Skip to content
Welcome guest. | Register | Login | Add
About | Wiki | Legacy

Bush attacks The New York Times

10 replies [Last post]
memenode's picture
User offline. Last seen 6 days 9 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 2004-07-12

Yet another sign of how bad the direction US is moving in.

Bush administration is actually going to prosecute a newspaper for revealing the truth in the name of, well of course, "war on terrorism".

Who does this behaviour remind you off? China of course, because what better way to prevent New York Times and other media from revealing the sensitive truth than to simply censor all talk the government disaprove off.

And given the fact that there is practically no valid choice on any conceivable US elections and that it would hence be hard to either elect Bush out of the office or elect someone better in place, as one commentator explained US is truly going way downhill.

__________________

Daniel Memenode signature

memenode's picture
User offline. Last seen 6 days 9 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 2004-07-12
Re: Bush attacks The New York Times

On IRC free-zombie has pointed me to this link: http://www.pirate-party.us/

It seems some US people are forming an US version of the swedish "Pirate Partiet" to fight for copyright reform, patent system elimination and generally against increased state control and corporate greed.

Very interesting. The names of these parties are for the first time probably, openly and proudly accepting the title the big industry gives to those who they oppose: "pirates". In essence, that term is being turned into an activist banner. Kind of ironic, isn't it?

__________________

Daniel Memenode signature

User offline. Last seen 11 years 21 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2004-08-23
Re: Bush attacks The New York Times

I think it's really smart. Changing a "bad" name into a name you're proud of takes away your opponent's favourite insult. Secondly, starting a political party could be a good way to get things into the mainstream media, if you're smart enough to avoid being ridiculed by them.

dylunio's picture
User offline. Last seen 11 years 20 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2005-05-08
Re: Bush attacks The New York Times

And they say the US of A is the land of the Free...

AFAIK the US hasn't got a decleration of war against 'Terror' - since it's not a country. Thus the 'war on terror' isn't a war and the NY Times should legaly have right to publish this stuff (IANAL).

This is another tactic used by repressive regimes, such as China, North Korea, Iran and Iraq.

User offline. Last seen 12 years 37 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2005-09-28
The United States has had

The United States has had numerous "wars" on issues rather than nations.

The War on Terror
The War on Drugs
The War on Poverty
The war against communism (containment)
The war on alcohol (prohibition)
etc.

These "wars" are always about drumming up support for certain positions or detracting attention from another extremely unpopular situation, such as the Vietnam War or internal political scandal. It's a diversionary practice that dates back to the writings of Machiavelli.

User offline. Last seen 7 years 17 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2007-02-26
A New America Century

As as kid we were raised on Sesame Street, The Little House on the Prairie, The Waltons and so on.
We were big Elvis fans in our house, add Blues, Jazz, Soul, Country, Bluegrass, yes, even Cajun, we loved it all.

Many Irish homes had three framed photos on the wall, Michael Collins *or* the other fella, the Pope, and JFK. I watched Neil Armstrong land on the moon on our old 405 line B&W tv, Evil Knevil's daredevil stunts, Hollywood gave us King Kong, Star Trek, Star Wars, E.T., Jaws. It was the land of the free who helped save Europe in WWII from truly evil empires and then spent a fortune to keep the mad Ruskies at bay.

Despite some shocking revelations which could be blamed on individuals, from our perspective growing up the USA had the best image in the world and were an inspiration to the rest of us. Anyone speaking badly of the USA was just a nay-sayer with no plans for a better tomorrow, a begrudging gutter-snipe who wanted to drag everyone down to their level of misery.

But what a shattering fall from grace. At the hands of greedy corporations and their puppet politicians.

Bush claims "they hate our way of life". Wrong. Give me freedom, prosperity, and happiness over oppression, squalour, and misery any day. But let's have some fairness, or do all those lofty principles only apply to some 'chosen' few? I actually feel sorry for ordinary decent Americans. any I've met I've liked, how bad is it to see such corruption in your own country? We've had it here in Ireland, it was a local issue given our scale, but we've been cleaning house.

It really is down to those ordinary decent Americans to get past this two party pantomime though. There's Ralph Nader and the Pirate Party, good. Hopefully someone will set up a right wing party, maybe gun-totin' ESR will help. The diametric opposite of what I believe in of course, but strategically it would split the republican vote. The world doesn't want a New American Century, but we could sure do with a New America Century.

User offline. Last seen 10 years 25 weeks ago. Offline
Moderator
Joined: 2005-05-29
libervisco wrote:it would
libervisco wrote:

it would hence be hard to either elect Bush out of the office

<a href="http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Additional_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Amendment_XXII">Amendment 22 of the US constitution</a> wrote:

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice

Btw this thread is from July 2006...

__________________

idontknowctmwhatsthepointofcapitallettersorspacesorpunctuation

memenode's picture
User offline. Last seen 6 days 9 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 2004-07-12
I feel much the same way,

I feel much the same way, although I've obviously been through a lot different life myself. Everyone, including us here in poor Croatia (been in Yugoslavia, broke through the war etc.) was affected and inspired by USA in some way, a lot of which was US culture. It really was percieved as a "promised land" of sorts, a land of freedom.

The problem with Bush saying that he is trying to protect american way of life is that he is in fact doing just the opposite. If freedom was at heart of the american way of life and he is suppressing it, how is that protecting it?

So this whole cover is being blown away. It's not about war on terror. It's not about protection and it's not about freedom. It is pure old greed for power and money. That's why corporations were practically let into the government and that's why Iraq was invaded.

And now whenever a new kind of government is to be set up, and whoever this will be, will have quite a bit of mess to clean up. Either that or they'll be no different.

__________________

Daniel Memenode signature

memenode's picture
User offline. Last seen 6 days 9 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 2004-07-12
Right, I heard about that

Right, I heard about that some time ago. So Bush is basically out either way soon, unless he manages to either change or break the constitution (again I suppose).

But it's going to be hard to stay on the throne anyway. I hear there is quite a bit of uprising against him even in USA? America has finally awaken I suppose.

__________________

Daniel Memenode signature

User offline. Last seen 10 years 25 weeks ago. Offline
Moderator
Joined: 2005-05-29
sort of

In the midterm (of the presidency, which is 4 years) elections in November 2006, the Democrats (major opposing party of Bush's Republicans) won the majority in both houses of Congress. That does signal a change, BUT the Democrats are cowards (if they weren't they would've already done something serious (that is, not a stupid nonbinding resolution) to end the war in Iraq) and in the aspects of free culture, parties don't matter; all that matters is how tech-savvy the politian is.

__________________

idontknowctmwhatsthepointofcapitallettersorspacesorpunctuation

memenode's picture
User offline. Last seen 6 days 9 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 2004-07-12
Yeah, I know democrats won,

Yeah, I know democrats won, and was also glad to hear this because I knew republicans were more supportive of Bush. Of course, I'm remaining quite skeptical about democrats causing significant changes (in your two party system, they don't seem all that different to each other), but as you say, parties don't matter.

If democrats can be changed to the better, brought to terms with how things work today in the technology world, understand why things are different today and that laws should hence be adapted; there may still be hope.

Well I do like to be an optimist, so I'll look forward to more good news.

__________________

Daniel Memenode signature

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.