Osama Bin Laden is not dead. Of course, the US confirmed his death*, and so did al Qaeda, not to mention Osama's daughter, an eye witness of the operation. But for Truthers**, Bin Laden is not dead.
To their credit, his elimination brought all the ingredients needed for a good conspiration theory with a stealth chopper parading next to a Pakistanese army base, a body discarded into the sea, and a final victory speech by Agent O from the Men In Black... But no. Osama is not dead. Truthers ask for pieces of evidence they will anyway never consider as true, as usual.
Because for a Truther, the truth lies somewhere else an preferably in some remote, hidden place. Those guys love the X-Files because you only catch a few subliminal glimpses of The Unbelievable. Not the classic B-movie where Godzilla shows his ugly plastic face on every frame, no. Here, everything is suggested, with here and there a 25th image stolen from an impossible angle, just to maintain the suspense and to help those nerds moving one nanoinch closer to their elusive orgasm. And above all, no final conclusion. Because a solved and close case means death. Their death.
So no, Bin Laden is not dead. Or maybe he'll resuscitate the third day. Anyway, bet on more sightings on video : as a Yeti up in the Himalayas, as a Dahu in the Swiss Alps, as Rick Astley in the Apple Store... it doesn't matter if, for the same lunatics, Bin Laden didn't exist in the first place. Just like September 11, 2001, that mythic, concealed, classified day when all cameras where simultaneously hacked by a clone of Kim Jong-il.
Navy Seals didn't assassinate Bin Laden : Americans got rid of the worst enemy of Islam***. Using methods (un)worthy of Mossad (when they don't imitate Borat, that is - see "Israel's Funniest Away Videos"), but also using a clear mandate against the criminal at the top of the world's most wanted list. Moderate Muslims applaud, but Truthers see a Zionist plot, a grotesque Photoshop forgery. The impostor who announced the death of their hero ? Michael Jackson. The old man watching the terrorist on his TV ? Elvis himself, barely recognizable after his opium diet in Afghanistan. Amateur work.
Now Truthers, they're true professionals : field journalists who investigate beyond what official media say, but never far away from the Truthersphere... except when they dump tons of Trutherisms over the web, clogging up fora and even this excuse for a website.
Actually, the true Truther doesn't want to know for fear of facing his own reality.
blogules 2011 (see also on blogules VF : "Les Truthers veulent la peau de Geronimo")
* BTW loved that cartoon (I forgot by whom) where Obama proudly brandishes his birth certificate in one hand and Osama's death certificate in the other, in front of a 2012 campaign board.
** on this weird cult, see previous episodes :
- "ReOpenReOpenReOpen911 - the Pentagony continues" ("Truthers : la Pentagonnade continue")
- "9/11 Truthers Knockin' At Your Door" ("Baggy truthers")
- "11 Septembre français : l'incroyable vérité"
*** see "Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader, he was a mass murderer of Muslims"
Showing posts with label osama bin laden. Show all posts
Showing posts with label osama bin laden. Show all posts
20110502
Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader, he was a mass murderer of Muslims
Another radical political leader falls : Bin Laden was a warlord and by no means a religious leader.
So thank you Mr President for reminding your national and international audience this evidence : Bin Laden was an imposter and the worst enemy of Islam, even before he was an enemy of the USA*.
Yes, "Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader, he was a mass murderer of Muslims". But no, Justice has not fully be done : the man has been killed, not technically brought to justice.
Still, his death is the best case scenario : the terrorist has already been found guilty, and a public trial would have offered him one last moment to spread hatred in the spotlight.
The President's Speech (not the one broadcasted at the 2011 White House Correspondents' Dinner) also timely stressed the need for national unity, to the point of mentioning Fundamentalist in Chief GWB in positive terms.
That imposter has yet to be brought to justice.
blogules 2011
* see "Universal Declaration of Independence from Fundamentalism"
So thank you Mr President for reminding your national and international audience this evidence : Bin Laden was an imposter and the worst enemy of Islam, even before he was an enemy of the USA*.
Yes, "Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader, he was a mass murderer of Muslims". But no, Justice has not fully be done : the man has been killed, not technically brought to justice.
Still, his death is the best case scenario : the terrorist has already been found guilty, and a public trial would have offered him one last moment to spread hatred in the spotlight.
The President's Speech (not the one broadcasted at the 2011 White House Correspondents' Dinner) also timely stressed the need for national unity, to the point of mentioning Fundamentalist in Chief GWB in positive terms.
