“You have asked us to ‘Bring it on’, and so have we."

[mikelewis]

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7468.htm
I came across this video and I find it disturbs me a great deal.

I've been looking into the Iraqi Resistance lately. I wanted to see what our enemies have to say. Mostly it was curiosity and a desire to know the truth. I believe both sides are lying to me and trust none of the motivations of either party involved.

I watched this video and I find myself in need of advice. While I sympathize with my enemies position, I do not, cannot support it because it means more of my countrymen will die. I do not support violence against violence as I have seen very little evidence that this sort of resistance yields any other result but more violence. While I do not support what they are doing, I understand it. If someone breaks into my home, I would defend it with my life and kill if I must. If someone attacked my country, I would defend it with my life and kill my enemy.

To a limited extent, I address this issue everyday in my work. I install electronic security systems and I gain a lot of satisfaction knowing that I am helping to deter criminals from violating my clients’ homes. I believe in the old adage, “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” I gain satisfaction by knowing I am arming people with the means to avoid confrontation with the unknown dangers of this modern society. I have followed this path all of my life. I joined the Army when I was 20 and became an MP because I believed that in this manner I could best serve my country. I wanted to be an MP because I believed in protecting people from violence, not causing it.

I joined prepared to go to war in the first gulf war. I signed up in December of ’91 and fortunately, the war was over before I even made it to boot camp. I never fully realized what a war would entail. I simply believed that it was my duty to serve my country in a time of war.

But I didn't have the understanding I do now. This new understanding is clouded by muddied waters, propaganda and deceit. How can I justify this contradiction? The contradiction lies in the distaste for a war I allowed and even supported because I believed a liar. It also lies in the fact that my countrymen are dying at the hands of an enemy who suffers for the same lies that I believed unquestionably. I cannot support them because they want to kill my countrymen. I cannot condemn them because I would do the same if I were in their shoes.

I see two Americas, an America hijacked by fascism and a regime determined to tear apart this country and then I see an America of Americans, the people of this country that suffer at the hands of this regime. I see an America made up of people just like me. I don’t blame the Bushites, they have been duped as I had been duped and because they do not know what they have done, so to me they are innocent.

So how do I come to terms with these loyalties, my loyalty to righteousness and my loyalty to country? How do I strike back at the heart of tyranny without harming the innocent human shield that they hide behind? I believe the time is coming when that cloud will lift and a choice will be made for me, I can smell blood in the air and I grow fearful for the future. I don't know where this is going to lead.

I hear the words of my enemy and I know he will never quit killing my countrymen. This makes him my enemy even though I understand and sympathize with why he commits these acts. How do I come to terms with this? What can I do? To support him, I must betray the sacrifice of my countrymen and that I would never do. So what do I do?

I oppose this war with every fiber of my being but I am paralyzed by this conflict of emotions. I wish I hadn't listened to my enemy, I wish I didn't understand why he is waging war against my countrymen. I wish my enemy would lay down his weapons and seek another path but he knows this regime will never veer from the path of war against him. So the fight goes on... but the question remains, what do I do?

[Fridays Child]

1. Bushites are enablers and co-conspirators. Bushites voted for Bush, and...

...ignorance is not an adequate defense of their behavior. As for the reason your countrymen are dying, look to the murderous regime in Washington, and lay the blame squarely where it belongs.

Peace.

[mikelewis]

4. I do lay blame on Bush but it doesn't just rest on thier shoulders

It rests on all of our heads because it was done in our name, because they derive the power to do these things by through the power we have given them. If the power of this country derives from the will of the people, even as we know that will has been subverted, we are responsible.

No outside power has the ability to break the might of our country. And I pray they will never try. It is our responsibility to set this right and the first step is to acknowledge our responsibility. It is our sons and daughters who have gone to this illegal war. It is our money that funds the machine that kills and oppresses. It is by succumbing to fear that we allowed these things to happen and continue. There are those who knew better but thier voices were drowned out by the drums of war and the lack of adequate leadership to match this growing danger.

I believe in Democracy and so I must accept the responsibility the charge these priciples have laid on me. If a tyrant has taken control, it's becuase we did not stop him. If we have been led down a path of evil, it is because we had millions of people who are willing to follow.

I'm not using the term Bushites to label those involved in the conspiracy, I am referring to those who still sleep. Many of these people are good people and though thier ideas differ from mine, thier beliefs are just as valid. I think they simply just don't know and have been hijacked by propaganda and fear. I can't blame them for thier ignorance when I suffered the same affliction. If I condemn them, I can't have hope of thier awakening.

[Fridays Child]

9. We are both calling the same group "Bushites," and I maintain...

...that their ignorance does not excuse their behavior. What they choose to believe is informed by hatred and bigotry. I am not sympathtic to them.

I will accept responsibility for what my country has wrought abroad but Bushites are to blame for it, as are the members of the B*sh administration and Congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle who refused to take a stand against Bush's imperialist juggernaut.

So, for me, there is a distinction between blame and responsibility.

[demo dutch]

16. Bushites would have been able to correct their first mistake

by overwhelmingly voting against him in 2004! It's because of them that we're stuck with this regime until 2008.

