Re: International Peace March (19th / 20th March 2005)

From: Beth (BethStone21_at_hotmail.NOSPICEDHAM.com)
Date: 03/25/05 

Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 14:17:44 GMT

Annie wrote:
> Beth wrote:
> > Annie wrote:
> > > The purpose of a war is to kill people and break things.
> >
> > Well, at least someone admits that it's just about sadistic
> > pleasure and little else...
>
> Silly mad cow. This remark merely illustrates your naivet,.

How dare you even refer to the concept of anyone being "naive" when you
advocate "killing people and breaking things" as a means of "solution" to
all difficulties...don't you even dare use the word "civilised" when - in
between cavewoman grunts - you wave around your club made of bone, crying
"kill!" with bloodthirstiness...and don't go anywhere near pretending
you're somehow more "realistic", just because you always give a cynical
reply...

Your remark here in response just demonstrates that I was crediting you
with more intellect than you actually possess...I apologise for the
"mistaken identity" there...you are clearly a complete idiot with a
"superiority complex" so blinding and blinkered, it's surprising you can
acknowledge the presence of anything beyond your own nose long enough to
have any conversations with anyone at all...

> It has nothing to do with 'sadism' or 'pleasure.'

Torturing common criminals who have absolutely no information to supply
about "terrorism", with a big smile on your face and a thumbs up sign, has
nothing to do with "sadism"?

Taking photos of it - intermingled with home-made pornography from the
torturers - and then distributing this as a "morale booster" to fellow
troops is not "sadism"?

I'm sorry...but "sadism" is named after the infamous Marquis De Sade and
mixing pornography with torture and abuse is _exactly_ the definition of
this "extreme schadenfreude" to delight in the _PAIN_ and _HUMILATION_ of
others, especially with a "sexual gratification" angle...

Those "abuse photos" (which are actually torture photos but watered-down
euphamisms are the American way, when it comes to avoiding facing the
reality of their own actions...dropped a bomb accidentally on your own
troops? Nevermind, call it "friendly fire" and this saves you from the
psychological trauma of realising what you've actually done) are _exactly_
"sadism" 100%...and are exactly about deriving "pleasure" from the _PAIN_
and _HUMILATION_ of others...who, in this case, were mostly looters and
other common criminals that you can't place that "terrorism" nonsense as
justification (even if "terrorists" - which most could not in any way be
described as such (it's a prison: Actual "terrorists" get the "full
treatment" of being kidnapped to the Guantanamo concentration camp for
their "interrogation") - then such treatment cannot still be
justified...for what it does to the _TORTURER_, irrespective of the
tortured...you think these sadists - given free reign to torture and kill
and humilate even the corpses - will make "healthy" citizens to return to
American life? They are as psychologically traumatised - mentally
diseased - and dangerous as paedophiles, with "tastes" for grossly vile
methods of "sexual gratification"...not my "opinion" there, ask any
well-qualified psychologist about the mental state and _criminal_
behaviours of such people...there is a _REASON_ for nearly everything in
law...and fair treatment is not solely about the "victim", it is also about
the perpertrator...I mean, imagine it were you: A trained killer, ordered
to annihilate people arbitrarily, break souls, torture and humilate fellow
human beings...and being immersed in this kind of conduct, possibly for
years? You think you'll walk out of that in a good mental state?

It is NOT solely the Iraqis who were tortured, abused, humilated and
killed...it is the American soldiers out there who are equally being
mistreated in the exact same way, on the orders of the
Commander-in-chief...

You talk of "conflict by attrition"...to wear down the enemy until you
"win"...but you seem to fail to acknowledge the "attrition" works on both
sides...or, indeed, if it did not, then America could not possibly have
lost Vietnam, as the "superior military forces" existed then, as much as
now...how did America lose what should have been a "push-over"? Because war
causes "conflict by attrition" on _BOTH_ sides...

