US Politics.

lewdandlicentious

I AM THE ALTAR
Joined
Dec 30, 2003
Posts
1,992
I'm a Brit, and other than knowing a few names and faces, I know Jack-Diddly about US politics.

I got this by email today, and although I don't know how valid it is, I thought it might interest some of you.





Subject: What the media don't want you to know

A viewpoint not often presented in the media...
KEVIN T. BETZ, LtCol, USAF 28 MXG/CD
DSN 675-4862

I head off to Baghdad for the final weeks of my stay in Iraq, I wanted to say thanks to all of you who did not believe the media. They have done a very poor job of covering everything that has happened.

I am sorry that I have not been able to visit all of you during my two week leave back home. And just so you can rest at night knowing something is happening in Iraq that is noteworthy, I thought I would pass this on to you.

This is the list of things that has happened in Iraq recently: (Please share it with your friends and compare it to the version that your paper & TV is producing)

-Over 4.5 million people have clean drinking water for the first time ever in Iraq.

-Over 400,000 kids have up to date immunizations.

-Over 1500 schools have been renovated and ridded of the weapons that were stored there, so education can occur.

-The port of Uhm Qasar was renovated so grain can be off loaded from ships faster.

-School attendance is up 80% from levels before the war.

-The country had it's first 2 billion barrel export of oil in August, 2003.

-The country now receives 2 times the electrical power it did before the war.

-100% of the hospitals are open and fully staffed compared to 35% before the war.

-Elections are taking place in every major city and city councils are in place.

-Sewer and water lines are installed in every major city.

-Over 60,000 police are patrolling the streets.

-Over 100,000 Iraqi civil defense police are securing the country.

-Over 80,000 Iraqi soldiers are patrolling the streets side by side with US soldiers.

-Over 400,000 people have telephones for the first time ever.

-Students are taught field sanitation and hand washing techniques to prevent the spread of germs.

-An interim constitution has been signed.

-Girls are allowed to attend school for the first time ever in Iraq.

-Text books that don't mention Saddam are in the schools for the first time in 30 years.

Don't believe for one second that these people do not want us there. I have met many many people from Iraq that want us there and in a bad way.



They say they will never see the freedoms we talk about in our Country; but they hope their children will.


We are doing a good job in Iraq and I challenge anyone, anywhere to dispute me on these facts. So If you happen to run into John Kerry, be sure to give him my email address and send him to Denison, Iowa.


This soldier will set him straight. If you are like me and very disgusted with how this period of rebuilding has been portrayed, email this to a friend and let them know there are good things happening.

Ray Reynolds, SFC
Iowa Army National Guard
 
My guess would be partially true because we've lifted the embargo, and partially false - the only example I know enough about to offer is that their engineers rebuilt the entire electrical power system in record time after the first Gulf War. I read that in an article a month or two after the invasion, about how much slower our effort was going than it had under Saddam after Desert Storm. Understandably, since he was a dictator and stuff, and could presumably tell the Head Engineer of Electric Utilities to get the system back up or receive terminal demerits.
 
Now this looks familiar...There was a mini-scandal a few months ago involving a fake letter sent to newspapers around the United States, each signed with the name of a local soldiier. It was exactly the same letter, though, and evidently composed by someone at the Pentagon.

I wonder if it's just now making its way around the web. Does look familiar.

What was amazing about that story is how the Pentagon didn't think anyone would ever see two of the letters from two different newspapers and notice that they were exactly alike except for the name.
 
Seems to be legit....I found reference to it here

The man who wrote it is quoted as saying:

"I did write it and I am in Kuwait now on my way home. I wrote it while at home because I felt that too many people were exploiting the violence in Iraq to sell papers and gain votes. Sometimes the silent majority need to be awakened to respond to the bad things in our world. I am passionate about our President's decision and support this rebuilding whole heartedly...Yes legit..I am a fire fighter in Denison, Iowa and to verify, call Mike McKinnon of the Denison Iowa fire department."
 
Last edited:
Whatever the truth on the letter, the truth in Iraq has to be that it will be a better place in the long-run, if not already.

For the people there I mean, no other sense is relevant.

It's all to easy in all parts of life, to jump on the bandwagon of the negative. The politicians will do it as a matter of course to try for the anti vote, on any and all government policies.