That imposter has yet to be brought to justice.
blogules 2011
* see "Universal Declaration of Independence from Fundamentalism"
20091119
Warniks' Woodstock
At the beginning, only a few heard about the event. After all, this kind of people have never felt comfortable with social networking - beyond the occasional tea party or KKK BBQ that is. But Fox News helped rumors spread around like wealth across a socialist program : Sarah would be there, Dick could also do a gig... heck, George Himself may bless the gathering with His Presence !
Next thing you know, half a million souls showed up over this week end of music and celebration in the little town of Woodstock, AK.
Sarah Palin opened the show with her Lipstick Inc hit "Fundie Town", but first she warmed up an already very friendly audience : "howdy lads ! woa, there's a great buncha yougaz - I can see ya all the way to Siberia ! If y'feel cold just burn some of the stuff ya've been playin' in all afternoon long - ain't no mud but pure, high octane moose turd... burns like a cross in an Alabama field, if you know what I mean - nudge nudge, snap snap, grin grin, wink wink, say no more ?" Sarah didn't leave stage without reminding the crowd to purchase her last book, "Goring Roe (v. Wade)".
Following a short sermon on abstinence by Bristol Palin, Mark Sanford sang a moving "Appalachian Trail Blues". This quiet interlude climaxed with some classical music, Glenn Beck playing the Magnum 44 and Rush Limbaugh the AK 47.
"Gimme a F gimme a U, and please gimme a R, I'm freezing my arse off", roared Dick Cheney, drawing massive cheers. "I shot a bear down on my way here, but didn't have time to skin it. To tell the truth, that was an easier shot than skinny Harry Whittington, believe me ! Let'em peaceniks know what we think of the shame Obama and his un-Amerikan pals keep pourin' over our beautiful country !" The Man Who Sold The War started the Warnik Anthem a capella : "NRA can't you see, by the dawn's early light / What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's first waterboarding..."
Ever the entertainer, Lobby Dick granted the crowd with their favorite song : "I saw many of you planted your derricks for the night. Them thugs fear global warmin' ? Let's giv'em some ! Let's rock, let's roll, let's 'Drill, baby, drill' !!!"
Then came George.
The Fundamentalist in Chief waved at His flock, praised The Architect of the concert for his Nuremberg-style stage, and prayed. Tears rolling down theirs cheeks, His followers went down on their knees (except for those who lost them somewhere near Bagram), and religiously listened to his oldies but goodies, including a most moving version of "With a little help from my friends the haves and have mores".
This already cult concert finished with surprise guest stars : flown in straight from the Middle East on CIA Airlines, Osama Bin Laden and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad joined W. to reunite, one last night, The Hate Brothers. Fans sang along their most enduring standards : "I need you to exist", and "war is the answer". The final prayer went to the fourth member of the group : "Ariel couldn't make it tonight", concluded George W. Bush, "but Benjamin sure did a terrific job today - I wish my successor were that brilliant. But we reject as false the choice between a Nobel Peace Prize and a Prius."
blogules 2009
Next thing you know, half a million souls showed up over this week end of music and celebration in the little town of Woodstock, AK.
Sarah Palin opened the show with her Lipstick Inc hit "Fundie Town", but first she warmed up an already very friendly audience : "howdy lads ! woa, there's a great buncha yougaz - I can see ya all the way to Siberia ! If y'feel cold just burn some of the stuff ya've been playin' in all afternoon long - ain't no mud but pure, high octane moose turd... burns like a cross in an Alabama field, if you know what I mean - nudge nudge, snap snap, grin grin, wink wink, say no more ?" Sarah didn't leave stage without reminding the crowd to purchase her last book, "Goring Roe (v. Wade)".
Following a short sermon on abstinence by Bristol Palin, Mark Sanford sang a moving "Appalachian Trail Blues". This quiet interlude climaxed with some classical music, Glenn Beck playing the Magnum 44 and Rush Limbaugh the AK 47.
"Gimme a F gimme a U, and please gimme a R, I'm freezing my arse off", roared Dick Cheney, drawing massive cheers. "I shot a bear down on my way here, but didn't have time to skin it. To tell the truth, that was an easier shot than skinny Harry Whittington, believe me ! Let'em peaceniks know what we think of the shame Obama and his un-Amerikan pals keep pourin' over our beautiful country !" The Man Who Sold The War started the Warnik Anthem a capella : "NRA can't you see, by the dawn's early light / What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's first waterboarding..."
