Misdirection, Greed, Lies...

Post-9/11 Era Forum

I have a news flash for those Americans out there who buy into the current American regime's political propoganda. This includes those who thought that the war was really about weapons of mass destruction. Or those who later thought it was about "liberating" Iraq from a dictator. Or those who believe that our government will now let Iraq rule itself. Or those who believe that the patriot act is for our protection. I could go on, but that should get your attention.

So, here's the news flash. You ready?

Your government lies to you. Every day. They utilize misdirection in their public affairs, getting the public to look at one thing, so that they can pull off another behind thier backs. Or they get Joe Sixpack to believe in one thing, so that they can use his passion and patriotism to accomplish something else. They lie outright. Sometimes they get caught. Watergate. Whitewater. Iran contra, etc, etc. Recently the UN was told that the evidence that the US provided about the Iraq's WMD was actually faulty. Think thats a coincidence?
Sometimes they don't. Those examples are harder to give, obviously.
They use the media to control public opinion. Here's how that works:

Pop quiz: Who owns the major Television networks?
Answer: Large corporations with interests outside the entertainment/news industry. Including international energy companies. Those are the companies which lobby and fund your elected officials. WHEEEEE!!!!!!!
Those companies, if they have interests that lie outside the realm of the news, and they control the news, will obviously not report stories that fall on the wrong side of thier interests.
An example you say? OK, but ITS HYPO-THETICAL!

Lets say one of the big networks is owned by a major energy company.....lets call it, company........Major Voltage, or MV for short. Now, MV has interests in other fields besides the news and television, especially since they are an energy company. Maybe in.......oh, I dont know....oil? ok, oil. MV has billions of dollars tied up in oil companies, making trillions on them each year. Said oil company wants to market (quite fairly, they insist) a foriegn countries' vast oil fields, but the country is ruled by an evil monster who will not let in foriegn coporations. There is a war, since MV lobbies and pays off to get the oil, knowing the investment will be worth it in the long run. Still with me? good. Ok, so, the war happens, and who covers it? that's right! the news station owned by MV! and if something really crappy happens, or doesnt happen, that makes the war look foolish, are they going to put it on the Television? HECK NO! that would ruin theyre enormous investment! Are they going to run every single story possible about how cool the government is? Yes! because that way, the war looks good, the oil company moves in, and presto-chango, we start pumping oil! Of course, they pay the citizens of the foriegn nation TWICE waht they made before (which was less than the average 16 year old in America). Arent they great?

Any questions?

So, next time you are watching Fox news at home on your TV, think about that.

Mulder, is that you?

(flashback to 9 years old)

Wow - that is soooooo cool - i didn't know that!

(back to reality)

We know who runs the agencies, who owns the radio stations - its the same around the world (whether they want to admit it or not).
The world is corrupt - USA, BRITAIN, PERFECT FRANCE, GERMANY, RUSSIA, AND EVERY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!

If anyone thinks that their country has not the mentality of that which they hate - they are foolish, blind, and non-too-bright


He hath no sin cast the first stone

Originally posted by Wolf_eyes
Your government


Your government too!!



Any questions?


Yes I have one.......Will you need a ride to the airport when you leave the country?

This world is so mysterious, corrupt and untrustworthy. Everyone is evil and in it for themselves.

Cue X-Files theme song.




Fred Hooper

Ooops... wrong thread...when I saw the title "Misdirection, greed and lies", I thought it was about Micheal Moore or Bill Clinton.

Very interesting responses fellas. What I found particularly interesting was that, amidst your insults, insecurities, and basic banter, there was not a single shred of conherent, intelligent response. Not one of you who disagreed gave any real reasons why, or any proof that I was wrong. Not one of you bothered to form an argument, you simply reverted to insults. The closest was Dreamzwalker, who, I might add, did not disagree with me, simply stated that the whole world was in the same prediciment we are.
Does anyone have anything constuctive to say? I understand the impulse, when confronted with something that totally disrupts your paradigm, to simply imply that 'something' is ridiculous. But pretend that you are capable of seeing at least the possibiltiy of what I am saying as being the truth. Not as fact, but as the possibility of fact. Try and keep your mind open long enough, at least, to form an argument. What about my thread do you disagree with? what about my ideas dont you like? what do you think I am making up? tell me, Ill respond, and *presto-chango*, we have a debate!