Think it over: The Iraqi insurgents are sustaining the greater
casualities - over 14,000 or so, at the most minimum estimates - but they
are being drawn from a "pool" of _MILLIONS_ who live in that
country...whereas, the American troops are approaching 2,000 casualities,
which is less in absolute terms but the "pool" being drawn on is only
several hundred thousand in total...and over eleven thousand are reported
"wounded in action" by the DoD itself...

Then troops are being asked to remain in Iraq far longer - uninterrupted -
on duty than they should be...even if a "minority", those torturing
soldiers with their sadistic "snuff movies" and photos, mixing torture with
pornography...they've clearly been there too long, subject to the wrong
orders, the wrong "climate" where they believed this "acceptable"
conduct...when they do come off "duty", are they psychologically _safe_
people to return to "civvie" life eventually?

There was no WMD so there was no "threat"...it has made America more
vurnerable and hated and despised that the "recruits" for the suicide
bombers must now be queuing around the block...with troops engaged
elsewhere on missions that have nothing to do with "terrorism" that they
are being drawn away from _real_ "defence" of the nation - more
psychological issues: Soldiers sign up to defend the nation, not to do
personal missions of "economic strategy" for the Commander-in-chief...that
this _abuse_ of the American military can't be too good either...soldiers
_refusing_ to go to the front line, _refusing_ their orders, becoming the
_torturers_ we saw in those photos - from "terrorism"...

Are you completely sure you can win "by attrition"? That is their home
country, they are waging conflict to protect their nation, families and
friends...that's a far more powerful motivator...

Oh, indeed, "war by attrition" _WORKS BOTH WAYS_...the question is: Who
will crack first? And don't think your world-reknown American "patriotism"
is any kind of "advantage"...your "enemy" is _exactly_ as nationalistic,
fighting for their country - as they see it - right there on their own
doorsteps...how "determined" would you be in their place? Can flag waving
in front of soldiers too long out there, too long apart from their homeland
really compare, however "patriotic" they may be? And knowing that they are
fighting on what has been shown to at least be partially, if not wholly,
based on a lie?

Do I think America will lose? No, I don't..._IF_ we solely mean
"militarily"...the "elephant" does, indeed, have immense weaponry to crush
the comparatively defenceless "flea"...

But if we mean in human cost...in cost to American "defence"...in cost to
the psychology of a nation...in cost to the feelings of "patriotism"
amongst American...in cost to dividing the nation in two, never more
pronounced since the Civil War...in costs to - though the nation rallied in
a time of struggle, as is the American way and all tribute to it - the
"trust" in the Commander-in-chief with that fool-hardy, idiotic "mission
accomplished" sign staying in the minds of an entire nation...in these not
insignificant non-military "peripheral" costs of the war...in costs to the
damage to the sacrosanct nature of the Constitution, as Bush rode roughshod
over it to set up concentration camps...the continual - and, deep down, you
_KNOW_ it's at least partially _DESERVED_, if not completely so - barrage
of attack at what your nation has done and will do, from the rest of the
world...in these costs - real _AMERICAN_ costs to America herself, what
makes the country what it is - you've already _LOST_...

Have you heard of the term "Pyrrhic Victory", Annie? It's where you do,
indeed, "win" a conflict eventually...but that you've lost far, far more in
that struggle to "win" than you actually gain by winning...

Even if you "succeed" right this very minute, the damage already caused to
the nation by its own actions cannot come close to justifying or rectifying
the losses so far taken...let us say that, tomorrow, all Iraqi insurgents
cease...that the "democracy" begins to flourish in that country...that,
immediately, there is no more "cost", only "success" at reaching the
"objectives" (whatever they are, as they are "moving goal posts" from
everything Bush has cited over the course of the war)...

