The United States' latest foreign policy blunder, orchestrating the recent Ethiopian invasion of another Arab League Muslim capital, has created a new hotbed of militant anti-Americanism in the turbulent Horn of Africa. The message sent has been clear: no Arab or Muslim metropolis has imunity unless it falls into step with vital U.S regional interests. http://www.metimes.com/storyview.php?StoryID=20070108-090559-1606r

The mainstream media seem to have the attention retention ability of someone suffering from ADD. But why is it that the USA inc. can get away with blunt disrespect and underestimation of the intelligence of the population that is its' "shareholders" - the people paying and providing with patriotic acts, taxes, political participation and interest, military enlistment, trust and faith placed in the nation and so many other ways the means that keeps up and running an enormous corporation disguised as a nation disseminating the guilt but concentrating the pay-offs and power?

It's scary when President Bush says in his greeting to the incoming new congress that it is time to put politics aside and focus on the future. This should mean putting away the last remaining differences in methods and visions between the parties for the sake of "moving on", on the expense of ever learning from or, God forbid, acknowledging mistakes and crimes of the past.

So, will the figure heads and puppets playing the parts of a badly written pretense of democracy, get away with rewriting or simply ignoring history and past deeds when I as an individual have to suffer for years due to one late payment on a mortgage?

USA is providing aid to Somalia (1)- and the same media criticized and subjected(2) to attempts of restraining of such "anti-American slant"(3) and irresponsible management of information when telling of politicians misdeeds and attempts at power abuse - is now gladly recruited to carry this sunshine story(4).

But - of course - as White House spokesperson Tony Snow said about the War on Terror on 9 Jan 07(5) :

"The president will not shape policy according to public opinion, but he does understand that it's important to bring the public back to this war..."

I can only see this as meaning that instead of allowing the people to shape their government, the government's predetermined agenda should shape the public

Now the U.S military is now - again - directly involved in strikes on another nations' sovereign territory after indirect pulling of strings behind the scenes. And- again - it is all part of the war on terror. A label that is so suitable since it is so open-ended and ill-defined. Thererefore it provides a seemingly universally applicable justification for trespasses of sovereignty and meddling with other people's business and expression of free will.

But, we are told we should take the word of those we are told are the leaders that this is right since- they say - they have excluded all better alternatives.

Wonderful, but how did we get here?

What main actions and agents of the near and more distant past converge to form the present situation, and why is that treated as irrelevant?

I presume that information that would distort the message currently desired to bring to the audience - perhaps by adding facts that abruptly would change the alleged "good guys" to less good or maybe even slightly bad - is left out since it is better to get caught omitting than lying.

Now, let me remind you of some documented background facts that might not simplify, but it will most certainly put the presence it into a context of space and time instead of just "moving on". But first a clarification of terminology to prevent confusion and misunderstandings before we go down the rabbit hole.

Terminology: USA Inc.

 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  |  7