CMD's "The "Other Iraq" Opens a DC Lobbying Office" (20070302)
20070122
"Jesus vs Mahdi" Prophecy - Red blogule to Bush-Cheney's war on Iran
Lobby Dick has decided : the US must bomb Iran's nuclear facilities. W is almost ready, just making sure he doesn't need any agreement from the Congress, that ugly and totally unnecessary offspring of democracy.
Make no mistake : just like the invasion of Iraq, this attack has nothing to do with the official agenda. Preventing WMD proliferation, getting rid of a dictatorship, and even securing juicy contracts for big corporations... all these are mere alibis, the Bush Administration's usual sales pitch*.
The aim of the game is to accelerate the final showdown between Iran and Israel before the World's most important regime change : Lord Dubya's rule is bound to end by 2008, and this mad crusader has yet to fulfill his most important task ; the so called Bible Prophecy.
If you missed the previous episodes, here's the story : Bush believes Jesus Christ's Second Coming will be provoqued by the ultimate war between Israel and Iran. Crazy enough ? There's more : the Shiite sect to which Mahmoud Ahmadinejad belongs believes the Mahdi is coming this spring... which means Dubya's favorite philosopher will face another heavyweight messianic figure somewhere between the begining of the MLB season and the NBA finals. This definitely beats Rocky Balboa's return, Jason vs Freddy and even Alien vs Predator !
Both sides consider it The Clash between Good and Evil... without noticing they're talking about the same God. So make that "Good vs Good", or better : "dimwit vs dimwit".
It would be laughable if human lives and nuclear powers weren't involved.
If God does exist, I guess the time has actually come to pay us a visit and wipe all this crap out of the surface of the Earth.
* Don't get me wrong : Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a bad guy and potentially as dangerous as Saddam, and the Iranian theocracy is as dangerous for World peace as the US theocracy. I'm only warning you like I did four years ago : if you follow Bush on his crusade, you are doomed. And this time, we all could be doomed.
Make no mistake : just like the invasion of Iraq, this attack has nothing to do with the official agenda. Preventing WMD proliferation, getting rid of a dictatorship, and even securing juicy contracts for big corporations... all these are mere alibis, the Bush Administration's usual sales pitch*.
The aim of the game is to accelerate the final showdown between Iran and Israel before the World's most important regime change : Lord Dubya's rule is bound to end by 2008, and this mad crusader has yet to fulfill his most important task ; the so called Bible Prophecy.
If you missed the previous episodes, here's the story : Bush believes Jesus Christ's Second Coming will be provoqued by the ultimate war between Israel and Iran. Crazy enough ? There's more : the Shiite sect to which Mahmoud Ahmadinejad belongs believes the Mahdi is coming this spring... which means Dubya's favorite philosopher will face another heavyweight messianic figure somewhere between the begining of the MLB season and the NBA finals. This definitely beats Rocky Balboa's return, Jason vs Freddy and even Alien vs Predator !
Both sides consider it The Clash between Good and Evil... without noticing they're talking about the same God. So make that "Good vs Good", or better : "dimwit vs dimwit".
It would be laughable if human lives and nuclear powers weren't involved.
If God does exist, I guess the time has actually come to pay us a visit and wipe all this crap out of the surface of the Earth.
* Don't get me wrong : Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a bad guy and potentially as dangerous as Saddam, and the Iranian theocracy is as dangerous for World peace as the US theocracy. I'm only warning you like I did four years ago : if you follow Bush on his crusade, you are doomed. And this time, we all could be doomed.
20070116
Bush : Cultural Learnings of Iraq for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of America
Saddam may not be hanging around anymore, Osama may or may not be dead, justice remains to be truly rendered.
The US have a great opportunity to clean the whole mess and restore their status of a great democracy. Actually, impeaching Dubya is its only way out of Iraq.
Don't get me wrong : the US can't abandon what's left of Iraq that soon. It's just that they cannot signify a change in their approach any other way. This country badly needs a regime change and I don't want Dubya to survive 2007 as the oldest G8 leader.
Both George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney must and can be impeached. Treason could be a good start : 2006 was the year a wider audience than this lousy blog's came to understand this Administration's blunders were actually strategical successes for the true W.