RUPERT K.(KEITH) MURDOCH. Born in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, 11 March 1931. Attended Oxford University, England. Married: Anna Maria Torv, 1967; two sons and two daughters. Spent two years in London as sub-editor with the Daily Express, 1950-52; inherited father's newspaper holdings, 1952, and returned to Australia to run The Adelaide News and Sunday Mail; acquired more Australian newspapers and expanded to England in 1969, buying The News of the World and The Sun; purchased San Antonio Express--News, 1973, and the New York Post, 1976; his News International organization subsequently bought the New York Magazine, The Star, the London Times and Sunday Times, the Boston Herald, the Chicago-Sun Times, television stations, book publishing companies, and airline, oil, and gas concerns ; purchased 20th Century-Fox and independent U.S. television stations from Metromedia, 1985, and established FOX Broadcasting Network; took U.S. citizenship, 1985; sold New York Post to conform with Federal Communications Commission regulations, 1988; acquired Triangle Publications, including TV Guide, 1988; founded Sky satellite television network, 1989; Sky absorbed rival British Satellite Broadcasting to become British Sky Broadcasting, 1990; bought controlling interest in Asia's Star-TV, 1993. Director, News International plc, since 1969; chief executive, since 1979, and chair, since 1991, News Corporation Ltd; chair and chief executive, 20th Century-Fox, since 1992. Address: 1211 Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York 10036, U.S.A.; 1 Virginia Street, London, E1 9XY, England.

FoxNews: if they can lie on milk, what can they do for a war .... http://www.foxbghsuit.com/bgh2.htm

http://www.humorisdead.com/whoownsyou/fox.html

quote:

Rupert Murdoch joined the board of directors at the Cato Institute .... Financial firms now kicking in big checks to Cato include American Express, Chase Manhattan Bank, Chemical Bank, Citicorp/Citibank, Commonwealth Fund, Prudential Securities and Salomon Brothers. Energy conglomerates include: Chevron Companies, Exxon Company, Shell Oil Company and Tenneco Gas, as well as the American Petroleum Institute, Amoco Foundation and Atlantic Richfield Foundation . Cato's pharmaceutical donors include Eli Lilly & Company, Merck & Company and Pfizer, Inc.

........

That's stereotyping through Guilt by association - I'm not saying your wrong but let us say -

Chirac owns the most stock in XXX - XXX is found guilty of supplying weapons to YYY. YYY then attacks ZZZ and police find out that YYY had ties to XXX - does that mean Chirac had ties to YYY, who attacked ZZZ because he had ties to XXX through owning the most stock?

board of directors not shareolder ...... and joined it in 1998 .....

I was only providing an example.
thanks though.

Im away for the weekend, reply monday or tuesday

What was that all about?

Analogizing the actions of a government to a fictional father is irrelevant. There are so many dissimilarities, I wouldn't know where to start.

And I will state that I KNOW the sun will rise tomorrow. If it doesn't and I am wrong, then it really doesn't matter that I was wrong as all life on the planet would end.

The stove analogy is also irrelevant. Comparing something that is bound by physical laws to the actions of human beings is not appropriate. You can be sure that every time you touch the stove you will get burned. You cannot be sure of the actions of human beings or collections thereof as they are, by nature, unpredictable and not bound by the laws of physics or a simlar set of immutable rules.

Personally, I try very hard to refrain from using analogies. By their very nature, they descibe something different from the item at hand and are therefore inherently flawed.

Perhaps you would have been better served using the addage "Once bitten, twice shy." I would have understood your sentiment immediately and not been confused by your analogies. (It would have saved you some typing too!)

On to the government....

The government does not, as you suggest, have unlimited budget, manpower and information access. Do they have a very large budget, lots of manpower and a fair amount of information access? Yes. But it is light years from being unlimited. If this were true, we could have rounded up all of the elements of Al-Quieda within a month of 9/11. Instead, the government was forced to go on a fishing expedition to try to find hostile elements within our borders. Do we get some? Yes. Did we miss some? I'm sure we did. I cite this only as an example that the gov't does not have unlimited budget, manpower and information access.