The ONLY time all parties agree, is in the support of troops in conflict. And let's face it, being anti troops in conflict is a sure vote loser.

That's why I don't vote, I don't believe or trust any of them!
 
I have no doubts that the US has done many wonderful things in Iraq and we should be proud of them. I would also bet that there a plenty of Iraqis who still like us. I don't know if they're a majority or not, but I'm sure they exist.

Aside from the prison scandals and probably a few other incidents, I think the behavior of our troops over there has pretty much been exemplary, in both war and peace, and we can be proud of that too.

But none of that changes the fact that this whole invasion and occupation has been a disaster, any way you slice it. It's ruined our reputation especially in the Arab world, wasted lives and treasure, and made us many more enemies than it ever got rid of. Plus, it's pinned us down in a hopeless situation, put our credibility and the political stability of Iraq at peril, not to mention all the gains that the soldier who wrote that letter mentioned.

I also can't help but notice that all the things he lists could probably have been accomplished much more cheaply had there been no war at all.

---dr.M.
 
Last edited:
One of those 273 entries led to The Orwellian Times

* Over 400,000 kids have up-to-date immunizations

This is interesting. A lot of kids have been immunized in Iraq. In fact, last year the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) "25 million doses of vaccines to Iraq to help prevent the spread of polio, tetanus, diphtheria, pertussis, measles, and tuberculosis -- considered the main killers of children in developing countries."[*] At the time, UNICEF spokesman Gordon Weiss explained that the children of Iraq would need several stages of repeated immunizations for the immunizations to be effective:

<snip>

Here's what the Fact Sheet says:

"USAID has partnered with UNICEF, the World Health Organization (WHO) and Abt Associates to support health program in Iraq. Since the end of the war, USAID has vaccinated three million Iraqi children under the age of five, administered tetanus vaccine to more than 700,000 pregnant women, and by April 30, 2004 the USAID mission will have provided updated vaccinations to 90 percent of pregnant women and children under five years of age."

Hmmm. UNICEF said that 3 1/2 million Iraqi children were vaccinated last year. Does this mean that the vaccination program is not being pursued as much as last year? I don't know.

I also don't know where the 400,000 number came from. Last year, Iraq had approximately 4.2 million children in Iraq under the age of five. If fewer than 10% of young Iraqi children have up-to-date immunizations out of the millions who have been on an immunization schedule and are exposed, that would seem to be a serious failure.

That being said, hundred of thousands of immunized children has got to be a good thing.



* Girls are allowed to attend school.

True, but not because of the invasion. Girls were allowed to attend school during Saddam's rule. Between 1997-2000 82% as many girls attended primary school as did boys. 62% as many girls attended high school as did boys, during the same period.[*]


There is a whole lot more, if you are interested.

[Edited to correct number: 273, not 1500 :eek:]
 
Last edited:
cloudy said:
Seems to be legit....I found reference to it here

The man who wrote it is quoted as saying:

"I did write it and I am in Kuwait now on my way home. I wrote it while at home because I felt that too many people were exploiting the violence in Iraq to sell papers and gain votes. Sometimes the silent majority need to be awakened to respond to the bad things in our world. I am passionate about our President's decision and support this rebuilding whole heartedly...Yes legit..I am a fire fighter in Denison, Iowa and to verify, call Mike McKinnon of the Denison Iowa fire department."

I wonder how the fire department in Denison, Iowa feels about soliciting calls to their phone from people all over the world. Is someone going to phone Mike and ask where he got those figures?

What if there's a fire and people can't get through? Shouldn't Mike have posted his home phone number?

I haven't heard the term "silent majority" since Nixon used it.

:(
 
Virtual_Burlesque said:
There is a whole lot more, if you are interested.

I didn't notice the one about girls being allowed to attend school until you posted the reply from that site, or I would have known it was a scam.

Women's rights in Iraq suffered substantial setbacks as soon as they lost the protection they had under a secular regime. Rapes and kidnappings of teenaged girls have been a serious problem in the cities. Women used to have high-level jobs - even one of the weapons researchers was a woman, if you recall.
 
dr_mabeuse said:
I have no doubts that the US has done many wonderful things in Iraq and we should be proud of them. I would also bet that there a plenty of Iraqis who still like us. I don't know if they're a majority or not, but I'm sure they exist.

