Silence is Consent

If you don't speak up you accept what is happening. This site was born out of the mainstream media's inability to cover the news. I am just an American cititzen trying to spread the word in the era of FCC consolidation, post 9/11 Patriot Act hysteria, hackable voting machines and war without end. I rant and post news items I perceive to be relevant to our current situation.

All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.
- Thomas Jefferson

Social Security is not broken and therefore does not need to be fixed

So Called Social Security Crisis (SCSSC)

Comments, questions, corrections, rebuttals are always welcome.

Thursday, January 13, 2005
 
WMD? Did we say Saddam had WMD?
When we speak of Iraq, WMD and 9/11 there is one key thing to keep in mind. While many misinformed people in this country believe that to be true the people of Iraq know that is a lie. Say what you will but when a people know the reason for their occupation to be a lie, a concoction, a bunch of crap shall we say it does not shine a good light on the occupier. It also shines a pretty ugly light on the people of the occupying nation. Don't you think?

So why did we invade Iraq, kill thousands of civilians, occupy the country, ruin its cities, and turn its people against us? Well it wasn't WMD. WMD was just what the sheep in this country would buy. If they were able to scare the sheep in this country enough anything is possible. Do you remember this from Paul Wolfowitz?:
"The truth is that for reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. government bureaucracy, we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on which was weapons of mass destruction as the core reason,"
Wolfie I always good for a quote. So why did we create chaos in Iraq. If there's chaos, then we can't leave. So why do we want to stay there? I have no idea.

This soldier has had enough
War Veteran Refuses 2nd Iraq Deployment
A mechanic with nine years in the Army, including a role in the assault on Baghdad, has refused to return to Iraq, claiming "you just don't know how bad it is."

[and]

"I told them that I refused deployment because I just couldn't go back over there," Benderman said Wednesday. "If I'm going to sit up there and tell everyone that I do not believe in war, why would I go back to a war zone?"

[and]

"You can sit around your house and discuss this thing in abstract terms, but until you see and experience it for yourself, you just don't know how bad it is," he said. "How is it an honorable thing to teach a kid how to look through the sights of a rifle and kill another human being? War is the ultimate in violence and it is indiscriminate."
The Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations
U.S. Lowers Expectations On Iraq Vote
With just over two weeks until the Iraqi elections, the United States is lowering its expectations for both the turnout and the results of the vote, increasingly emphasizing other steps over the next year as more important to Iraq's political transformation, according to U.S. officials.
This is a classic ploy for this administration. Make the expectations so low that if one person shows up to vote it will be an incredible victory.

Congress is pro-torture as well. Isn't one party rule great?
White House Fought New Curbs on Interrogations, Officials Say
At the urging of the White House, Congressional leaders scrapped a legislative measure last month that would have imposed new restrictions on the use of extreme interrogation measures by American intelligence officers, Congressional officials say.
Monty Python provides the comic relief
A man-made tsunami
I am bewildered by the world reaction to the tsunami tragedy. Why are newspapers, television and politicians making such a fuss? Why has the British public forked out more than £100m to help the survivors, and why is Tony Blair now promising "hundreds of millions of pounds"? Why has Australia pledged £435m and Germany £360m? And why has Mr Bush pledged £187m?

Of course it's wonderful to see the human race rallying to the aid of disaster victims, but it's the inconsistency that has me foxed. Nobody is making this sort of fuss about all the people killed in Iraq, and yet it's a human catastrophe of comparable dimensions.