[mikelewis]

17. I tried to answer that in post 14

[applegrove]

2. Baathists are not your friends. You led Cheney dance you outside of

yourself if that is the case.

Hussein was always a monster. He was Nixon's, Cheney's, Bush Sr.s, Rumsfield's, Reagan's and Wolfowitze's monster in the 1980s. They lost control over him (or realized they never controlled him) and it became time to take him out under the auspices of WMD. They could have gone in under 'human rights abuses' but that is not the precedent they wanted to start. They wanted to start the pre-emptive...they have weapons I don't like and could be a threat some day rule.


Proved wrong already..they will never be right about the reasons for going to war. Cause they lied. They were wrong.

Are Iraqis better off without the American back strongman? Yes. Do we want to Iraqis to loose their new found freedom? No.

Will we have fun watching the Saddam Hussein trial being reported on TV where ever 3rd tactic Saddam used will be just like something in the bag of tricks Karl Rove has? Yes.

Relax? The reasons for going to war were wrong. Bush will always be wrong about this war. He may try to change the reasons mid-way through to 'human rights' to make it all work out. Nobody in the Middle East buys it - why should you? They have lived with the Hypocrisy of Rumsfield, Cheney, Wolfowitz, etc. for 30 years. They know hypocrisy you have no control over. If they jump at democracy it is because it is now allowed (and they know it could easily just be a window because the same lot didn't not let democracy be before). Saddam will testify to Cheney or Rumsfield asking him and supplying him with chemical weapons for 'practice'.

I, personally, cannot wait for this war in Iraq to end so I can witness the Saddam trial and see how hard and long the Bush Administration suffers for it!

Let us all hope for peace in the middle east. Saddam's trial will either involve complete blackouts in the continental USA or there will be tons of things about Cheney, Rumsfield, Wolfowitz, Bush Sr., Reagan, Nixon, etc to come to the surface.

Remember there are three types of countries in the world:

1) democracies that will dump any leader who made friends with Bush (Britain, Spain, Mexico, Italy).

2) strongman or elite run countries who are friends with Bush but whose people now want democracy (Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, etc.)and regime change

3) Poland.

[mikelewis]

5. I don't believe they are my freinds

I know they are lying but I also understand what they are doing. I understand how they are gaining support and what motivates them to continue this insurgency. I don't believe they are noble warriors fighting for god and country but I do believe some, if not most who follow them do believe this.

I hope your right about the trial. I don't believe any of this will come back to haunt Bush because the truth will be spun out just as it has been done for the past 20 years. I hope I'm wrong. I would truly love to see some retribution but as the months wear on, that hope is fading.

[applegrove]

11. Twenty years ago the fundamentalist Islamist (Arab) decided to

use terrorism to get control of Arab countries and then once they had control over the nations, add them all together and create one super-state. The Taliban was the first model (though Afghanistanis are not Arab). Iran was also a model..but they are neither Arab or Sunnis and wanted nothing but Iran and less USA hegemony than the Shaw, and the Iranians still wanted their women and girls to go to school. So no connection there.

For years, these Sunni Arab Fundamentalists did terrorist attacks inside the Arab Countries. Something funny happened. Nobody jumped on board and signed up! Amazing eh? (goes to how nuts these fundamentalists are if they though just blowing up Lebanese Civilians would get Lebanese followers). So bin-Laden, taking a page out of how the Americans baited the Soviets in Afghanistan and did the same to the US (Embassy bombings, etc... leading up to 9/11). With America as the enemy... more recruits would be guaranteed. And naturally that is what is going on... but as soon as the USA can get out of Iraq, the sooner the bin Laden Sunnis insurgents (former baathists likely have found religion) will end up back where they started... bombing Arab civilians and attack Arab civilian government.

For sure the reason why these nut-bombs find any followers at all is because there is a lack of democracy & distribution of wealth within many Arab ME nations (and USA, Britain, etc. can take some responsibility for the support of strongmen in exchange for good Oil deals... and thus the flip in policy for Rumsfield, Cheney, Bush family, Wolfowitz). While bin-Laden was running training camps in Afghanistan..the bratty kids from families all over the ME went there to train. (In the past it was always upper middle class kids who have been the terrorists - the truly poor are busy trying feed their families and this likely is the case here too). Many 'brats' just went home and participated no further. Only a very few became bin-Laden operatives.

The goal of these Islamist fundamentalists is to return people (women) to severe Sharia law where they have no rights, no school, no say, etc. Also to turn all Arab nations into one big country (that in and of itself is a legitimate thing... if not for the human rights abuses inherent in fundamentalist Islam, and the terrorism to accomplish this goal... it would not be so bad). Geopolitically this is bad for access to oil and may be an equally motivating reason for neocons. Democracy is the new policy of the USA (it divides and conquerors). Democracy (plurality) defeats tribalism. Human rights always follow the situation of the woman.. and the situation was not pretty under the Taliban. So Democracy defeats transnational tribalism.

Makes you wonder why the neocons and Karl Rove are encouraging tribalism within the USA. Naturally, tribalism in the USA undoes the democratic plurality. Funny that the ME gets democracy as intended outcome and policy... just as Americans loose theirs. Not funny, actually. But something to think about and teach each other about.

