People generally aren't much good with facts Francis and we won't face up to the madness as long as people keep telling us it's acceptable. There is a very simple con involved, not much different from selling. It's in everything now like a disease - perhaps why we experience so much dis - ease. We still haven't caught the real terrorists, or even identified them.
On 30 Aug, 18:43, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote: > On 30 Aug., 17:51, BB47 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Yes, you have good points except that Guantanamo went on for seven > > years. There was plenty of outrage, yet It is still not over. > > I'll just quickly take up one point here. Yes, the USA needed 7 years > to tackle the Guantanamo question. In this period there were two mid- > term elections and two presidential elections - only after the last of > these did things finally start to move. The basic "facts" pertaining > to Guantanamo were generally known from the beginning. There were also > figures who presented themselves (more or less) as alternatives to > Bush's politics and measures. The US electorate decided in 2002, 2004 > and 2006 not to give them practical majorities. Like it or not, those > of us living in systems which organise themselves according to the > principle of representative democracy have to accept election results > (as long as they are generally regarded as being fair). The > unfortunate fact is that, despite the question of legitimacy regarding > Bush's first term (I'll leave it to Chris to educate us in the > peculiarities of Florida election procedures, should he wish), the > majority of those who voted in November 2004 in the USA gave Dubya a > second term. Confused, misled, lied-to, foxxed as the electorate may > have partly been, the majority of US Americans who bothered to vote > chose to ignore the alternative views being presented and confirmed > Bush, his regime and his policies for a second term. > > It took so long, because it took so long for the majority of voters in > the US to finally look at what was really going on. But, seen in a > purely US context, that was as much the responsibility of "us" (the > voting electorate, who gave Bush a continued mandate) as it was of > "them" (the politicians who carried on doing what they were doing). > Try as we may, we cannot abdicate responsibilities - or pass them on, > like a blank cheque, to someone else. > > "If we have this power you speak of, why do these things not only > > > occur, but carry on for years and years?" > > Because it often takes that long for us to realise our > responsibilities and do something about them, that's why. > > Francis --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
