Be Brave, Be Free !

Current Events

Should We Care About the

"Fear o' the Week?"

"Propaganda has only one object - to conquer the masses."
Josef Goebbels


 



Introduction   Every day we are bombarded with "crises."  Once you become aware of how often this word is used
   - misused - it becomes predictable and funny.

Why are there so many crises?  Every political bump is frantically announced, every disease is a pandemic, and every quirk of human nature is a disease.  And all can be solved only by government.   Can this be true?

   Let's examine some current events, maybe some below the headlines, and see which we should accept and
   which we should reject...
 
U.S. Ranked 37th
in Health Care
   This story ran on CNN on 11/29/06 with absolutely no explanation.  It piqued my interest precisely because
   of the lack of factual support.  So, I did a Google search and found this article:
   
http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html
   If you click the link to "Source: WHO World Health Report," some interesting facts come out:
   1.  First of all, the WHO (World Health Organization) has a bias you can check yourself on its site...
       Socialistic, one-world control of health care and health related" issues, such as birth control
       (which equates to population control), and government health "insurance" (tax-based health care).
       The article cited supports this point of view.    

   2. If you have the patience to read almost all the way down,
       you can see that their rankings are largely based on socialistic criteria, such as "fairness" and  availability
       of health care to those who have a low capacity to pay.  In other words, how many Peters are robbed to
       pay for Paul.  Under these criteria, to quote the WHO:  
       
"Colombia achieved top rank because someone
       with a low income might pay the equivalent of one dollar per year for health care, while a high- income
       individual pays 7.6 dollars."

       So, unless a Colombian doctor only charges a median fee of about $4 a year per patient, the real cost
       must be borne by taxpayers... a fact totally omitted from this report!   According to the WHO, if health
       care is largely funded by taxation, minus the cut government takes for its own uses, it is "free."
   3.  So, is the ranking, and the alarming headline it produced, worthy of our concern.  I don't think so!
Propaganda and the Iraq "War"The following terms are used by all major news reports of the Iraq conflict.  Here's how you can see for yourself their real purpose is to get a gut reaction out of you.  The terms  and concepts are designed to mislead us into being "for" a constant state of war with newly defined "enemies:"

1.    "War" - The Iraq conflict is not a war, it was an invasion of a country that could not and did not harm us.  Under the U.S. Constitution, Congress is the only body empowered to declare war.  Instead, our so-called representatives shirked their Constitutional duty by delegating their war power to the President.  This is an abdication of their duty under the separation of powers which protects us from a dictatorship.  So, what's happening in Iraq and Afghanistan is not a war, but an invasion of countries which did nothing against ours.  Calling it a war, though, helps to make it sound justified, even moral.

2.  "War on Terror" - Try to imagine this as a real concept, a real activity.  How can one have a war on any inanimate concept?  Remember the "War on Alcohol?" That's what they called Prohibition to "sell" it.  The "war" on drugs"  the "War on Tobacco."  These are just wars on the people who use the drugs, tobacco, alcohol, etc.  So, who is the "War on Terror" against?  Anyone the government says is a terrorist!  Remember, with the so-called PATRIOT Act, () they don't need to try you, nor do the Constitutional protections apply against warrantless searches, self-incrimination, nor speedy trial.  All they have to do is show another government agency that they have reason to believe you are "in league" with terrorists they have defined.  And their list is secret - you can't see if you are on it!  Not 'til they knock on yourdoor - with a battering ram!

3.    "Insurgent" - An insurgent is defined as:  

     adj : in opposition to a civil authority or government [syn: {seditious},
            {subversive}]
     n 1: a person who takes part in an armed rebellion against the
          constituted authority (especially in the hope of
          improving conditions) [syn: {insurrectionist}, {freedom
          fighter}, {rebel}]
     2: a member of an irregular armed force that fights a stronger
        force by sabotage and harassment [syn: {guerrilla}, {guerilla},
         {irregular}]

So, is the U.S. a "constituted authority?"  If so, under what authority but the authority of armed invasion?  The second definition does seem to fit, in that the people resisting the U.S. do use sabotage and harrassment.  However, what other weapons do they have?  If the U.S. were invaded by, say France, wouldn't you use harrassment and sabotage to fight them?  I sure like to think I would!

Note that as used in the news, "insurgent" is really "anyone our soldiers aim a gun at."

I think a definition which better fits these "insurgents" is "resistance fighter" someone who is:
"a secret group organized to overthrow a government or occupation force [syn: {underground}]"

However, talking about Iraqis as "resistance fighters" would put a negative light on the U.S.

4.    "Support the Troops" - Anyone who takes a position against the official government line on this invasion is immediately labelled as "Hating America," or "Not Supporting the Troops."  Well, if the troops are being misused for an immoral, unconstitutional purpose, should we robotically approve anyway?  

5.    "Un-American" - Anything that disagrees with the Government's position.

To be continued...



Back to  Return Home  Home Page

Updated:  May 30, 2008