|
|
 11 Oct 2002 @ 11:20
Bush’s war drive vs. Iraq
By Patrick Martin
11 October 2002
The Democratic Party is moving to provide a comfortable margin of votes to pass resolutions in the House of Representatives and the Senate authorizing an imminent US invasion of Iraq. The House voted Thursday to give Bush the power to wage war, a week after an agreement between Bush and House Democratic leader Richard Gephardt on the language of the resolution.
A series of top Senate Democrats have endorsed the resolution, including Majority Whip Harry Reid, Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph Biden, and John Kerry of Massachusetts, a prospective presidential candidate and one-time leader of veterans’ protests against the Vietnam War. It is expected that less than a quarter of the Senate will vote against a resolution to authorize Bush to launch a unilateral war of aggression.
The war resolution’s text is an amalgam of the lies and distortions issued by the Bush administration to justify its long-sought goal of invading Iraq and overthrowing Saddam Hussein, including repeated mentions of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, although there is no evidence connecting Baghdad and the suicide hijackings.
The gist of the resolution is a blank check for Bush to use military force against Iraq: “The president is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to (1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and (2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq.”
For the first time in US history, the president would be authorized to launch a war preemptively against a country that had not attacked the United States first and has no ability to threaten or even reach the US militarily. This war is to be waged on the pretext of enforcing UN Security Council resolutions, even if the UN Security Council majority opposes such military action.
In statements defending the resolution, Gephardt embraced the “big lie” of the White House, that the September 11 terrorist attacks make it a matter of self defense for the United States to invade Iraq, in order to prevent further terrorist attacks using weapons of mass destruction.
“Everything changed with 9-11,” Gephardt declared. “If you’re worried about where terrorists will get these weapons, the first place you’d be concerned about is Iraq.”
Effectively admitting that there is no evidence that the Iraqi regime has either the ability or the intention to use such weapons against the United States, Gephardt said, “There’s no smoking gun, and you’re not going to have one. Your standard of proof has to go down, because you’re living in a world of terrorism. We have to prevent a weapon of mass destruction being detonated in the United States. We have to do everything possible to prevent that.”
Such arguments do not make sense even in their own terms. If the greatest danger facing the American people is the possibility of a terrorist attack inside the United States using nuclear, chemical or biological weapons, nothing is more likely to produce such an outcome than a foreign policy based on the principle that the United States has the unilateral right to invade any country in the world it chooses.
The Bush-Gephardt doctrine, by authorizing a one-sided US slaughter of the people of Iraq and, by implication, any other country targeted by the White House and Pentagon, makes terrorist retaliation and the slaughter of innocent Americans even more likely.
Gore’s critique of the Bush doctrine
It is little more than two weeks since the Democratic presidential candidate in 2000, former vice president Al Gore, delivered a blistering critique of the Bush administration’s war policy in a speech in San Francisco. It is worth recalling the speech today, since it reads as an indictment, not only of the Bush White House, but of the Democratic congressional leadership.
The bulk of Gore’s September 23 speech was devoted to the implications of Bush’s doctrine of launching unilateral, first-strike military action against Iraq. The former vice president’s attack was couched in a right-wing, pro-imperialist framework, warning that the drive to war with Iraq would disrupt the international support necessary to wage a successful war against terrorist groups like Al Qaeda. Gore made no mention of the overriding motivation for the war: the desire to seize control of Iraq’s oil resources, the second largest in the world. But the points he made were nonetheless telling.
Recalling that he had been among the minority of Senate Democrats who voted for the first Persian Gulf War, Gore noted that in 1991, Iraq had crossed an international border to attack to Kuwait, but in 2002, the US government was proposing to cross an international border to attack Iraq. Opposition to such a move had already become a powerful factor internationally, he said, pointing to the results of the German election campaign, in which the Schröder government overcame a significant deficit in the polls by appealing to antiwar sentiment.
Gore made an extraordinary admission for an American politician, pointing to the “great anxiety all around the world, not primarily about what the terrorist networks are going to do, but about what we’re going to do.” He then went on to outline the longer-term consequences of the doctrine of preemption.
“To begin with, the doctrine is presented in open-ended terms, which means that if Iraq is the first point of application it is not necessarily the last. In fact, the very logic of the concept suggests a string of military engagements against a succession of sovereign states—Syria, Libya, North Korea, Iran—none of them very popular in the United States, of course, but the implication is that wherever the combination exists of an interest in weapons of mass destruction, together with an ongoing role as host to or participant in terrorist operations, the doctrine will apply.
“It also means that if the Congress approves the Iraq resolution just proposed by the administration, it would be simultaneously creating the precedent for preemptive action anywhere...”
Even more dangerous, he said, was the administration’s broader attack on democratic rights. “The idea that an American citizen can be imprisoned without recourse to judicial process or remedies, and that this can be done on the say-so of the President or those acting in his name, is beyond the pale,” he said.
Without referring to it by name, Gore denounced the national security strategy document released by the White House earlier in the month, saying that it was “important to note the consequences of an emerging national strategy that not only celebrates American strength, but actually appears to glorify the notion of dominance. The word itself has been used in the counsels of the administration.”
He concluded, “What this doctrine does is to destroy the goal of a world in which states consider themselves subject to law, particularly in the matter of standards for the use of violence against each other. That concept would be displaced by the notion that there is no law but the discretion of the President of the United States.”
