|
|
 30 Oct 2002 @ 09:11
Message to the Troops: Resist!
David Wiggins, AlterNet
October 11, 2002
Dear Soldier of the U.S. Military:
Considering the common practice of talking about "supporting the troops" in times of hostilities, I should let you know how I feel.
With all due respect, I want you to know that if you participate in this conflict, you are not serving me, and I don't support you. Speaking for myself, I feel those who participate will be damaging my reputation as an
American, and further endangering me and my children by creating hatred that will someday be returned to us -- perhaps someday soon. Your actions will not lead to a safer world, but a more dangerous world of pre-emption
and unilateral decisions to commit mayhem. I don't support that.
This talk of 'supporting the troops' is just another method our government uses to manipulate and control us. I don't support the troops, but I certainly fear for the lives of the troops. I would support the troops
staying home. I regret that our so-called leaders have involved the troops in such a foolish, misguided undertaking. I would support the troops disobeying orders. I feel sorry for the troops' families. I would support
the troops if they realized that the best way to defend their families would be to stay alive and healthy and resist this war.
The only people the troops are possibly serving are those who agree with this act of military aggression. Perhaps you are not even serving them if they end up suffering retribution for your actions.
Oh yes, and you are serving the President, of course -- the man who avoided combat duty and deserted his National Guard unit. You are serving the man who enriched himself through crony capitalism, shady accounting practices and insider trading while running multiple corporations into bankruptcy.
You will be serving the man who lost the popular vote for president, but was handed the presidency by a Supreme Court influenced by his father and through voting irregularities in a state governed by his brother. You will be serving the man who, as President, turned the budget surplus into a
deficit and presided over the largest stock market decline since the great depression. You will be serving the man who unilaterally withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, ignored the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
and rejected the International Criminal Court and Kyoto Protocol on Global Warming.
If you are involved in an invasion of Iraq, you will be faced with some difficult ethical decisions. Are the Iraqi foot soldiers really the guilty party here? Is it reasonable to expect them to refuse orders to defend themselves against an invading force (you)? Is this conflict really necessary at all? If not, why kill these people? If it is, are there other means our Commander-in-Chief and others are not exploring that might prevent you from having to kill these people and possibly civilians too, and possibly die yourself or contribute to your friend's death? I'm glad I
don't have to make those decisions.
I feel for you and the difficult decisions you must make. I hope this note frees you of any sense of obligation to serve me you must feel, and helps you make a conscientious decision that you will be proud to accept complete
responsibility for making. Please pass the sentiments I expressed in this letter on to your fellow soldiers. More >
|
|
|
|
 24 Oct 2002 @ 03:44
Psychological Warfare Techniques
Dear UCS,
A few items of interest for you here, with regards to Iraq.
Speaking of Iraq, I'm sure you have all noticed a most curious development on the nighly news. As you will recall, we recently spent (literally) weeks listening to Bush, Powell, Ashcroft and Fleisher talk endlessly about why we need to bomb Iraq pre- emptively, "before those evil, bad, monstrous guys get us". Then we had the commentary and talk shows rehashing their words, with expert this, and retired general that, expressing mostly similar views.
Now look at what the news is filled with. Suddenly, after endless weeks of "Showdown with Iraq", there's barely a peep about it on any station. I guess we are expected to believe that the Iraq situation is no longer even newsworthy. That doesn't sound very likely or logical does it?
It's very clear that the "news" is nothing of the sort...what we see on television is a carefully orchestrated play that is designed for one thing, not to inform, but to condition a psychological response. The pattern here is the endless repeating of whatever is calculated to provoke the greatest fear and dread in the largest percentage of viewers. Now there is the "sniper thing", which dominates literally every news channel every hour of every day. You can't even get other news! Iraq is off the radar, and so is the economy, the Homeland Security legislation, Patriot Act legislation and implementation, and a whole list of social issues from medicare to taxation, that is simply unreported. It's all very, very bizarre. Talk about "psyops". We're being manipulated left and right.
