Law School Discussion

Poll

best of three?

Syracuse
9 (75%)
Albany
1 (8.3%)
Akron
2 (16.7%)

Total Members Voted: 10

Was the war in Iraq a war of choice?

The truth is this: Americans are brainwashed
« Reply #30 on: June 14, 2006, 03:51:54 AM »
The truth is this: Americans are brainwashed

It's not that Americans hate the truth -- though too few bother to seek it, even though about two-thirds of Americans have Internet access, the primary (non-Bible) instrument for truth seeking. It's that most Americans, as they have not trained themselves to resist, to turn-off, to wear the proverbial "b-s detector", have been driven to a state of total apathy or complete cognitive dissonance, the forerunner to brainwashing. Combine that with the fact that most Americans see themselves as part of some collective (and have the "us" vs. "them" mentality leaders like Bush can exploit), and you have a nation where people aren't stupid, but for the most part are brainwashed.

"Americans are brainwashed," you say?

"Yes," I answer, and here's the proof: fully 70% of the American people believed, prior to Iraq War II, that Saddam was responsible for 9-11. Now, Bush and company NEVER claimed that Saddam was responsible for 9-11. After 9-11, the US invaded Afghanistan with the precise mission of finding and capturing Osama bin Laden, whose al-Qaida WAS responsible for 9-11, and getting rid of the Taliban government which supported bin Laden. That alone proves Bush and Co. believed bin Laden caused 9-11. Thus, the American people, aided and abetted by the lying media, must have come to believe that (once the Afghan adventure was "over" -- yet it isn't over, in fact) Saddam had something to do with Sept. 11, 2001. Remember, Bush and Co. never claimed Iraq had anything to do with it. So, here's where the lying media comes in: insinuate, insinuate, insinuate. The media is a culprit, but so is the collectivist mindset of Americans.

I offer the following as proof:

1. Amercians are like everyone else, particlularly, everyone else who has ever lived in an empire: they want their "national greatness" to last, and, to prop it up, become jingoist or ultra nationalistic. Sometimes this merely leads to insularity and feeling everyone else is inferior (for instance, the Brits felt this way during the Victorian age, or the French during their empire, which crashed and burned in the likes of Algeria, 1962), but sometimes this leads to fascism / nazism / Stalinism. To the degree that dissent is allowed by the general public will show whether or not the US becomes more like Britain or more like Hitler's Germany. But the fact is this, that most Americans do not want to hear that their country has done wrong. America is, after all, the only thing many Americans still have in which to be proud. When you know your living standard is in decline; when you don't know if you'll have a job next month; when your town is dying; when the only hope many American youth have for a bright future is in joining the military, law enforcement, or becoming a faceless bureaucrat; and when you contantly live in one state of fear or another, who can blame folks for wanting an anti-war commencement speaker off the stage?

2. Americans simply won't travel abroad anymore. But, what with anti-Americanism so high abroad, who can blame them? What American really wants to go to a third-world country and be kidnapped for ransom, or go to Europe, with its self-righteousness -- as if they never traveled the road the US travels now -- or even to Canada, which was called "America Junior" on The Simpsons, but could more rightfully be called "America wanna-be", which, if folks like Eric Margolis represent Canadian public opinion, makes Canada even more self-righteous than Europe, but without imperialist intentions (because Canada --- good for them -- doesn't have what it takes to be an empire).

3. Most Americans are tired of wanton legal and illegal immigration. This is always the case in nations that are empire but really deep down inside don't want to be empires OR are waning or has-been empires (there is some case to say that the US is already a waning empire, or in the last stages of empire). But, though most Americans want staunch curbs on immigration, their elected (and unelected) rulers simply don't listen. And is anyone really dumb enough to think the reason Dubya Bush is so hell-bent on illegal immigration from Latin America is because he really sees these folks voting Republican in the not too distant future?

4. Americans are not "stupider" than Europeans or Canadians or anyone else. Our technology proves it -- even if you grant the fact that much of Americas technology now was created by non-natives, but even more so our entreprenuership, much of which is native. So why does it appear to outsiders that Americans are stupid?

First of all, though few Americans will admit it, most Americans believe what the media tells them (ie. Americans are brainwashed), and the media post-911 is not about to tell us the truth, which for now must be ferreted out over the Internet.

Second of all -- and this is the case because most Americans are still educated in public schools -- most Americans are either ignorant of or deliberately dumbed-down in the subjects that Americans must learn if they are to be bequeathed an empire, history and its sister, geography. This goes beyond the fact that geography bees tend to be won by home-schoolers. When less than 30% of public schooled students can't find Iraq on a map, and when so many fewer than that know that places like Iraq have never been totally conquered by imperialist powers, that can be put down to just how ignorant (not stupid) Americans are when it comes to history and geography.