George W. Bush didn't act in the interest of his country as a President of the United States.
George W. Bush didn't act in the interest of his party as a Republican.
George W. Bush did act in the interest of fundamentalism as a fundamentalist.
Once again, the war in Iraq was not masterminded by neocons for the benefit of oilcos : the war in Iraq was sold by neocons to SIGs which sold it to the Congress, but it was masterminded by a bunch of crazy theocons who planned from the start the collapse of Iraq and a final showdown between Israel and Iran.
Reelecting Bush-Cheney was an Historical blunder, not impeaching them would be criminal.
The US have a great opportunity to clean the whole mess and restore their status of a great democracy. Actually, impeaching Dubya is its only way out of Iraq.
Don't get me wrong : the US can't abandon what's left of Iraq that soon. It's just that they cannot signify a change in their approach any other way. This country badly needs a regime change and I don't want Dubya to survive 2007 as the oldest G8 leader.
Both George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney must and can be impeached. Treason could be a good start : 2006 was the year a wider audience than this lousy blog's came to understand this Administration's blunders were actually strategical successes for the true W.
George W. Bush didn't act in the interest of his country as a President of the United States.
George W. Bush didn't act in the interest of his party as a Republican.
George W. Bush did act in the interest of fundamentalism as a fundamentalist.
Once again, the war in Iraq was not masterminded by neocons for the benefit of oilcos : the war in Iraq was sold by neocons to SIGs which sold it to the Congress, but it was masterminded by a bunch of crazy theocons who planned from the start the collapse of Iraq and a final showdown between Israel and Iran.
Reelecting Bush-Cheney was an Historical blunder, not impeaching them would be criminal.
20061220
Rewriting history (reloaded) - IHT Letters To The Editor
Praise the International Herald Tribune. First for publishing another blogule of mine (even if slightly edited* to fit a wider audience than this utterly incorrect blog), second for giving it a title I've been mantrazing for a few years.
Actually, I mentioned "Rewriting History" in one of the few blogules published by "Le Figaro" before Sarkozy became Editor in Chief. Back then, I noticed the irony in the way Dubya compared himself to Roosevelt and Churchill ("Reecriture de l'Histoire - GW Bush le nouveau FDR ?" - 20040607).
I guess "rewriting history" could be considered today's international pastime on steroids.
Anyway... For those who missed my latest ranting on Abe** and/or reached their newstands to late, here is the letter as published in today's IHT*** :
* let's say I elaborated a bit on "declared his nationalist views"
** see "Red blogule to Shinzo Abe - another revisionist leader" (20060926), or the unedited blog spill in French preceding my letter to the IHT : "Blogule rouge a Shinzo Abe - l'Empire contre attaque" (20061216)
*** see iht.com/articles/2006/12/19/news/edlet.php (20061220)
Actually, I mentioned "Rewriting History" in one of the few blogules published by "Le Figaro" before Sarkozy became Editor in Chief. Back then, I noticed the irony in the way Dubya compared himself to Roosevelt and Churchill ("Reecriture de l'Histoire - GW Bush le nouveau FDR ?" - 20040607).
I guess "rewriting history" could be considered today's international pastime on steroids.
Anyway... For those who missed my latest ranting on Abe** and/or reached their newstands to late, here is the letter as published in today's IHT*** :
Rewriting History
Your Dec. 16 edition delivered two rather disheartening insights on the way history is being taught.
In "Confronting Holocaust denial" (Views), Ayaan Ali Hirsi reveals how the Holocaust is not only absent from textbooks in many Muslim countries but also still considered a great idea by many young people.
In the news report "Japan passes measure for patriotic education," an education reform is not only meant to keep the Japanese people in the dark regarding the terrible war crimes committed during Hirohito's reign, but also to revive ultranationalism.
Perhaps worst of all: None of this comes as a surprise. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran is on a permanent revisionist road show, while Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan has already declared his nationalist views.
I wonder what tomorrow's textbooks will tell the next generations about our time? In this sick medieval revival, even the president of the United States and the pope want to replace science and reason by an ultraconservative caricature of religion.