Ever the entertainer, Lobby Dick granted the crowd with their favorite song : "I saw many of you planted your derricks for the night. Them thugs fear global warmin' ? Let's giv'em some ! Let's rock, let's roll, let's 'Drill, baby, drill' !!!"
Then came George.
The Fundamentalist in Chief waved at His flock, praised The Architect of the concert for his Nuremberg-style stage, and prayed. Tears rolling down theirs cheeks, His followers went down on their knees (except for those who lost them somewhere near Bagram), and religiously listened to his oldies but goodies, including a most moving version of "With a little help from my friends the haves and have mores".
This already cult concert finished with surprise guest stars : flown in straight from the Middle East on CIA Airlines, Osama Bin Laden and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad joined W. to reunite, one last night, The Hate Brothers. Fans sang along their most enduring standards : "I need you to exist", and "war is the answer". The final prayer went to the fourth member of the group : "Ariel couldn't make it tonight", concluded George W. Bush, "but Benjamin sure did a terrific job today - I wish my successor were that brilliant. But we reject as false the choice between a Nobel Peace Prize and a Prius."
blogules 2009
20090604
"Antagonizing Muslims" ?!? Look who's talking, Osama
Osama Bin Laden has got a sick sense of humor : Barack Obama would be "antagonizing Muslims"... that's according to a man who killed much more Muslims than non-Muslims.
Remember this : the main targets of al Qaeda are not Americans but moderate Muslims across the world. And George W. Bush's Amerika was not an enemy but a partner, and a very efficient at that : a double imposture that fueled fundamentalism over the past few years (see "Universal Declaration of Independence From Fundamentalism").
Bin Laden speeches resonated well with a fellow fundamentalist at the helm of the US but now, they fall short. His attacks sound more unfair, less sincere than ever, and at last, the impostor is exposed.
Bin Laden is not a religious leader with consideration for coreligionists, but a selfish warlord purely motivated by hatred, on a personal crusade against himself, alienating his own allies because he is unable to build anything positive, hiding behind Zawahiri's fundamentalist rethorics to make himself believe he is fighting for a cause. Bin Laden is not submitting to Islam but to his own troubled ego. He is not defending Islam but destroying it.
Barack Obama is not a religious leader (and he most certainly doesn't want to be that One !) but he has the qualities required for a great religious leader. Not respected because feared ; respected because respectful.
Barack Hussein Obama is not antagonizing Muslims when he says "I have Muslim members of my family. I have lived in Muslim countries".
Barack Hussein Obama is not antagonizing Muslims when he says "My job is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people" (...) "My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy" (...) "My job is to communicate the fact that the United States has a stake in the well-being of the Muslim world, that the language we use has to be a language of respect".
President Obama doesn't act like a stubborn again Christian fundamentalist pretending to force caricatures of democracy into other countries, but as a humble leader trying to restore the core values of democracy in his own country.
Of course, Ayman al-Zawahiri can mock at Mubarak or King Abdullah, the kind of leaders who make al Qaeda's day almost everyday. But what is Zawahiri doing except reminding us what his top job consists of : "antagonizing Muslims".
And while touring the Middle-East, Obama will probably put as much pressure on the Egyptian and Arab leaders as he did on Netanyahu.
Bin Laden (or his al Qaedan impersonator) doesn't dare to flash the Palestinian card in his attacks. So he focuses on the usual new weak spots*, and pushes hard on Pakistan : "Obama and his administration have sown new seeds to increase hatred and revenge on America. The number of these seeds is equal to the number of displaced people from Swat Valley."
Not totally untrue : as everybody concedes, US bombings in Pakistan as well as civilian casualties both sides of the border, an unsettling echo of the Bush heritage, hurt the image of the country and trouble the message of its leader.
But somehow, Bin Laden is not as much planting new seeds in order to harvest future generations of terrorists as trying to secure his own old and shaky alliances with Talibans.
Osama Bin Laden is weaker than ever : USA's main target is no more a fake icon pretending to lead the Muslim world, but the very roots of fundamentalism upon which this impostor feeds and thrives. Obama means to fight poverty and unfairness, help moderate Muslims reclaim their hijacked religion, contribute to a sustainable resolution of key conflicts...
You simply can't grow in popularity by criticizing this kind of agenda.
* see "Next stop: Pakistan"
Remember this : the main targets of al Qaeda are not Americans but moderate Muslims across the world. And George W. Bush's Amerika was not an enemy but a partner, and a very efficient at that : a double imposture that fueled fundamentalism over the past few years (see "Universal Declaration of Independence From Fundamentalism").
