Friday, August 27, 2004

Is that with a capital "T"?

Remember those two Russian airliners that crashed the other day, almost simultaneously? According to this article (NEWS.com.au Plane crash a terror attack: authorities (August 27, 2004), Russian "authorities" are saying that at least one of the tragedies "came as the result of a terror attack".

Now, this might seem like I'm making light of a horrific accident that killed nearly 100 people, but the wording of this article begs the question: terror attack? Is that like a panic attack? Was it a case of the heebie jeebies that brought the plane down? Was the pilot startled by something?

Okay, it might seem like I'm just playing around, but seriously, WHEN are we (the Western world) going to stop using this overused boondoggle of a word "terrorism" and start saying what we actually mean: "murderous acts by fanatical Muslims"? Because that's what we mean over here in the United States.

Face it, everytime you hear the word "Terrorist" in the American media, a picture of someone who looks a lot like Osama bin laden automatically pops up in your mind's eye. You can't help it, we've all been programmed to believe that a terrorist is a suicide bomber from a Middle-Eastern country. Sure, there are one or two people in Great Britain who have a different mental image of a terrorist, but their minds are changing with every minute they watch another show on one of Rupert Murdoch's many satellite channels.

When President Bush declared the "War on Terror", EVERYONE knew he meant we were gonna start bombing in the Middle East. Even the Middle Easterners knew it. Our so-called "War" is a blatant attempt to rid the world of Muslims. Not all of them, of course, but enough so that the rest step in line and stop complaining about Israel. It's that simple.

More later...
Paul

Thursday, August 19, 2004

My problems with John Kerry.

Direct from the John Kerry for President website, his position on National Security:
“Today, we face three great challenges above all others - First, to win the global war against terror; Second, to stop the spread of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons; Third, to promote democracy, freedom, and opportunity around the world, starting by winning the peace in Iraq.”

First off, this “war on terror” is Bush’s made-up war, not a real war. Why take it on? Why not tell the truth: we have to address the fact that there are people out there that hate us, and killing them all is not an option.

Second, stopping n/b/c weapons begins at home, where they were invented for the most part, and then sold to other nations by our fantastically profitable military industries. Is he promoting a shutdown of the weapons manufacturers? Of course not, he is promoting pre-emptive military strikes against non-aligned countries that have these weapons. World police, just like Bush. JUST LIKE BUSH.

Third, what the heck is he talking about? “Winning the peace” in Iraq? And that will promote “democracy and freedom” around the world? This is Republican jingoism, but it was found on Kerry’s website! And notice the namby-pamby words used: “promote”…what, is he gonna put up posters? Maybe do some radio ads? Or…is he gonna use the military…JUST LIKE BUSH?? I could be wrong, but it seems to me the best way to promote a form of governance is to actually EXERCISE IT….yet we continue to be a republic and not an actual democracy. Do as we say, not as we do…

Again, from his website, his position on healthcare: “Kerry and Edwards will allow reimportation (sic) of safe, FDA-approved prescription drugs to give Americans access to the substantial discounts for prescription drugs in Canada…” And again, what the heck?
Why not just attack the problem where it lives, here at home….and get those greedy pharms to drop their U.S. prices to more reasonable levels. That old “price of R&D” argument is getting stale and moldy, and they know it.

Or how about this statement on energy: “The Kerry-Edwards plan will increase energy conservation and create clean, renewable sources of energy that no terrorist can sabotage and no foreign government can seize. Their plan will also save billions by cutting waste and pork-barrel spending in Washington.” Again with the terrorist line. The DNC is getting really good at this fear-monger business. Please explain what type of clean, renewable source of energy hasn’t already been created, and cannot be sabotaged. Why is he reluctant to spell things out? Are we talking legalizing hemp or what? If so, excellent! Just say so and you have my vote.

But what does clean, renewable energy have to do with waste and “pork-barrel spending in Washington”? Once again, WHAT THE HECK IS HE TALKING ABOUT?? Digging deeper in the website, I found this: “They will create an “Energy Security Trust Fund,” which will encourage the development of new clean fuels and technologies of the future, and their plan will promote the diversification of energy sources like natural gas, coal, renewable and nuclear energy.” Oh, I see now…it’s all so clear to me….NOT.

You’ve got a website; why not use it to tell people WHY THEY SHOULD VOTE FOR YOU? Instead, we get the usual vapor-policies that will go up in smoke as soon as the pledge is finished at the inauguration. Kerry represents politics as usual, and I for one am not going to accept it any longer. Either put up or shut up, Mr. Kerry.

More later…
Paul