you the man Edward you the man.
oh, wait damn.... the tents on fire ;^P
iggy
Edward Britton wrote:
Were it not obvious, the un-quoted text is mine :-):
May 20, 2002
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,482-301440,00.htmlTHE SOLUTION WAS OBVIOUS. BUSH SHOULD HAVE SIMPLY TOLD AMERICA TO
STAY AT HOMEBy Mick Hume
Now there's an idea! Just tell some fifty million people to stay home and wait for "a puff of smoke" from the White House. If the smoke is white, you can come out. If it's black, most likely the tent is on fire. (ROFLMAO!)
Was September 11 preventable? That is what Senator Hillary Clinton
and others in America are now asking, amid revelations that President
George W. Bush was warned shortly beforehand of possible al-Qaeda
attacks.
And as well they SHOULD ask. Government "performs" "best," when it performs at all, under the scrutiny of two-hundred and eighty-one million microscopes--or gun sights if you prefer.
The answer, of course, is yes. All the Bush Administration had to do
to prevent those terrorist attacks was to close down the entire civil
airline industry and evacuate all skyscrapers and government
buildings (or, better still, empty the cities of New York and
Washington).
OR, it could close the nation's borders to all persons from X Arab countries, and then verify the whereabouts of all foreign nationals currently here who come from these countries. This is NOT rocket science, folks.
Then it could have rounded up and interned all Muslims
and everybody of "Middle Eastern appearance" (including several
million US citizens)
OR,. . .why do I feel as if I am about to repeat myself?
and launched nuclear missile strikes against
Afghanistan, Sudan and anywhere else that might be accused of
harbouring Osama bin Laden and his agents. Job done.
Damn! NOW, you're talkin' my language! Take out Saudi Arabia (the country, not just a few token cities), Afghanistan (same here), Iraq (ditto) and maybe Egypt and Iran for good measure. Whatever is left of the "Arab" and/or "Islamic world" will be too fucking scared to breathe much less cause trouble.
Think I'm teasing? Maybe just a little. There comes a point when one can no longer reason with a radical, fundamentalist fruit pie, just as there is a point when one can no longer "reason" with a metastatic cancer which threatens the body. Cut the damn thing out now and worry about being called a monster by future generations later. The patient is dying.
If this idea sounds scary, it should. The idea is shared by an increasingly large number of American citizens. Israel may be used to daily attacks by barbarians, but the citizens of the United States are not--and we're rapidly growing very tired of Arab and Islamic shit.
Come to think of it, however, even that might not have stopped a
small group of suicide bombers, armed with little more than zealotry
and razor blades, from carrying out some similar atrocity in America.
So clearly the answer must be to take out the country of origin of each terrorist or group of same. Sooner or later, the scumbags will start to police themselves.
There is simply no way that any government can guarantee to protect
its citizens from such acts of terrorism,
Save one. Think white flash with attendant large orange cloud.
any more than it could
abolish accidents in the air or on the railways. Yet, on both sides
of the Atlantic, that is what many seem to expect of our bumbling
politicians today, especially with the benefit of hindsight. (Anybody
who imagines this is a particularly American disease would do well to
look at the political post-mortem on the Potters Bar crash.) The
present furore in America reveals little about what really happened
before the attacks on New York and Washington, but a lot about how a
culture of fear, caution and conspiracy-mongering has taken told of
Western societies post-September 11.
Save us, o Great God Government! We humbly beseech thee! (The other side of my schizoid opinion on this issue wishes for me to mention that maybe we're getting our come-uppins' for being so freaking lily-livered.)
It is particularly ironic that the Bush Administration should be
accused of knowing too much about the terrorists' plans before
September 11. The truth is that even now, months after the terrible
event, US intelligence agencies have discovered little about the
specifics of that plot.
I've thought about this as well, but such analysis--apart from the fact that US intelligence couldn't catch its ass with a flashlight--fails to consider the "sour grapes factor": the nearly obsessive need of Democrats to jump on anything Republican in retaliation for having to put up with eight years of Clinton bashing.