Read Gwynne Dyers book for some of this background. (Dyer himself hopes that the USA fails in Iraq in order to save multilateral-ism).. but it would be enough for Bush to fail in 'undoing America's democratic government'. I'd rather see Bush get hit on that. Iraqis have put up with enough **** already. Time for Americans to look into their hearts and hit back at Bush themselves. That is reality: the problems and bleeding should be within the USA.. because that is where it starts. I'd love to see Bush intellectually eviscerated in the years to come. Undoing a bad policy does not make you a hero. It is a band-aid over what corporate hegemony has done in the ME. The disaster that was 'just' averted because USA policy was anti-democratic. I cannot wait for the non-kool Aid drinkers to write the history.

[mikelewis]

14. 5,000 Roses

It was our policy that began and fueled the fundamentalist policy in Afghanistan. This was inspired by a plan by Bryzneski, Carter's National Security Advisor. The plan was to replace the communist government of Afghanistan with a fundamentalist government that would harass the Soviets and threaten to lure the lower Soviet states into revolution. The lower Soviet Union was and is comprised of countries that are predominantly Muslim. We used the fervor of these fundamentalists to control the civilian population and inspire the foot soldiers to fight for thier God and people. This plan ultimately succeeded and led to the collapse of the Soviet Empire.

This was a grand deceit that shows just how powerful our clandestine operations can be. On the surface, we appeared to distant from the events but in reality, we created the conditions that destroyed an empire. I even question the validity of the hostility we held with Iran. On the surface, we disliked the ruling Mullahs because they took our people hostage and displaced thier "rightful" ruler. I happen to think this was deceptive as well. We know for a fact that this did not stop us from trading with them in arms and equipment. That was the basis of the Iran Contra scandal. The presence of a fundamentalist state on the southern border of the Soviet Union was one of our goals at the time for Afghanistan. Why did it not apply to Iran? The same situation existed in Pakistan to a limited extent. We had placed sanctions on the Pakistanis numerous times but we did not halt our covert operations with them. In fact, more recently, the leader of the alleged perpetrators of 9/11, Atta, were partially funded by a direct order from the head of the ISI. So the appearance that we are trying to defeat the fundamentalist movement seems completely bogus. If anything, we are actively strengthing this movement.

The same holds true for our country. Ruling by consent is rife with problems and it is difficult to retain your power when it is answerable to the people over which you rule. The rise of the fundamentalist christian movement allows the Right Wing Conservatives to use the implied consent of God to rule over man, not the will of the people. To a leader, this is a desirable means to rule as it guarantees his right to hold power. Of course they want theocracy. But how do they instigate this sort of rule?

Enter Osama bin Laden and 9/11. Prior to 9/11 Bush began an aggressive Faith-based initiative that was unprecedented in it's scope. It empowered religious leaders and offered huge incentives for Americans to participate in these organizations. These initiatives where seen as proof of his commitment to helping people of faith and proving that he was in fact a spiritual as well as secular leader. After 9/11, the hero of the churches stood before us and proclaimed a Crusade against the fundamentalists and the regimes that harbor them. He was seen as a holy crusader and that image has yet to fade in many of thier eyes even though he recanted those words.

I don't believe we were attacked by Al Qeada on 9/11. Go to the September 11 discussion forum and you can find out my views on that. But whether or not Osama orchestrated the acts on 9/11 are irrelevant. The outcome was the same. People began to look to thier government for protection against this illusive enemy. They would also find strength in religion since not only were we allegedly attacked by terror, we were attacked by an extremist religion. Since the U.S. is predominantly christian, this would induce people to turn to religion as an answer and as a means of salvation when they are confronted by the possiblity of random death from terror. This is why these RW radio hosts like Dennis Pregar and Glenn Beck have risen to such popularity. That's why morality and values has become such an issue with the American people. When people feel helpless, they turn to God and country, and our government knew this. It's a natural reaction. It was also a desired reaction.

The Middle east is not "getting democracy". The middle east is getting "theocratic democracy". Big difference. Who was it that made these election in Iraq happen? Bush? No, it was Ayatollah Sistani and his call for the Shia to vote in the elections. With out his participation, the election would have been dead in the water. Isn't it odd that it would take the theocratic rulers to call for democracy before the people would vote? Isn't it odd that the political parties divisions are characterized by their particular religeous sects? In Iraq, it's not the Democrats versus Republicans, it's the Shia and Kurds against the Sunni. Whatever they call themselves is ultimately irrelevant and is mere window dressing. If there is no separation of church and state, the church can claim that God wants them to vote one way or the other and the people, if they do not agree, have a choice to either vote thier conscious or defy the implied will of God.

In many respects, that was the decision millions of Americans were faced with in our November 2004 election. By the claim that "God wants me to be President" and hearing that echoed by the evangelical churches, what true choice were the people presented with? You either vote for Bush or you defy the Lord. What we are seeing built in the country is a thoecratic democracy and it is growing in power everyday.

