New Civilization News: Kerry on "Meet the Press"    
 Kerry on "Meet the Press"28 comments
picture19 Apr 2004 @ 01:50, by spells

Kerry on “Meet the Press:” Democratic candidate reiterates support for Iraq war

By Patrick Martin
19 April 2004

In an hour-long appearance Sunday on the NBC News program “Meet the Press,” the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, Senator John Kerry, reiterated his support for the US war in Iraq, while suggesting that it would take the election of a new president for Washington to succeed in mobilizing additional foreign troops and resources to reinforce its grip on the conquered country.

Kerry underscored his solidarity with the Bush administration’s policy of crushing the mass uprising that has brought together Sunni Muslims in the west-central area of Iraq and Shiites in Baghdad and the south in a common struggle against the occupation forces. Saying the US should send in more troops if necessary to defeat the insurgency and prevent a failure of the Iraq occupation, the Democratic candidate declared, “Number one, we cannot fail.”

“Meet the Press” interviewer Tim Russert asked Kerry about an op-ed column he wrote for the Washington Post last week, in which he stated: “Our country has committed to help the Iraqis build a stable, peaceful and pluralistic society. No matter who is elected president in November, we will persevere in that mission.” Kerry replied by repeating his unconditional endorsement of the American occupation, leading Russert to respond, “That sounds exactly like George Bush.”

The program began with Russert asking Kerry, “Do you believe the war in Iraq was a mistake?” Kerry replied, “I think the way the president went to war is a mistake.” This set the tone for the entire interview, as Russert asked no further questions about the decision to go to war and focused entirely on Kerry’s prescriptions for fighting the war more effectively.

Kerry made repeated criticisms of Bush’s conduct of the war. He said, “This administration misled America,” and declared that Bush “broke faith with his own promises to the country.” He added, “Iraq had nothing to do with Al Qaeda.” But Russert did not ask how a war based on such lies could be legitimate, and Kerry did volunteer an opinion.

Instead, Kerry again voiced a theme first raised in a speech last week in New York City: that the criteria for a successful completion of the US intervention in Iraq would be the creation of a stable regime, not the establishment of a democracy. Following Kerry’s pronouncement that “we cannot fail” in Iraq, the following exchange took place:

Russert: How do you define failure?

Kerry: Well, I think failure is the lack of a stable Iraq. I think a failed state in Iraq is failure.

Russert: An Islamic regime similar to Iran would be acceptable?

Kerry: You could even go further than what I just said and suggest that if we are stuck for a long period of time in a quagmire where young Americans are dying without a sense of that being able to be achieved, I think most Americans will decide that’s failure.

Russert: Could you accept a Shiite theocracy running Iraq similar to what we have in Iran?

Kerry: I think that what is important is to have a pluralistic representation. It doesn’t have to be, at least in the early days, the kind of democracy this administration has talked about, though that’s our goal and we should remain there. But what is critical is a stable Iraq.

In other words, a President Kerry would scrap the messianic and increasingly ludicrous rhetoric of the Bush administration about democratizing Iraq and the entire Middle East, and get down to business: creating the stable conditions required for American capitalism to extract super profits from Iraq’s oil resources, under some form of clerical/military dictatorship propped up by American troops.

In the course of the interview, Kerry also declared that if he is elected, there could well be 100,000 or more American troops in Iraq a year from now. Kerry went on to say, “Tim, let me be very clear to you: We are united around our troops. We support our troops. They’re extraordinarily courageous. We have the best military we’ve ever had in the history of our country, and they deserve a strategy that’s going to minimize the risk to them. But I am united, along with everybody else, in knowing that we have to have a success in not having a failed Iraq. That we are united in.”

This declaration of unity is Kerry’s assurance to the American ruling elite that whatever criticisms he may make of the Bush administration’s tactics in the war—particularly its dismissal of the views of nominal allies like France and Germany, and its contempt for institutions like the United Nations—he is committed to maintaining US control of Iraq. With its strategic position in the center of the Middle East, and its vast oil reserves, a US-dominated Iraq has become a vital interest of American imperialism, and will not be given up lightly.

Reassuring the ruling class has been Kerry’s main focus all week. At a public forum at City College in New York, he seized on a question from a vocal critic of the war to underscore his support of the US occupation. Retired mathematics professor Walter Daum denounced the war in Iraq as imperialist, and warned that a President Kerry would quickly become as hated as Bush if he continued Bush’s policies in Iraq.

Kerry did not try to interrupt his antagonist—evidently welcoming the opportunity to distance himself from antiwar sentiment. He then replied, “I have consistently been critical of how we got where we are. But we are where we are, sir, and it would be unwise beyond belief for the United States of America to leave a failed Iraq in its wake.”

Later he gave a speech to a fundraising event that netted nearly $3.5 million from Wall Street fat cats and other corporate executives in which he flatly declared his opposition to “redistribution of the wealth,” and pledged a Kerry administration to fiscal responsibility and deficit reduction.

On “Meet the Press,” Kerry gave other assurances of the right-wing foreign policy his administration would pursue. Asked about the Israeli assassination of Hamas leader Abdel-aziz Rantisi, he responded, “I believe Israel has every right in the world to respond to any act of terror against it. Hamas is a terrorist, brutal organization.” He also gave uncritical support to Bush’s decision last week to reverse four decades of American foreign policy by officially supporting Israeli retention of West Bank land illegally occupied by Israeli settlers.

Finally, Kerry made what amounts to a repudiation of the antiwar stance which first brought him to public attention during the Vietnam War. Russert played a tape of Kerry’s first appearance on “Meet the Press,” in April 1971, when the Democratic candidate was a leader of Vietnam Veterans Against the War. The young former Navy lieutenant showed considerable personal courage by going on national television to admit his own involvement in actions—search-and-destroy missions, the burning of villages and other atrocities—which violated the Geneva Conventions.

More importantly, the antiwar veteran compared the leaders of the US government to Lt. William Calley, who was tried and convicted of mass murder in the My Lai massacre: “All of this is contrary to the Geneva Conventions and all of this ordered as a matter of written established policy by the government of the United States from the top down. And I believe that the men who designed these, the men who designed the free-fire zone, the men who ordered us, the men who signed off the air raid strike areas, I think these men, by the letter of the law, the same letter of the law that tried Lieutenant Calley, are war criminals.”