If the war was about the US gov't controlling Iraq's oil, I'm sure it will become evident over the next few years. If it turns out that it was, then the current adminstration will be held accountable - certainly in the polling booth and hopefully in court. However, to date, I have seen nothing to suggest that is the case other than a myriad of conspiracy theroies and loosely fitting inference by inuendo. In my mind, none of these constitutes proof of some greedy evil scheme by Congress, the White House or the Pentagon.

If it does turn out that there was a big government-run conspiracy to sieze Iraqi oil, I will be first to decry the actions of the government. That said, I do expect government to spin (regardless of which party is in power) so I will allow for some of that.

As a citizen, it is my responsiblity to sift through a myriad of information and disinformation. Based on my experience and perception, I then decide what the underlying truth is. In this case, I have chosen to believe in the core of the government's rationale for conducting this war. Does that mean I fully support or beleive the adminstration's entire package? No. But I do, for the most part, supprot the actions that were taken.

Again, if it turns out that I was wrong to trust the government in this situation, I will be the first to admit it.

Moving forward, I think that winning the peace will be more difficult than winning the war. I expect that the next few years will be especially difficult in Iraq and, hopefully, though the efforts of many, Iraq will be a much better (though not perfect) place for the people of Iraq.

I have a huge philosophical difference with those who would look for every glitch in the process and immediately cite it as a failure of the overall objectives. It seems to me as though these people are motivated only by vindicating their own point of view, tearing down the US or some other hidden agenda.

In my mind, those who truly wish the best for peace and for the Iraqi people should support efforts to construct an environment in Iraq which:

1) Is tolerant of all indivuals. (With the exception of criminals and those who would impose their beliefs upon others.)

2) Utilizes their oil wealth for the benefits of the population, not for the beneift of the US or some subset of the Iraqi population.

3) Allows Iraq as a nation and Iraqis as inidivduals to determine their own destiny.

Until I see convincing evidence that this is not the goal of the US, I will support the government in these efforts. I do not expect perfection but I do expect a good faith effort.

ok. First, I was forced to leave the computer before fully formulating my argument, due to work constraints. Sait la vie. Also, your problems with analogies I am truly sorry for. As a writer, life exists as a series of analogies, for all of life is, in my opinion, relevant. It's all about relationships, most importantly to most people, themselves as related to the rest of the world. Therefore, as we progress through life and begin to see how things relate, through our own perspective, we begin to make analogies. Even though we've been making them in our heads since we were children, we give them a name and a purpose. How else do we relate then through analogy? consider: how many times have you heard someone trying to explain something to someone else, and heard them say "It's like X!" (where X is an experience common to both speakers). How can I possibly explain to you what my experience is like without analogies? how can you? Common experience, we are both human.
So, I am sorry if you did not like my analogies, and I will try others if you would like. Or, if you would like, I can explain why those particular analogies are relevant. An addage can be used as well, I never implied otherwise. If it makes you more comfortable, I will try and use addages. Do not pretend, however, that addages are not ambiguous or relative to personal perspective. I'll save myself the further typing on that topic until you inform me of the most effective level with which to communicate with you.

On to the government:
Please refer to my earlier post for clarification. I never said that the government had unlimited funds, I said that they basically did. I admit that seems a bit colloquial, and it is, but the reference is clearly to myself, and the wealth and power of the government as compared to mine. When you look at the comparison, you should be able to see that I did not mean that the government was all powerful, but rather that the government as an entity might as well be when compared with myself as an entity. Making the rest of that paragraph moot, since I was in no way referencing the farcical unlimited power of the government.

The oil. Time may perhaps tell, or it may not. There are secrets buried in history, even recent history, which will probobly never be revealed. Undeniably, there are things which we will never know about the worlds most powerful past civilizations and/or leaders. On the other hand, time may, in fact, tell. If that is the case, which is sometimes is, then it is another debate for a future venue. As far as your complaint about proof, please do not badger me with cries for evidence. I am not prosecuting the government. I am not a lawyer, a politician, or (at this point at least) a person in a position to find or bring out evidence against the most powerful organization in the world, arguably ever. That does not put it, however, outside of my jurisdiction (to stay with the legal analogies ) to talk about what I believe, why I believe it, or what I think about the world at large. Nor does it put it beyond yours. Thus: A political debate forum, not a courtroom. The only advantage I conceed to you, is that, in our system, one (and presumably the government as well) is innocent until proven guilty. At least in theory, though again, that is another debate. further, if you go back and read the foundation of this thread, it has more to do with capatalism than socialism, more to do with large corporations then the congress.