Third of all, except for our Civil War / War between the States / War of Northern Agression or whatever you want to call it, Americans have never had war on their soil. We simply don't know what it's like, so who can blame us for being ignorant of the costs of war? Europeans can gloat all they want that they are too smart or too self-righteous that they want no part of US Imperialism -- I'd rather never have had to live through the series of wars they'd had to put up with, starting with the Thirty Years War in the 1600s.

Finally, it just so happened that America is an empire precisely at that point in history that a media hell bent on brainwashing its people can do it so well. I have stated many times in various columns that the present-day ability to brainwash the public was not begun in Hitler's Germany but on the eve of World War One by President Wilson's propaganda department, aided and abetted by behavioral psychologists and good ol' American advertizing know-how.

Re: Was the war in Iraq a war of choice?
« Reply #31 on: June 14, 2006, 03:59:33 AM »
We rip Arab countries of their wealth, resources and oil. Their religion is under attack because of us. We kill and murder Islamic people. We compromise their honor and their dignity and dare they utter a single word of protest, they are called terrorists!

There is an Arabic proverb that says "she accused me of having her malady, then snuck away." Besides, terrorism can be commendable and it can be reprehensible. Terrifying an innocent person and terrorizing him is objectionable and unjust, also unjustly terrorizing people is not right. Whereas, terrorizing oppressors and criminals and thieves and robbers is necessary for the safety of people and for the protection of their property. There is no doubt in this. Every state and every civilization and culture has to resort to terrorism under certain circumstances for the purpose of abolishing tyranny and corruption. Every country in the world has its own security system and its own security forces, its own police and its own army. They are all designed to terrorize whoever even contemplates to attack that country or its citizens. The terrorism Arabs practice is of the commendable kind for it is directed at the tyrants and the aggressors and the tyrants, the traitors who commit acts of treason against their own countries and their own faith and their own nation. Terrorizing those and punishing them are necessary measures to straighten things and to make them right.

Tyrants and oppressors who subject the Arab nation to aggression ought to be punished. America heads the list of aggressors against Muslims. The recurrence of aggression against Muslims everywhere is proof enough. For over half a century, Muslims in Palestine have been slaughtered and assaulted and robbed of their honor and of their property. Their houses have been blasted, their crops destroyed. And the strange thing is that any act on their part to avenge themselves or to lift the injustice befalling them causes great agitation in the United Nations which hastens to call for an emergency meeting only to convict the victim and to censure the wronged and the tyrannized whose children have been killed and whose crops have been destroyed and whose farms have been pulverized ...

...

America started it and retaliation and punishment should be carried out following the principle of reciprocity, especially when women and children are involved. Through history, American has not been known to differentiate between the military and the civilians or between men and women or adults and children. Those who threw atomic bombs and used the weapons of mass destruction against Nagasaki and Hiroshima were the Americans. Can the bombs differentiate between military and women and infants and children? America has no religion that can deter it from exterminating whole peoples. America has no shame. ... The worst thieves in the world today and the worst terrorists are the Americans. Nothing could stop them except perhaps retaliation in kind.

lipper

  • ****
  • 349
    • View Profile
Re: Was the war in Iraq a war of choice?
« Reply #32 on: June 14, 2006, 05:36:45 AM »
perhaps coming up with an original response, rather than cutting and pasting an article.

wow

Re: Was the war in Iraq a war of choice?
« Reply #33 on: June 14, 2006, 03:24:18 PM »
Awesome!

Budlaw

  • ****
  • 518
    • View Profile
Re: Was the war in Iraq a war of choice?
« Reply #34 on: June 15, 2006, 10:59:20 AM »
Awesome!

What's awesome about it? That he's plagerizing from this?

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/binladen/who/interview.html

Or the fact that he's quoting Bin Laden? (or passing himself off as Bin Laden?) Yeah it's pretty awesome that he wants to be associated with the same thoughts as a man who has been responsible for the death of thousands of Americans.

Yeah you and your buddy are a really "awesome". Piece of *&^%.

Re: Was the war in Iraq a war of choice?
« Reply #35 on: June 15, 2006, 04:46:00 PM »
Why does everyone have to act like they spontaneously come up with 1000-word essay-like responses, instead of just giving the original source? I think you end up looking like a jack-ass when you get caught trying to look smart...

meh...

Re: Was the war in Iraq a war of choice?
« Reply #36 on: June 15, 2006, 05:40:32 PM »
budlaw, why are you interpreting the OP's "Awesome" post as commenting on cornucopia's post?! It may just be that wow thinks that the idea of starting this thread was awesome. Just a thought, yanno ..

_e_

Re: Was the war in Iraq a war of choice?
« Reply #37 on: June 15, 2006, 05:43:14 PM »
DEATH TO THE M U T H A @ # ! * I N G AMERICA!

Re: Was the war in Iraq a war of choice?
« Reply #38 on: June 15, 2006, 06:06:36 PM »
hahaha

Re: Was the war in Iraq a war of choice?
« Reply #39 on: June 18, 2006, 04:35:23 AM »