Thirty-three years later, as a senator who is auditioning for the position of war-criminal-in-chief, Kerry was called upon to make a public act of contrition. Under prompting from Russert, Kerry declared that “atrocities” was “a bad word ... an inappropriate word.” As for calling presidents Johnson and Nixon and their top generals war criminals, he told Russert: “It was, I think, a reflection of the kind of times we found ourselves in and I don’t like it when I hear it today.”

At the same time, Kerry tried to have it both ways. “There were breaches of the Geneva Conventions,” in Vietnam, he said. “There were policies in place that were not acceptable according to the laws of warfare, and everybody knows that.” He concluded: “I’m proud that I took the position that I took to oppose it. I think we saved lives, and I’m proud that I stood up at a time when it was important to stand up, but I’m not going to quibble, you know, 35 years later that I might not have phrased things more artfully at times.”

The issue, of course, is not artfulness, but truth. The young Lieutenant Kerry of 1971 gained national attention because he provided at least a glimpse of the brutal reality of imperialist war. The Senator Kerry of 2004 seeks to trade on his antiwar reputation to delude voters opposed to the current imperialist war in Iraq—a war, which, as the events in Fallujah are making clear, rivals Vietnam in its barbaric and wanton disregard for human life.

See Also:
Bush's press conference: evasions, lies and a promise of more bloodletting
[15 April 2004]
Socialist Equality Party US presidential candidate: "A vote for Kerry is a vote for war"
[14 April 2004]
The Democrats and "Bush's war"
[9 April 2004]



[< Back] [New Civilization News]

Category:  

28 comments

19 Apr 2004 @ 09:46 by vaxen : Thanks...
again, sandi, for bringing out the reality of the situation. Vote? Ha! When the line soldiers, the grunts, start fragging people like 'Kery and Bush' then, and only then, will the American Imperialists, and their cohorts, stop the 'holocaust' in Iraq. There is no vote, there is no real AMerica, it is all a bizarre, and horrible, nightmare and fiction! Leep it up, please, 'Brother Jonathan.'

http://www.brojon.org/  



19 Apr 2004 @ 13:29 by Emily Vonnessa @69.33.46.10 : In a pickle over Iraq, aren't we?
Wished Bush [Jr.] had listened to daddy (I never thought I would ever say that):
"We were concerned about the long-term balance of power at the head of the Gulf...Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the U.N.'s mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the U.S. could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different--and perhaps barren--outcome." ("Why We Didn't Remove Saddam" by George Bush [Sr.] and Brent Scowcroft, Time, 2 March 1998)

There is no doubt that Kerry is a political player playing a political game according to complex political rules in an unforgiving political arena. Is Kerry (or any other politician playing by these rules) going to change that or do any better than that? I doubt it—not if they want to stay in the arena (ask Ralph Nader.) I suspect that such a change will eventually come from the bottom up, if ever. Still some politicians are a better choice than others (so choose your poison carefully—or let others choose for you.) I do not know that "a vote for Kerry is a vote for war" as your post seem to suggest or that we are better off not voting at all, as is implied in the above comment but the Iraqi question sure is an interesting conundrum, isn't it? The question just begs to be asked, so I’ll go ahead and ask it: if it were up to you—and, hey, wait a minute, it IS up to you, isn’t it?—what would you recommend be done at this point? What would you like to hear President George Bush or Senator John Kerry, or Mister Jefferson Smith (what an intersting thought) tell the people he will do with regard to Iraq? Or to put it another way, in your own honest opinion, what would the steps for true beneficial change be at this point regarding the Iraqi question?  



19 Apr 2004 @ 14:06 by spells : being part of it all.....
I say fire the whole government, stop paying taxes, and don't bother to vote. Until we really let them know that we are not going to put up (with a better "poison"), with lies, corruption, hidden agendas, payoffs, bribes, greed, to just name a few, NOTHING will change. As long as we allow them to do what they are doing we are part of the karma, (cause and effect). It is not my karma...is it yours? But perhaps this is taking too much responsiblity and too simple to fathom....  


19 Apr 2004 @ 15:33 by Emily Vonnessa @69.33.46.10 : I am afraid we are "part of it all"
whether we want it or not, spells.

Our current political, social and economic system is so intricately intertwined with our lives and the social/technological/ecological fabric of the world we live in that nothing we do short of dropping out of society and taking up residence as hermits (where?) is going to spare us from granting legitimacy to the system. And then what? Dare we wash our hands of the problems of the world and stand by and do nothing? Or do you expect enough people will follow and make a difference?

Following up on the Iraqi situation presented in this post, my question was: what would, the steps for true beneficial change be at this point with regards to Iraq? But spells brings up yet another interesting question here: {link:http://www.sierratimes.com/03/11/09/ar_lexconcord.htm|to vote or not to vote?}  



19 Apr 2004 @ 18:29 by Ray Justice @69.33.46.10 : Let's fire the whole government
Good idea, spells: I say, let's begin with the Bush administration!!!

While in my heart I want to live in a progressive paradise where everyone challenges assumptions, calls things by their right names, and has compasion for every living thing, I also know that such a place is essentially impossible to achieve right now given the reality of who is in power.

