The "New" War on Terror? (I didn't write this...but it's great)

From The Desk of Avron (Note: Get to the web page I'm talking about by clicking on the title of this post)

Just thought I would weigh in on the whole war thing. Since I am not into "beliefs" per se`., I'll just show you what a really bright guy named Noam Chomsky says: (This is an excerpt from the link listed)

What is the War Against Terrorism?

Well, let’s go to the third question, ‘What is the war against terrorism?’ and a side question, ‘What’s terrorism?’. The war against terrorism has been described in high places as a struggle against a plague, a cancer which is spread by barbarians, by “depraved opponents of civilization itself.” That’s a feeling that I share. The words I’m quoting, however, happen to be from 20 years ago. Those are…that’s President Reagan and his Secretary of State. The Reagan administration came into office 20 years ago declaring that the war against international terrorism would be the core of our foreign policy….describing it in terms of the kind I just mentioned and others. And it was the core of our foreign policy. The Reagan administration responded to this plague spread by depraved opponents of civilization itself by creating an extraordinary international terrorist network, totally unprecedented in scale, which carried out massive atrocities all over the world, primarily….well, partly nearby, but not only there. I won’t run through the record, you’re all educated people, so I’m sure you learned about it in High School. [crowd laughter]

Reagan-US War Against Nicaragua

But I’ll just mention one case which is totally uncontroversial, so we might as well not argue about it, by no means the most extreme but uncontroversial. It’s uncontroversial because of the judgments of the highest international authorities the International Court of Justice, the World Court, and the UN Security Council. So this one is uncontroversial, at least among people who have some minimal concern for international law, human rights, justice and other things like that. And now I’ll leave you an exercise. You can estimate the size of that category by simply asking how often this uncontroversial case has been mentioned in the commentary of the last month. And it’s a particularly relevant one, not only because it is uncontroversial, but because it does offer a precedent as to how a law abiding state would respond to…did respond in fact to international terrorism, which is uncontroversial. And was even more extreme than the events of September 11th. I’m talking about the Reagan-US war against Nicaragua which left tens of thousands of people dead, the country ruined, perhaps beyond recovery.
Nicaragua’s Response
Nicaragua did respond. They didn’t respond by setting off bombs in Washington. They responded by taking it to the World Court, presenting a case, they had no problem putting together evidence. The World Court accepted their case, ruled in their favor, ordered the…condemned what they called the “unlawful use of force,” which is another word for international terrorism, by the United States, ordered the United States to terminate the crime and to pay massive reparations. The United States, of course, dismissed the court judgment with total contempt and announced that it would not accept the jurisdiction of the court henceforth. Then Nicaragua then went to the UN Security Council which considered a resolution calling on all states to observe international law. No one was mentioned but everyone understood. The United States vetoed the resolution. It now stands as the only state on record which has both been condemned by the World Court for international terrorism and has vetoed a Security Council resolution calling on states to observe international law. Nicaragua then went to the General Assembly where there is technically no veto but a negative US vote amounts to a veto. It passed a similar resolution with only the United States, Israel, and El Salvador opposed. The following year again, this time the United States could only rally Israel to the cause, so 2 votes opposed to observing international law. At that point, Nicaragua couldn’t do anything lawful. It tried all the measures. They don’t work in a world that is ruled by force.
This case is uncontroversial but it’s by no means the most extreme. We gain a lot of insight into our own culture and society and what’s happening now by asking ‘how much we know about all this? How much we talk about it? How much you learn about it in school? How much it’s all over the front pages?’ And this is only the beginning. The United States responded to the World Court and the Security Council by immediately escalating the war very quickly, that was a bipartisan decision incidentally. The terms of the war were also changed. For the first time there were official orders given…official orders to the terrorist army to attack what are called “soft targets,” meaning undefended civilian targets, and to keep away from the Nicaraguan army. They were able to do that because the United States had total control of the air over Nicaragua and the mercenary army was supplied with advanced communication equipment, it wasn’t a guerilla army in the normal sense and could get instructions about the disposition of the Nicaraguan army forces so they could attack agricultural collectives, health clinics, and so on…soft targets with impunity. Those were the official orders.
************************************************************************************
Hmmmm... Kinda puts a whole new spin on things when you find out more "truth", doesn't it? Please read the entire article. Then read more. And More....and more. See why I have no "Beliefs" and at least try to stay away from "opinion"? I don't have the luxury of opinion; there's too much to be known that I will only scrape the surface of in my lifetime...but I will scrape as much as I can. Avron

And To My Complete Chagrin...

