Author: R J Adams

It’s celebration time in America, but what is it they’re partying about? President Obama called it ‘justice’. It’s not that. One BBC reporter said it was a classic case of ‘the good guys killing the bad guys’. It’s not that, either.

On the surface, you might find it hard to find any similarity between the alleged assassination (for that’s what it was) of Osama bin Laden and the recent royal wedding in Britain. In fact, there’s an obvious parallel.

As the Western world teeters on the edge of economic decline, both the royal wedding and the news of bin Laden’s alleged violent demise at the guns of America’s elite troops, serve the same purpose. They provide the populace with a reason to celebrate, at least, temporarily.

Personally, I enjoyed those parts of the royal wedding that made it into the Adams’ household. It made me feel good about being British. Right now, I’m glad I’m not American. Somehow, the idea of feeling enthused and patriotic by the violent end of another human being is distinctly disturbing.

If the story, suddenly released in a blaze of media frenzy this morning, is true and bin Laden is dead, it is of no consequence to me. That old adage is invariably right, “He who lives by the sword shall perish by the sword.”

Justice, however, it is not. For the supposed leader of the ‘free’ world to state that it is, says more about the sad state of the ‘free’ world than it does about Osama bin Laden.

The mass hysteria that accompanied the news, so hyped by the US media with its videos of yelling crowds outside the White House, young men chanting, “USA! USA! USA!”, and the inevitable “Christian” gentleman assuring us that ‘God had taken his [bin Laden’s] soul and hurled it into Hell!” is as disturbing to me as any crowd of Muslim fundamentalists dancing with glee at the sight of burning towers on 9/11.

It’s a viewpoint that begs the question, “Who are the good guys and who are the bad guys?”

Does it just depend which part of the world you were born into?

If so, it’s no different than the football fan who supports his local team, except the stakes are just a little higher. Is America, then, merely celebrating a home team touchdown?

Is bin Laden dead? There’s not a shred of evidence been released to substantiate the claims. So far, we have only the word of politicians to go on, and we all know how trustworthy they are. Getting rid of a body before anyone has a chance to corroborate its identity is amazingly suspect.

Still, when everyone wants to believe he’s dead, and America is once more the vengeful angel of righteousness wreaking havoc on the ungodly, who needs evidence anyway? Most Americans will now believe revenge has finally been taken for the attacks of 9/11.

Just as there’s no evidence of his sudden death, neither is there yet one shred of evidence bin Laden was involved in the 9/11 hijackings, but after ten years most Americans find it a convenient truth, and are happy to celebrate the alleged perpetrator’s violent end.

Justice has not been done, for justice must also be seen to be done. With no trial, no evidence, no defense and no prosecution to seek out the true facts behind the accusations, to even suggest justice was done is to denigrate the very process of justice.

That the man who uttered those words is not only the president of the United States of America, but a highly qualified member of the legal profession, says little for the state of justice in this land today.

Tonight, most Americans don’t care about justice. They’re celebrating a victory. In their eyes, America is suddenly great again.

I’ve used the phrase, “most Americans” on a number of occasions throughout this article. I did so deliberately.

Earlier this afternoon I received an anonymous email in my in-tray. It contained an attachment. Apparently, the Social Security Administration’s top man, Commissioner Michael J Astrue, was so overcome with emotion at the news of bin Laden’s alleged demise, he couldn’t resist sending out an email message to all his thousands of employees. I assume it was one of them who sent it to me:

Subject: The Death of Osama bin Laden

Our unified nation has taken a major step toward peace with the death of Osama bin Laden. To those of you who serve and have served America not only through your work here but also with military service, I extend my thanks for your dedication to our country.

To those of you who lost family and loved ones on September 11, 2001, as I did, I hope last night’s news brings you some measure of comfort and closure.

Michael J. Astrue
Commissioner

The emailer who sent the attachment had written these words:

Something about this message just makes me feel sick in the pit of my stomach.”

Most Americans will be rejoicing tonight, but there’s at least one out there who won’t be.

Somehow that makes me feel a whole lot better.

Filed under: High ’em high

It’s good to know that Superman and I have something in common.

When Americans I meet realize I’m from Britain, and have been living in the US for nine years, they automatically assume I’ve taken US citizenship. My response to their question induces an immediate glazing of the eyes as they struggle to comprehend my reasoning.

Quite simply, I’ve never pledged allegiance to any nation or flag, and I’m not going to start now. My right to British citizenship is a birthright, not because I swore an oath of allegiance to the country in which I just happened to be born.