Aside from the prison scandals and probably a few other incidents, I think the behavior of our troops over there has pretty much been exemplary, in both war and peace, and we can be proud of that too.

But none of that changes the fact that this whole invasion and occupation has been a disaster, any way you slice it. It's ruined our reputation especially in the Arab world, wasted lives and treasure, and made us many more enemies than it ever got rid of. Plus, it's pinned us down in a hopeless situation, put our credibility and the political stability of Iraq at peril, not to mention all the gains that the soldier who wrote that letter mentioned.

I also can't help but notice that all the things he lists could probably have been accomplished much more cheaply had there been no war at all.

---dr.M.

It's been busted. It would have been nice to think that people's lives didn't completely suck, but this letter is the one the Pentagon circulated last year. It's too full of errors like the girls-in-school bit, and the idea that a fire department at a small town in Iowa is lending its telephone to a global PR effort is a bit much.

You're right, though, about the fact that there may have been some improvements in some people's lives. We could have accomplished that by lifting the embargo. Like the one against Cuba, it harmed the dictator not one whit - in fact, it probably strengthens Fidel's position because dictators need an enemy to protect their people from.

Folks: if there are happy circumstances to demonstrate the good we've done, I think the military should have a film crew put something together. The president could get it on all of the networks by calling his 4th-ever press conference which is always major news.
 
Sher, there seems to be no doubt that this guy actually wrote it. The Orwellian site actually called and confirmed it.

The facts aren't all completely wrong but some of them definitely are, and some are just question marks as to where he got them.
 
cloudy said:
Sher, there seems to be no doubt that this guy actually wrote it. The Orwellian site actually called and confirmed it.

The facts aren't all completely wrong but some of them definitely are, and some are just question marks as to where he got them.

I still want to know what happens if your house is on fire in his town. And if he wrote the list at home, why is he in Kuwait on his way home? And who are the Orwellians? And was it Nixon who told Mike to say "silent majority?" Is Mike channeling Nixon?

I'm too lazy to go to the site and find out. Tomorrow, I promise.

:eek:
 
shereads said:
... And was it Nixon who told Mike to say "silent majority?" Is Mike channeling Nixon?

Wasn’t "The Silent Majority" Spiro Agnew's claim to fame . . . or am I thinking of Gyro Gearloose?

And what's the difference?
 
I'd like to believe this letter, but I confess I'm suspicious. It cites no sources, just the name of a single soldier. Where did he get this information? Has he seen all this first-hand? That would seem difficult for one man, so I must assume that he has other sources of information, and I'd like to see those.

And then there's the problem of the inaccuracies. Several of these statements, like the issue of girls getting to go to school, are either patently false or highly suspect. This may merely reflect on the soldier's ignorance of Iraqi history and so on, and his inaccuracies may therefore be honest mistakes. It's not as though the troops were given much background information about Iraq before they were sent there.

It's also true that Mr. Reynolds' letter has been doctored, if we compare what was posted here with what is at Cloudy's link. Our poster's version says that girls are allowed to attend school for the first time ever, while Cloudy's link's version states simply that girls are being allowed to attend school. Even if true, someone seems to be fiddling with the document, and that also makes me suspicious, since I have no way of knowing what Reynolds actually wrote and what someone else added or changed for their own purposes.

Similarly, if all this is true, why has the administration, which has public-relations experts, not been parading this information all over the news media? Bush's approval ratings, especially about the war, continue to slip, yet none of his officials mention this stuff?

So I'm going to withold judgment, and hope and pray that this isn't a propaganda ploy in very poor taste, and hope and pray as well that I'm horribly, horribly wrong in my assessment of the war.
 
Break the Chain

Ray Reynolds is, indeed, an SFC with the National Guard's 234th Signal Battalion. As a civilian, he is a firefighter in Denison, Iowa. Sources close to Reynolds say that he based his claims on information gleaned from publications by the United States Agency for International Development, as well as from contacts with influential Iraqis and the police chief of Baghdad.