The democratic party, while firmly entrenched in the corporate world order, still has many principles that leave room for the values in our hearts to be manifested in actions. The Kerry versus Bush's "Tweedledee-Tweedledum" propaganda only serves the interest of those interested in keeping Bush in power by encouraging skepticism (and dampening the spirit of those who want to fire the current administration.) YES, Virginia, there's a democratic party. Democrats pushed tax cuts for the middle class; Republicans delivered tax cuts for the rich. Democrats shamefully caved in and backed war in Iraq—BUT under the auspices of the United Nations; Republicans insisted on going alone. Democrats urged action to control global warming; Republicans deny it even exists. Democrats support a woman's right to choose; Republicans want to overturn Roe v. Wade. Democrats delivered a $125 billion surplus; Republicans turned it into a $520 billion deficit. And YES there are real differences between {link:http://www.damnedbigdifference.org/KerryBush.html|Bush and Kerry}—at least between their platforms. I wonder if any of the voters who proudly proclaimed in 2000 that there is no difference between democrats and republicans still feel that way today? Not enough people know what the stakes are. Most people have never really learned how the U.S. system of government and economics works. They complain about how unfair it is while being full participants in everything from resource consumption to taking part in retirement plans that have tobacco company stocks. And who can blame them—we lead a rich, good life. So we look pretty ridiculous complaining about the system. Before a new way of doing things can supplant the current system, a LOT of other things must come together. For one thing, such a change need to be supported by a strong collaborative movement among the population. Such is not the case right now. And as serious as things have been getting in the past four years, I find it way too dangerous to thrown my vote away for the sake of making a political statement or "keeping my hands clean" of the system. Looking the other way is not my karma...is it yours?

 



19 Apr 2004 @ 21:17 by spells : SYMPTOMS
All the things you are talking about Mr Justice are symptoms. So one side lies a little less or better than the other. The government has no right to tell me anything...they are only greedy creeps who really care nothing for the earth or it's inhabitants. If the democrats are so good, why did all those bill pushed by Bush go through without even being read a lot of the time? Yeah they have some better ideas, I am not defending republicans, but they (any political party) are all out for two or three things...themselves, money and power. So the lesser of two evils is not what I want to follow or give my confidence in.

IT is ALL wrong! To make a difference and make changes that will last, society does have to be rejected. This may sound harsh and extreme, but everything else is just a band-aid.

Emily...no, I don't think enough people will follow to make a difference, but that matters not because the only way to live is by example. I do reject society and all it stands for, I will not be a part of materialism/consumerism.., nor being a wage slaver, coveting posessions, ignoring my soul, paying the government to rape our lands, kill people for greed, profit and power, lie, care nothing for the planet or it's inhabitants...no thanks. At least there are a few souls with the spirit to stand up for what is right and not give in just because the majority says that is the way. We had no right going to Iraq in the first place.

Beneficial change would be to stop living a wasteful lifestyle so that we wouldn't be using up the earth's resources and in desparate need of the oil in Iraq to keep up this extreme lifestyle. If one does stand up for Truth and what is right living they would drop out of society. If enough people would do this there would communities to live in with others of like minds. I realize this isn't the way but that doesn't negate it's importance. As I said there are very few that have the spirit and courage for such a way of living. It would mean be ostracized by all those around one. Since image is all that matters in this society that is not a popular way to live. Back to nature, respect for all life, not taking sides because all sides lie are out for their own good, simple living, etc is what is needed, but I know there are a million excuses for not doing this, but only one for doing this...the Truth. Living for Truth in all matters is one cause maybe 1 in 100,000 live. Remember, the truth cares not how you feel, so don't shoot the messenger.  



20 Apr 2004 @ 02:52 by ashanti : Excellent....
....to see you posting again, Spells. Many thanks!  


20 Apr 2004 @ 12:02 by Emily Vonnessa @69.33.46.10 : Yes, many thanks—to all—good thread!
COMMON GROUND:

I've read the above comments and I think that Ray and Spells are both saying the same thing:

Ray — "Most people have never really learned how the U.S. system of government and economics works. They complain about how unfair it is while being full participants in everything from resource consumption to taking part in retirement plans that have tobacco company stocks. "

Spells — " I will not be a part of materialism/consumerism.., nor being a wage slaver, coveting possessions, ignoring my soul, paying the government to rape our lands, kill people for greed, profit and power, lie, care nothing for the planet or it's inhabitants...no thanks."

Hehehe...a lot of posturing and lecturing too:

Spells — "As long as we allow them to do what they are doing we are part of the karma, (cause and effect). It is not my karma...is it yours? But perhaps this is taking too much responsibility and too simple to fathom.... "

Ray — "Looking the other way is not my karma...is it yours?"
 
DIFFERENCES:

Well it's all very silly, so forgive me if I oversimplify:

Spells says: Doing something (trying to change things from within the system) is doing nothing ("a band-aid") and accuses Ray of being a collaborator.

Ray says: Doing nothing is...well, doing nothing, and thinks that although spells believes she is "keeping her hands clean," such a claim is fallacious because whether she wants it or not, "looking the other way" makes her an accomplice.

Quite frankly, and even though I find the whole exchange, oh so fascinating, (though hardly original) I can’t help but be somewhat disappointed by the lack of maturity of it all (assuming, of course, that Ray and Spells both are adults—my apologies to them if they are not—I do not mean this facetiously or disparagingly, I know a lot of High school students who get very active on the internet nowadays, a thing to be lauded and encouraged.)

In an article {link:http://scarletjewels.com|Julie Solheim-Roe} posted not too long ago, I was reminded of what Martin Luther King Jr. said:
"The reason there is so much evil in the world, is not because there are a lot of evil people. It is because the good people, sit on their porches and do nothing."

MLK, jr. was someone who worked both within and without the system to change the system - remember The Voting Rights Act of 1965? Civil Rights, {link:http://www.aclu.org|Civil Liberties}, child labors law, women rights, I do not call those "band-aids." We’ve gone a long way, and yet there is so much to do and so very little time, and I do not believe either that politics as usual is going to cut it. But recognizing that something needs to be done is recognizing that something needs to be done. And doing something about it is doing something about it. Whether you are a footman (a day to day political or social activist) in the struggle to create a better world, or whether you have rejected the system and thrive to find new ways (by setting yourself as "an example" like spells suggests), I think there are a lot of better things proponents of either ways (I don’t even think these ways necessarily are mutually exclusive) can do, other than pointing fingers at each other.  



20 Apr 2004 @ 12:19 by Emily Vonnesa @69.33.46.10 : Iraq, anyone?
It would appear that the thread has moved away entirely form the initial question which started the whole thing:

"What would you like to hear President George Bush or Senator John Kerry, or Mister Jefferson Smith (what an interesting thought) tell the people he will do with regard to Iraq? Or to put it another way, in your own honest opinion, what would the steps for true beneficial change be at this point regarding the Iraqi question?"  

Any idea anyone? Where should we go from here?