No greater example illustrates this point better than the Terri Shaivo case. By invoking the religious and moral imperitave that we save a brain dead woman from a brutal godless death, they have energized thier religious base. They don't care what the rest of us think or the fact that they are being hypocritical. That is irrelevant. It was by invoking God and following his calling that they decided to act. Of course this was complete bullshit and we know that. The problem is, the Fundies don't. They can't understand that they are being lead around by thier religion by politicians and charlatans who seek to use them to gain more power/money/prestige.

Your hope for a return for a true Democractic Republic where honorable intentions and respect for the individual may never be realized. Our unbridaled capitolism stands in the way of our desire for equality. Capitolism requires competition and revolves around the notion, "to the victor goes the spoils" and "win at any cost". But for it to flourish, it needs to be checked by a system of government that respects the rights of the individual. Maybe that will never be realized, maybe that utopia can't exist outside the realm of theory. It doesn't mean we don't fight to make it so but it takes will power and a belief that it can. It takes compassion and understanding. It takes knowledge and reward for those who struggle for this end. But ultimately, it takes courage and passion. I can see it happening now. Look at Barbara Boxer. On Valentine's Day, she recieved 5,000 roses from people who wanted to thank her for embodying the very spirit of what a representative democracy should be. 5,000 roses is a start, it's a good start and it gives me hope for this country and my family.

I pray our neighbors in Iraq have people who embody the same spirit we see in Barbara Boxer. I believe that if they do, they can lead thier people away from the destruction and designs of greed and provide them a better life. I feel pity for my enemy because they face an evil that does not sleep, that hungers for more and more with no clear idea on what it is even hungry for. I feel pity for my enemy because in his words, I hear myself. But more than all, I feel pity for my enemy because he thinks that to defeat his rivals means he must act like his rivals. He believes he must hunger for power and strive to rule. If he finally succeeds, his soul will be lost and in the end, he will truly be my enemy.

[applegrove]

18. I agree and disagree. I say take a few steps back.

It was our policy that began and fueled the fundamentalist policy in Afghanistan. This was inspired by a plan by Bryzneski, Carter's National Security Advisor. The plan was to replace the communist government of Afghanistan with a fundamentalist government that would harass the Soviets and threaten to lure the lower Soviet states into revolution. The lower Soviet Union was and is comprised of countries that are predominantly Muslim. We used the fervor of these fundamentalists to control the civilian population and inspire the foot soldiers to fight for their God and people. This plan ultimately succeeded and led to the collapse of the Soviet Empire.

This was a grand deceit that shows just how powerful our clandestine operations can be. On the surface, we appeared to distant from the events but in reality, we created the conditions that destroyed an empire. I even question the validity of the hostility we held with Iran. On the surface, we disliked the ruling Mullahs because they took our people hostage and displaced their "rightful" ruler. I happen to think this was deceptive as well. We know for a fact that this did not stop us from trading with them in arms and equipment. That was the basis of the Iran Contra scandal. The presence of a fundamentalist state on the southern border of the Soviet Union was one of our goals at the time for Afghanistan. Why did it not apply to Iran? The same situation existed in Pakistan to a limited extent. We had placed sanctions on the Pakistanis numerous times but we did not halt our covert operations with them. In fact, more recently, the leader of the alleged perpetrators of 9/11, Atta, were partially funded by a direct order from the head of the ISI. So the appearance that we are trying to defeat the fundamentalist movement seems completely bogus. If anything, we are actively strengthing this movement.I have to agree with you on the USA luring Soviets into Afghanistan with the thinking "if we could only give them a Vietnam..they would be destroyed". Where I do not agree with you is how the USA is responsible for 9/11. Bin Laden and his pals were having trouble getting the whole Islamist thing going (somehow bombing civilians did not work). So of course Osama was taking notes on what the USA did in Afghanistan and said: "if we can bait the USA then we can make our movement really grow and we will have an common enemy". So Al Quaeda did that all throughout the 1990s cumulating in 9/11. The USA is responsible because they funded it 1) oil money has been fund terrorists for generations as the American policy of supporting government/elites/strongmen who give good Oil deals..also means the elites end up with the other big of the Oil wealth and it was not disseminated amongst the population. So the fact that Saddam Hussein had enough money to pay off suicide bombers in Palestine during sanctions... and that Saudi Arabia had so much excess money floating around that the unfavoured son of a construction magnate had a few Billion extra dollars... these are all results of the past American Policy. Democracy will do away with the excess money (as it goes to schooling and is more fairly distributed 2) The fact that democracy was even discouraged in places like Iran (the first PM was pushed out of office and the Shaw put in his place by USA/Britain in the 1950s) just doubled up the need for the poor in the Middle East to stay tribal. Iatola Kromeni lived in England for god's sake until the Shaw was deposed. The fact that Iranians are not Arabs so that their own brand of Islamist fundamentalism didn't transfer to the rest of the Middle East (only Iraq has enough Shiites)did stop Arab Islamist Reactionary Fundamentalist from being inspired and coming up with a transborder organization.

On both accounts.. Oil money and anti-democracy foreign policy of the USA (both are really the same thing) bin Laden's group was created and tried one way and another to get new members. We see that the Bush attempt to stop the transnational Islamist Fundamentalist tribe is now being stopped with Democracy. Democracy is the opposite of tribalism. So the current Bush (finally on the liberal bandwagon hoping for democracies to break out)policy is like that of the Liberals but not for reasons of altruism.. but for reasons of national security and foiling Arab Islamist Fundies attempts to go global.