Independent research has found his list of accomplishments to be a mixture of accurate, misleading data. For a point-by-point breakdown of the claims, consult the TruthOrFiction.com reference listed below, but here is a quick breakdown:

Accurate

Over 400,000 kids have up-to-date immunizations.

School attendance is up 80% from levels before the war.

Over 1,500 schools have been renovated and rid of the weapons stored there so education can occur.

The port of Uhm Qasar was renovated so grain can be off-loaded from ships faster.

100% of the hospitals are open and fully staffed, compared to 35% before the war.

An interim constitution has been signed.

Textbooks that don't mention Saddam are in the schools for the first time in 30 years.

Inaccurate

The country had its first 2 billion barrel export of oil in August.
(Oil Production hit 2 million barrells a day in April, 2004)

Over 4.5 million people have clean drinking water for the first time ever in Iraq.
(While some treatment facilities neede repair, clean drinking water is not a new thing in Iraq)

The country now receives 2 times the electrical power it did before the war.
(Electricity production is only slightly higher than pre-war levels)

Elections are taking place in every major city, and city councils are in place.
(Elections remain a point of contention and have been suspended in some cities)

Unproven or misleading

Sewer and water lines are installed in every major city.
(Work is still underway)

Over 60,000 police are patrolling the streets.
(The goal is to train and implement 35 - 50 thousand. The first class of 400 graduated in January, 2004)

Over 100,000 Iraqi civil defense police are securing the country.
(About 25,000 were hired and trained as of February 2004)

Over 80,000 Iraqi soldiers are patrolling the streets side by side with US soldiers.
(Only 2,000 were operational as of February 2004)

Over 400,000 people have telephones for the first time ever.
(Most of the post-war work on the telephone system has focused on restoring service lost or damaged during the war)

Girls are allowed to attend school.
(Girls have been allowed to attend school since 1970, more boys than girls typically enrolled)

SFC Reynolds intended his message to be spread far and wide, but underestimated the reliability of e-mail. As this one circulates, forwarders have added comments, commentary and additonal 'facts' that have less validity than Reynold's collection. Also, some forwarders have been incorrectly connected to Reynolds and this information. Break this chain.
 
Last edited:
shereads said:
I still want to know what happens if your house is on fire in his town.

I don't know. :confused: Rain dance?

And if he wrote the list at home, why is he in Kuwait on his way home?

Looks to me like he wrote it while at home on leave from Baghdad, Iraq. He was returning to finish his tour after a 2 week break and wanted to leave this 'info' to pick up the media's slack. :rolleyes:

And who are the Orwellians?

Orwellian Times

And was it Nixon who told Mike to say "silent majority?" Is Mike channeling Nixon?

:confused: I claim age deficiency. :confused:

I'm too lazy to go to the site and find out. Tomorrow, I promise.

Rest sweetie. You've been busy lately.

~lucky
 
Last edited:
lewdandlicentious said:
That's why I don't vote, I don't believe or trust any of them!

Sheesh man! Didn't you see what happened the last time someone said that to this crowd? *shhh...you didn't hear this here, but it was Raphy** :D

Anyway, good thing you're British or this whole thread might've taken a totally different turn.

:) Thanks for sharing. Some of the information is accurate, some is false and some they're just not sure of yet. At any rate, it's good to see that at least some things are coming along.

~lucky
 
lucky-E-leven said:

100% of the hospitals are open and fully staffed, compared to 35% before the war.



Over 10, 000 dead Iraquis, and countless more injured - I'm not sure the Iraqui hospitals would be the nicest places to be treated.

(Although it is nice to hear that some good may be coming from the war:) )
 
lucky-E-leven said:
Sheesh man! Didn't you see what happened the last time someone said that to this crowd? *shhh...you didn't hear this here, but it was Raphy** :D

Yeah, it's a dangerous thing to say around here, seeing as how these parts are filled with all these political animals.
 
raphy said:
Yeah, it's a dangerous thing to say around here, seeing as how these parts are filled with all these political animals.

Taking a Closer Look at the Patriot Act
Where Are You Heading, America?

By BRIAN CLOUGHLEY

The parallels with 1930s Germany are ominous . . .