Maybe the Iraqi question is not a good topic for NCN, I don't know, I just asked because that's what I thought Sandi's post was about.  



20 Apr 2004 @ 14:16 by spells : Truth..............
Dear Emily and all..

I had a long message typed but it got deleted. Quite a message for me because of what I had stated. The message was 1. you cannot change a corrupted system within that system and 2. you cannot make any true change within the level of consciousness that exists.

Not being a child, I have tried it all...protests, petitions, voting, paying taxes to name a few. Where has all this gotten us? Just more corruption, lies, deceit than was prevalent years ago. What can one then conclude? That you cannot change a corrupt system within that system.

As I said before...being an example of right living is all one can do. Not paying taxes, not buying into media lies and propaganda, respecting nature by living as simply as possible, writing about the truth, informing people,watching one's intentions behind every action (to name a few) is not what I would call.."doing nothing".

A lot of what I said was ignored...our wasteful lifestyles that is killing the earth and using up her resources to name one. This is often ignored because we would have to take a serious look at ourselves and our part in it. Let me ask you this...is your soul here to work 40+ hours per week, 50 weeks a year? or is your soul here to evolve, expand, learn and grow? Does your soul care how big your house is, what degree you have, about your stock portfolio, to just name a few? I would say no. Thus we have the law of karma and the cycle of reincarnation, that has so many souls stuck. (Universal laws that exist with or without humans) Some believe that after death the soul sees all and learns, but not if the soul is stuck in karma and a lower vibration of consciousness. So if we don't do it now, we may never do it.

Emily stated that there isn't much time left. So what can we do? Be honest, live for Truth, work on ourselves and hopefully this will trickle out to the consciousness of the planet. If the consciousness is not raised, nothing will change. pure and simple.

Quite a thought ...keeping one's hands clean. doing nothing. Perhaps so much of the doing is only a distraction and to make one "feel" as if they are doing something, but as long as one lives by the standards set forth by the powers that be, even in a small way, then they are only perpetuating more of the same.

What can we do about Iraq? I think my statements above answer that. What comes immediately to mind is bring the troops home and stop lying! But this is too simple and too straightforward..so go ahead, protest, sign petitions, vote and one year from now, let's talk again and see how far all this has brought us.

I wish you all well. I don't mean to come across as angry, negative or arrogant...I am only telling you what I see. Please again remember....the truth cares NOT how you feel, it is still the truth.  



20 Apr 2004 @ 17:56 by Ray Justice @69.33.46.10 : ................Truth
I have no quarrel with you spells. A path is only a path. And if being an example of right living works for you, then go with it. I respect that.

You feel you know "truth" and "universal law," I make no such claim and I certainly don’t know what "he standards set forth by the powers that be" are. But I know that "keeping one’s hands clean" and "doing nothing" are not always one and the same (as I am sure you well know.)

"A lot of what you said" was not "ignored," I am sorry if I gave you that impression, I have no argument with anything you are saying (the part about wasteful lifetime, killing the earth, etc…) and my response was specifically directed at the way Emily had framed the question: To vote or not to vote?

You see what you see and I see what I see (and I am sure we each have our own biases, LOL—but we can only see what we see, can’t we?) So this is what I am seeing. I am looking at the world and I see that a dangerous ideology has taken over the Republican party and the country and the rest of the world along with it. Borg-like cohesive alliances (broadly collaborating, pooling resources, manipulating the system and buying radio and television stations across the country) have been getting their candidates voted into high profile offices (and low profile, but important, local roles on school boards and city councils across the country.) They are well organized, they work together, and they have been gaining momentum at a rapid pace. This is no conspiracy theory; it's politics. You said it best yourself, "just more corruption, lies, and deceit," the worse part is that it’s not just about corruption, lies and deceit, some believe they are "righteous," add "Ultranationalism" and "God" to it and you have a dangerous explosive mix. Such alliances are the "civilized" evolution of man’s predatory nature and one of the many aspects of the world we live in and the way of tribes, nations and Empires ("Rome’s way"---Little is remembered of the Celts.)

Worse, given the nature of passive populations like in the United States that have been raised on very wrong assumptions about the way things work (some of the things you were talking about in your comment), a large percentage of the population has become a complacent complicit part of the Borg. Why do you think Democrats caved in over Iraq? I think they were wrong to do so, but the reason is clear, they were concerned about lack of support and a damaging political backlash from the population in the wake of 911. (How did Cesar become Cesar?)

It is not unlikely that an evolution in human consciousness and technological advances (probably both) will make it possible for humanity and the rest of the world to live harmoniously one day in a decentralized world where everyone is connected yet live off the grid. For that to happen, it would probably be best if there is a world (we like) left for it to happen when/if it happens.

The thing with the Borg is that you can run from it but you cannot hide (ask the Celts.) Politicians are politicians, but don’t forget they too are human beings (shocking isn’t it :-) and they too are an emanation of the dynamic inherent to that same evolving humanity. Politics is in governments and it is in human nature. So, what does it say about humanity? (Judging from what I see, not much of it has "rickled out to the consciousness of the planet," so far.)

Are Democrats as firmly entrenched in the corporate world order as Republicans are? No doubt about it. But there still are differences across major party lines between Democrats and Republicans. Firing a government that has become dangerously out of control is one of the tool still available to us little "footmen" who are standing our ground against the Borg and by goalies, praise me or call me a fool for it, but I sure intend to do my part and cast my vote on this one!

What about Iraq? Well Emily is right, we are in a pickle. I don’t believe Kerry would have supported the kind of ideology that lead Bush to invade Iraq. And I don't think we would be in Iraq right now. But, it’s no longer a matter of do we have any business going there--we are there. We should never have invaded Iraq in the first place, but we have, and we have destroyed the existing government and supporting infrastructures.
Now what? Should we just leave? There is a reason why the country came to be ruled by such a ruthless autocratic regime. The Baath dictatorship came about after decades of political violence and instability. Civil war will likely ensue. Are the Iraqi people better off with a civil war than with Saddam Hussein? Was it for us to decide? Is it ethical for us to leave? Is it ethical for us to stay? Are we responsible for what will ensue? What if another dictatorship takes root? What about an Islamic Theocracy (you know, a little bit like what we have at home right now, but with persians and muslims instead of patriots and christians)? I believe that ultimately it’s a question better left to the people of Iraq. The question for us then becomes how do we get out of there without causing a blood bath in the process. There is also the unsavory question of realpolitic. Let’s not play innocent here. The US is not the only player in the region. We have removed the Baath Party and created a vacuum. Other regional powers (like Iran and Turkey, for example) have clear and obvious vested interests in influencing what will happen next in Iraq. Let say we leave without having created a "stable, peaceful and pluralistic society," as Kerry said (or a "client regime" as other would put it) and some other power come along and use their influence to subvert the system. What then?  