Bin Laden speeches resonated well with a fellow fundamentalist at the helm of the US but now, they fall short. His attacks sound more unfair, less sincere than ever, and at last, the impostor is exposed.
Bin Laden is not a religious leader with consideration for coreligionists, but a selfish warlord purely motivated by hatred, on a personal crusade against himself, alienating his own allies because he is unable to build anything positive, hiding behind Zawahiri's fundamentalist rethorics to make himself believe he is fighting for a cause. Bin Laden is not submitting to Islam but to his own troubled ego. He is not defending Islam but destroying it.
Barack Obama is not a religious leader (and he most certainly doesn't want to be that One !) but he has the qualities required for a great religious leader. Not respected because feared ; respected because respectful.
Barack Hussein Obama is not antagonizing Muslims when he says "I have Muslim members of my family. I have lived in Muslim countries".
Barack Hussein Obama is not antagonizing Muslims when he says "My job is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people" (...) "My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy" (...) "My job is to communicate the fact that the United States has a stake in the well-being of the Muslim world, that the language we use has to be a language of respect".
President Obama doesn't act like a stubborn again Christian fundamentalist pretending to force caricatures of democracy into other countries, but as a humble leader trying to restore the core values of democracy in his own country.
Of course, Ayman al-Zawahiri can mock at Mubarak or King Abdullah, the kind of leaders who make al Qaeda's day almost everyday. But what is Zawahiri doing except reminding us what his top job consists of : "antagonizing Muslims".
And while touring the Middle-East, Obama will probably put as much pressure on the Egyptian and Arab leaders as he did on Netanyahu.
Bin Laden (or his al Qaedan impersonator) doesn't dare to flash the Palestinian card in his attacks. So he focuses on the usual new weak spots*, and pushes hard on Pakistan : "Obama and his administration have sown new seeds to increase hatred and revenge on America. The number of these seeds is equal to the number of displaced people from Swat Valley."
Not totally untrue : as everybody concedes, US bombings in Pakistan as well as civilian casualties both sides of the border, an unsettling echo of the Bush heritage, hurt the image of the country and trouble the message of its leader.
But somehow, Bin Laden is not as much planting new seeds in order to harvest future generations of terrorists as trying to secure his own old and shaky alliances with Talibans.
Osama Bin Laden is weaker than ever : USA's main target is no more a fake icon pretending to lead the Muslim world, but the very roots of fundamentalism upon which this impostor feeds and thrives. Obama means to fight poverty and unfairness, help moderate Muslims reclaim their hijacked religion, contribute to a sustainable resolution of key conflicts...
You simply can't grow in popularity by criticizing this kind of agenda.
* see "Next stop: Pakistan"
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
20070718
Back to square one, back to Ground Zero
Bin Laden determined to strike in US.
It took six years to say it out loud, the creation of a Department of Homeland Security, the death of thousands of US civilians in the 9/11 attacks, of thousands of US soldiers in Iraq, of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians who lost their country along with their dictator.
The war on terror is a total failure : the US helped islamists draft millions of new sympathizers and thousands of new terrorists, and even provided them with a new real size training ground. Whether US troops leave Iraq or not, these apt pupils will put into practice their cultural learnings for make benefit glorious nation of Amerika as well as of all other nations.
Furthermore, instead of fighting the right battle at the root of terror, the US have fueled anger, despair and unfairness, deliberately slaughtering what was left of the peace process in the Middle East and especially between Israel, Palestine and Lebanon.
The man in charge proposes peace talks the way he has always been talking about peace : are you with us or against us ? are you good or evil ? will you help us remove from power this Saddam / Hamas we empowered all by ourselves ?
It took six years to say it out loud, the creation of a Department of Homeland Security, the death of thousands of US civilians in the 9/11 attacks, of thousands of US soldiers in Iraq, of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians who lost their country along with their dictator.
The war on terror is a total failure : the US helped islamists draft millions of new sympathizers and thousands of new terrorists, and even provided them with a new real size training ground. Whether US troops leave Iraq or not, these apt pupils will put into practice their cultural learnings for make benefit glorious nation of Amerika as well as of all other nations.
Furthermore, instead of fighting the right battle at the root of terror, the US have fueled anger, despair and unfairness, deliberately slaughtering what was left of the peace process in the Middle East and especially between Israel, Palestine and Lebanon.
