web analytics

The Good, The Bad, And Occasionally, The Ugly

To an immigrant, one noticeable aspect of American life is the commonly utilized phrase: “The good guys versus the bad guys”. It’s no longer just another mediocre plot-line in one of those Hollywood Western films, it crops up in the news media and on political chat shows with depressing regularity. Depressing, because Americans always portray themselves as ‘the good guys’.

Bad guy good guy

The recent escalation of conflict in Iraq is being viewed as ‘bad guys fighting bad guys’. Certainly in the US, and possibly elsewhere in the West, the attitude rules that ‘we good guys went to help them, but now we’ve left they’ve just reverted to being bad guys again’.

This is sad. Iraq has been in a state of semi-civil war since the West invaded in 2002. Not only were Iraqis fighting the US in the central areas, and the British in the south (who feel they’ve a god-given right to march into any part of the Middle East at will, simply because they were mandated the place by the League of Nations in 1919), but the enforced demise of Saddam Hussein created a political vacuum that opened the floodgates of Shia resentment, egged on by Shia clerics and others seeking political power, that’s produced violent skirmishes between Sunni and Shia for the last three years.

The West refuses to admit the present conflagration is a direct result of its illegal intervention in 2002. Tony Blair was quick (too quick?) to state that recent events would have occurred without the West’s invasion and its occupation of the country from 2002 to 2011:

“We have to liberate ourselves from the notion that ‘we’ have caused this. We haven’t. We can argue as to whether our policies at points have helped or not; and whether action or inaction is the best policy and there is a lot to be said on both sides. But the fundamental cause of the crisis lies within the region not outside it,” he wrote. Mr Blair added that it is a “bizarre reading of the cauldron that is the Middle East today, to claim that but for the removal of Saddam, we would not have a crisis”.[1]

Blair is wrong. But then, Blair has a vested interest in continuing to proclaim his innocence over the Iraq issue. A long awaited UK report into the Iraq War is soon to be published, and while it will undoubtedly be heavily whitewashed, Blair is unlikely to escape criticism.

Unfortunately, in the US no such report will ever be considered, least of all reach the light of public gaze. Here, wars are only ever fought by the ‘good guys’ in the US against the ‘bad guys’ everywhere else – anywhere there happens to be oil, or some other economic commodity necessary for maintaining the status of this self-appointed ‘superpower’.

Notable for their crawl out of the woodwork of late have been certain members of that unholy band of brethren once known as the Project for the New American Century. The utter failure of their nefarious plans to take-over the Middle East, beginning with Iraq, caused the PNAC to (officially) disband. They have not, however, been mowing their lawns and pruning their roses over the last few years. Cheney, Wolfowitz, Kristol, Rumsfeld, and others have been seen recently touring the right-wing media outlets, taking every opportunity to malign the present administration for its ‘lack of military muscle’, which is, according to them, entirely responsible for the situation in the Middle East today.

Hear no evil speak no evil see no evil

They are as wrong as Tony Blair. But then, war crimes perpetrators are always quick (too quick?) to defend the morality of their actions. Cheney was fast onto that old chestnut of: ‘…another 9/11 just waiting to happen, and next time accompanied by a mushroom cloud’.

Ah, yes, Mister Cheney, we all remember the mushroom cloud of 2001-2002, magically conjured from a fantasy smoking gun, though only in the dream-world of the Bush administration’s imagination.

American politicians never learn from their mistakes, partly because they never admit to making any. De-throning Saddam Hussein was the worst blunder they could have made in the Middle East. Countless thousands have paid with their lives, and will continue to do so, in Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Libya, and Afghanistan.

Saddam, Mubarak, Gaddafi, like Assad, ruled with an iron fist. When your enemies are religious fanatics bent on bringing the nation to its knees, is there any other way? Secular dictators have to be at least marginally preferred to Islamic fanatics whose idea of implementing Sharia law is to torture, rape, murder, and mutilate those who fail to abide by their twisted philosophies. It’s no accident of history that many Middle Eastern nations are controlled by powerful dictators or monarchs. For centuries it’s been the only method of maintaining peace and preventing religious rivalry from running amok.

The West has made yet another mistake by not learning from their last one. Supporting the rebels against Assad in Syria has allowed Islamic terrorists like ISIS free reign in that country, with the opportunity to recruit members (many British), purloin arms (mostly American), and become a formidable fighting force with every man happy to die for their misguided ideology.

Even now, the US media is still talking of a ‘possible diplomatic solution’, if only to say it seems unlikely. ‘Unlikely’ is perhaps the understatement of all understatements. ISIS has no diplomats among its leadership.

Had the West not invaded Iraq in 2002, Saddam Hussein would have kept his tight rein on Shia and Sunni extremists in his country, as he had done for nearly three decades. Despite a similar religious allegiance (Sunni), he would not tolerate al Qaida or any of its affiliates. The Arab Spring would likely never have occurred. Egypt would have remained a relatively safe environment for tourists, instead of the hotbed of turmoil and religious violence it is today, with its attendant economic problems; thousands of Syrians would still be alive and living comfortably in their homes; Libya would not be in the throes of violent conflict, and Iraq would not now be facing a terrible and bloody war, which will have devastating consequences for the whole region if ISIS manages to gain the upper hand.

But then, its just bad guys fighting bad guys, and the only question on the lips of most in the West is: should the good guys once again come riding to their rescue?

[1] “Tony Blair: Syria conflict is to blame for current Iraq crisis” Independent, June 24th 2014

CBS, NBC, ABC – Or, Sparrow News!