Have you read the USA PATRIOT Act right through, and examined every one of its amendments to existing legislation? Has anyone done this, apart from its authors and a few agitated souls in media, academia and some Congressional offices? It is 342 pages long, and went through the legislative process of the United States like a hot knife through butter. Senators voted 98 to 1 for the Act, and the House endorsed it by 357 to 56, but not one of those who approved its terms could possibly have had time to read it and cross-reference its details before endorsing it. This was governance by misplaced trust, because the Patriot Act is potentially the most dangerous piece of legislation in US history.

The Act alters 15 Statutes. The prerogatives, personal authority and dominance of the president of the United States have been extended to include drastic and quasi-imperial powers that threaten the liberties of all Americans.

One reason the Patriot Act is worrying for foreigners is that US military expansionism and economic domination are drastically affecting the entire world. What is decided in Washington today is immensely important for every other capital tomorrow. We are all dependent in one way or another on US policies. Therefore it is appropriate rather than impertinent that the rest of the world should comment on US domestic matters that inevitably impact on every person on the globe.

Another reason for concern is that there are alarming echoes of the 1930s, when a semi-elected and eventually-appointed national figure amassed such power as to be unaccountable to the people of his country, and went on to create mayhem and chaos to the extent that the entire world was shaken to its foundations.

You question or deride the notion that there could be parallels between Bush and Hitler? Very well. But please read the Act before you finally make up your mind.

The Patriot Act is hideously reminiscent of the "Decree for the Protection of Nation and State" that became law in Nazi Germany in February 1933. Its provisions were described by John Toland, in his masterly "Adolf Hitler", as ostensibly innocuous while in practice destroying every reasonable humanitarian right formerly possessed by the German people. There were "Tribunals set up to try enemies of the state", and Toland observed that Hitler made his legislation (the "Enabling Act") "sound moderate and promised to use its emergency powers "only in so far as they are essential for carrying out vitally necessary measures"." Does that sound horribly familiar? And who would decide whether a measure was "vitally necessary"? " Why, the man wielding total power, of course. ("Trust me!" is ever the cry of the incipient dictator.)

So Hitler"s Decree and the Reichstag"s subsequent Enabling Act were never modified or repealed, because they gave the man who was served by a compliant and intensely patriotic legislature the instruments he needed to keep him in total control. This is the reason for Bush"s energetic campaign to prevent the Patriot Act being subject to the existing "sunset clause" whereby most of its more despotic provisions should lapse next year. It was passed by a compliant and intensely patriotic legislature : will it be repealed by one?

It is far from irrelevant that Hitler was appointed Germany"s Chancellor, in legal accord with the Weimar Constitution, by President Hindenburg in 1933, just as Bush was appointed president of the United States by the Supreme Court in December 2000. Shortly after Hitler came to power the chamber housing the Parliament, the Reichstag, was set ablaze. Hitler thought this an excellent opportunity to consolidate his dominance. As Toland records, he declared : "Now we"ll show them. Anyone who stands in our way will be mown down". Nobody died in the Reichstag fire, but it was Hitler"s 9-11, and it spawned the Patriot Act of its era.

Hitler"s sweeping Decree provided that ". . . restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press, on the right of assembly and the right of association, and violations of the privacy of postal, communications, and warrants for house-searchers, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed."

The USA Patriot Act also restricts personal liberty "beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed". Every provision of the 1933 Protection of Nation and State Decree, save that of speech and press freedom, is mirrored in the Patriot Act which permits investigators, without having to show "probable cause", to obtain a subpoena to search anyone"s personal details held by their library, bank, credit card and insurance companies " in fact by any organisation or institution that keeps records.

This is Orwell"s Big Brother at work " but the Act is relished by those who advocate more and more state supervision and investigation of the private lives of ordinary US citizens. The Ashcroft Act (as it should be named) is accepted and even welcomed by countless millions of Americans who are kept totally unaware of its terms.

The Senate and House approved colossal extension of state control without any debate of consequence on the dangers to ordinary people posed by this modern version of the "Decree for the Protection of Nation and State". Only a tiny number of citizens have the remotest notion of the Act"s contents, because it is the intention of state-control freaks to avoid explanation and to repeat endlessly the mantras that "The Patriot Act defends our liberty" ; "It's essential law" ; "It's a law that is making America safer . . . It doesn't make any sense to scale it back," all of which comforting slogans were uttered by Bush in the Chocolate Ballroom in Hershey, Pennsylvania, on April 20.