While there is much that I like about America – many of its people, some of its geography, etc – and much that I dislike, acquiring citizenship is not about swearing allegiance to those factors, but to a political system that has become repugnant to me.

Apparently, Superman feels much as I do.

^{Click to enlarge}

As Guy Adams (no relation to the author) writes in the Independent this week:

He’s still a firm believer in truth and justice, but the world’s foremost superhero is no longer sure he can carry on proudly endorsing the American way. As he approaches his 80th birthday, Superman has made a shock decision: he intends to renounce his US citizenship.

The move, to be announced next week in the 900th edition of Action Comics, comes after a peculiarly topical plot twist: the Man of Steel finds himself being criticised by the White House for joining young Muslims at a rally against the regime of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Tehran.

“I’m tired of having my actions construed as instruments of US policy,” he wearily tells the President’s National Security Advisor. “Truth, justice and the American way… It’s not enough anymore. The world’s too small. Too connected. I intend to speak before the United Nations tomorrow and inform them that I am renouncing my US citizenship.”^[1]

Superman’s threat has upset quite a few Americans, particularly those with leanings to the political right.

“This is absolutely sickening,” commented one reader on Foxnews.com. “We are now down to destroying all American Icons. How are we going to survive as a Nation?”

As Guy Adams writes:

News that Superman’s commitment to the USA is wavering sparked comic levels of outrage among right-leaning commentators yesterday.

“We are turning into the biggest bunch of pantie-wasted sissies I’ve ever seen,” wrote one Jimmy Wallingford, of Texas, after reading of the development on the New York Post’s website. “Has anyone at DC Comics been to another country? America may have some problems, but there is nowhere I’d rather be!”

Another reader, Bernie Loverde, suggested that the development was part of a plot to indoctrinate children with left-wing beliefs. “Do progressives, with their one global life and political correctness, have no end to what they have to shit all over?” he asked.

Comic? Well, it would be if it were fiction, but for grown men to act so immaturely says much about why this country’s government is the way it is.

As for Jimmy Wallingford, of Texas, asking, “Has anyone at DC Comics been to another country?” I would venture to suggest Mister Wallingford has never set foot outside of Texas. Though, possibly he’s vacationed in Mexico?

Superman travels all over the Universe and has certainly journeyed throughout much of this globe, so it’s possible he’s realized many countries are streets ahead of America.

Europe could teach the US a lot, if only it was prepared to listen. Unfortunately, Americans are so indoctrinated against the concept of socialism (most, conveniently confuse it with communism) that they become blind and deaf, though certainly not dumb, whenever the subject is broached.

If there’s one thing America can teach the world, it’s how to cut off its nose to spite its face.

Sadly, there’s a strong possibility that Superman’s action is no more than a clever plot, by corporate Hollywood, to boost international interest in its latest movie involving the superhero. It’s probably no coincidence that the movie script for the upcoming, “Man of Steel”, set to shoot this summer, is written by David S. Goyer, who will also write Superman’s renunciation episode in the 900th edition of Action Comic.

So, despite Krypton, despite the chisel chin and rippling muscles, despite the flowing cape and cute red panties…

…perhaps, in reality, Superman is just another of those corporate pawns cleverly designed to mislead the public into believing Capitalism is the only true religion, and America the greatest nation on earth.

Oh, well, maybe Superman and I don’t have that much in common after all.

^{[1] “Superman becomes a super-rebel – and scourge of the American right” Independent, April 30th 2011}

Filed under: No Santa Claus either

As a European living in a foreign land, the differences between cultures provide an interesting study. How people respond to politicians can vary remarkably. Italy, for example, has put up with Silvio Berlusconi’s antics for a long time, in a manner that probably wouldn’t be tolerated in, say, Britain.

The British still like to regard their politicians as their representatives in parliament. They’re rather slow to comprehend this isn’t true today, if it ever was. Britain’s politicians are generally only slightly different from those of other nations. Only the most ambitious make it, and ambition is an essential stepping-stone to the attainment of power. Power, of necessity, must beget more power, and so any sincere desire to represent one’s constituents will inevitably get lost along the way.

When it comes to regarding their political masters, Americans must surely be the most bizarre. The two constituent parts of American government, the Senate and the House, are viewed as Roman amphitheaters, the parties inside forever locked in gladiatorial combat.