* let's say I elaborated a bit on "declared his nationalist views"
** see "Red blogule to Shinzo Abe - another revisionist leader" (20060926), or the unedited blog spill in French preceding my letter to the IHT : "Blogule rouge a Shinzo Abe - l'Empire contre attaque" (20061216)
*** see iht.com/articles/2006/12/19/news/edlet.php (20061220)
20061109
(debate) First withdraw from... the Bush doctrine
(debate on "our way out of Iraq")
No sane decision can be made before setting the house in order (the house beyond the House, that is - congrats for the Elections !). I suggest 3 steps :
First, America must clearly formulate some apologies to the Iraqi people and the international community for forgetting its own values. America will be respected again when America will be respectful again.
Second, quickly formulate the positions from all key players through a commission with a mandate to meet with all parties willing to talk (including Iranians). Iraqis should be open to new faces and ending the black / white talk should help hitting common ground / common sense. From America's point of view, that could also be a way of putting a friendly pressure : the US won't be the black sheep anymore, the scapegoat responsible for all trouble.
Once America repositions itself as a neutral force instead of an invasion / occupation force, the next steps will appear much easier.
But the US cannot leave Iraq without fixing the damage done. It is the hell of a burden but you cannot say you weren't warned of the consequences of this war.
No sane decision can be made before setting the house in order (the house beyond the House, that is - congrats for the Elections !). I suggest 3 steps :
First, America must clearly formulate some apologies to the Iraqi people and the international community for forgetting its own values. America will be respected again when America will be respectful again.
Second, quickly formulate the positions from all key players through a commission with a mandate to meet with all parties willing to talk (including Iranians). Iraqis should be open to new faces and ending the black / white talk should help hitting common ground / common sense. From America's point of view, that could also be a way of putting a friendly pressure : the US won't be the black sheep anymore, the scapegoat responsible for all trouble.
Once America repositions itself as a neutral force instead of an invasion / occupation force, the next steps will appear much easier.
But the US cannot leave Iraq without fixing the damage done. It is the hell of a burden but you cannot say you weren't warned of the consequences of this war.
20061107
VOTE FOR AMERICA - VOTE AGAINST BUSH IF YOU ARE A TRUE REPUBLICAN
If you are a true Republican and if you are a true Conservative, you MUST vote against your party.
Back in 2004, you missed the opportunity to kick George W. Bush out of the White House and restore the values that built America. If you don't realize by now how far you have been betrayed by this President, here are a few wake up calls :
- the Bush Administration doesn't fight terror but feeds it. You've heard about it, you may even understand some of it, but that's not the worst piece of news : all this is done on purpose
- this president turned America into a outlaw and a pariah, insulting the very values he pretends to represent : how can you be proud of your country and how can it remain a model democracy overseas when its leader refuses any kind of accountability before the international community as well as before its own Congress, when it legalizes torture and abductions, when it denies its own citizens basic human and legal rights ? Do you believe this "compassionate republican" ? Do you think this president does what is best for his country or what is best for his own hidden agenda ?
- it is time for you to understand Bush's agenda is neither conservative nor even neo-conservative : the aim of the game is to make fundamentalism mainstream across the world and in the US. And fundamentalism cannot survive in a peaceful environment - fundamentalism feeds from fear, anger, war, frustration, injustice, unfairness, the absence of debate... the very way this Administration is running and ruining the country. Don't expect these guys to lead Amerika nor the World to peace.
- this has nothing to do about genuine faith or religion : this is about changing politics, science, society, about raping the very idea of democracy to please a bunch of madhatters
- if you don't consider US fundamentalists as mad as Islamist fundamentalists, consider this : from the very start, your leaders wanted Iraq to collapse and be parted, Iran to become the superevil it is now and Israel to infuriate its neighbors. All this because the craziest among them believe the final battle between Israel and Evil must happen as soon as possible in order to provoque the return of the Messiah during their lifetime... How is that for an "intelligent design" ?
You may like your Republican representative or your senator but do you really think America can afford two more years of impunity for the Bush Administration ? Do you really want to see what these people (from the White House, not from Capitol Hill) will do to make sure they remain in power after Dubya's second term ?
What will you tell your children and grandchildren ?
Vote for America, vote against Bush.