It is fair to say that Bush family & Cheney, Rumsfield, Wolfowitz, Reagan, perhaps Carter, Nixon, etc. were all responsible. In fact right after the first Gulf War after Bush Sr. had not deposed Saddam Hussein, right after that was when the neocons realized the equation (lack of democracy = tribalism & terrorisms & less secure source of Oil & Oil wealth). In a sense they all realized their horrid, horrid mistake (controlling the Oil in the ME had stopped the progression of democracy and started the Islamist fundie movement). So when Powell said to Bush "you brake it you own it" it very well must have meant something quite different to Bush than we assumed the first time we heard that quote. Bush & his father & the whole gang.. had already destroyed any chance at peace in the Middle East by allowing for rich strongmen, elites.. and excess cash in the hands of Arabs. Even before Bush was elected they had a "correction" to make.

So they just exploited bin Laden's simple attack on America. They jumped right into the game that bin laden wanted.. but in actual fact they already knew that they had to turn the worm where democracy and the Mid East were concerned. The damage (creation of bin Laden & his ilk) had already been evident.



The same holds true for our country. Ruling by consent is rife with problems and it is difficult to retain your power when it is answerable to the people over which you rule. The rise of the fundamentalist Christian movement allows the Right Wing Conservatives to use the implied consent of God to rule over man, not the will of the people. To a leader, this is a desirable means to rule as it guarantees his right to hold power. Of course they want theocracy. But how do they instigate this sort of rule?

Enter Osama bin Laden and 9/11. Prior to 9/11 Bush began an aggressive Faith-based initiative that was unprecedented in it's scope. It empowered religious leaders and offered huge incentives for Americans to participate in these organizations. These initiatives where seen as proof of his commitment to helping people of faith and proving that he was in fact a spiritual as well as secular leader. After 9/11, the hero of the churches stood before us and proclaimed a Crusade against the fundamentalists and the regimes that harbor them. He was seen as a holy crusader and that image has yet to fade in many of their eyes even though he recanted those words.

I don't believe we were attacked by Al Qeada on 9/11. I am sorry you do not accept that basic fact. I know it too be true. But I can understand what it is like to not know what to believe because your leader George Bush is a big fat liar and his pals are sociopaths. If I were you I would stick to "I don't know what to believe". bin Laden had everything to gain from 9/11.. he just didn't know how fancy the USA weapons were and how can you fight a drone? And he probably never thought that US Oil would give up its 'fancy deals' with the elites because he would know very well how much fun money was. But he didn't guess that militarily the USA would be more interested in long term access to Oil than to the deal. If all you want is access then democracy will deliver that (anytime the Islamist take over and try and merge with their neighbor into some great Islamist Oil rich empire... you go in and slap them down for hurting 'democracy'. In a sense many small democracies are a way to divide and conquer and keep the Islamist Empire from ever being. Bin laden just misjudged. Go to the September 11 discussion forum and you can find out my views on that.I will never go to the Sept 11 forum because I would find it heartbreaking to see people so traumatized they cannot get past the initial shock & denial But whether or not Osama orchestrated the acts on 9/11 are irrelevant. The outcome was the same. People began to look to their government for protection against this illusive enemy. They would also find strength in religion since not only were we allegedly attacked by terror, we were attacked by an extremist religion. Since the U.S. is predominantly Christian, this would induce people to turn to religion as an answer and as a means of salvation when they are confronted by the possibility of random death from terror. This is why these RW radio hosts like Dennis Pregar and Glenn Beck have risen to such popularity. That's why morality and values has become such an issue with the American people. When people feel helpless, they turn to God and country, and our government knew this. It's a natural reaction. It was also a desired reaction.

The Middle East is not "getting democracy". The Middle East is getting "theocratic democracy". Big difference. Who was it that made these election in Iraq happen? Bush? No, it was Ayatollah Sistani and his call for the Shia to vote in the elections. Also Arafat's death and the car bomb in Lebanon. Also just the fact that the USA foreign policy is announced as Democracy Democracy Democracy... I mean the people in the Middle East have been batted about by American Hypocrisy on Democracy for 50 years (before that the lack of democracy - called colonialism was overt). If I had lived under hypocritical asshole American Policy and it suddenly was announced that a democracy I tried would not be interfered with.. I would jump for joy and get a flag too. With out his participation, the election would have been dead in the water. Isn't it odd that it would take the theocratic rulers to call for democracy before the people would vote? Isn't it odd that the political parties divisions are characterized by their particular religious sects? In Iraq, it's not the Democrats versus Republicans, it's the Shia and Kurds against the Sunni. Whatever they call themselves is ultimately irrelevant and is mere window dressing. If there is no separation of church and state, the church can claim that God wants them to vote one way or the other and the people, if they do not agree, have a choice to either vote their conscious or defy the implied will of God. I feel that the whole religious thing in the USA is just tribalism. If the hierarchical tribes are fighting all day long..then they do not get together and vote as a plurality and kick you neocon ass to high hell. The reason for the laws on church & state being loosened.. is just to make for better petty boundary wars between all the tribes. That and the teaching of adolescent thinking to USA population (it is okay to scapegoat, bait, mob, target, hurt, invade the space & rights of) the other..because you are not an adult so you do not have to take responsibility for how your behavior makes the 'other' feel. Patriotism is a tribe too. Karl Rove and the neocons want as much (what they consider to be petty) & as many petty issues (local, personal) bumping up against each other and keeping the masses busy..so that they can get on with the important work of militarization, wealth sharing amongst their small elite and empire building.