But if an American dares criticize the president in vehement terms, and that fact is recorded in the minutes of a private meeting, then the FBI can place such information on a citizen"s action file. The citizen will never know about this, because the FBI"s subpoena cannot be challenged in court " and the target, the victim, to put it bluntly, is legally kept in ignorance about its ever being served. How"s that for a slam dunk against civil liberties?

It is not only in the Patriot Act and the Decree for Protection of Nation and State that the regime of Hitler and the administration of Bush strike parallels. There is the business of God :

"God heard the nations, scream and sing and shout :

"God punish England! God save the King!"; And God this, and God that, and God the other thing. "Good God!" said God. "I've got my work cut out"."

And there is no doubt God has got his work cut out, because some of the people who have quoted Him and assured the world that His support for them is their . . . well . . . God-given right, have been somewhat presumptuous in their approaches to the Deity.

Take Hitler, on February 1, 1933 :

"May God Almighty give our work His blessing, strengthen our purpose, and endow us with wisdom and the trust of our people, for we are fighting not for ourselves but for Germany."

And Bush on January 28, 2003:

"We do not claim to know all the ways of Providence, yet we can trust in them, placing our confidence in the loving God behind all of life, and all of history. May He guide us now. And may God continue to bless the United States of America."

Or Nazi propaganda master Goebbels on December 31, 1938, when he asked "May God hold His hand of blessing over Germany in the future."

Then there is the serving US army three star general Boykin who announced, without censure by his superiors, that ". . . our spiritual enemy [Islam] will only be defeated if we come against them in the name of Jesus". NBC News reported on October 15, 2003 that "Boykin routinely tells audiences that God, not the voters, chose President Bush. [Boykin asks] : "Why is this man in the White House? The majority of Americans did not vote for him. Why is he there? I tell you this morning [at a prayer meeting] that he"s in the White House because God put him there for a time such as this"." Politicized to his revolving eyeballs, and energized by militant religious fundamentalism, Boykin would have fitted well into Hitler"s scheme of things. And how many followers does he have in the army?

Doctor Johnson observed pithily that "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel", but he might have added that Christian piety is the first recourse of the western politician with tendencies to totalitarianism. It is, after all, a weapon against which it is difficult to argue in a Christian country in which many millions regard the man at the top as little short of a deity. Remember Britney Spears" loyal declaration that "I think we should just trust the president and go along with whatever he says"? This is what many millions of Americans support, without doubt or question.

Just as Hitler rejoiced to the sound of thousands of happily-duped citizens screaming "Sieg Heil! Sieg Heil! Sieg Heil!", so did Bush last week welcome the orchestrated chants of "four more years! four more years!" during his recent political tour, during which the Winona (Wis) Daily News of May 8 reported that : "Hundreds of soldiers from Fort McCoy, all wearing white T-shirts with an American flag on the front, enthusiastically cheered the president, especially his remarks about the war on terror. "I will never relent in bringing justice to our enemies. I will defend the security of America, whatever it takes," Bush said to enthusiastic chants of "Four More Years!""

Who sent these soldiers to cheer for Bush? Were they on official duty at the time of their attendance at a political function? Who provided transport for them to go to the Republican rally? If Bush visits soldiers on duty, as commander-in-chief, then it is proper they should pay respect to him. And if soldiers want to attend a Republican Party supporters" mass meeting as individuals, that is their right as citizens. But when they are publicly and jubilantly highlighted as soldiers by the organizers of a partisan electioneering jamboree it appears that they are being used in a political propaganda operation, just as was the crew of the aircraft carrier USS Mission Accomplished.

According to the La Crosse Tribune: "Servicemen and women from Fort McCoy filled an entire bleacher section. The soldiers, who wore T-shirts with American flags on the front and the wording, "I am an American soldier" on the back, drew lots of applause from the rest of the crowd. When Larry Gatlin of the Gatlin Brothers stopped to let the soldiers sing a line of "America the Beautiful" solo "America, America, God shed His grace on thee" people responded with huge applause.

