h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

In that case it might be an idea to just, you know, let the old fundamentalists die out...

News for the New Zealanders (and anyone else):


http://www.cbc.ca/cp/world/030617/w061742.html

http://www.cbc.ca/cp/world/030617/w061760.html

Good links. Thanks.

I find it interesting that the link to *Dubya*'s indescretions and illegal activities has not so much as kicked up dust here and elsewhere. It's veracity is heavily researched and well referenced as well as being fair and balanced. Is the moral and ethical grounding of one of the aggressors in this event not relevant?

I didn't comment because I wasn't at all surprised. But now that you mention it, let's recap:

Saddam is a psychotic Stalinist running an impoverished, hedged in country of fifteen year olds.

George is a lying, hypocritical, drug using Fundamentalist who may have stolen an election to become the head man of the most powerful military and economic machine the world has ever known.

Isn't it obvious who the world should worry about?

Ah, Zoomer, don't get me started. As soon as Clinton was elected, they hired Kenneth Starr to dig up some dirt on him - and it took them six years. Bush already has plenty of dirt around those roots, and they're busy shaking him off and washing him down - nope, no dirt on him!

Personally, I dislike the mudslinging that any campaign always descends to. I don't think that an affair with an intern diminished Clinton's abilities in any way. Bush has plenty of faults to keep him from being elected - if those weren't enough, then bringing up his coke habit isn't going to help. It's worth a try, though!

It is the moral, ethical, and business backround I am concerned with, not just past indescresions with illegal drugs. And this is not an election year, but they still keep coming around, bigger and more damning every time.

"They have used the pretext of anti-communism. The truth is very different. The truth is to be found in the financial interests of the fruit company and the other US monopolies which have invested great amounts of money in Latin America and fear that the example of Guatemala would be followed by other Latin countries.[...] I was elected by a majority of the people of Guatemala, but I have had to fight under difficult conditions. The truth is that the sovereignty of a people cannot be maintained without the material elements to defend it.[...] I took over the presidency with great faith in the democratic system, in liberty and the possibility of achieving economic independence for Guatemala. I continue to believe that this program is just. I have not violated my faith in democratic liberties, in the independence of Guatemala and in all the good which is the future of humanity..[...]"

Jacobo Arbenz, President of Guatemala, 1954

http://www.stanford.edu/~mbucheli/arbenz.html

This is a speech which will be referred to frequently in the future.

From the second link

"The reforms aim to upgrade a judicial system that catered to a dictator's whims more than the rule of law. "

like WindowsXP. Not an upgrade, just a slap of paint. Like "Made in USA" on a certain stack of crates from China

******

" The U.S. military said raids that began Sunday on Iraqi homes and businesses in Baghdad and northern Iraq..."

I saw that on TV. The loudest sound during the night-time raid was a child crying. So what's the difference between the old reigheme and the new one? Is it that the new one televised?

Great quote:

"I fear the fundamental problem is that instead of using intelligence as evidence on which to base a decision about policy, we used intelligence as the basis on which to justify a policy on which we had already settled," Cook said.

For those who are interested...

There's a great interview of General Clark on this website... and some other juicy stuff too.

http://www.bushwatch.com/

And this is really frightening... a short history lesson on Hitler and his rise to power - sound familiar?

http://www.bushwatch.net/miscellanea2002.htm#germany

I agree bouncy. That would be the prefered route.

Note the emphasis on "letting the old fundamentalists die out", rather than coercing them to die out.

Here we go again:

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/06/18/bush_iran030618

From anhaga's link

"Bush said following a cabinet meeting at the White House. "Iran would be dangerous if it had a nuclear weapon.""

- and North Korea is a perfectly safe country to have one? It seems to be true what people have been saying. The US will bully countries that it knows does not have WMD's. It's safer that way.

***************

"Tehran, meanwhile, says Bush is interfering in internal matters. Some reformers in Iran say the U.S. attention isn't helping."

Maybe they haven't caught on the the idea that it's not suppost to help.

***************

Thanx for the links Canada seems to have a great news service, judging but the site.

>> do not see Iran as a target of anything more than destabilization. There are movements poping up daily by the dicontented youth of that nation which is a large demographic in Iran. The young are tired of the old fundamentalists,>>
Which is no doubt true, but not the whole story... Propaganda TV and radio, including contributions by Reza Pahlavi are being beamed into Iran all the time by the USA. The 'movements' are more orchestrated than spontaenous!

Fascinating, especially the second story...
I cannot believe people who think the WMD excuse was real - surely there are enough enquiries going on to make anyone think twice...

Thanks, anhaga, that's great!

That's a great site, Lentilla, I shall be back to it...