In many respects, that was the decision millions of Americans were faced with in our November 2004 election. By the claim that "God wants me to be President" and hearing that echoed by the evangelical churches, what true choice were the people presented with? You either vote for Bush or you defy the Lord. What we are seeing built in the country is a thoecratic democracy and it is growing in power everyday. personally I thin the ones at the top are very aware that they are using the religious to build the coalition they need to get and maintain power. That is why they do not 'solve' the issues of the religious right..they need those wedges to win another election or two. It is why they had to respond so eagerly to the TS death watch. They had some religious ass to kiss as the religious right was beginning to suspect their chump ness: none of their issues were on the GOP agenda despite Bush having been handed all three levers of government.

No greater example illustrates this point better than the Terri Shaivo case. By invoking the religious and moral imperative that we save a brain dead woman from a brutal godless death, they have energized their religious base. They don't care what the rest of us think or the fact that they are being hypocritical. That is irrelevant. It was by invoking God and following his calling that they decided to act. Of course this was complete bullshit and we know that. The problem is, the Fundies don't. They can't understand that they are being lead around by their religion by politicians and charlatans who seek to use them to gain more power/money/prestige.

Your hope for a return for a true Democratic Republic where honorable intentions and respect for the individual may never be realized. Our unbridled capitalism stands in the way of our desire for equality. Capitalism requires competition and revolves around the notion, "to the victor goes the spoils" and "win at any cost". But for it to flourish, it needs to be checked by a system of government that respects the rights of the individual. Maybe that will never be realized, maybe that utopia can't exist outside the realm of theory. It seems as if the 2% of the population who are soulless sociopaths finally got together and want to remake the nation in their own image. It is not a human image. And the evil do not get to keep control. humanity always wins out. But enough elite’s money was thrown at the issues of elites never getting real control in the USA.. and they came up with what they came up with.. a coalition of the selfish and the power-hungry. When these freaks are ousted and the air finally clears..we will have to take a good long hard look at how it happened and how the elites have to be monitored the world over.. or they will turn us all back into serfs. It is just the nature of the elites to do that. So we have more work. But I must say.. it has gotten the whole world thinking. We definitely need to put something inside of corporations to tie them to humanity. Some structural change needs to happen there.It doesn't mean we don't fight to make it so but it takes will power and a belief that it can. It takes compassion and understanding. It takes knowledge and reward for those who struggle for this end. But ultimately, it takes courage and passion. I can see it happening now. Look at Barbara Boxer. On Valentine's Day, she received 5,000 roses from people who wanted to thank her for embodying the very spirit of what a representative democracy should be. 5,000 roses is a start, it's a good start and it gives me hope for this country and my family.

I pray our neighbors in Iraq have people who embody the same spirit we see in Barbara Boxer. I believe that if they do, they can lead their people away from the destruction and designs of greed and provide them a better life. I feel pity for my enemy because they face an evil that does not sleep, that hungers for more and more with no clear idea on what it is even hungry for. I feel pity for my enemy because in his words, I hear myself. But more than all, I feel pity for my enemy because he thinks that to defeat his rivals means he must act like his rivals. He believes he must hunger for power and strive to rule. If he finally succeeds, his soul will be lost and in the end, he will truly be my enemy.
look forward to the Saddam Hussein trial(s). For sure there will be witnesses who talk about torture and human rights abuses. I will have my TV zapper in hand for when it is too painful to watch. But just as many will talk about the emotional exhaustion of having a sociopath in power, the constant propaganda, the coercion, the created adolescence, etc And that will remind Americans of the current WH. And there will also be discussion about what Rumsfield et all were doing with Saddam as his friends for such a long time. So we have that to look forward to. Saddam really was a creep & a monster. But so much of what he does will mirror in the current WH. So we will then be able to perhaps look to our freeper neighbours and say: "doesn't that sound familiar" "Rumsfield wanted Saddam to practice with the chemicals?" or whatever comes out of the trial. Bells of recognition will be ringing all over America. You are all learning. As hard as it is. We are learning how to step back and look at the larger patterns of the liars. Forget the details.. they will trick you with that all the time. But the patterns.. they cannot hide from. Because it is in the nature of patterns..that there is repeated evidence. That is where you my friend should plant yourself. It is also less emotionally exhausting to grieve the losses so that you can let go of (the loss of the way of life you were proud of) and step back. If you were to be following the details of TS too close you may not have noticed that it was a complete Conservative back flip..and you could end up running around saying you are for small government..when that is just a knee jerk reaction to the TS thing. Really they were just being the usual WH bullshit artists. So you don't want to be following the details too close. Dick Cheney will dance you outside of your own dam self if you look too closely into his eyes. You'll find yourself outside in the snow.. saying "how'd I get outside of who I was and what my values are". Stick with the big picture.