The response on the part of the Bush administration, congressional Republicans and the bulk of the media was to portray Gore—who received more than 50 million votes for president in 2000, winning the popular vote over Bush—as a virtual traitor who was undermining national unity and presidential authority in wartime. Congressional Democrats reacted to this major pronouncement by the titular leader of their party with a combination of indifference to the substance of Gore’s criticism and fear that the speech would cost them votes in the November 5 election.
The Senate suppresses debate
Perhaps the most significant vote in the Senate took place more than a week before the final passage of the war resolution. It was the vote to shut down the one-man filibuster launched by Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia against any consideration of the measure.
Byrd, the longest-serving Democrat in the Senate and its president pro-tem, pointed out the war resolution was unconstitutional on its face because it shifts the power to declare war from the Congress, where it is vested in Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution, to the president.
The resolution was “a product of presidential hubris,” Byrd said. “This resolution is breathtaking in its scope. It redefines the nature of defense. It reinterprets the Constitution to suit the will of the executive branch.”
Byrd cited a speech delivered by Abraham Lincoln while he served in Congress, opposing US aggression in the war against Mexico of 1846-48. Those who wrote the US Constitution had regarded the power to declare war as the most oppressive power of the British king, Lincoln argued, and therefore decided to place that power in the legislature rather than give it to one man, the president. Giving the chief executive power to wage war on his own decision “destroys the whole matter and places our president where kings have always stood,” Lincoln concluded.
But not a single senator, Democratic or Republican, would support an effort to invoke the Constitution against the drive to war. Byrd’s filibuster was shut down by a vote of 95 to 1.
A similar issue was raised by Congressman Jim McDermott, one of three Democrats who traveled to Baghdad two weeks ago to view first-hand the target of impending US military attack. McDermott told a public meeting in Seattle, Washington October 6 that war with Iraq was the occasion for a profound transformation in the American government.
“What we are dealing with right now in this country is whether we are having a kind of bloodless, silent coup or not,” he told several hundred people at a town hall meeting in his home district. The Bush administration was continually frightening the American people with threats of unspecified terrorist attacks, he said, in order to justify a decision to “suddenly go to war with the whole world.”
The central issue was the assumption of near-total power by the executive branch, McDermott concluded, saying, “If we don’t derail this coup that is going on, we are going to wind up with a government run by the president of the United States and all the rest of us will be standing around just watching it happen.” More >
|
|
|
|
 8 Oct 2002 @ 17:58
Subject: Stand for Peace
PLEASE PASS IT ON
WE STAND UNITED
ACROSS THE COUNTRY, MEN AND WOMEN ARE BEING CALLED TO STAND AS PEACEHOLDERS ON
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 10, AND TELL THE U.S. SENATE NOT TO PASS THE RESOLUTION
LETTING THE PRESIDENT ATTACK IRAQ.
WE ARE CALLED TO STAND IN SILENCE AROUND THE FEDERAL BUILDINGS AND THE OFFICES
OF OUR U. S. SENATORS ALL ACROSS THE COUNTRY-AND ESPECIALLY AROUND THE CAPITOL
BUILDING IN WASHINGTON, D.C.
WE ARE CALLED TO STAND AS INDIVIDUALS AND AS FAMILIES, AS MEMBERS OF CHURCHES
AND OF SYNAGOGUES, TEMPLES, AND MOSQUES. WE ARE CALLED TO STAND IN SOLIDARITY
WITH THOSE SENATORS WHO SEEK A HIGHER GROUND TO PREVENT THE RESOLUTION'S
PASSAGE--AND ESPECIALLY IF SENATOR BYRD'S FILIBUSTER TAKES PLACE. WE ARE
CALLED TO STAND UNITED, AS AMERICANS HOLDING A VISION OF PEACE.
TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS STAND IN SILENCE FOR PEACE:
-FORWARD THIS BULLETIN to everyone in your network, telephoning those
without email ;
-forward it to your Senators and Congressmen and local media, to let them
know you'll be there;
-find out where your local federal building is, or your Senator's office
(they're in the phone book), or, if you have the means, get to the Capitol
building in Washington, D.C.;
-ARRANGE TO SPEND AS MUCH OF THURSDAY AS POSSIBLE STANDING (or sitting if
health is an issue) around your chosen site; if you can only stand for a lunch
hour, great; if you can be there for the full day, great;
- PRINT OUT SOME COPIES OF THIS BULLETIN to take with you and hand them to
the spokesperson to share with others (you can copy the text without the names
and dates and print it).
-DRESS APPROPRIATELY: WOMEN WEAR BLACK AND MEN WEAR WHITE, for spirit-to
distinguish the silent vigil of Peaceholding from any other demonstrations
that may be happening;
-feel free to JOIN THE GROUP AND LEAVE IT AS YOU NEED, honoring your own
being as you call on the government to honor all life.
When standing, PLEASE HONOR THESE GUIDELINES:
- WEAR BLACK IF A WOMAN OR WHITE IF A MAN (distinguishes our silent stand
from all other demonstrations that might be going on around us)
-with the group, CHOOSE ONE SPOKESPERSON to answer all questions and hand
out flyers during the stand;
-STAND SILENTLY, holding a vision of peace for your self, the community, and
the world;
-stay out of the way so you DO NOT OBSTRUCT OR INTERFERE WITH ANYBODY else
during the stand.
