How can I really say this, besides just saying: terrorism is the reason to do anything. Period. What was communism is now terrorism. I know I am not alone feeling this way, but if anyone in the public spoptlight said anything like, “Hey, you know, the Global War on Terrorism is a bunch of bullhockey. There is no ubiquitous demon out there, like some boogeyman, conniving to take away your FREEDOM”.
Can you imagine? Hannity would blow his lid. Well, I think the GWOT is bullshit. I don’t think there are these people who hate us for what we stand for. They may hate us for meddling in their business in their land, but they (whoever they is) do not hate us for what we are. There are those equivalent to our “red-neck mafia” and such, but are they their majority? Is it ours? I am not on the farm anymore. They are not trying to take away our freedom, our way of life, our fundies our trying to take it from them, using their fundies as provocation
And to all you who spout “They treat their women like shit, they are fundamentalist freaks… blah blah blah” I say unto you, “The fundamentalist appear when the reasonable people have been beaten out of the public square. It is the fundamentalist who rise up when a society has had its back pushed to the wall.” America did not create the beehive. But they certainly keep throwing rocks at it.
And when the swarm strikes: BLAMO its A WORLD WIDE CRUSADE AGAINST OUR WAY OF LIFE.
May I tell you, late night blog traveler, this GWOT is bogus. But its premise is to build the walls. The real walls. The walls that protect those who protect/ exploit us.
Yes, tonight I’ve been talking, getting myself worked up a bit, which I may add does not happen much. I tend not to get “worked-up”. But it continues. I just… I’m sick of it. I’m sick of the GWOT being the KEY to everything big and small:
“Directors raised with him their concerns of the possibility of an increased security risk he would bring to the bank.”
Ya think? Do you think the guy who designed a war may have enemies? Do you think this is the guy to run the World Bank (well, yes, because I don’t believe the WB is a benevolent institution)?
Listen. If the World Bank were a generous organization clearly committed to improving life around the world instead of driving all kinds of local economies into the void, then Wolfowitz would be like appointing the Rev. Jim Jones to speak for all religions if God ever set “foot” on Earth. But… the World Bank is not interested in improvement, they are interested in debt.
By appointing Wolfowitz to head it, (which was passed unaminously), obvious attention will be drawn to him and the institution. But what is he being protected from? Terrorist? Or anybody who has been wronged by him? Is there a difference?
I’ve read stuff explaining how the Repugliastics complain about others doing the same things they do to other people. Why is terrorism any different? Does this administration behave like terrorists?
All I got to say is, we have dropped alot more on them than they have on us. The World Bank will have tighter security because of Terrorist Threats because Wolfowitz is the new head. Another rock at a beehive. Antagonize them into acting.
Slaps to the face. Bolton. Wolfowitz. Gonzales. Rice. I recognize this language. It is the language of a takeover. And building the walls to protect the newly conquered ground.