As to your plegde to decry the foul actions of the government should you learn of them:
You are missing part of the point. The point was not that Americans will sit by and let their government be blatantly corrupt, but rather that they have no real way of knowing about it. If Joe Sixpack knew about all of the things that his government did, he would throw a fit. The point is, you are not going to find out about it by just sitting home watching fox news. You have to seek knowledge, it doesnt just float into your lap. you must research, read, ask, travel, witness, experience, quest, whatever. Having said that, let me make clear that i am not trying to judge your learning process. Perhaps you have done all of those things, and simply come to different information than I have. Again, refer to the first post on the thread. This is about Misdirection, lies, and greed. If it were easy, if you could just go about your normal routine and know all of what happened in your government, I wouldnt have to have written this post. Thanks for your sentiment, but honestly, who will you believe anyway? what your government tells you about what happened, or what some small reporter in the field does? or a man who farms in a small village in Iraq? or a shopkeeper in colombia? or a teacher, a student, an iron worker, a soldier, etc, etc? I think, between you and me, its ok to admit that you will listen to and believe what the white house tells you over the stories of people.

Ok, I really want to finish the post, but I have to go for now. I was never able to finishthe last post either, and an incomplete thought is rarely one worth writing, but I have no choice, it was post this or nothing. to be continued...............

ok. now I may continue.

If you are sifting through the myriad of information, stop and consider the source. Would you deny that major corporations, with interests in energy companies, including oil, are responsible for almost all of the information processed by the average American? Television, newspapers, radio, and quite a bit of the internet. Just think about it. Even if they were all as liberal as I was, I would still have a problem with that kind of homogeneous, obviously indebted presentation.

Please tell me, what will it take for you to admit that you are wrong? what kind of realistic situation would make you change your mind? Already, we have killed thousands, allowed international energy companies acess to Iraqi oil, disobeyed the will of the international coalition of nations which we have set up to deal with these kinds of situations, found that the cause of the conflict was erroneous, set an international precedent for pre-emptive invasion, ruined a capital city, imposed our form of government on another nation, ruined the economy through tax cuts to the rich, paid through the nose through a conflict which our children will still be paying for years from now, I could go on and on and on. So please, tell me, at what point does it become clear to you that we have made a mistake? Perhaps you are expecting our arrogant president to step out of the white house today and admit that it was all just a big joke? Or maybe you are thinking that Mr. Bush himself will call you on the phone and tell you that he was wrong, and hes sorry? maybe you think that tonight on fox news there will be a special apology from the pentagon to the rest of the world? please, I am confused. What are you looking for?

As for the people of Iraq, I will not pretent that I know what is best for them. Why are you?

I am not looking at every little glitch in the system and faulting its overall objectives. What I am doing is noticing the failure of the system to keep withthe overall objectives for which it was origionally designed, or even to keep with the overall objectives its people have set for it. Cite whatever hidden agendas you think I might have. Or ask me, and I'll tell you exactly what my objectives are.

To your Iraq list:

1)Tolerant of all people as long as they fulfill the expectations of the western democracy. We will now dictate thier presidentail canidates in an election in which we will force upon a people who have not ever run a western democracy.

2) will benefit the people of Iraq with its oil wealth about as much as the US people benefit from the wealth of its farmland, which essentially means low paying, hard working jobs which will keep the worker indebted to the system, and the large corporations who have waited years to enter and harness the wealth of the oil fields, but have been held off by that dude Saddam.

3)Allows the Iraqi people to decide thier own fate, within the guidelines we have set for them.

Until I see evidence that this is not the goal of the US, I will expect them to continue doing it anyway, despite the will of the majority of the rest of the world at large.

Wolf: try starting a riot against the government, or writing a book about corrupted US government (Mein Kampf '2003), or try to impeach GWB and establish democratic, peacefull communism.