The man in charge proposes peace talks the way he has always been talking about peace : are you with us or against us ? are you good or evil ? will you help us remove from power this Saddam / Hamas we empowered all by ourselves ?
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.
20060815
Red blogule to Amerika's "Freedom Agenda"
I listened to Dubya's I have a dream press conference yesterday. It's good to hear again about the need for an independant and free Palestine, but it's getting harder and harder to stand this voice and that surrealistic propaganda rap of empty keywords repeated on and on (blah blah terror blah blah freedom blah blah Iran nuke blah blah liberty blah blah freedom of worship blah blah strategy of freedom blah blah universal desire for liberty blah blah democracy blah blah tyranny blah blah unstoppable power of freedom blah blah amen). While munching their pizzaz, mesmerized Joe Sixpacks musta understood Hezbollah helped Saddam and Bin Laden destroy the Twin Towers back on 9/11. With such efficient History Bis 101 lessons, no wonder 50% of US adults now think Iraq had WMDs when the US invaded that country, up from 36% back in February 2005 (Harris polls mentioned by the CMD).
Freedom will prevail, yeah... Hezbollah, a state sponsored terrorist group, will be replaced by Qaeda wannabes, a cloudy mist of irresponsible people far more dangerous for the region, but that's OK because Israeli hardliners need a bigger threat at their doors. Olmert will be replaced by a madhatter even worse than Benjamin Netanyahu but that's OK because that's what Amerika needs too. The utterly successful Iraki model will be replicated in Lebanon but that's OK because that was the aim of the game... Sorry Beirut but Bush's speech is yet another bring'em-on-invitation to terrorists from all over the world to visit your country.
But the most surrealistic speech of the day was pronounced by Ehud Olmert himself : admitting his own failure, he dared say next time - because there will be a next time - , he'll handle war better. Talking about flattened Lebanon as a learning curve...
Last throes of sanity, anyone ?
More than ever, it's time for a regime change in both the US and Israel... but for the better, please.
Freedom will prevail, yeah... Hezbollah, a state sponsored terrorist group, will be replaced by Qaeda wannabes, a cloudy mist of irresponsible people far more dangerous for the region, but that's OK because Israeli hardliners need a bigger threat at their doors. Olmert will be replaced by a madhatter even worse than Benjamin Netanyahu but that's OK because that's what Amerika needs too. The utterly successful Iraki model will be replicated in Lebanon but that's OK because that was the aim of the game... Sorry Beirut but Bush's speech is yet another bring'em-on-invitation to terrorists from all over the world to visit your country.
But the most surrealistic speech of the day was pronounced by Ehud Olmert himself : admitting his own failure, he dared say next time - because there will be a next time - , he'll handle war better. Talking about flattened Lebanon as a learning curve...
Last throes of sanity, anyone ?
More than ever, it's time for a regime change in both the US and Israel... but for the better, please.
20060614
Red blogule to the US CENTCOM - paint it black
Sick and tired of listening to CENTCOM briefings with daily claims of a dozen so-called Qaeda members (half of which under 7 year-old "terrorists"), the US audience cheered the death of Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi, a genuine thug with a fake al Qaeda label.
Now the propaganda experts feel strange : the non-event of this death exposes a disgraceful vacuum. The top bad guy (Osama Broadcasting Laden) remains at large and the US army in Iraq lacks a marketable target... Unless the Pentagon decides to go after al Sadr and thus officialize the civil war.
They'd better sponsor some other suicidal wannabe, give some other thug his Warhol's 15 mn of fame. Prime time, live or dead.
Now the propaganda experts feel strange : the non-event of this death exposes a disgraceful vacuum. The top bad guy (Osama Broadcasting Laden) remains at large and the US army in Iraq lacks a marketable target... Unless the Pentagon decides to go after al Sadr and thus officialize the civil war.
They'd better sponsor some other suicidal wannabe, give some other thug his Warhol's 15 mn of fame. Prime time, live or dead.
20050824
Red blogule to Ayatollah Pat Robertson
Tell me the difference between Christian fundamentalists and Islamist fundamentalists now that both are issuing fatwahs. According to Ayatollah Pat Robertson, killing Chavez wouldn't cost $200 bns and killing Chavez is "a whole lot cheaper than starting a war. And I don't think any oil shipments will stop".
I don't think any craziness will stop soon either.
I'm just amazes me how Bu(ll)shites manage to make the weaker minds feel even more sympathy for such madhatters as Osama Bin Laden or Hugo Chavez.