By standing together we unite in expressing to our leaders that reverence for
life on the planet demands alternatives to war: Wisdom now must guide us to
find new ways to resolve our conflicts. Silence allows us to be a witness,
seeing the consequences of war. In silence we stop and let the Spirit that is
expressed in all life help us be more creative and mature. By wearing black
(or for men, white), we identify ourselves as nonviolent holders of peace,
distinguishing ourselves from those who would shout or act out their emotions.
WE STAND UNITED
THE TRADITION
As participants in this Stand in Silence for Peace, we are part of the larger
tradition of Mahatma Gandhi, Rev. Martin Luther King, Aung Sang Sun Kyi, the
Women in Black, and others who have changed the world by peaceful, nonviolent
action.
As Peaceholders--men and women joined together in holding a vision of peace
for ourselves, our communities, and our world--we stand united with thousands
of others over the years whose prayers and dreams and actions have been the
same.
WOMEN IN BLACK
Women in Black stand in silent vigil, wearing black in remembrance of those
lost to violence, holding a vision of peace. Begun in 1988 by Israeli and
Palestinian women in the Gaza Strip, Women in Black organized and were
effective in South Africa and Belgrade during the '90s, as well. They stand
where they can be seen without impeding normal activities. They stand
silently, each group appointing a single spokesperson to answer questions and
hand out flyers (such as this bulletin) explaining who they are and what
they're doing.
MEN WEARING WHITE
Men Wearing White is a separate-but-related movement, standing for peace on
their own, or joining Women in Black as Peaceholders when the need is for
solidarity--as on Oct.10. Though many men have wanted to join Women in Black
over the years in standing for peace, it has not worked. Women, representing
the feminine, receptive spirit, need a voice of their own and too often give
way to the active, enthusiastic voices of men in their group.
Men Wearing White standing with Women in Black represent the black-and-white
clarity that is needed at this critical point in our history, reflecting the
yin and yang balance our world needs. The request of Men Wearing White is that
they honor the guidelines and traditions of Women in Black when standing with
them--this means standing in silent vigil holding a vision of peace.
THE POSSIBILITY
Most of us who have participated in such a vigil have felt our souls touched
and choose to stand regularly as Peaceholders, as part of our spiritual
practice or religious faith. If you feel this way, ask the spokesperson on
Oct10 when and where a regular stand is held. If there is none, or you need a
different schedule, feel free to start a new stand using the following
guidelinesâ?¦
WE STAND UNITED
TO CREATE A REGULAR PEACEHOLDING VIGIL
1. contact the concerned, spirit-filled men and women you know and tell them
about your experience and desire to continue it;
2. with those who are interested, select a time and place where you'll be seen
but won't impede normal activities (e.g., 5:30 Wednesdays on the Courthouse
steps; 1st & 3d Mondays at noon in the town square);
3. make a sign that says some version of: We stand united as Peaceholders
standing in silent vigil holding a vision of peace for this community and the
world;
4. make up a couple dozen flyers using the relevant information from this
bulletin and including when and where you will be standing;
5. dress comfortably and use umbrellas and stools as needed for health-do
choose to wear black or white, the psychological effect is important;
6. Show up when and where you've agreed, with your sign and flyers;
7. with the group, decide who will be spokesperson, offering to answer
questions and hand out flyers and who will say when the time for standing is
over;
8. maintain a comfortable silence as you stand and feel peace radiating
through you and out to the world around you;
9. when the time is over, acknowledge each other and, as a group, decide who
will take the sign and flyers and bring them back next time;
10. ask everyone who stood with you to contact everyone they know to join you
next time, get phone numbers or email addresses of those who are willing and
create a "phone tree," and reply to this email so everyone can be reached
when important times come, like 10-10, to stand in large masses.
KNOW THAT BEING PEACE IS THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY TO EXPERIENCE IT in the world
around you--and give thanks each day for the peace that is present in your
life today.
The Blessings of Peace, in your heart and your world, be yours always---
from the members of the
Peaceholders Network More >
|
|
|
|
8 Oct 2002 @ 17:18
The following is part of a discussion on another forum....
Dear Vaughn,
Like you, and like any thinking person, I consider war to be something that is usually far more destructive and regretable than other real solutions for human ills. After all, when we consider conflict of any kind it is only reasonable to first realize the original cause of that discord, and address THAT issue, with war only being the symptom, not the cure.
President Bush said in his latest address that, "Iraq is a special case" and therefore deserving of special (military) treatment. In my view it is indeed a special case, but not for the reasons he quotes. First of all, I do not see that it was necessarily any of our business being over there to start with in the Gulf War. Our country was not attacked, nor were our citizens or allies. What WAS attacked was the stability of the regional oil reserves, commonly known as "our national interests". So I don't believe we had a "law enforcement" right to be in someone elses' conflict, at least certainly not on humanitarian or moral grounds.
Secondly, those poor people in Iraq have not only been bombed, their troops literally bulldozed into their trenches and their citizens killed by the millions afterwards because of the depleted uranium munitions we used against them, but they have also suffered under over a decade of sanctions and virtual occupation. Their citizens are starving and their hospitals are without needed medicines/equipment. Their own air space has not been theirs. Their own oil has not been theirs to use. They have not been able to buy even some basics for their people because everything they purchase has to go through a UN committeee before it is "approved", including necessary medicines, and these are often denied. The "food for oil" program basically steals their oil in exchange for wheat and produce. They've been bombed continuously for over 11 years right up to the present day, even while bargaining at the UN is still going on. Basically, the Gulf War never ended for them, and yet Bush has the audacity to complain that they've shot at our planes who regularly bomb the hell out of them.