2 comments <

2 Comments:

I do not think that we "invaded Iraq" as most people say.
As we all know, there are many sides to this "War On Terror" many people who hate it, and are fighting against it, and many who support it and realize the cause we're fighting for. My Great Books Teacher at Layton High has been in this debate with many people for a long time. People would post flyers telling how many Americans have died in the war, trying to get people to think that it is wrong and we should give up. My teacher had another idea though, he posted up the number of Americans killed by terrorists, the number of abortions in the last year, and many more things. I think that my favorite that he posted would have to be the number of police men that have been killed in action, along with the question, should we now give up the fight on crime since so many police men have died. People don't seem to understand that we cannot just sit back and not fight this fight. If we do millions of more Americans will die by the hads of these terrorists. Sure there will always be terrorists, and there will always be people out to destroy us, but we can't just let them do it. "I can live with losing the good fight, but I cannot live without fighting it." It irritates me when people think that fighting for your freedom is wrong, when sacrifice for justice is not worth it. Nothing can be acheived without sacrifice in one way or another. The men and women fighting this good fight for us are heros, they are fighting for our rights, they are giving their lives so that we can keep ours. Yet there are people who look at them as fools, who think they have no right to be in Iraq at this moment, people who are obviously not really a true American at heart. There are also people who use the argument that the people of Iraq don't want us. Honestly now, who can believe that? I mean, of course the people there didn't want us at first. They have been taught from birth to hate us, to fear us, and to kill us. They have been taught by wicked men that we are the wicked, and that they must cleanse the earth by killing us all. If, from the moment you were born, you were taught to hate something, you most likely would. Because you woulnd' t know any better, it would be the only way you knew how to live. We went to Iraq and the people hated us, but look at how many have thrown down their guns and stopped fighting because they don't have to live in fear anymore. We are eliminating their fears, which were their leaders, and giving them another chance at life. Wars are ugly things, but sometimes they have to take place! We can't just sit back and let people try to control our lives with fear of death or anything else. That is exactly what would happen if we never took a stand and never faught back. Also, what harm can it really do to show some compassion and help a country in need? Maybe we can't be the police for the entire world, but then again, if we don't do it, who will? If evil can be destroyed in Iraq then what reason do we have to not go destroy it before it spreads to the U.S.? Evil is evil no matter where in the world it is, and if it gets the chance, it will spread until it consumes all it can. It is the "Right War, Right Place, Right Time." (Mr. Conner)
And that is my opinion on the War, the people there need us, and are learning to want us, if we give up, this will only become another Vietnam.

By Blogger Draricul, at 9:13 AM  

There are so many problems with this comment I am really having trouble finding our where to start. First, there is the opening, "I do not think that we ‘invaded Iraq’". Then there is the conflation of the War on Terror (WoT) and Iraq--not the same thing. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, had no WMD, -- yes we knew beforehand; do a Google search on Scott Ritter -- no ties to Al Qaeda, etc. This all goes to the ignorance of the writer. Obviously, there is no awareness of the root causes of this situation. The writer’s belief seems to be that ol’ tired ‘they hate us because we are free’ claptrap. If you still believe in the WoT, such a blatantly wrong assumption must be clung to prove to yourself that killing innocent men, women, children, and unborn Iraqis is somehow justified. They hate us because we support oppressive regimes in so many of these countries (see Islam Karamov, Saudi Arabia) until they become a liability (see Saddam Hussein). Then we set up puppet regimes (see Afghanistan and soon-to-be Iraq) and steal their resources. Now we have been exposed as torturers. Is that the ‘fight’ we cannot just sit back and not fight? Millions more Americans? Not to minimize the casualties, but we haven't already lost ‘millions’ of Americans, so we can't lose millions more.

This comparison between war dead and social ills is humorous. The writer compares leaving Iraq to no longer fighting crime, as if we had no choice but to go attack and unarmed country. We have an air force. I'm sure everyone remembers all those great stories of dogfights in the skies over Baghdad in those early days of the war. Oh, that's right, I forgot, Iraq didn't have an air force. See if your teacher knows how many innocent civilians have been killed in Iraq. Are that many lives worth attacking an unarmed and defenseless country (as compared to our military might) which never threatened us?

I have always laughed when I hear this statement from those on the other side, "Sure there will always be terrorists, and there will always be people out to destroy us, but we can't just let them do it". Why are we fighting a WoT if there is always going to be terrorists? Shouldn't we just learn to deal with it then? No, there will not always be terrorists. If we keep fighting this way, however, there will be. Violence begets violence. People in Utah are God-fearin’ Christians, aren’t they? What did Jesus say? Here’s a thought: if we stop supporting the repressive regimes that create these ‘rogue’ nations and start dealing with their people as equals, and not as our children, then we can end terrorism.

I'm assuming this good fight comment means that the writer will be joining the military soon after graduation. That's great. Just make sure to steer clear of the depleted uranium (DU), IED's and suicide bombers. Oh, yeah, and see if your family and friends can shell out several hundred dollars to make sure you have the body armor you’ll need. I hope this will all be over before you get to combat.