I don't think any craziness will stop soon either.
I'm just amazes me how Bu(ll)shites manage to make the weaker minds feel even more sympathy for such madhatters as Osama Bin Laden or Hugo Chavez.
20050614
Red blogule to President Cheney and his "unlawful combatants"
Hypocrisy is not Lobby Dick's middle name. You can easily translate Dubya's doubletalk by catching the not so innocent pieces of ultraconservative wisdom his VP keeps releasing with the precision of a Swiss clock. Who was there to put some (Halliburton ?) oil on the fire at the peak of North Korean tension last week ? President Cheney. Who is there to defend Guantanamo under fire ? Richard The Second.
According to the NYT, the man a heartbeat away from becoming the world leader of democracy said Guantanamo detainees do not qualify for treatment under the Geneva Conventions because they are "unlawful combatants" who have not "operated in accordance with the laws of war" because they don't wear uniforms and have targeted civilians.
Here are the facts, Mr Cheney :
According to the NYT, the man a heartbeat away from becoming the world leader of democracy said Guantanamo detainees do not qualify for treatment under the Geneva Conventions because they are "unlawful combatants" who have not "operated in accordance with the laws of war" because they don't wear uniforms and have targeted civilians.
Here are the facts, Mr Cheney :
- Yes, atrocities are also committed by American people because you told them not to abid to any laws. Refusing the Geneva Conventions and any other kind of accountability goes beyond "unlawfulness" : you are training outlaws and torturers and this administration brought the shame on your country like no other one before.
- Yes, terrorists did and do commit atrocities - against the American people but more fundamentally (indeed !)against moderate muslims who are now defenseless because of the illegal war you sold - these are the perfect target civilians who get killed while you, as usual, stay safe far away from the actual war.
- Yes, this can also be said about you : you are "unlawful", you have not "operated in accordance with the laws of war", you don't wear uniforms and your so called war on terror mainly targeted civilians (the fact that US soldiers die because of you doesn't hurt the feelings of your buddies : after all, you traded their big corporation losses for a massive public deficit).
You say you want to bring Osama to justice but I wonder what kind of justice USA can bring under the helm of a known promoter of torture and at a time when even paedophiles are acquitted.
20050327
Red blogule to the "Bush doctrine"
The big question nowadays is : was Bush right ? Is the man responsible for democracy's tidal wave in Ukraine, Gaza, Lebanon, Kyrgyzstan...?
The answer is yes, the US did play a major role, but not the way they dreamed it.
Washington did invest in the opposition in former soviet republics, and keeps laying greenbacks over Iraq (even watering them with the blood of honorable marines and local citizens, but I'm not sure it will help them grow). But the US also made their point in revealing their own weaknesses : here is an allmighty warlord getting humiliated, losing face (faith ?), uniting the international community against this negation of respect. Bush even managed to pass for the bad boy while fighting Bin Laden and Saddam. This man did everything he could to crush the Palestinian side during his first mandate. And when his top aides dare say about Lebanon elections cannot be considered democratical when held in an occupied country, how do you think Iraqis should take it ?
The world knows well the US are not likely to repeat their Iraqi failure that soon, that their military forces are far too stretched to allow one more "shock & awe" mission right now. The world knows the US are no more the center of the world, the only economical superpower. The world knows the US are weaker than ever.
But the world knows the world is watching. Not necessarily with enough strength to avoid the abuses of a Bush or a Putin, but with enough intensity to make it count.
The answer is yes, the US did play a major role, but not the way they dreamed it.
Washington did invest in the opposition in former soviet republics, and keeps laying greenbacks over Iraq (even watering them with the blood of honorable marines and local citizens, but I'm not sure it will help them grow). But the US also made their point in revealing their own weaknesses : here is an allmighty warlord getting humiliated, losing face (faith ?), uniting the international community against this negation of respect. Bush even managed to pass for the bad boy while fighting Bin Laden and Saddam. This man did everything he could to crush the Palestinian side during his first mandate. And when his top aides dare say about Lebanon elections cannot be considered democratical when held in an occupied country, how do you think Iraqis should take it ?
The world knows well the US are not likely to repeat their Iraqi failure that soon, that their military forces are far too stretched to allow one more "shock & awe" mission right now. The world knows the US are no more the center of the world, the only economical superpower. The world knows the US are weaker than ever.
But the world knows the world is watching. Not necessarily with enough strength to avoid the abuses of a Bush or a Putin, but with enough intensity to make it count.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Search my personal portal :