Iraq is a special case all right...they have every reason to hold a grudge...wouldn't you after all, if that were your country?
Vaughn, you said;
The "war" now declared, and the threat of war to disarm Iraq, are hopefully conceived to be an effort of most civilized people to restrain a ruthless underworld obviously standing in the way of an evolving commonwealth of cooperating as well as competing societies and cultures. If the forces of goodwill in most nations are marshaled in this effort to use every intelligence, financial, economic, and (when necessary) military tool, we may move through and beyond war toward the greater goal of eliminating the horrible scourge of war itself."
I fail to see how our actions over the last decade have been "civilized". Perhaps we are the barbarians and the aggressors, yes? If we are to eliminate the scourge of war, then lets focus on what we can do in the spirit of friendship in the international community, rather than making constant threats and demands on dozens of countries around the world. What example can we provide as a nation to the world? Ours is that we maintain the most agressive and expensive military on the planet.
Why don't WE "disarm"? More >
|
|
|
|
7 Oct 2002 @ 15:51
More of the Same
Off the net;
From: "Mark Nemeth" Subject: Is US planning on unleashing Smallpox on it's citizens and then blaming Iraq? Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002
The marketing strategies of the military intelligence community worked wonders for the military, intelligence and security industries when they planned "Operation Let It Happen --- the 9/11 and Anthrax Attacks." The religous right, Israeli lobby and justice department have been successful too. Now the war and secrecy machine they have all built together has hit a small speed bump in "War for Middle East Oil -- Iraq Chapter" with dissent from actual citizens.
Some reports indicate over 95% of the calls to Congress have been against an invasion of Iraq, but of course the Bush team tells us that support for invasion is growing. Now that the media is reporting a BIT of the dissent, the government has sent minions out to complain how liberal the media is. Of course, this is the same media which spends the OTHER 95% selling us a war on Iraq. Are you worn down yet? "Hey over here, don't look at that. Look at this."
Why doesn't Rumsfield simply come out and say "Look. We're going to invade Iraq and then Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia, whether you like it or not. If you don't go along with it now, we're going to have to fake a smallpox attack by Saddam Hussein. Don't make us pull off another faked terror attack. We don't really care what you think, but it is a bit of trouble for us keeping those protests off TV." Of course he doesn't have to say that -- your tax dollars are going to the think tank and public relations consulting firms of the military, intelligence, Israeli lobby and GOP who can win your opinion through writing the scripts for the fake terror alerts and talking head television interviews where you form your opinions. Just turn on CNN for 30 seconds to get the message, but don't expect to hear ANY news there. The terror in this country comes from Washington, DC. That is not an opinion.
Don't think that just because dissent is gaining in popularity that the powers that be will not succeed. Their resolve will be even stronger. They have committed a crime against humanity that we as Americans cannot even fathom they could commit and they must move forward, using Anthrax, West Nile Virus, Smallpox or whatever it takes. Public opinion is a side stage game of politicians and can be easily faked through press releases and the media. While politicians do have power, they do not run this country.
Do you realize that the US government has run out of money? Stay tuned for Bush cutting domestic programs
|
|
|
|
5 Oct 2002 @ 16:06
It seems that many missed this the first time, therefore I am posting it again for all members of NCN.
"Confessions" are good for the Soul....
Love
Spells
Confessions of an American
Ex-patriot
It all began about a year ago. I had just finished watching the morning news over a cup of coffee, and nothing felt quite right. Having dutifully pecked the cheek of my wife with a kiss, I stood beside my sporty new car with mug in hand. The engine was purring away before my drive to work, and my favorite bumper sticker caught my eye. “Proud to be an American” it read. I paused for a moment, reflecting upon this. For some reason it just didn’t set well, like a lunch eaten too fast. On the way to the office I was at a loss to explain, in fact, why it began to seriously irritate me. I see statements like these on countless other cars every day, and I wondered how many people think for themselves these days. Then the question arose…What are we so proud of? As I asked myself this question over and over again, I suddenly couldn’t think of a single response. So why did I have this proclamation on my bumper, if I didn’t know what it meant? Why does everyone else seem to have one too, (or a flag or sticker in the window and yard). Do they know something I don‘t??
My day at work was pretty much the same as always, except for one thing. I seemed to raise a few eyebrows over lunch with my question, “Why are you proud to be an American”? The immediate reactions were about the same as mine. There was also obvious irritation about being asked a question to which everyone is expected to know the answer. Each person I asked had no immediate response, and their confusion reminded me of my own. But then to my relief the answer that was provided one way or another, was something to the effect of…”Well, we’re a free country. We’re a democracy, and the people decide how they want to believe, and you know, that’s a lot better than any place else in the world, right?” But my sense of relief at this answer did not last. I kept the thought that came to mind secret, which was, “Yeah, you’re free to believe whatever you want, so long as it’s politically correct”. Recalling recent events and the sorry shape the world is in right now, such responses seemed very shallow. They sounded like tape recordings being played on cue. It was a little eerie how everybody answered in the same basic way, using the same words I’d heard on television so many times. It would be interesting to know if everyone would talk differently if the television and newspapers were taking a different stand. I suspect they would be.