Every evening, the contests are poured over and dissected by the cable media. Each tries to rewrite the scripts in a desperate attempt to show their side won the day. It’s all reminiscent of some major, never-ending, sports event, or perhaps the caucus race from ‘Alice in Wonderland’:

There was no “One, two, three, and away!” but they began running when they liked, and left off when they liked, so that it was not easy to know when the race was over. However, when they had been running half an hour or so, and were quite dry again, the Dodo suddenly called out “The race is over!” and they all crowded round it, panting, and asking, “But who has won?”

When preparing to choose a political leader, Americans appear to pay far more attention to his, or her, ability to diss the opposition, than any political views the candidate may hold. This is probably because the ideals of both parties are so firmly entrenched as to be immutable. A candidate has no need to state his viewpoint, the party does it for him.

Consequently, some other form of discourse needs to connect the politician to the people, and this is generally achieved by slinging dirt at one’s opponents. In America, it’s a very effective strategy and has evolved to more than just a political gimmick. Putting others down has become an intrinsic part of all aspects of American life, from the bumper stickers:

My daughter is an honors student”

“My dog has more brains than your honors student daughter”

to the sad, listless, comedy that passes for entertainment on many US TV channels.

But nowhere is it more effective than in the political arena.

When a wannabee president has no qualifications for the job and is barely tolerated by most of the populace, he has to think of a way to improve his ratings.

In the case of the rather suspect, Donald Trump…

…he took an old chestnut and tried to roast it a second time.

Using a tired old question-mark over the incumbent president’s place of birth, Trump toured the media chat shows in an attempt to re-sow the seed of an idea that Barack Obama was not really president because he wasn’t born in the US.

As a concept, it was done to death two years ago by other Republican wannabees. President Obama’s ‘Certification of Live Birth’ from Hawaii was scrutinized, analyzed, and found to be wholly legitimate. He was born in America. He was a legitimate president.

Given the facts, you might be forgiven for assuming Trump would be laughed off the stage. Surely, Americans wouldn’t fall for that nonsense a second time? Had Barack Obama been a white man that would almost certainly be the case. In fact, it’s doubtful any dispute over his birthplace would have occurred at all. But he’s not a white man, he’s black, and in America a black man can’t be trusted to tell the truth. Hence, raising a doubt about his integrity for a second time produced, not cries of derision, but a public upwelling of support for the instigator, Donald Trump.

Trump’s popularity among right-wing voters soared. Suddenly, he went from a non-starter in the presidential candidate race, to lying a close third.

Barack Obama is rightly upset by this obsession with his birthplace. Today, he has published an image of his ‘long form’ birth certificate…

^{Click to enlarge}

…presumably in the hope this ‘issue’ will now finally lay down and die a death.

Trump had broadcast to the nation time and again his doubts of President Obama’s legitimacy, and how his ‘people’ in Hawaii were discovering ‘stuff that would amaze you’, so you might be forgiven for thinking Trump would want to lie low for a while and hide his embarrassment. After all, when British prime minister Gordon Brown accidentally left his microphone on and broadcast to the nation, in colorful language, his views on a lady who’d recently harangued him, he didn’t immediately leap out and proclaim how proud he was to have spoken his mind to the country. He did the right thing – he went home and cried.

That’s definitely not the way America’s wannabee politicians behave, though. Trump leaped out of his helicopter this morning and declared to ABC reporters:

“Today I am very proud of myself because I have accomplished something that no one else has accomplished. I am really honored, frankly, to have played such a big role in hopefully, hopefully, getting rid of this issue.”

In Britain, or anywhere else in Europe, he’d never get away with it. His fate would be to quickly retire somewhere in the countryside, far from political influence, and spend the rest of his days raising chickens.

But this is America, and in this land of the bizarre and weirdly eccentric, Donald Trump just might pull it off.

The one aspect totally missing from the controversy over President Obama’s birthplace is why it matters. No-one ever asks that question. Presumably, if it were discovered that Obama was born in Kenya, or Cleethorpes, or Katmandu, he would be drummed out of the White House. Even, if he had proved himself the best president in America’s history.

Because it’s written in the sacred ‘Constitution’, that all US presidents must be born in the country, it’s impossible to have one that isn’t. If he held the secrets to eternal life and prosperity for all, but could only disclose them after inauguration, it wouldn’t make one iota of difference – sorry, no can do.

In the United States, even God is only legitimate if He’s an American.

Filed under: Weird politics