20 Apr 2004 @ 18:11 by jmarc : 2 cents worth from the right
Kerry will say whatever it takes to get him elected. Just because he pays lip service in favor of the war, make no mistake, he's a dyed in the wool liberal, and if he gets elected, he will find the first oportunity to pull us out of there. Just as Bill Clinton "promised" a middle class tax cut, and when he got elected, changed his tune, saying " well, i tried my hardest". Nader, on the other hand is honest about what he will do, pull us out of there within 6 months. So if you want a politician who will get the U.S. out of Iraq, then vote for either Kerry or Nader. If you want a politician who will honestly tell you the truth and pull us out of Iraq, vote for Nader. Meanwhile, i'll vote for Bush.  


20 Apr 2004 @ 18:27 by spells : ???
jmarc, are you serious about voting for Bush? and if so, please tell us why....  


20 Apr 2004 @ 18:38 by Ray Justice @69.33.46.10 : Respect
I would not exactly have put it this way. But this is it, in a nutshell.
Myself, I just want Bush out of there. So I guess l'll just vote Kerry.

Note: Kerry knows about realpolitics, so he'll eventually get us out of Iraq but it will take time. A hasty withdrawal would be disastrous, Bush' people knew this and they knew what they were doing when they rushed us into this. With little consultation, they have deliberately and very purposefully committed us to a course of actions that they knew would be extremely difficult to reverse.  



20 Apr 2004 @ 18:38 by jmarc : well, i don't know if it would help
the discussion, me telling you why,but i stated it for the sake of honesty, so you can see where i'm coming from. My main point is that kerry knows enough to play the system til he wins, at which point i sincerely believe he will revert to his liberal stances. Now, me saying he's liberal is one thing, but he has been labeled, according to his voting record, by watchdog groups on both sides of the aisle as the most liberal senator in the U.S. senate. He has to appear more moderate than that to get elected, so i think your dismay may be misplaced in him "supporting" Bush's war. His honesty on the other hand is questionable.
As for my support for Bush, i don't have the time or inclination to debate that with you, but know that i respect your opinion and wouldn't think of trying to convince you that it's wrong. Some of it is quite right actually, but we approach our ideals from different paths.  



20 Apr 2004 @ 19:02 by Emily Vonnessa @69.33.46.10 : Kerry
I can't help but feel sorry for the guy. If he's elected, he's going to end up spending his entire term trying to clean up the big doodoo left on his doorstep (Iraq is just one part of it,) and, whatever he does, chances are that the right and the left both will find ways to severly criticize him. He's going to have to be a shrewd politician to do what needs to be done. I'd hate to be in his place.  


20 Apr 2004 @ 19:28 by spells : truth continued....
Dear Ray,

I hope you don't mind that I pasted your message here and answer paragraph by paragraph. I have been told that I am not very popular here and I didn't want your message ignored because I inserted comments within your orignial message. Thank you for intellegent discussion. Why don't you join NCN and/or if you already are a member don't be anonymous....you comments are very meritorious.

**************
Ray: I have no quarrel with you spells. A path is only a path. And if being an example of right living works for you, then go with it. I respect that.

You feel you know "truth" and "universal law," I make no such claim and I certainly don’t know what "he standards set forth by the powers that be" are.

Spells: Truth is that which doesn't change because of personal preference. You know what is true and what isn't. Truth can be backed up with facts. Now we may not always know the full picture but that doesn't mean that truth doesn't exist. Humans aren't the beginning nor the end of truth. What I mean by Universal laws are law of gravity, law of inertia, law of karma to name a few.

****************
Ray: But I know that "keeping one’s hands clean" and "doing nothing" are not always one and the same (as I am sure you well know.)

**********

Spells: I am not sure I understand your point, but believe me, my hands are not clean...

***************

Ray: "A lot of what you said" was not "ignored," I am sorry if I gave you that impression, I have no argument with anything you are saying (the part about wasteful lifetime, killing the earth, etc…) and my response was specifically directed at the way Emily had framed the question: To vote or not to vote?

You see what you see and I see what I see (and I am sure we each have our own biases, LOL—but we can only see what we see, can’t we?)

Spells: yes but we can look deeper and therefore learn more. yes we have our own biases, but if we use a scientific approach (I know this sounds cold) we can be observers and not get attachments to results. By being observers, we have the opportunity to be objective and not have personal biases, feelings etc at stake. Sticking to facts, being honest about those facts will always bring us closer to the truth.

Ray: So this is what I am seeing. I am looking at the world and I see that a dangerous ideology has taken over the Republican party and the country and the rest of the world along with it. Borg-like cohesive alliances (broadly collaborating, pooling resources, manipulating the system and buying radio and television stations across the country) have been getting their candidates voted into high profile offices (and low profile, but important, local roles on school boards and city councils across the country.) They are well organized, they work together, and they have been gaining momentum at a rapid pace. This is no conspiracy theory; it's politics. You said it best yourself, "just more corruption, lies, and deceit," the worse part is that it’s not just about corruption, lies and deceit, some believe they are "righteous," add "Ultranationalism" and "God" to it and you have a dangerous explosive mix.