When I got home that evening, I made my wife nervous by talking about how the last presidential election was a farce. George W. Bush is president today, but not by a vote of the people. I said, “Yes, don’t you remember…nobody ever talks about this now, as though it’s ancient history. But George W. was put in office by the Supreme Court, while the recount of votes in Florida was actually prevented. How can a court decide who wins the presidency in a democracy? She did not seem to appreciate my new fascination with being politically incorrect, and offered no answers.
Afterwards, other questions arose in my mind. If we’re a democracy, then why is it that the important decisions of running this country and how our tax dollars are spent, are rarely a matter of public knowledge, let alone votes? Do we really live in a free country or a police state? Are we really promoting democracy around the world as the television claims we are, or are we just installing puppets who do our economic bidding? I thought of recent police suppression of demonstrations in Seattle, Portland and elsewhere. Images of pepper spray, riot gear, Nazi insignias, and countless people in prison cells filled my mind. I thought about how the Justice Department locks people up indefinitely now, without charges, even if they are American citizens. Bank accounts are frozen and lives are destroyed, just because George and company says they have “ties” to so and so. Our words speak of “nation building” but our actions speak more loudly of. nation destroying. I remembered hearing how the CIA meddles in governments the world over, staging armed rebellions and the like, yet without a single vote from the people involved. How does one establish a democracy by installing puppet dictators who are on the CIA payroll? I thought about the “Patriot Act” which makes wire taps, e-mail interception and house searches without warrants “legal“. So much for the Bill of Rights. I considered how it’s becoming more and more accepted that neighbors report each other to the government for “suspicious behavior”. What is “suspicious” behavior anyway, not wearing green on St. Patrick‘s Day?? How will this new “Homeland Security” office be used against our citizens? Perhaps it should be called “The Office of Suspicious Behavior”. I thought about college professors being fired and receiving death threats, for teaching that we should critically examine how our Bill of Rights and Constitution are being trampled on by recent legislation. We’re told, “we have to give up our liberties for the sake of our protection”. How is giving up our sovereignty and freedoms protecting us from anything, and why does one have to come at the cost of the other?
The more I thought about such questions the more uncertain I became about how “proud” I am to be an American. I certainly want to be proud, don’t get me wrong. I would like nothing better than to believe that my government is just and honest, that it represents the people who pay for its existence, (taxpayers) and which is a force for good in the modern world. Yet it’s pretty clear that our government is no longer for the people, but for money interests. Ours has become a government by and for the corporations, and as such how can it be a democracy? The general attitude today seems to be that the people exist to serve and obey government, rather than the other way around. Media exists to condition a response rather than to just inform. Isn’t a government that has this attitude a parasite?
I was raised in an upper middle class family, attended a private school for “gifted students” and have an excellent academic record. I hold Masters degrees in business administration and psychology, having firmly believed that such accreditation is essential for “success” in this wonderful, modern world of ever-increasing standards of living. I was employed for many years in a significant middle management position at an electronics firm based in Dallas Texas, making in excess of $85,000 a year. My wife and I and our two children, lived in a 5 bedroom, 3500 square foot home, in an excellent neighborhood. Yet through all these years I was never truly satisfied, and didn’t know why. I didn’t know anyone else who was satisfied either. After giving the whole thing some thought, I’ve come to the conclusion that our society is moving in the wrong direction. It glorifies greed as the supreme goal in life, and egotism as the norm for social interaction. I honestly can’t think of any other reason at this point, why anyone would even desire more than they need to live well.
But all that is changed now. The more I’ve learned in fact, the more I realize the world isn‘t going to last very much longer at this rate..
In the weeks following my initial “political incorrectness”, I did some research on the internet, and at the library. My mind was really opened by all this information, but even more so by the implications of what I was finding out. The following statistics are fully verifiable;
As of August 2001, the national debt has risen to the astronomical figure of over 6 trillion dollars. That’s 6000 billion! I asked myself, “Good God! Where has all this money been spent? If we’re supposedly the richest nation in the world, with the highest standards of living, then how can we possibly owe 6000 billion dollars?” If we’ve spent this much money, then why is the quality of life for most people continuing to decay? That sounds like monumental mismanagement to me. This debt I’m told, increases by an average of 1 billion, 111 million dollars a day! As it is now, a child born tomorrow will be born into debt to the amount of $21,438! Mind you, this figure only reflects the national debt. If one were to figure in state, county and city debts, the amount owed by a newborn today is well over $100,000! And the government has the nerve to criticize or penalize corporations for their mismanagement of funds? Almost as much money is spent on paying the interest to this incredible sum, than is spent on the military! That’s right, we all pay interest on this debt, in the form of increased taxes and loss of social programs. I read in the paper recently that budgets have been cut so drastically, that grade schools can’t afford construction paper, sufficient teachers to fill positions, or even to fix their own computers. Social welfare programs are evaporating like desert ponds in summertime. The elderly can’t afford their pills, consumer debt is at an all-time high, and thousands get laid off every quarter. Meanwhile, corporate scandals rage on, with a predictably higher level of corruption than ever before to the tune of tens of billions. Political campaigns and “political contributions” run into the tens of millions of dollars, while the local library can’t afford to buy new encyclopedias. I wonder if it ever occurred to most people that while we’re spending these astronomical sums on the military and government, we’re spending less on what matters in life. Why are all the state budgets so strapped? Because the government is no longer there for the people, that’s why.