How the media loves to split this country in two. Take the case of Bowe Bergdahl, who’s recently exchanged his Taliban prison in Afghanistan for a US military prison (sorry, that should have read ‘hospital’) in Germany.

Deserter

It’s interesting to note Bergdahl was a lowly private first class when he disappeared from his platoon, apparently after just walking away from his base. He’s been twice promoted while held in captivity by the Taliban: once, to specialist, and then, to sergeant. (So far as we know, it was the US army that promoted him, in absentia, – not the Taliban!)[1]

The release of Bergdahl was agreed with the Talban on condition five detainees were freed from Guantanamo Bay in exchange. The US media has played up the idea these five are dangerous individuals who will return to the battlefield and fight against America. It’s probably true. No-one held without trial for years, and treated with gross inhumanity during that time, is going to thank their captors on the way out.

The idea that five mere human beings are going to make a huge difference to the Taliban’s grudge against the West in general, and America in particular, is beyond ludicrous. Yet it serves to divide this nation down the middle, with many viewing Bergdahl as a deserter who should have been left to rot, and others agreeing with the US president, who authorized the exchange without consultation with Congress. The corporate media is once again deploying its power to divide and conquer.

News recently of the tragic road accident that killed one man and put the comedian, Tracy Morgan into intensive care, has now revealed the driver of the Walmart truck that collided with their vehicle had not slept for twenty-four hours.

Trucking Money

Walmart say their driver was ‘operating well within federal regulations’. It is, perhaps, the type of irresponsible reaction one might expect from Walmart, but the sad fact is that the only legislation addressing the subject states that drivers can work a maximum seventy hours a week. This means a man or woman may drive fourteen hours a day, every day, for five days of the week. How many us could keep that up without having an eventual accident?

Showing, yet again, a reliable lack of consideration for the safety of US citizens, Congress last week moved to relax these already lax regulations following sustained lobbying from the truck industry. A 24/7 economy apparently requires truck drivers to work 24/7, and Congress is only too happy to oblige big corporations like Walmart.

Apparently, it’s gone unnoticed in Congress that Europe’s economy is also 24/7. It might seem amazing to certain US senators and representatives that European economies manage to operate despite truck drivers having to adhere to these rules:

Daily driving must not exceed 9 hours, although this may be extended to 10 hours twice a week.

Weekly driving must not exceed 56 hours.

Fortnightly driving must not exceed 90 hours in any two consecutive weeks.

Drivers must take breaks that total at least 45 minutes during or after a maximum of 4.5 hours of driving. The break can be split into two periods, one of at least 15 minutes followed by one of at least 30 minutes. You cannot split breaks into three periods of 15 minutes.

Drivers must normally take at least 11 consecutive hours of daily rest. This can be reduced by up to 2 hours on no more than three occasions between any two weekly rest periods…[2]

It’s amazing what Europe manages to achieve, that America finds quite impossible. In this instance – the saving of many lives.

In company with the US mainstream news media we’ll finish with a feel-good story, to warm our souls and revitalize the love each human being holds in his heart for his fellow man.

Are you feeling stressed, low, depressed or suicidal? Fear not, the folks at Los Angeles airport will be happy to help you. There you’ll find the soothing company of a ‘therapy dog’, complete with handler, to ease your cares away.

PUP Kai card

Yes, LAX is running a “Pets Unstressing Passengers” program (acronym: PUP – get it?) designed to put your stress to rest and allow you to fully enjoy the airport experience.[3]

What a truly wonderful idea! Though, there is perhaps one concern.

Given that the stress experienced by airport users is created almost entirely by the airlines and airports, and domestic animals can be equally affected, those ‘therapy’ dogs may just end up needing therapy themselves.

Tiddles

Who’ll be the first unfortunate traveler to get bitten?

[1] “Army Promotes Missing-Captured Soldier” US Dept of Defense, June 16th 2011

[2] “DRIVERS HOURS RULES FOR GOODS VEHICLES IN THE UK AND EUROPE” Warwickshire Police, UK.

[3] “Meet the PUPs of LAX” LAX Website

They’re Trying To Take Our Internet Away

banner-take-back

There’s a lot going on right now to thwart attempts by the government and corporate interests to take control of the internet. We’re all aware, thanks to Edward Snowden, of the NSA’s surveillance of the American public’s use of cellphones and internet access. FFTF (Fight for the Future) and other organizations are currently sponsoring efforts to assist us in making our own internet activities safer from prying eyes.

At the end of this post is a link to a website detailing just what can be done, mostly for free, to keep your internet activity secure.[1]

Meanwhile, the FCC is suspending its decision on whether to hand over control of the internet to corporate ISPs like Comcast and Verizon, for a period of 120 days. This is, at least ostensibly, to allow us peasants to make our feelings known. Given that US president Obama has just handed control of the FCC over to Tom Wheeler, whose previous career was as…

… a venture capitalist and lobbyist for the cable and wireless industry, with positions including President of the National Cable Television Association (NCTA) and CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA)”.[Wikipedia]

…it seems unlikely the US president is on the side of the people.

“Yes, we can! Yes, we can!” … NO, HE DIDN’T!

Coincidentally, Wheeler raised over half a million dollars for Obama’s presidential campaigns.

Spend a few minutes with John Oliver while he succinctly explains the subject of net neutrality:

[cvg-video videoId= ’14’ width= ‘420’ height= ‘250’ mode= ‘playlist’ /]

[1] Reset The Net ResetTheNet.org

Hosted By A2 Hosting

Website Developed By R J Adams