Spells: Yes I see your point here, gives new meaning to "we are all one". People use that phrase all the time, but don't know the implications of our connectedness. It can work to raise us to heights yet unknown, but it can also lower us to despair. There is a borg like consciousness and tv and media, schooling all contribute to this. We are conditioned from day one with schedules, biases, feelings etc and none of the important things are even discussed. As children we "Feel" the vibes of others around us, but this is totally denied and ignored. Therefore the pharmaceuticals can have a field day with our misused intentions and wrong focus. Image is all that matters, not truth. Who can "win" an argument, not truth. This is what is ingrained. Who cares who wins...can we learn something? can we progress? My point is that the borg mentality has taken over. Resistance is futile...take a side, live as we say, ignore how you feel, ignore your body...so we have the elite borg and we have the following borg. As I said nothing will change until this consciousness changes. This has made it self evident all too often. It is not my preference but it is true and time is running out.

Ray: Such alliances are the "civilized" evolution of man’s predatory nature and one of the many aspects of the world we live in and the way of tribes, nations and Empires ("Rome’s way"---Little is remembered of the Celts.)

Worse, given the nature of passive populations like in the United States that have been raised on very wrong assumptions about the way things work (some of the things you were talking about in your comment), a large percentage of the population has become a complacent complicit part of the Borg. Why do you think Democrats caved in over Iraq?

Spells: Partly yes it is this metality that caused that cave in, but I am sure it was also bribes, threats, manipulations...we just don't get to hear or see that part. Also it is a known fact that we are running out of oil, and the one who controls it, will control the world. Now that is a motive to cave. With the way most in this country live, and if they don't live that way, they wish they did, we won't have enough resources for much longer.


Ray: I think they were wrong to do so, but the reason is clear, they were concerned about lack of support and a damaging political backlash from the population in the wake of 911. (How did Cesar become Cesar?)

Spells: hundreds of thousands protested here and around the world, how could they worry about lack of support. Families of people who died in the twin towers have come out and said that Iraq had nothing to do with 911. If that is why they caved, it appears that they only did it to have something for which to campaign with, a slogan, an in, but it is not based on true support. This isn't really logical. So why support them at all?

Ray: It is not unlikely that an evolution in human consciousness and technological advances (probably both) will make it possible for humanity and the rest of the world to live harmoniously one day in a decentralized world where everyone is connected yet live off the grid. For that to happen, it would probably be best if there is a world (we like) left for it to happen when/if it happens.

Spells: There won't be much of a world if they are allowed to keep going as they are and we (as a population) live by the same materialistic standards, the earth just can't support us. That is if humans don't blow themselves up first and take most of the earth down with them. Oil is only the beginning. Clean water will be scarce also as the corporations are polluting more and more everyday. Forests are being clear cut for profit. Your tax dollars working hard for you!

Ray: The thing with the Borg is that you can run from it but you cannot hide (ask the Celts.)

Spells: There is a difference between hiding and saying it is all wrong,therefore I won't be a part of it.

Ray: Politicians are politicians, but don’t forget they too are human beings (shocking isn’t it :-) and they too are an emanation of the dynamic inherent to that same evolving humanity. Politics is in governments and it is in human nature. So, what does it say about humanity? (Judging from what I see, not much of it has "rickled out to the consciousness of the planet," so far.)

Spells: of course they are a part of humanity, the lower vibration, after money, power, image and greed (wrong focus)part of humanity. But how many people do you know that don't live for one or more of the aforementioned attributes. If not power. then money. If not money or power then image, sometimes two, sometimes three reasons. As I said before... nothing will change as long as humanity follows the same standards and at this level of consciousness.

Ray: Are Democrats as firmly entrenched in the corporate world order as Republicans are? No doubt about it. But there still are differences across major party lines between Democrats and Republicans. Firing a government that has become dangerously out of control is one of the tool still available to us little "footmen" who are standing our ground against the Borg and by goalies, praise me or call me a fool for it, but I sure intend to do my part and cast my vote on this one!

Spells: Bush didn't legally win the last election, what makes you so sure that voting will help in this one?

Look, I only call it as I see it. They are ALL wrong, so why buy into it and help them stay wrong in any capacity?

There is a bigger picture here we are not addressing. That is that we are part of the cosmos. The earth is only one small planet among who knows how many. One group consciousness out of an infinite number. We are as microbes on specks of sand when compared to the universe. Our souls, although tiny in comparision, are a part of that universe and our consciousness does effect it. This is the law of cause and effect. If the earth is destroyed, the cosmos will go on. If we don't progress and evolve, the cosmos will go on. I will not be part of the karma (cause and effect) that buys into such a tiny fraction of decay, destruction and selfishness. This is all I/anyone can do at this late date. It has all been tried and unless someone(s)have the power and strength and charisma to bring home this truth, then humanity is lost. if I/you don't do it,who? IF not now, when?

Ray: What about Iraq? Well Emily is right, we are in a pickle. I don’t believe Kerry would have supported the kind of ideology that lead Bush to invade Iraq. And I don't think we would be in Iraq right now.

Spells: you may be right about Kery, I don't know, but that is speculation. We need the oil, pure and simple, and we don't know what Kerry would do under such pressure.

Ray: But, it’s no longer a matter of do we have any business going there--we are there. We should never have invaded Iraq in the first place, but we have, and we have destroyed the existing government and supporting infrastructures.
Now what? Should we just leave? There is a reason why the country came to be ruled by such a ruthless autocratic regime. The Baath dictatorship came about after decades of political violence and instability. Civil war will likely ensue. Are the Iraqi people better off with a civil war than with Saddam Hussein? Was it for us to decide? Is it ethical for us to leave? Is it ethical for us to stay? Are we responsible for what will ensue? What if another dictatorship takes root? What about an Islamic Theocracy (you know, a little bit like what we have at home right now, but with persians and muslims instead of patriots and christians)? I believe that ultimately it’s a question better left to the people of Iraq. The question for us then becomes how do we get out of there without causing a blood bath in the process. There is also the unsavory question of realpolitic. Let’s not play innocent here. The US is not the only player in the region. We have removed the Baath Party and created a vacuum. Other regional powers (like Iran and Turkey, for example) have clear and obvious vested interests in influencing what will happen next in Iraq. Let say we leave without having created a "stable, peaceful and pluralistic society," as Kerry said (or a "client regime" as other would put it) and some other power come along and use their influence to subvert the system. What then?