Back in 2004, you missed the opportunity to kick George W. Bush out of the White House and restore the values that built America. If you don't realize by now how far you have been betrayed by this President, here are a few wake up calls :
- the Bush Administration doesn't fight terror but feeds it. You've heard about it, you may even understand some of it, but that's not the worst piece of news : all this is done on purpose
- this president turned America into a outlaw and a pariah, insulting the very values he pretends to represent : how can you be proud of your country and how can it remain a model democracy overseas when its leader refuses any kind of accountability before the international community as well as before its own Congress, when it legalizes torture and abductions, when it denies its own citizens basic human and legal rights ? Do you believe this "compassionate republican" ? Do you think this president does what is best for his country or what is best for his own hidden agenda ?
- it is time for you to understand Bush's agenda is neither conservative nor even neo-conservative : the aim of the game is to make fundamentalism mainstream across the world and in the US. And fundamentalism cannot survive in a peaceful environment - fundamentalism feeds from fear, anger, war, frustration, injustice, unfairness, the absence of debate... the very way this Administration is running and ruining the country. Don't expect these guys to lead Amerika nor the World to peace.
- this has nothing to do about genuine faith or religion : this is about changing politics, science, society, about raping the very idea of democracy to please a bunch of madhatters
- if you don't consider US fundamentalists as mad as Islamist fundamentalists, consider this : from the very start, your leaders wanted Iraq to collapse and be parted, Iran to become the superevil it is now and Israel to infuriate its neighbors. All this because the craziest among them believe the final battle between Israel and Evil must happen as soon as possible in order to provoque the return of the Messiah during their lifetime... How is that for an "intelligent design" ?
You may like your Republican representative or your senator but do you really think America can afford two more years of impunity for the Bush Administration ? Do you really want to see what these people (from the White House, not from Capitol Hill) will do to make sure they remain in power after Dubya's second term ?
What will you tell your children and grandchildren ?
Vote for America, vote against Bush.
20060805
Red blogule to fundamentalists - bases are loaded
The disarmament of Hezbollah is under way thanks to... Hezbollah itself : the organization is methodically getting rid of its stocks of weapons over Israel. Tel Aviv's attacks are not meant to destroy Hezbollah but to make sure Eretz Israel has strong enemies for the decades to come and thus, to make sure Israeli fundamentalists remain in power. Paradoxically and just like Bush's counterproductive "War on Terror" helps terrorists recruit new followers, new waves of antisemitism will lead more Israelis towards the welcoming arms of their country's extreme right.
Whether from Iran, Israel or the USA, fundamentalists don't want peace : peace means living without fear nor coercion ; peace means opening up and accepting the world as it should be, diverse and tolerant ; peace means the irrelevance of fundamentalism.
Look at them cheer up all over the world : radical Sunnis and radical Shiites applauding each other's victories ; Amerikan New-Born Neo-Cons and Iranian radical islamists using each other as evil witches to be hunted in a sick medieval obscurantism remake...
US "diplomats" don't seem to care much when masses of pro-Hezbollah demonstrators hit the streets in Baghdad. They don't seem to worry when Israel ruins the heritage of Yitzhak Rabin and infuriates the whole world as well as Bush did back in 2003 with an unecessary war doubled by a provocative occupation... The White House's most radical wings are actually rejoicing.
I wonder when the US citizens will eventually realize their country is led by lunatics devoted to putting out fire with gasoline. It will take decades to repair the image of the country overseas (not to mention implementing actual peace) - but judging by the 2004 landslide victory of immoderate conservatism across Amerika, I don't believe the restoration of the values that made America respected to be a priority.
Whether from Iran, Israel or the USA, fundamentalists don't want peace : peace means living without fear nor coercion ; peace means opening up and accepting the world as it should be, diverse and tolerant ; peace means the irrelevance of fundamentalism.
Look at them cheer up all over the world : radical Sunnis and radical Shiites applauding each other's victories ; Amerikan New-Born Neo-Cons and Iranian radical islamists using each other as evil witches to be hunted in a sick medieval obscurantism remake...
US "diplomats" don't seem to care much when masses of pro-Hezbollah demonstrators hit the streets in Baghdad. They don't seem to worry when Israel ruins the heritage of Yitzhak Rabin and infuriates the whole world as well as Bush did back in 2003 with an unecessary war doubled by a provocative occupation... The White House's most radical wings are actually rejoicing.