The same failures of intelligence-gathering
have been evident during the war in Afghanistan, where the US-led
forces have now chalked up the remarkable achievement of knowing even
less about bin Laden (which country he is in and whether he is alive)
than when the conflict began.
Where in the world is Osama Bin Hidin'? Somebody said they saw him flying over Graceland with Elvis in his new UFO. (ROFLMAO!)
President Bush has much to answer for. Rather than being criticised
for its conduct of the real "war on terrorism",
Phuck this bobbing for apples in caves, NUKE the bastards Georgie! :-)
however, the
Administration now finds itself under fire for not doing something to
exorcise the spectre of terror before September 11, on the basis of
some vague-sounding warnings and out-of-date information. These
criticisms reflect the extent to which emotionalism, suspicion and
blame have come to dominate public discussion.
Personally, I see this as the beginning of something potentially good: the end of the age of institutional trust. And it's about damn time!
We seem to find it hard to handle uncertainty these days, so that the
demand for safety has become overwhelming.
The other side of my schizoid opinion on this issue wishes to remind you of his statement above regarding lily-livered government junkies. :-)
This should have been
evident long before September 11. But the response to those attacks
has done much to intensify the culture of fear and loathing, and the
consequent drive to turn precaution into the first principle of
politics. As a result, Bush can now effectively be criticised for
failing to freeze history on September 10 as a precautionary measure.
Don't worry. Bush will figure out a way to turn this into some means to eliminate personal and civil liberties in the name of "security." The sniveling masses must be satiated even if it comes at the price of their spines.
The Bush Administration has been hoist with its own petard. Since
September 11 US authorities have done more than bin Laden to spread
fear and panic, publicising every rumour of impending terrorist
atrocities across America and the West.
And do we think this is by accident? "Just save us from 'terrorism,' Georgie, and we'll gladly take that ID chip up the ass for ya. Hell, ain't no big loss. We'd sell our souls for a few pennies saved at the market."
The Government has even asked
Hollywood film-makers to help it to imagine potential scenarios for
future attacks.
Imagine that; art imitating delusion.
Its defensive response to the latest who-knew-what
row was to announce that al-Qaeda is now planning an even bigger
attack on America � "intelligence" based on what the FBI admits
is "chatter" and "an abundance of caution".
God, I love quotation marks! :-)
The result of these
precautionary politics is to make matters worse, creating an endless
cycle of anxiety, accusations and unrealistic demands for
reassurance.
Not to mention turning a once pioneering people into a mass of quivering goo. Wherever he is, Osama Bin Laden has GOT to be laughing his ass off.
Throughout history, humanity has had to learn to live with all manner
of risks. Even after the seismic shock of September 11, it was
remarkable how quickly people got on with their lives, almost in
spite of themselves.
Gotta pay for the wide-screen TV, don't ya know. :-)
Yet our politics and culture remain dominated by
a maudlin obsession with where the next threat to our existence might
be coming from.
I'm putting my money on an asteroid. . .or maybe a solar flare. Who knows, maybe God will pull the flush handle.
Whether we like it or not, we will have to learn to manage the new
risks without being panicked into reorganising our lives around them.
Hmmm! Us, starting to trust in ourselves again? Us, starting to form true community bonds? Nah, it'll never happen. It's too damned convenient depending on the government.
That means having a debate based on the facts as we know them today,
Poof! There go the liberals. Facts? Logic? Yeah, right! :-)
rather than on far-fetched speculation and fears for the future. It
also means recognising that even the President of the global
superpower cannot stop the world because some of us want to get off.
Sniff, sniff. I feel so sorry for the quivering world. No antichrist to "save" it.
Edward ><+>
"UFOs exist. It's the Air Force that's only in science fiction."~GB+
http://www.global-connector.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/reality_pump/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