Spells: As I said it is all wrong and there is the law of karma. We made our bed and now we will/may lie/die in it. Keep supporting that karma and world karma becomes your karma. If enough people would not pay their taxes, what would the government do? If enough people stopped living wasteful lifestyles, we would not need as much of the earth's natural resources. But I know that won't happen, but as I said it is not my karma. and although this may sound as if I am doing nothing, in the bigger picture, I am. After many efforts and many different applications, this is the conclusion. As I said, keep doing what you are and let's talk in a year, I'll bet nothing will be better, it will only be worse. That is what I mean by taking care of symptoms and not getting to the cause.

Ray I thank you for this opportunity for lucid and in depth discussion. I hope you will continue.  



20 Apr 2004 @ 22:36 by Ray Justice @209.178.148.27 : Circular argument
Spells? I think that I understood what you were saying, the first time around, but thank you for taking the time of explaining yourself again. As I said before a path is only a path and if you feel "right" about yourself and about what you do, as you obviously seem to, then go with it, you have nothing to prove to me or to others and no one is judging you. I know I am not.

As far as your not being very popular here, I don't know anything about that. I wonder if it might possibly have anything to do with your "scientific approach" to people's comments (there is no such a thing as absolute objectivity, you know---science itself has taught us that.) I don't know, maybe you should try to be more "organic" about it and try reading people's entries as a whole, sometimes, and go with the flow rather than dissecting arguments mechanically like you did. Or maybe you could just pick one or two points at a time, that you wish to develop and give people a chance to respond on specific issues. I know you mean well, but your last comment looks a little too much like a laundry list to me and (no offense) but it's rather a tedious way of running a thread, if you ask me. Almost sound like a lover's quarrel on a bad soap opera. (I wonder how other people feel about it?) Furthermore, over-analyzing things doesn't always bring illumination and examining things too closely can sometimes cause one to loose sight of the bigger picture and one might not see the forest for the trees.  



20 Apr 2004 @ 22:41 by spells : question....
Sorry to have mentioned about not being popular here, I truly didn't mean to get off topic. I only ask one question...what wasn't true about what I said?  


21 Apr 2004 @ 11:12 by Emily Vonnessa @69.33.46.10 : answer...
.
{link:http://www.cuyamaca.net/bruce.thompson/Fallacies/petitio.asp|Petitio Principii}?

Ok, what did I win?

Are you sure you guys are not high school students?  



21 Apr 2004 @ 11:36 by Ray Justice @69.33.46.10 : ...answer
No one is trying to prove you wrong, spells...

I think I'll just take the [20 Apr 2004 @ 18:38 jmarc] amendment on this one:
"...know that i respect your opinion and wouldn't think of trying to convince you that it's wrong. Some of it is quite right actually, but we approach our ideals from different paths."  



21 Apr 2004 @ 11:42 by spells : true discussion....
Thanks for taking attention away from the message Emily...and I never said anyone was trying to prove me wrong...yes I repeat myself...this is because people so rarely addresses specific points. No one has to, but how do we learn if we don't dig...anyway, thanks for your time....  


21 Apr 2004 @ 18:07 by Ray Justice @69.33.46.10 : Leave-taking
Hey, spells, no hard feeling, eh? I am detecting a hedge of bitterness on your part, here. Am I wrong? I am just going to be moving on to something else now, and I would hate to depart on bad note after an exchange which all things considered was, I feel, a rather enjoyable and positive experience all around---quite a few specific points have in fact been very specifically addressed by all participants on various sides of the issues in a rather responsible manner (don’t mind Emily---she’s probably a high school student :-)
I know you are disappointed, but I am not going to answer your point by point responses in your "truth continued" comment as I feel it is a rather futile exercise at this stage. I know you don’t see it, but most of your points are points that everybody here more or less already agree upon (I am not even sure why you chose to bring them on.) As to these points where we disagree, well, they have already been addressed earlier on, on this thread, I think everyone has made their positions clear and the whole thing is becoming somewhat redundant. So, anyway, I just wanted to say, nice talking to you, and you take care of yourself, Okay?  



21 Apr 2004 @ 19:54 by sharie : Emily, when you point a finger...
there's three pointing back at yourself.

Thank you Spells and Ray for your intelligent conversation.

For those who are unaware, *spells* has been a member of NCN for long enough to have made her position, her lifestyle, her intelligence, and her good work well-known to anyone with a brain to comprehend.

Someone shows up here at ncn without a profile for us to read of their background, and then insult ncn members over and over... this is the height of immaturity and ignorance.

Thank you again Spells and Ray.

Spells, since I don't have their profiles to read, I can only guess that they are so caught up in the system they can't see what's really going on, and how they are contributing to the system (paying taxes) and so they're pointing the finger at you, accusing you of doing "nothing" because they don't understand what you have said, the simple lifestyle you advocate, and so on.

Anyone who think *voting* will make a difference, they haven't done their research. A number of enlightening newslog posts can be found on this topic here at ncn.

Anyone who thinks Kerry will be in charge of what happens in Iraq has failed to do their research to know who is actually running the military.

Emily, since you regard yourself as so much more mature, educated, and informed, please let us know of your credentials.  



22 Apr 2004 @ 12:57 by Emily Vonnessa @69.33.46.10 : lol, Sharie,maybe Ray is right about me
and maybe I am a {link:http://www.apple.com/trailers/sony_pictures/13goingon30|high school student} after all. So don't expect to see me sitting on "credentials" and lecturing others about the {link:http://www.general-semantics.org/library/eddy-on-beliefs.pdf|truth}. It' s not my game either. Being a high school student also means that I haven’t gotten "wise" enough to start to interpret and evaluate the world in terms of a consolidated catechism of "received wisdom" (or "tunnel vision"— who is to say?) Thank you for small blessings...lol... People with "credentials" sometimes tend to assume that there is only one "right" way to look at or feel about anything, and that if they talk long enough ("specifically" enough,) other will understand the "truth." The paradox is that they also often tend at the same time to make generalized conclusions in such a way that new experiences have to fit their old conclusions or remain ignored. Dogmatism does tend to creep on all of us as we grow up, we also become more experienced and more knowledgeable, too; I suppose there is a give and take. Does it make us wiser? Yes and...no, is the answer. I suppose, it makes it a good thing then that there is death taking us away before we become too settled in our ways...lol...and birth, and spring, with new growth every year.
In the mean time, I'll just be a high school student. I suppose it means I like to show off (how sophomoric of me), hehehe…and point at other's mistake when I think they are making fools of themselves...what can I say...the impetuosity and arrogance of youth, you would say—but, of course, you would say that…lol.