I wonder when the US citizens will eventually realize their country is led by lunatics devoted to putting out fire with gasoline. It will take decades to repair the image of the country overseas (not to mention implementing actual peace) - but judging by the 2004 landslide victory of immoderate conservatism across Amerika, I don't believe the restoration of the values that made America respected to be a priority.
20060510
Pink blogule to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Persian Letters to George W. Bush
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's words are softer on paper than at an anti-zionist tribune. I definitely cannot award a white blogule to this man, but one has to admit he gave quite a lesson to Our Dear Compassionate Leader Lord Dubya : History 101, Religion 101, Politics 101, Economics 101, Communication 101, Social Sciences 101... a one way casual conversation from a radical fundamentalist to a radical and autistic fundamentalist. Too bad L. Ron Hubbard couldn't join : his noxious insights about Battlefield Earth would perfectly complete the picture.
"Is there no better way to interact with the rest of the world ?" Indeed.
We're not evil, see ? Neither you nor me. We've got so much in common. Let's talk and read some verses together.
"Those in power have specific time in office, and do not rule indefinitely, but their names will be recorded in history and will be constantly judged in the immediate and distant futures. The people will scrutinize our presidencies." How true.
I'm scrutinizing all right. And I guess it's time for both peoples to get rid of these fundamentalists.
=> The letter (Le Monde website) : http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-727571,36-769886@51-677013,0.html.
"Is there no better way to interact with the rest of the world ?" Indeed.
We're not evil, see ? Neither you nor me. We've got so much in common. Let's talk and read some verses together.
"Those in power have specific time in office, and do not rule indefinitely, but their names will be recorded in history and will be constantly judged in the immediate and distant futures. The people will scrutinize our presidencies." How true.
I'm scrutinizing all right. And I guess it's time for both peoples to get rid of these fundamentalists.
=> The letter (Le Monde website) : http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-727571,36-769886@51-677013,0.html.
20060214
White blogule to Dick Cheney - Shooting Star vs silver star
Unlike John Forbes Kerry, NRA fave Dick Cheney didn't get any silver star for his courageous behavior during the Vietnam war*.
So I'm pleased to unanimously award Richard B. Cheney a white blogule for his almost perfect shot at his hunting pal in Texas**.
This white blogule rewards Mr. Cheney's creativity and dedication to invent new reasons why he should be the most hatable, abhorrent and repulsive man in the US.
Training all day long with the toughest emulators does help. For an Administration to reach this level of ignominy, it takes more than one Architect.
* Mr. Cheney courageously supported the said war while serving the Nixon and Ford administrations, and later proved his courage by voting against the Martin Luther King, Jr day, against the creation of the Department Of Education, against the overriding of Reagan's veto (protecting South Africa from sanctions for maintaining apartheid) or against the liberation of Nelson Mandela. Even after joining the private sector, he lobbied against the US boycotts of Iran & Lybia because they didn't help the eradication of terror, nor the development of Halliburton.
** Despite 10 pellets in the torso, neck and face, 78 year old Attorney Harry Whittington shall survive and remain at the Texas Funeral Services Commission as a chairman - not a commodity.
So I'm pleased to unanimously award Richard B. Cheney a white blogule for his almost perfect shot at his hunting pal in Texas**.
This white blogule rewards Mr. Cheney's creativity and dedication to invent new reasons why he should be the most hatable, abhorrent and repulsive man in the US.
Training all day long with the toughest emulators does help. For an Administration to reach this level of ignominy, it takes more than one Architect.
* Mr. Cheney courageously supported the said war while serving the Nixon and Ford administrations, and later proved his courage by voting against the Martin Luther King, Jr day, against the creation of the Department Of Education, against the overriding of Reagan's veto (protecting South Africa from sanctions for maintaining apartheid) or against the liberation of Nelson Mandela. Even after joining the private sector, he lobbied against the US boycotts of Iran & Lybia because they didn't help the eradication of terror, nor the development of Halliburton.
** Despite 10 pellets in the torso, neck and face, 78 year old Attorney Harry Whittington shall survive and remain at the Texas Funeral Services Commission as a chairman - not a commodity.