Read this article:

"Communism was perhaps the most spectacular political failure in history, killing tens of millions, and wasting the lives of hundreds of millions more. These victims mostly came from societies that were still traditional, usually agricultural. How were they to explain to themselves the calamity which Communism visited upon them? The arrival of democracy in Russia and its former satellites has brought into these countries fresh editions of Mein Kampf in half a dozen languages. In Poland the initial print-run was 20,000 copies (a significant quantity there). A minority evidently believes that Communism was all a Jewish plot, and Hitler had got things right. The authorities crack down half-heartedly.

Muslim and Arab society is today a failure much as Communism used to be. Muslims and Arabs live under absolute and despotic government which prevents them from enjoying anything like the freedom and prosperity that they see in the West and wish for themselves. On the whole they realize that they have long ago taken their history and destiny into their own hands, and so are responsible for themselves. But so dire are the injustices and the poverty, and so threatening is the tyranny over their heads, that many are lost in pity for themselves, and hatred of everyone else. A slew of racists, radicals, and Islamists share a frame of mind that the West is selfishly conspiring against them, with the Jews once again secretly in charge. Catering to such people since the early '60s, editions of Mein Kampf have been put out in Lebanon and Saudi Arabia, and it is reported to be a bestseller in the Palestinian Authority area. It is available in London stores selling Arabic books. As its Arabic translator Luis al-Haj expresses it in his preface, "National Socialism did not die with the death of its herald. Rather, its seeds multiplied under each star."
*****************
This is why US can't let Iraq's islamic leaders build an islamic state. It would be a catastrophe.

Im confused, juko. Never once did I mention communism, nor hitler, mein kampf, or rioting. Not to mention that Hitler was not a communist, but a facist, which is a big difference. What exactly is your point? Perhaps you should go back and read what I wrote again, you niether answered the questions I asked nor presented me with any....

I am tired of this ****! How many times can i say the same ****in thing over and over: Islamic state won't work! When you agree with it, or better to say - understand it - we can continue. Until that time im outta here.

First, I do not talk for Iraqi, they are free to do it - as long as it's "compliant" with what the US gov want -


pessimism or realism ?


time will tell .......

Here's the point, as I see it.
We are forcing a government on another people.
The nature of the word force implies (correctly in this case) that the Iraqis have no choice. They do not. they will take whatever form of government we choose for them, because they are a conquered people. We happen to be choosing democracy. This fits in a long line of conquerers choosing thier own form of government for thier conquered nations. It only makes sense, we think we are the best, so we try to make everyone else like us. We will choose thier presidential canidates, thier government, and thier judicial system.
They have no choice in these matters. And we are stupid enough to say that we liberated them into freedom. C'mon. We moved them from one form of oppression to another.

Freedom is a big word. Lets see if I can help out

Freedom (as per Websters ninth new collegite dictionary):

1)enjoying civil and political liberty (liberty: the power to do as one pleases; to choose)

ok,failed there.

2)...choosing or capable of choosing for for itself.

ok, but only if you choose what we want you to....and we get to select your options.

3)...not bound, confined, or detained by force.

Ooops. So much for occupying a foriegn nation.

4) ...not subject to official control.

Ok, no one was expecting that kind of freedom, we dont even have that here.

5)..having no obligations...

lol not in this world, anyway.



I could go on, there are 17 different definitions here, but you get the point.

At any rate, I think the terms liberated and free are mistakenly applied to the current conditions in Iraq. Anyone disagree?

There is nothing wrong with an Islamic state. Not all Islamists are fundamentalists. Just because 60% are Shia doens't mean they are all anti-democratic or radical fundamentalists. They are free to dislike the Western society and it's values that is the teaching of Mohammad. There are also a lot of Christian in Iraq. Islam does not hate Christianity and reference Mary and Jesus in the Karan. It's their country and they can now speak. The Arab countries will not allow another Saddam like regime in power. Now that the bodies are being discovered, Shia, Kurd or other, will not let this happen again.
At least now they have a choice. When the terrorists and violence stops, we will leave them to rebuild.

... Still didnt understand.

To Wolf_eyes

I was an english major myself and tend to get on people cases when their understanding of the language is poor. I have to say though, I have thoroughly enjoyed your posts.

It's Memorial Day. The time to honor America's fallen heroes....