Proud to be an American? Yeah, proud like a armed robber, leaving another bank with an armful.
There’s been a lot of talk about attacking Iraq for months, and yet another war is not far away. Why is it we always seem to be in a state of war? The “debate” rages on, not so much as to why we should attack, or what right we have playing policeman, (or God Almighty) to the rest of the world. We seem to assume that the whole world is ours to do with as we wish, while punishing those who dare to manage their own affairs. We hear congressmen screaming for blood, and a president who consults “legal advisors” as to whether or not he can go to war without the approval of congress. Of course, there is a high public approval rating for all this, if the news is to be believed. You know, it’s really fascinating to watch such events with an attitude of detachment. If for instance you had just arrived on this planet and knew absolutely nothing about “the war on terror”, how would you perceive the American attitude? Try that mental exercise and see where it leads.
In any case, we’re told by the media that it is our dire need to immediately attack Iraq in a “pre-emptive strike”, before they attack us or anyone else. Because Iraq possesses, or might possess, “weapons of mass destruction” we should do away with Saddam Hussein. Hmmm. I guess that means it’s OK for us to attack them, since we are morally perfect in every way. It’s our self-assigned role on this planet to define right and wrong, after all. So while it would be “evil” (i.e. George Bush‘s “axis of evil”) for them to attack and kill us, it is “good” for us to attack and kill them. When ’they” kill it’s called “terrorism”…when we kill it’s called “establishing democracy”. Continuing on this line of reasoning then, it’s called “murder” if anybody else kills, but if we do it, it’s called, “preventing murder”. Confused? I should hope so. If this makes sense to you I suggest you look up the word “hypocrisy“ in the dictionary.. Imagine if our legal system adopted this same reasoning. Picture the police driving around shooting and killing anyone on the street who, “looks like they might commit a crime“ or who, “appears to have an interest in buying a gun” thereby preventing murder, rape and other atrocities.. “Justice” could then be dispensed at the humble price of a bullet, rather than messy court proceedings and the silly presentation of evidence. If we have such a foreign policy, devoid of all due process, UN approval or international court proceedings, then why not adopt such a policy at home? That seems to be where we’re headed. Everyone is assumed to be guilty until proven innocent, assuming that is, you are even allowed to see a lawyer behind closed doors, after the police beat you when they’re sure no one has a camera aimed in their direction.
Also, if by merely possessing or hoping to possess, “weapons of mass destruction” a country deserves to be bombed and occupied, then almost all the countries of the world will have to be leveled flat. What about Russia, Canada, China, France or Great Britain? Hey, for that matter, what about US? Nobody has more of these weapons than we do, and nobody has sold more of them to other countries than we have. Oh, that’s right, we can do that because we’re “God’s chosen”. Isn’t this the official line? Well, what other excuse can one offer?
We spend about 300 billion dollars a year on the military budget, not counting the cost of wars and preparations for war. This is far more than any country, anywhere, in the history of this planet. That’s enough to completely transform the environment and world poverty, in one stroke. It’s not hard to see where our priorities are.
Proud to be an American? Am I proud about the bombing of Afghanistan or Iraq for weeks on end, and at the cost of a billion dollars a day? No, mass murder is not something I cherish, nor is it a hobby of mine. I’m not convinced that the Afghan people had anything to do with the events of 9-11. Nor am I convinced that Iraq deserves to be singled out for execution, as a “bad guy” with a black hat, amidst a sea of pearly white morality the world over. And what’s this about “IF” we go to war with Iraq? Don’t our warplanes bomb Iraqi targets on a regular basis, even as we speak?
Right now there is an “Earth Summit” being held in Africa by the United Nations, attended by most of the countries of the world, with the notable exception of the president of the United States. This is no surprise, since as a country, we’ve also pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol regarding greenhouse emissions, and several other environmental treaties. I guess “green” isn’t good for business. Bush and company have reduced clean air and water standards, increased logging and mining, given big businesses billions in government subsidies, (free handouts) calling that an “economic stimulus package”, while the Environmental Protection Agency receives less than one percent of the national budget. Again, it’s all a matter of greed, not concern for future generations.
Did you know that out of the 6 billion people in the world, over one billion don’t have clean water to drink, and two billion don’t have access to adequate sanitation? Four billion don’t have running water. Two billion don‘t have electricity. 1.6 billion people are poorer now than they were 15 years ago. Did you know that one billion people live on about a dollar a day, while we consider $20,000 a year underpaid? I didn’t.
Americans comprise 5% of the world’s population, and yet consume 30% of its resources. Does this make us moral and good?
A child born in the US will use 5-20 times the amount of energy of their counterparts in the developing world, by the time they live to be 75. The 20% of the world’s population which has the “highest standards of living”, consumes 85% of the aluminum and chemicals of the world, 80% of the paper, iron and steel, 75% of the timber and energy, 60% of the meat, fertilizer and cement, half the world’s fish and grain, and 40% of the fresh water. At the same time they will generate 96% of the radioactive wastes, and 90% of the ozone depleting chlorofluorocarbons. (source; Presidents’ Council on Sustainable Development). Millions of third world children die of disease and malnutrition every year, and our concern is how to make the next car payment on that luxury sedan. Meanwhile the World Bank and International Monetary fund, (in which the US plays a central role) squeezes the poor even further with “austerity measures”, so they can keep making their national interest payments.