That seems to be where so many in the DU are these days. Stepping back and saying..okay I will be smart about which fights I invest in. I will look to my leaders and look to the patters to know what is going on.

[Al-CIAda]

3. You've got to be kidding.

"I see an America made up of people just like me. I don’t blame the Bushites, they have been duped as I had been duped and because they do not know what they have done, so to me they are innocent. "


The willfull ignorance and despicable arrogance of such people make them complicit. By virtue of their support they are guilty and party to these crimes.

[mikelewis]

6. "There are none so blind, as those who would not see..."

[TheWatcher]

7. And pray tell what is it we are supposed to see Mike?

How is it that you are wiling to let the Bushbots have a pass on this?

They supported the war and Bush and they still support DESPTE all of the revelations that have come out about NO WMD's, the lies that were told to get us into this war, etc., etc., etc.

[mikelewis]

8. Because they don't know about the revelations

They're sheep...

How many of them still think Iraq was responsible for 9/11. How many of them believe that there really was WMD's but they were spirited out of the country.

Hell, my own sister believes this. I try like hell to convince her but she says I'm just trying to stir up shit. She thinks it's a Democtrat/Republican issue. She's not evil, just blind.

You're not blind, not to the issue of the truth about what's going on at least. But you're rage at the ignorance of these "sheeple" blinds you in other ways. You seek to hold people accountable for things they don't understand or aren't willing to face. When I first found a link that said Bush was responsible for 9/11, I had a choice to pursue the truth or accept what the TV was telling me. I chose the truth but to do that, you have to accept some difficult realities that a lot of people aren't willing to face. You have to face the fear that these allegations inspire. That's not an easy thing to do for a lot of people.

The same applies for the insurgents who are fighting for God and Country in Iraq. The leaders are seeking power but the foot soldier is seeking righteousness. They are blind to the power grab so they continue to fight. These are the ones I sympathize with. They fight because they believe they are fighting for a cause.

[TheWatcher]

10. Fair enough

I think we all can agree the whole sordid mess needs to end.

immediately.

I would elaborate more but I need sleeep.

Don't give up on your sister, and don't give up period, Mike.

The Truth about what has happened is very difficult thing to face. When I accepted what I beleive to be the Truth about 9/11 it was December of that year. It has been a very lonely and harsh road for the informed.

This country is about to face it's darkest hour, and I am not going to sugar coat this. It might not survive. But I can tell you this. I will never give in to these people, even if there is no hope.

[cestpaspossible]

12. I don't agree.

I understand your willingness to give your sister a pass, after all, she is your sister.

But she's not my sister. I don't agree that she's 'just blind'.

I don't know her, but I'm willing to bet she is neither blind, nor stupid, nor ignorant. Yes, I do seek to hold people accountable for things they aren't willing to face. That willful act is evil when it is evil that they are not willing to face.

[mikelewis]

15. The Spiral of Silence

How do I force her to see when she does not believe her lying eyes? When I tell her the truth, she doesn't believe me because she is being told something else. She believes strangers rather than her own blood. The talking heads and radio programs tell her and the rest of America lies and they don't see the truth. Even when you tell them the truth, they don't believe you because you are contradicting what the vast majority of people believe.

I posted a thread a while back ago that explains why I think this is happening.


Reposting:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=81767

An open discussion on how to beat the election clock and defeat the Spiral

At Half Price Books, I picked up a copy of The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. I love this book, it's like reading about the devil. I picked it up again because of this election and more importantly, the events that have transpired over the past few years.

The thing that has puzzled me about the election fraud stories is the lack of main-stream media coverage. One would think that stories such as those from Blackboxvoting.org and others would have created a media frenzy the likes of which this country has never before seen. But it has not. In fact, the only coverage seems to try to label those who are searching for answers as "tin-foiled hat" wearing conspiracy theorists. It begs one to consider what the people in Germany must have been saying as Hitler rose to power. I know, for some, equating Bush to Hitler is a vulgar stretch of the imagination. For others, it rolls off the lips as easy as strawberry wine. Regardless, the concern people felt about Hitler's rise to power was as real as many people's concerns about Bush's ascension to power. If this election was rigged and if the other issues that people feel Bush is responsible for are true, then why has there not been more of a public outcry? Despite the lack of media coverage, why aren't people rising up in massive demonstrations to force our government to reveal the truth? Why is there no public outcry for justice in our voting system? Are the people so complacent that they will allow the democratic process to be undercut by fraudulent actions?

The answer to this question is the same as it was 60 years ago. The Spiral of Silence is the name of the phenomenon in which the people of Germany experienced during Hitler's rise to power. The number of people who know that the 2000 election was rigged and the growing revelation that this 2004 election was rigged is settling into the minds of the people and yet, where are the patriots, the protestors, the "voice of one calling in the desert"?

The true enemy of our country is the Spiral of Silence.
http://www.colostate.edu/Depts/Speech/rccs/theory09.htm

In this article, the key concepts of the Spiral of Silence are:

Central Assumptions:

One's perception of the distribution of public opinion influences one's willingness to express opinions.