It"s back to Boykin"s militant God, again, and this time linked with stage-managed, football-game, strident patriotism to get votes for Bush. You might think that the Bush vote-shenanigan was appropriate use of the time of American soldiers (and of US taxpayers" money), but, even if you believe that it was, you may care to bear in mind sinister memories of other places, years ago, when massed ranks of soldiers behaved and chorused in similar fashion.

Have you seen the film of Hitler"s 1934 Nuremberg Rally made by Leni Riefenstahl? (It was a classic of its time. She died last year, aged 101.) The Nazi Storm Troopers wore crisp brown shirts rather than casual white T-shirts, of course, but the same enthusiasm, the same emotional, excited, starry-eyed devotion, was on public display. The army was politicized, and followed the chief politician, the charismatic Adolf Hitler, whose soldiers sang the Horst Wessel Song ("Flag high, ranks closed, the Storm Troopers [Brownshirts] march with silent solid tread"), which is set to the tune of the Christian hymn 'My God, How Great Thou Art'.

What goes around, comes around, and reappears in the enthusiastic chorus of "America the Beautiful, God shed His grace on thee" by hundreds of happy-clappy, US soldiers at a party political rally arranged to whip up support for a travelling politician. Sure, they were wearing T-shirts, not Brown Shirts, but just like the young Storm Troopers of seventy years ago they cannot differentiate between a commander-in-chief, in which appointment the incumbent is deserving of deference, and a cheapjack gobbet of political slime who was taking them for a ride in the interests of maintaining power. And why should they? How could they? They are, after all, taught to revere the great leader, and when their superiors encourage them to join in politics, who are they to question them? (Orders are orders . . . )

The American author William Shirer lived in Germany in the 1930s, and produced his definitive and terrifying "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" in 1959. Among other things he traces the policy of Hitler regarding the German army in which "it became obvious that Nazi propaganda was making headway . . . especially among the younger officers." Before Hitler came to power the German defence minister, General Groener, "requested soldiers to refrain from politics and to serve the state aloof from all [political] party strife." No chance, of course, because Hitler knew he could expect absolute obedience from all sections of the military, to whom he promised glory in patriotic defence of the interests of the Nation.

Hitler relied on the discipline that is instilled in all soldiers to ensure that their loyalty centered on him, and him alone. In an uncanny replay of history, the 21st Century US military is being manipulated through its members" instinctive patriotic feelings to believe that it is Bush and only Bush who can save the nation from unknown horrors. The strategy is identical : link patriotism and religiosity with the loyalty of gullible people who are inherently deferential to authority, or have been encouraged to be so, and you have the recipe for power, especially over those who know nothing about the outside world.

Do you think that the average American is well-informed about the world? It appears not to be the case. In fact it seems that the average American citizen has been thoroughly deceived by the very person they have been taught to revere.

It is terrifying that millions of down-to-earth, ordinary, decent people in the US believe that torture of Iraqis is permissible and even admirable, because of "what happened on 9-11". Take, for example, one particular supporter of the woman soldier, Lynndie England, who was photographed grinning at a heap of naked Iraqis. The Independent (UK) reported that the justifier of torture was "Mrs Gainor, [a] good-natured woman [in Lynndie England"s home town], who works for an internet company". She was "even more explicit in her defence of Ms England. She said: "We are not there [in Iraq] for a tea party. We are there because they blew up 5,000 of our people." She was then asked if she believed Iraq was involved in the terror attacks of 11 September 2001, and replied "They were definitely involved . . . "."

In that ignorance we see an eerie and disturbing picture of compliance with authority and unquestioning acceptance of what the powerful ones " the all-knowing, the benevolent, far-sighted Big Brothers of the masses " desire to be seen as a threat to complacency and normality. It is not just that the figure of 5000 is wildly wrong, it is that the statement "[the Iraqis] were definitely involved [in 9-11]" is contrary to demonstrable fact. But the continual linking by Bush, and his supporting propagandists, of 9-11 with "the just war" on Iraq has convinced half of all Americans, including this poor benighted soccer-mom defender of US torture, that the war on Iraq was necessary to punish those responsible for 9-11. Selling of the attractive lie about Iraqi responsibility for terrorism directed against America has become more urgent since it became obvious that other justifications for war, such as tales of "imminent threat" from nuclear weapons, "thousands of tons of chemical agents" and so forth, have been shown as the product of the Bush administration"s group psychosis, which is defined as "severe mental derangement, especially when resulting in delusions and loss of contact with external reality".