It’s not hard to realize how the lack of the majority, is directly proportional to the relative greed of a privileged few. How many acres of forest, tons of coal and metals, megawatts of electricity and square feet of sweat shop labor, did it take to build that fancy house of mine in Texas? Or that fancy new car? How much pollution was created to make and sustain these things? I didn’t NEED a NEW car to get from one place to another, and we didn’t NEED a modern mansion to live happily. But then I guess “happy” isn’t the point any more is it? The very thought makes me nauseous in the realization that I contributed to all that, for the sake of ego. And all this is what is called “success” and “getting ahead”. It sounds more like failure and falling behind to me, when it’s considered in the light of spiritual values.
Calling this consumerist way of life, a “higher standard of living” sounds nice, but another name for it is endless selfishness. The more money people have in this culture the more they want, (and the bigger house and more expensive car that goes along with it). They complain about not having enough, no matter how much they have. But that’s not because they don’t have enough, it’s because they waste what they have. The more they have, the more they waste. And I confess that I too believed THE GREAT LIE that “more is better”. I believed that a person who owns expensive things is a better person, someone to be admired. But now I realize this is only a very shallow concept. Only a misguided and selfish person spends their whole existence accumulating more than they need, at the expense of lives and the children of tomorrow. Only a base egotist thinks that they must live to impress, while hiding their real face underneath a façade of “things“. My training in this culture made me a glutton, an egotist and a fool. I admit this to the world now. What a relief it is to be honest! My humanity as a soul, and as caring person, has opened my eyes to a more sane lifestyle.
Proud to be an American? Proud to value egotism and image, over practicality and reality? The US spends 6 billion dollars annually on education, and 8 billion for cosmetics! Any television ad should prove this point to you. People buy things not for their practicality but for their image….in other words, they aim to show off, which reminds me of small children trying to show “who’s got the best toy” in the sandbox. That’s pretty sad. If this is all life is about, then no wonder people are committing suicide in increasing numbers. Never again for me. The American Dream has become a nightmare for the world and for ourselves.
And whatever happened to just being truly happy and fulfilled, by living an uncomplicated life? Americans are, for the most part, an unhappy lot. They don’t look healthy, they thrive on soap operas and romance novels, laugh nervously, smoke cigarettes, eat junk food, talk non-stop trivia and need to take pills just to experience some sexual appetite. In fact, we’re becoming more unhappy by the minute, if one is to understand what statistics and simple observation are revealing. We’re taking more Prozac, Zantril, vallium, alcohol and a million other antidepressants than ever before, because of what they’re calling “chronic stress syndrome” or “chronic depression“. Our children are on Riddlin for the same reason, and 20 years ago that would have been unheard of. We’re a nervous and suspicious people, never missing a chance to dial 911 at the slightest provocation. We’ve got more people in prison per capita than any other country in the world, and we’re the most “medicated”. It’s politically correct to call all this a “chemical imbalance” but the fact of the matter is, our lifestyle and materialistic values are KILLING us. Our young people are suicidally depressed. Grade school children carry knives and guns to school. Do you suppose there’s something wrong with society, rather than with these kids? You bet.
We fully expect to surgically remove this stressed organ and that diseased tissue, and maybe our lives will be extended, (though not improved) another five years. And you know what? We count on being diseased and incapacitated after 30 years of hard labor in the 9-5, (or is that 8 to 6?) routine. That’s why it’s common to believe that we each need a million + dollars saved up, to survive our self abuse in the nearest rest home. We’ve become wage slaves who never question what it’s all for. What is all this “success” for anyway? So that somebody, somewhere, some day might somehow admire you as a great person, when deep down you know it’s all just a façade? We supposedly work for all these material “conveniences”, yet there is nothing convenient about living 30+ years according to a job description. We’re destroying our minds, bodies and planet to accomplish nothing more than an extended hospital stay. I’ve noticed that some people I’ve discussed these matters with call such statements “negative”. But is the truth “negative” or is it simply true? Is an ostrich safe just because it sticks it’s head in the sand?
We all sit in front of television sets like zombies. Televisions have become our closest companions, instead of other people. And people will watch anything, as an “escape”. If we’re so “successful” then why is it that all we want to do is escape? Our mental lives are like those of soap opera characters concerned only with game show trivia. Our intellectual standards have sunk to a point where no one even asks “Why”? any more, and no one questions anything. The words “truth”, “logic” “honesty” and “reality” aren’t even in our vocabulary. No one dares speak them because of the responsibility they might imply.. Everyone has “their own truth” as though truth is whatever you want to make up. We don’t really talk to each other any more. It’s only polite smiles and small talk, as though there isn’t anything more important to talk about. We care more about our petty emotional distress and what product to buy next, than we do for the planet, which is being destroyed as we speak. We care more for what goes into the engines of our cars then our own bodies, while spending more time taking care of the lawn rather than working out. Don’t you see? Image has become far more important to us than substance. Our lives are like a fancy box with exquisite wrapping paper and bows, but with nothing inside.