20060201
Red blogule to demokracy - professor Bush's vision
There were eventually quite a few changes between the final version of Dubya's State of the Union speech and the complete and uncut version I published last week. But as for surprises, I didn't get a lot.
I don't need to learn from such a lousy teacher "terrorists have chosen the weapon of fear". I don't need the President of the United States to quote an unknown soldier (Dan Clay) to paint a thin emotional layer of justification on his strategic mistakes. I don't need W to speak directly to the people of Iran the same way he did with the people of Irak right before invading their country.
Democracy definitely is on its way and here are the results : fundamentalists won in Iran and made their highest scores ever in Saudi Arabia or Egypt in 2005, and fundamentalists won in Palestine in 2006 because fundamentalists won in the US in 2004.
When George W Bush is talking about "a nation now held hostage by a small clerical elite that is isolating and repressing its people", is he talking about Iran of the Amerika that harrassed and fired all the good law people within its own administration who confessed some doubts regarding the use of torture ? The Amerika that reserved the best positions for the promoters of Intelligent Design and crucified the ones who refused to mix religion and science ?
And yet, this man is asking for more support : "tonight I ask for yours. Together, let us protect our country, support the men and women who defend us, and lead this world toward freedom". The freedom of being either with him or against him, the freedom of facing the consequences, the freedom of either being a good Amerikan citizen/churchgoer or abandoning all rights and dignity, the freedom of contributing to the economic domination of the Liberator or undergoing boycott and pressure.
And what is his ultimate goal, the final point of his brilliant speech ? "By applying the talent and technology of America, this country can dramatically improve our environment … move beyond a petroleum-based economy … and make our dependence on Middle Eastern oil a thing of the past." What an inspiring vision... I suggest another wording for this back-to-square-one agony : "Help me outta there ! I've been stuck to that damn Texan pit ever since I started digging for my life but I've never been able to collect anything but mud, debts and shame."
I don't need to learn from such a lousy teacher "terrorists have chosen the weapon of fear". I don't need the President of the United States to quote an unknown soldier (Dan Clay) to paint a thin emotional layer of justification on his strategic mistakes. I don't need W to speak directly to the people of Iran the same way he did with the people of Irak right before invading their country.
Democracy definitely is on its way and here are the results : fundamentalists won in Iran and made their highest scores ever in Saudi Arabia or Egypt in 2005, and fundamentalists won in Palestine in 2006 because fundamentalists won in the US in 2004.
When George W Bush is talking about "a nation now held hostage by a small clerical elite that is isolating and repressing its people", is he talking about Iran of the Amerika that harrassed and fired all the good law people within its own administration who confessed some doubts regarding the use of torture ? The Amerika that reserved the best positions for the promoters of Intelligent Design and crucified the ones who refused to mix religion and science ?
And yet, this man is asking for more support : "tonight I ask for yours. Together, let us protect our country, support the men and women who defend us, and lead this world toward freedom". The freedom of being either with him or against him, the freedom of facing the consequences, the freedom of either being a good Amerikan citizen/churchgoer or abandoning all rights and dignity, the freedom of contributing to the economic domination of the Liberator or undergoing boycott and pressure.
And what is his ultimate goal, the final point of his brilliant speech ? "By applying the talent and technology of America, this country can dramatically improve our environment … move beyond a petroleum-based economy … and make our dependence on Middle Eastern oil a thing of the past." What an inspiring vision... I suggest another wording for this back-to-square-one agony : "Help me outta there ! I've been stuck to that damn Texan pit ever since I started digging for my life but I've never been able to collect anything but mud, debts and shame."
20051025
White blogule to John McCain vs cruel, inhuman, or degrading Amerika
The Reps have their moral leader back on time for 2006 and 2008. Karl Rove managed to ruin his 2000 campaign but Senator John McCain once again proved how great he could be as the commander-in-chief.
His amendment specifying no "cruel, inhuman, or degrading" treatment should be performed by the US against detainees puts the Commander-in-thief in front of a dilemma : if I veto the bill (since, as McClellan put it, it "would limit the president's ability as commander-in-chief to effectively carry out the war on terrorism"), I may have to renegociate a $400bn check. If I don't veto it, I'm losing the face as a commander-in-chief.