Enormous damage has been done. Much of the American public now begs to hear such declarations as "I will defend the security of America, whatever it takes" that Bush makes, time after time, to emotional audiences. A cheerleader for torture such as the seriously psychopathic Senator James Inhofe is considered patriotic when he declares "these prisoners [tortured in Abu Ghraib], they're murderers, they're terrorists, they're insurgents. Many of them probably have American blood on their hands, and here we're so concerned about the treatment of those individuals. I am outraged that we have so many humanitarian do-gooders right now crawling all over these prisons looking for human-rights violations while our troops, our heroes, are fighting and dying." Little wonder Mr and Mrs Average American are attracted to the notion that true patriotism and moral decency are exemplified by the grotesque amorality preached by such as he. Inhofe is in need of urgent psychiatric treatment and a dose of morality therapy, but this does not alter the fact that what he says has a great deal of appeal to a surprising number of people.

The willingness of millions of Americans to believe what is comfortable and good and patriotic, in defiance of evidence that what has been taking place in Iraq is uncomfortable and evil and nationally disgraceful, is shown by the supportive yellow ribbons displayed in the hometown of the grinning sadist, Lynndie England. Direct, undeniable evidence of wickedness is ignored, derided or explained away. The facts are not patriotic ; they are not what America should be about ; they are not NICE; therefore they cannot be accepted. The Nazi propaganda chief, Goebbels, was an expert at such manipulation. He and Inhofe are a lovely pair.

It is in the interests of furthering state control over any population that a threat to the nation be presented and described, repeatedly and in simple terms (soundbites ; quick video clips), with the overlying message that the looming menace can be neutralized and "normality" restored only by constant vigilance and action on the part of a kindly and all-seeing " and all-powerful " overlord. Of course it is the responsibility of government to deter, detect and neutralise threats to the citizenry, but it is not the responsibility of government to indulge in willful misrepresentation in order to achieve its aims. Suspension of belief in morality is not usually enforceable. But it can be willingly embraced, just as it was by ordinary, decent people in Nazi Germany, who were encouraged, at first gradually and then by a mighty propaganda campaign, to believe that minor and defenseless nations presented a threat to their personal security and to their country.

Germans lost their freedom, beginning with the Decree for Protection of Nation and State. If the Patriot Act is not repealed, Americans will lose their freedom, too. The parallels with Nazi Germany are too close for comfort.

Brian Cloughley writes on military and political affairs. He can be reached through his website www.briancloughley.com
 
lewdandlicentious said:


That's why I don't vote, I don't believe or trust any of them!

Do you not? I never realised that. Then again, politics isn't that likely to come up in one of our conversations. :p

I might just have to have a chat with you about that, though, and see if I can talk some sense into you (ha!). I might not be a political animal, as such, but I do believe in as much participation in the political process as possible. Of which, for obvious reasons, I see voting as one of the most important.

I had a good politics teacher at school. ;)

Lou :rose:

P.S. I doubt you'll even see this for at least a week, cos you're gonna be away, but I'll remind you when you get back. ;)
 
The comparison of Nazi Germany to the current situation in the US is odious only in light of what happened later in Germany, but I think it's important that we see that this is how fascism happens: not with troops in the streets or UN helicopters landing on your front lawn, but with people telling us to rally around the flag and taking our liberties away for our own security and the wellfare of our country.

There's another parlalel that wasn't mentioned, and that was the implicit trust the Germans put in their leaders and their refusal to speak out against them. Let's remember that Germany was a civilized nation of good people, not a land of sadistic monsters, and that they were certain God was on their side too.

---dr.M.
 
Effete vs. Silent

kiginally posted by Virtual_Burlesque [/i]
Wasn’t "The Silent Majority" Spiro Agnew's claim to fame . . . or am I thinking of Gyro Gearloose?

And what's the difference?
[/QUOTE]

No, Spiro Agnew was famous for going to a prison where he could still play golf, and also for coining the term, "EFFETE SNOBS" to describe Eastern liberals (aka the educated liberals from Ivy League schools.)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top