...Then Noory goes on to do an excellent interview (mostly excellent) with Daniel Estulin who has researched the so-called Bilderberger Group (I wonder if they have an official name?). This is how I know George Noory KNOWS DAMN WELL what he's doing and saying; when all this is added up it's enough to really cause one to take pause and wonder...is this guy acting exactly like one of the "Bilderbergers" Daniel is describing? I don't know, but I do know a complete lack of integrity when I hear one....I can't even describe this adequately; what would you call someone who one hour says the most idiotic and delusional rubbish one will ever hear, only to spend the next three hours hardly missing an intellectual beat (with the noteable exception of the "antichrist" and "satan" comments)..."social morphing"? Maybe "religious pandering" is even a more accurate term....Avron

Simply an Objective Observer?

I would be very remiss in not saying something at this point on the subject of mental illness. I suppose this must be included as another problem unrelated to either stupidity or ignorance; although I do not entirely support this view. It is well known that John Forbes Nash basically "talked himself out" of schizophrenia; I will have much to say on this subject later, for now I'm just acknowledging that it is a problem of which my opinion may have no bearing at all...we will see.
There is a subject along this line however I need to address right away. I'm sure many of you are familiar with the radio show "Coast to Coast AM with George Noory"...well...in the past I have written George because it really bugs the shit out of me to hear this guy furthering the all-negative cause of superstition in people who are in dire need of another message. George's only comments to me would be some gratuitous one-liner such as "grow up" or "you need help" or some bullshit along these lines, because he *knows* what he's doing...in my opinion. Sometimes I think he actually believes the crazy shit he's endorsing., either way it's still bullshit and it's
hurtful, damaging bullshit to boot.
At any rate, I began to feel a bit uncomfortable with myself; chastising myself mentally because I was "too hard on him" and maybe he really is just an "objective observer" who really is letting everyone make their own judgement....
OK, well, George, after what I just heard you say in the program from Tuesday, November 6th; I must take back my appology. This man, George Noory stated without hesitation or any subjectiveness whatsoever that "Demons exist, and can take any shape they want" (I'm not taking the time to go back and quote these rediculous remarks ver batim, but believe me, his meaning was very obvious)...among other direct remarks to callers as well as the audience at large that things such as "demons" "demon dogs" and other bullshit ...the last delusional, (self-serving to George's paycheck) crap any person with metal problems involving religious delusion should ever hear from a person in his unique capacity....this really took the cake with me...instead of using his position to try to *diminish* delusional thinking; instead of using his powers of oratory to *help* teach the healing power of rational and critical thinking skills to a population who so desparately needs this kind of learning; nope, ole' George just says any damn thing that will further "freak them out" or support their delusional thinking without any regard whatsoever of the consequences of his speech.
Is that it George? Wanna claim "free speech"? OK Me too...SCREW YOU. There. I said it freely. I rarely hope an individual looses thier job, but in this case I'll do what you tell people to do all the time; I'll PRAY you loose your JOB...but we both know THAT won't help, huh Georgy Boy...and NO, you mentioning in passing here and there that people should "use their own critical thinking skills and judgement" doesn't help when you turn immediately around and state to the WORLD things like "demons" exist, totally VOID of any conscience at all of the delusional thinking that you support in anyone that happens to turn their radio on the wrong channel at the wrong time is unforgivable as long as you keep doing it...YOUR WRONG MAN...
Oh and you folks who want to argue religion to me, don't worry; we will cross that bridge...only I promise you one thing; I will be VERY honest in what I say. Period. Fearlessly. Honest. I Promise. Only one caveat however; it may be a while before I engage in any debates; first, I have a lot to say on the subject...and it's going to take a while. Oh, and if you don't first read what I write, then forget it; I don't like doing battle with the unarmed.
On second thought I'll just write what I'm going to write, and still be fearlessly honest, and you can read it or not; and I'm not going into battle with anyone...yeah that's what I'll do. I like that. Read me or don't, who cares...I'm sick of people who want to fight anyway. Either learn, get intelligent, hone your critical thinking if you posses it or cultivate it if you don't; it's your life...just as long as you don't push yourself into my life, we're cool...
And yeah I know there's an "OFF" button on my radio, but we all have to drive down the street at some point...and with people like George Noory and most of his "guests" spewing garbage to the world, were all very likely to have to swerve to miss it if it keeps piling up...
Hey I like how I put that. I do hope you laugh at things I say, or laugh with things I say, or just laugh; thats better than the negative alternatives. I'm sure ya know what they are...OK good day, see ya later...maybe I'll write this book in private, maybe I'll do that as well as gab here, I dunno. Long as I keep writing...ciao. Good day George; I bet you sleep quite well. That's because your a sociopath. Bye.