Frightened people are ones which will give away more power to the government and the mega-corporations which run them. Informed ones on the other hand, govern themselves....
Spells More >
|
|
|
|
 23 Oct 2002 @ 20:36
SECURITY: BLANK IT
In the name of keeping sensitive information out of the hands of
terrorists, the Bush administration has restricted access to a broad
range of scientific research -- removing Internet links, deleting
information from websites, and even requiring federal librarians to
destroy a CD-ROM about public water supplies. The information
lockdown is making it tough for scientists to get their work done and
for the public to keep an eye on government goings-on; for example,
researchers at the University of Michigan lost access to a U.S. EPA
database that was crucial to their three-year study of
hazardous-waste facilities. Environmental organizations are dismayed
by the limited, expensive, or nonexistent access -- as are the
National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and
National Institute of Medicine. The heads of the three independent
academies sent a letter to President Bush Friday criticizing his
administration's creation of an ill-defined category of "sensitive
but unclassified" research that has been used to withdraw thousands
of reports and papers from the public eye.
straight to the source: CNN.com, Associated Press, 15 Oct 2002
straight to the source: New York Times, William J. Broad, 19 Oct 2002
More >
|
|
|
|
 20 Oct 2002 @ 15:05
From an ongoing discussion on Rishi's "Regime Change" Post...
I'd like to join in here, for a true debate....backing up statements with facts and truth. This is the true spirit of debate and one that is rarely seen. For those that believe we are involved with the rest of world for the highest benefit of all, for freedom and democracy and for the upholding of human rights...I give you the following link with evidence of some of the "terrorist" activities by our one and only...US Military.
A Chronology of U.S. Terrorism Operations
[link]
(...) This list of nations represents literally millions of human beings all over the world who have been brutally murdered - directly by the United States military/government or by its obedient proxies. Huge though the list is, there is yet more to add. But it does at least contain most of the known campaigns of American state terrorism, genocide and subversion - all of which are in the historical record for the whole world to see. God only knows what evil the U.S. government and military have committed that remains hidden. And as long as the United States remains a military power, the list of state terror victims will keep growing. HERE IS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT IS LISTED THERE... (And there is a LOT more!) 2001 - 2002 American State Terrorism of the Afghan Peoples Estimated civilian deaths: 4000-5000 people With total hypocrisy the United States military terrorized and mass-murdered thousands of innocent Afghan civilian people, supposedly in reprisal for the terror attacks of September 11. As they did in Yugoslavia and Iraq, heroic U.S. Air Force pilots murdered thousands of women and children by bombing hospitals and schools and private homes. They even bombed an Afghan wedding party. None of these innocent, civilian victims had anything whatsoever to do with the September 11 attacks. Obviously the so-called "war on terrorism" is a total sham. The real reason the U.S. is in Afghanistan is to get control of Caspian Sea oil. To get the oil out of the Caspian basin they have to run pipelines through Afghanistan. Most unfortunate for the hapless Afghan people. More >
|
|
|
|
20 Oct 2002 @ 10:46
The True face of empire.....
[link]
l#WTC HERE IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE...
1979 - 1992 American Subversion in Afghanistan Estimated civilian deaths: over 1,000,000 people From Killing Hope by William Blum: Everyone knows of the unbelievable repression of women in Afghanistan, carried out by Islamic fundamentalists, even before the Taliban. But how many people know that during the late 1970s and most of the 1980s, Afghanistan had a government committed to bringing the incredibly backward nation into the 20th century, including giving women equal rights? What happened, however, is that the United States poured billions of dollars into waging a terrible war against this government, simply because it was supported by the Soviet Union. Prior to this, CIA operations had knowingly increased the probability of a Soviet intervention, which is what occurred. In the end, the United States won, and the women, and the rest of Afghanistan, lost. More than a million dead, three million disabled, five million refugees, in total about half the population. More >
|
|
<< Newer entries Page: 1 ... 23 24 25 26 27 ... 29 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 |
|
|
Create your own News Log in your profile. |
|