I take it Spells is your friend, and you feel she was being attacked, and you want to defend here. This is all very honorable of you. I can relate to that and I admire your loyalty. But, really, Sharie, a lot ado about nothing here, don’t you think? So, I asked Ray and Spells, if they were high school students?…woop tee doo…big deal. With all due respect, I think you are too hanged up on the whole identity, profile, "credential" thing, sharie (a subtle ego-trap—look at your comment, it’s all righteous anger warped up around self and ego-concerns.) Can’t you just talk about issues without making it personal? Or are {link:http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html|ad hominem} attacks the way you like to go about things.

And, er…sharie? I was not insulting NCN, wherever did you get that idea??? Who is NCN? Are you NCN? Are Spells, or Ray, NCN? Are you speaking for NCN as a whole? Are your views, or Spells’s views, the view of NCN? Does every one here at NCN agrees with your "pronouncements" (about not voting, etc.) Is disagreeing with Spells on some issues an NCN offense? (And in case you had not noticed I was not disagreeing with everything Spells stands for, and neither was Ray or Jmarc either, as far as I can tell—I understand why you would want to make it appear that way, though…lol) So let’s drop the "righteous" indignation act here, it doesn’t suit you, my friend and reflects poorly on NCN.

As I said, I am a high school student, or maybe just a student of life, perhaps (what does it matter?) AND I am an activist too (I become one overnight, shortly after 2000—my wake up call—I know you think it’s futile, but that’s my path for now—I am sorry if it offends you) so, yes indeed, as a matter of facts, I’ve done my research (thank you for your concern,) as it turns out we might both have read some of the very same articles you are talking about (there are also many very good articles expressing concern over the dangerous ideological derive this country is going through and the danger of doing nothing—I guess you must have missed those. A bit of selective reading on your part, perhaps?—there are also some enlightening articles about ego and about people who take themselves too seriously too…lol…)

And as far as your off-handed remark, about Kerry, is concerned, I am no expert, but I, too, know about the military complex, thank you, I think I am probably as much of a cynic as you are about these things but the pronouncements of the cynics are only half-truth, the dark side of wisdom, Sharie. Along with it all, and despite it all, there also ARE ideological differences. The influences, that you are alluding to, have been trying to advance their agenda with two presidents before—unsuccessfully so. Heck even Bush the father refused to take Iraq over (and it would have been relatively easy for him to do so, in view of the circumstances), I don'tt believe Kerry would have given in either (I know, in fact, of very few "presidentiable" politicians who would have gone that road), it took a W, for the misguided ideology which is now running the country to take over the way it did. Those are not just ordinary "symptoms" (as Spells put it—and please spare me the lecture, I understand what she was talking about, and I agree with most of it) and those are not ordinary times. Don’t get me wrong, I believe in holistic medicine just as much as the next person, but there are times when a good shot of penicillin doesn’t hurt either.

As far as "finger pointing" is concerned I reiterate what I said in one of my comments before:
“I think there are a lot of better things proponents of either ways [yours and spells or mine] (I don’t even think these ways necessarily are mutually exclusive) can do, other than pointing fingers at each other.”
And, I am not trying to "convert" anyone here, do what you do and I'll do what I do, I leave the proselytizing to those who like to talk about what "truth" is…lol… I was just expressing a diverging opinion. Isn’t it what the comment section is for? Or are we all supposed to just agree and tell everyone how wise and spiritually evolved we think they are?  



22 Apr 2004 @ 15:47 by sharie : Your last post clarifies your position.
I have nothing further to add.  


22 Apr 2004 @ 16:53 by Emily Vonnessa @69.33.46.10 : That's OK , Sharie
We all do get a little bit carried away on some occasions (especially online) and I know you bear me no ill will.

I am glad my response helped. I make no secret of my positions; I have posted on NCN before, {link:here|http://scarletjewels.com/newslog2.php?did=148&vid=148&xmode=show_article&amode=standard&aoffset=0&artid=000148-000130&time=1082676321} and {link:here|http://scarletjewels.com/newslog2.php?did=148&vid=148&xmode=show_article&amode=standard&aoffset=0&artid=000148-000131&time=1082676321}. I don't mean to be a pest and I will post no longer on this Blog if my comments are not welcome here. That's OK, cyberspace is a large place...lol.

It was fun talking with you (with you too, Sharie), thank you all.  



22 Apr 2004 @ 17:07 by Emily Vonnessa @69.33.46.10 : ...lol...
Let's try that again: {link:http://scarletjewels.com/newslog2.php?did=148&vid=148&xmode=show_article&amode=standard&aoffset=0&artid=000148-000130&time=1082678577|here} and {link:http://scarletjewels.com/newslog2.php?did=148&vid=148&xmode=show_article&amode=standard&aoffset=0&artid=000148-000131&time=1082678493|here}.  


Your Name:
Your URL: (or email)
Subject:       
Comment:
For verification, please type the word you see on the left:


Other entries in
9 Sep 2008 @ 21:25: The United States Demonic Assault On The World Cannot Stand
13 May 2008 @ 12:36: THE STATE IS NO 'BIG MAMA' BUT AN ENABLER
13 May 2008 @ 09:20: The Superclass
9 Mar 2008 @ 14:01: What Will It Take?
24 Dec 2007 @ 21:41: X-Mas In NOLA
1 Dec 2007 @ 19:13: Art of Mental Warfare
26 Oct 2007 @ 05:20: Thought Crime Law
1 Oct 2007 @ 18:49: The Adoption of the Nazi State, with silence.
16 Sep 2007 @ 09:19: AMERIKAN DEMOCRACY DEAD
14 Sep 2007 @ 06:17: SURRENDER



[< Back] [New Civilization News] [PermaLink]?