Wars are spoken of so casually that you’d think killing another ten thousand or so, had no more relevance than a change in the weather. Perhaps less.
Every 20 minutes the world population goes up 3500 people, one species of plant or animal is destroyed forever, and the average American gets fatter. We’ve become the Feared, rather than the Just and the Trusted. And does anybody really care? No. I’ve noticed that such topics are considered impolite. People react to such subjects like they would the plague. We’ve become the tyranny and war mongering imperialist which the writers of our Constitution sought to change. The Revolutionary War was fought over such issues, but the people have forgotten what freedom really is. They’ve traded their responsibility and freedom for a false sense of “security”. To quote a famous dictator;
“Beware the leader who bangs the drum of war,
In order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor,
for patriotism is indeed a double edged sword.
It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind.
And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch
And the blood boils with hate
And the mind has closed, the leader will have no need of seizing
the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism,
will offer up all of their rights unto the leader, and gladly so.
How do I know? For this is what I have done.
And I am Caesar.
Julius Caesar
Nobody really wants to change how they live, even though they don’t enjoy life. Why is this? Because we’re all secretly terrified at what we’ve become, and feel powerless to do anything about it. But in reality that’s no excuse. The world situation isn’t going to magically improve itself without intelligent realism. Obviously it’s time for a fundamental change of how we view life. Consumerism, militarism and materialism just don’t work. Yet I don’t personally know of even one person who will admit that there’s a problem, let alone actually change for the better.
I realized that in our culture, when someone asks “what do you do for a living?” they don’t mean how spiritually you live, how socially conscious you are or how you have contributed to the real progress of the human condition. What they mean is, “What job do you have and how much do you make?”. It all boils down to dollars. They ask this so that they can determine how worthy or unworthy you are to be in their company. If you want to understand ANYTHING about our domestic or foreign policies, just ask “Where’s the money?” That will tell you everything you need to know about when, what, how, where and why, anything occurs as it does. Young people are encouraged to go to college, but I notice that the motive for this is not personal enlightenment, the improvement of the human condition or the understanding of life. It is for one simple purpose, and that is to gain more “earning power” as a showpiece on your resume’. It’s interesting how we’ve reduced all the knowledge, spirituality and Universal Truth to the lowest common denominator…dollars earned per annum, as though God himself is nothing more than The Cosmic Banker, and Reality is summarized perfectly in the pages of tax returns.
Materialism and consumerism are eating us alive, just as we are “consuming” the whole planet. Why shouldn’t consumers, after all, not consume each other as well? In the end, that’s exactly what’s going to happen. Already the countries of the world are fighting over what little is left, while people starve by the millions the world over.
Proud to be an American? I’m not a consumer, worms are. I believe that this is a very demeaning thing to call oneself, and to call others. And I no longer worship the dollar as God. So I guess that excludes me from the club. I know, I know, it’s “unpatriotic” to talk that way, which means of course, that the truth itself has become unpatriotic. I guess the universe will just have to change to suit our whims, ay?
I’ve become disillusioned with “the American Dream” and all that it supposedly stands for. Although I care about the people, I care less and less for governments bent on conquering the world to get their oil, and anything else that isn’t tied down. I’m no supporter of unprovoked war, or war for profit. But disillusionment is good…the word means; “no more illusions”. I don’t believe in raping the earth for dollars. I no longer blind myself to the impact of lifestyle on the world situation.. I no longer believe that just because everybody else is doing it, that this makes it OK. It’s not.
After realizing all this over a period of months, a bought a packet of razor blades from the hardware store, and scraped off my “Proud to be an American” bumper sticker in disgust. I’m not proud of any of these things, and frankly, it would be an embarrassment to be identified as an American if I were traveling abroad. I quit my corporate job because I didn’t want to be a wage slave any more, for people who don’t care about anything but money. And yes, they’re being investigated by the SEC also, while my former co-workers and I lose our 401K pensions. I broke up with my wife who still, “plays the corporate game”, having realized that she loved my money more than she loved me, something that is taken as commonplace these days. When I visit my children, I try to explain to them why mommy is so stressed out, and never has any time for them, (and never did). I tell them that there’s a better way to live beyond “happy pills“, that’s natural, simple and inexpensive. I live and travel in an RV converted van now, spending not even a hundredth as much as I once did to live well.. In this way I’ve gone from “living to work” to “working to live”. The apparent irony of this is that I’ve never been happier, healthier or wiser. I only wish I’d realized all this sooner.
I refuse to pay any more taxes for endless wars, and trillions in national debt, while scoundrels sit in places of government power. Give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s? NO way. Death and destruction is what is Caesar’s, not my money or my children’s lives..
I’m taking responsibility for the truth now, rather than trying to live the absurd fantasy of the American dream. It’s like waking up from a nightmare you‘ve been trying to outrun. It feels really good. I dearly hope the reader of this message will do the same.
Yours truly,
A caring American
|
|
<< Newer entries Page: 1 ... 23 24 25 26 27 28 Older entries >> |
|
|
A Newslog for those who seek Truth for the expansion of consciousness, knowledge, wisdom and the Highest Benefit for All. Leave your egoes at the door please! |
| Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat | Sun |
|---|
| 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
| 8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
| 15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
| 22 |
23 |
24 |
25 |
26 |
27 |
28 |
| 29 |
30 |
31 |
|
|
Create your own News Log in your profile. |
|