McCain said : "The enemy we fight has no respect for human life or human rights. They don't deserve our sympathy. But this isn't about who they are. This is about who we are. These are the values that distinguish us from our enemies." How about Saddam's trial ?
Saddam Hussein's trial is only about who he is, not about who we Western democracies are : the only charge is about a massacre of villagers. Relevant, but nothing about gassing the populations (with gas manufactured in Germany or in Iraq with French & US facilities). Nothing about the ugly war against Iran (sponsored by the US and "old Europe"). Nothing about the post Gulf War I retaliation on Kurds (abandonned by Dubya's father). Nothing about the honoris causa Doctor Hussein behind the evil Mister Saddam.
His amendment specifying no "cruel, inhuman, or degrading" treatment should be performed by the US against detainees puts the Commander-in-thief in front of a dilemma : if I veto the bill (since, as McClellan put it, it "would limit the president's ability as commander-in-chief to effectively carry out the war on terrorism"), I may have to renegociate a $400bn check. If I don't veto it, I'm losing the face as a commander-in-chief.
McCain said : "The enemy we fight has no respect for human life or human rights. They don't deserve our sympathy. But this isn't about who they are. This is about who we are. These are the values that distinguish us from our enemies." How about Saddam's trial ?
Saddam Hussein's trial is only about who he is, not about who we Western democracies are : the only charge is about a massacre of villagers. Relevant, but nothing about gassing the populations (with gas manufactured in Germany or in Iraq with French & US facilities). Nothing about the ugly war against Iran (sponsored by the US and "old Europe"). Nothing about the post Gulf War I retaliation on Kurds (abandonned by Dubya's father). Nothing about the honoris causa Doctor Hussein behind the evil Mister Saddam.
20050720
Red blogules to hypocrisy - what Bush doctrine ?
North Korea back to the 6 party talks ? Thank the very official US-NK meeting, a total renouncement to the Bush dogma : we don't talk to dictators (er... make that "this kind of dictators").
Iran and Irak restoring diplomatic links ? Thank the US-backed Iraqi government for initiating a meeting the US wouldn't want to be known as the actual initiator.
$500M for Iraq from the World Bank ? Thank the same US-backed Iraqi government for asking a favor which had been denied to the country since 1973. Thank also Paul Wolfowitz for making a priority of what we expected from him (outsourcing the US deficit created by the Iraqi quagmire) instead of what he said he would do (fighting against poverty in Africa).
The World is better when the US don't follow the Bush doctrine.
And the World would definitely be even a better place if the US didn't follow it in the first place.
Iran and Irak restoring diplomatic links ? Thank the US-backed Iraqi government for initiating a meeting the US wouldn't want to be known as the actual initiator.
$500M for Iraq from the World Bank ? Thank the same US-backed Iraqi government for asking a favor which had been denied to the country since 1973. Thank also Paul Wolfowitz for making a priority of what we expected from him (outsourcing the US deficit created by the Iraqi quagmire) instead of what he said he would do (fighting against poverty in Africa).
The World is better when the US don't follow the Bush doctrine.
And the World would definitely be even a better place if the US didn't follow it in the first place.
20050125
White blogule to the Straw man - pet stop boy
It's your time to shine, Jacko. The President pet's pet dares say "no" to the Bush administration even before (at least officially) being asked the question*. What question ? "Will you please back our attack on Iran, provide a few thousand troops and lose this year's elections for us ?" The message : the US won't set the so-called-"diplomatic"-but-poorly-hidden agenda for the rest of the World anymore, happy new year Condi, and thanks for giving me the opportunity to pass for a courageous man (who could possibly believe the US would open another front when they can't even draft enough fighters or torturers for Iraq).
Actually, the agenda may be set by North Korea, where gimchi will hit the fan much earlier than scheduled. Stephane MOT
* Sunday Times 20050123 "Straw snubs US hawks on Iran"
Actually, the agenda may be set by North Korea, where gimchi will hit the fan much earlier than scheduled. Stephane MOT
* Sunday Times 20050123 "Straw snubs US hawks on Iran"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Search my personal portal :