There is nothing wrong with fighting for freedom. Just don't confuse the WoT with freedom fighting. If by “sacrifice” you mean sacrificing our civil rights so the government can send you to jail without the benefit of a public hearing or search you and seize your property at will, then don’t worry: the Patriot Act has assured that.

Our soldiers are not fools. Most are just young men and women trying to do their jobs under extremely difficult circumstances. Lack of armor, lack of bullets, extended tours, having their benefits cut and, worst of all, knowing that their government--but especially their President--sent them to fight a war that didn't need to be fought, using misleading (at best) evidence, which is only making us less liked and less safe in Iraq and throughout the region -- these are the reasons the morale of our soldiers is very low. Of course they have no right to be in someone else's country. But you don't think we invaded.

Also, if you think my comments make me, "not really a true American at heart" then you need to go back and read the Declaration of Independence and understand that this country was built and became what it is today because of dissent. What in the world are they teaching you in history class?!

Your Iraq argument is totally backwards. The people of Iraq have not been born and raised to hate Americans. They, like most other people in the world, just want to be left alone to take care of their families. (To get an idea of what modern Iraqis are like, listen to reports by NPR’s Anne Garrells, or read her book, Naked in Baghdad.) When we went in, we had a window of opportunity to prove to the Iraqis we were there for good reasons. We blew it and then the resistance fighters took over. Yes, resistance fighters, not insurgents, they are resisting our occupation of their country. Now, especially after the torture problems at Abu Graib, we have lost the entire country. The war in Iraq is over and we have lost.

They are not throwing down their guns. They just want us to leave. But that's not the plan. Never was, never will be. Iraq was meant to be chaos from the beginning. The longer that country is in disarray, the longer we have to stay. You do know the US is building 14 military bases there, right?

Wars are definitely ugly and sometimes must be fought, but they should only be fought as a last resort. See above.

The only people trying to control our lives with fear and death are the fascists running this country. And by fascism, I mean the true fascism as defined by Mussolini, "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power."

Of course we have to fight back when we must. But to assume that the only recourse we have in any situation is war, is very shortsighted. Any war effort must be more than just killing people. We are not showing compassion in Iraq. If we were, or did, we would have heeded our generals’ warnings (see Gen. Eric Shinseki) and invaded with a much bigger force, not to cause more destruction, but to keep the peace afterwards. Allowing Iraq to fall into the destruction that we have, is not compassionate.

It is not about policing the world. It is about giving a people the ability to create the type of government that will suit them the best, even if it is led by their national faith. It’s interesting that Americans will tolerate and even demand that their government be responsive to and include their beliefs in Christianity, but they are not so supportive of another country’s trying to do the same with Islam.

Once again, no history. The ‘evil in Iraq’ that you speak of—am I to assume you are talking about Saddam? Do you know who created Saddam? Just do a Google on Saddam, CIA, and see what you get. We may have taken out evil/Saddam in Iraq, but we are creating another, yet unknown, evil to take his place.

I'm assuming that Mr. Conner, like most in the current administration, never served in combat. He probably has absolutely no idea, like them, whether this war was right in any way, shape, or form. That will be decided when it is over.

Your last comment about Vietnam once again goes to show your ignorance of history. "If we give up, this will only become another Vietnam". It already is another Vietnam. The lesson of Vietnam is that you cannot occupy, select governments for, and abuse a population and then expect your ideas to prevail. Vietnam was lost because all people want to choose their own destiny, and they will fight to the last person for that right.

If you and Mr. Conner are looking for a "good book," try this one, The Peace To End All Peace by David Fromkin. It is a beautiful history of how the British, French and to a lesser degree the U.S. screwed up the Middle East after World War I. You will see that we are making the exact same mistakes all over again. Also look up Chalmers Johnson who has written a very enlightening book, Blowback, about the consequences of our military actions, overt and covert, around the world. And last, but in no way least, check out www.tomdispatch.com, www.juancole.com, and the writings of Dahr Jamail on Iraq.

By Blogger Larry, at 12:43 PM  

Post a Comment


Powered by Blogger