The spiral of silence demonstrates why people are unwilling to express their opinions (publicly) when they are not believed to be in the majority.

People feel an increasing pressure to conceal their views and opinions when they believe they are in minority.

Individuals perceptions of the opinions of others is a critical factor in determining their willingness to express those opinions.


It is these factors that compel complacency and will allow, if not combated, the perpetuation of this fraudulent regime. But the question is, how do we combat such a powerful natural reaction?

Many believe that the media is the solution to this problem. That by exposing these issues to the major news publications and television shows will cause them to eventually realize that there is a problem and finally report what we have discovered. Unfortunately, this is doomed to failure. The reason is that the media is responsible for perpetuating this Spiral of Silence.

Media's Effect on the Spiral of Silence:
Mass media has a lasting effect on public opinion.
"The theory maintains that mass media work simultaneously with majority public opinion to silence minority beliefs on cultural issues."
--Defining Communication Theories

"Mass media, particularly TV, tells us not only what to think about, but also imposes their reality of what everybody else is---supposedly---thinking about."
--Tim Buell

"I have never found a spiral of silence that goes against the tenor of the media, for the willingness to speak out depends in part upon sensing that there is support and legitimization from the media."
--Noelle-Neumann

"The media provide people with the words and phrases they can use to defend a certain point of view. If people find no current, frequently repeated expressions for their point of view, they lapse into silence; they become effectively mute."
--Noelle-Neumann

It is by their actions and inactions that public perception is molded. Consider the Iraq War. The mantra of W.M.D and 9/11 connections was repeated so many times that some people still believe these issues are still solvent reasons for our participation. Now the current perception is that we are there to spread freedom and democracy to the Middle East. This new mantra has been repeated by such images as the peaceful voting in Afghanistan and the Prime Minister of Iraq, Allawi giving his speech of thanks before our Congress. As noble an enterprise as this is, this is not a valid reason to perpetuate aggression against another state. If this idea had been presented as the central reason we were attacking Iraq, how much public support would they have gleaned?

The same holds true for this election. If the media had came out on election night and proclaimed that there was something amiss, how would that have affected the public opinion in our nation? Would we see people in the streets in demonstrations, as we see in the Ukraine today? The media has made every effort to stifle doubt in this election. They have applied the label of "Conspiracy Theory" to honest questions and have, in fact, waged a disinformation campaign against the American people.

Our constant pleas to the Mainstream media will continue to go unheard unless we do something that will force them to abandon their current campaign. I don't believe that the entire media has been corrupted by the Bush Administration but it is likely that many have been. They have been promised access in exchange for silence in many occasions. Again, the example of Iraq is fitting. The media was allowed to "embed" reporters with our troops. This was never done before. This brought the war right into our living rooms on a scale never dreamt of in the Vietnam War. This also brought enormous ratings and enormous profits. What would they be willing to stifle in exchange for access, ratings and profits?

If we are to be successful in this campaign, we must adopt a new strategy. The Internet is a very powerful tool but it does not have the trust of the people. We must begin to distribute a new form of media. Actually, it's an old form of media. To incite the people to rebel in the Revolutionary War, what did our Founding Fathers turn to in order to educate the people to their point of view? We must once again bring up the Federalist Papers and Common Sense. If you agree that the media is no longer a friend to the American people and this message will not be presented to them, then what other alternative is there. Among us, we have the resources to distribute this information cheaply and efficiently.

To print up flyer, the cost is cheap. Your local copy store can print up flyers for about $0.08 a copy. If you print more, the price will go down. For the paranoid, I suggest paying cash and changing the place you get copies frequently. These flyers can be distributed at malls all over this country. Right now, we are in the holiday shopping season. The malls will be packed with people and the parking lots will be packed with cars. In a few minutes, you could have over a hundred flyers passed out and never even draw attention to yourself. For the bold, go downtown and pass them out on the streets or at churches.

As these flyers begin to circulate, the message that they deliver must be clear and contain a call to action. I am not going to offer an opinion as to what this call should contain as this should be a consensus of the people who write the fliers. If we could get a group of people together on this site to write these papers and allow them to be edited by their peers, I believe that in a few weeks, we could actually begin to start to slow this Spiral of Silence and begin to turn the tide in the other direction. I hope that you can participate in this, whether its delivery or design. If enough of us do this, the word will get out and people will no longer be afraid to discuss this topic. If enough people are talking about this, there will be those that will do something about it. This could spread beyond the control of our government and allow the people to once again have a voice.

I am not a proponent of mob rule. I believe in this Republic and this Constitution and do not want to see these cast aside. This is why I am offering this plan of action as this will restore the voice to the people and put our government on notice. We must no longer tolerate tyranny. Depriving the people their voice is a mechanism of tyranny. I will not suffer this Spiral of Silence, not in this country, not at this time. Please, help.

Sincerely,

Michael Lewis

[kliljedahl]

13. What do you do?

Fight to bring our brothers and sisters home. They are not fighting for our country. They are fighting for Halliburton, Exxon, etc.

This war was never started for our country and we need to keep that thought first and foremost.

I'd go on but I can't. I'm too heartbroken and sad for our country.


http://www.kliljedahl.net