If this happened right this very minute, then - in your heart of hearts -
could you say that it was truly a clear "win"? That the damage and cost
already done could be easily forgotten (how many are _STILL_ suffering
psychologically from Vietnam...indeed, one has to be "careful" in merely
speaking that name at all to America - not pushing it or over-doing it,
which would be so easy to do when it's ripe for the use as an example - as
it _IS_ a very sensitive subject to some)? That you could stand by the
Lincoln or Jefferson monuments with your head held high - knowing that
Lincoln and Jefferson themselves, as I've quoted, had to be _DEFIED_ in
their advice and wisdom to wage this "war of attrition" - in the same way
as before? Knowing that the nation is not "strong" at all by this
conflict...that it has been split straight down the middle (oh, there's
always been "culture wars" in America but the people were never _POLARISED_
on the issues in this kind of way, since - obviously - Civil War times)...

Because the lies won't disappear...those photos of torture enacted in
_YOUR_ name won't cease to have been taken...the tens of thousands dead -
on all sides - won't rise from the grave...and 9/11 won't be "erased" from
the consciousness...bin Laden is still out there...

Are you _REALLY_ sure you made the wisest decision?

Are you _REALLY_ so utterly "naive" to think that only "military victory"
counts?

You, my dear Annie, are the utterly "naive" one to think that this could
ever be "erased" or "undone" or that "victory" will justify it or
rationalise it or otherwise...

And how are you going to feel when - without rest - Bush sends the troops
onto Iran? Then on to Syria? Then on to North Korea? And that your vote
exactly gave him the "political captial", as he put it, to carry on?

I may not be an American myself...but you do know that I am, in fact, very
much an Americo-phile with regards to the Founding Fathers and the
Constitutional principles and the Bill of Rights and such...I have distinct
trouble supporting your country in practice but in the "theory" of what it
aspired to be, no nation has ever really been so bold and so inspirational
in its dreams of a better world...I have absolutely NO "anti-American
agenda" at all...on the contrary, it is the irrepairable damage that this
will cause to America herself, as much as any nation she attacks, that
concerns me...that America herself and Liberty off Manhattan, could
spiritually _DIE_ in the quest for a cheap - and ultimately unsatisfying -
piece of "revenge" (on people who had nothing to do with the 9/11 strike,
anyway)...that America will tear herself apart and her Dream will die, if
it has not already gone too far and the irretrievable damage done...

A nation is not her flag...a nation is not her anthem...a nation is not her
"pledge"...a nation is her people...and their Love for their own
lands...patriotism is the Love of one's own country, NEVER the hatred of
another...

> In a war, you kill people and break things so that the enemy
> eventually loses the manpower, the materiel, and/or the will
> necessary to continue waging war.

Yes; It's called "attrition", as you don't seem to know the correct
terminology for this military strategy...you just keep going and going
until the "enemy" cannot stand the bombardment any longer...

BUT "war by attrition" _IS_ a "battle of wills"...that is, this method of
attack _COSTS_ on both sides simultaneously...to keep going and going
levies its toll on the aggressor, as much as it does on the "victim"...

This has been well-known since ancient times...it is why "the Art of War"
ascribes the warrior who knows when _NOT_ to fight, as being the greatest
warrior...the warrior who can cause as much "attrition" on the "enemy"
side, paying the _LEAST_ cost to themselves...

There is a legend in China of Emperor Qin (pronounced "Chin" and, yes,
"China" is named after this first Emperor who united the six kingdoms to
create China and defended it from the Mongolian raiders by constructing the
Great Wall of China - apparently, the only visible man-made object from
space - around an _entire country_, which is no small
achievement)...assassins came to kill the king...but, at the moment of
assassination, the king was spared because it is "the way of the warrior"
to realise the greater forces of peace and unity...and saw in the king the
will to do such...the assassin then refused to attack and sacrificed
himself for the good of "our land"...the legend has gained mythological
status but there is no suggestion it is not based on some kind of
reality...

The assassin realising that the cost of the assassination would be too much
that he sacrificed his "victory" for the good of the entire country...a
legend upon which China founded itself...a culture founded on the ways of
war that it is NO "naivity" for this to be the "ultimate ideal of the
warrior" but the cold, hard lesson of centuries of nigh-on ceaseless
warfare...a view shared by Gandhi, who defeated the world's largest empire,
through non-violent means, to bring about the independence of the world's
largest democracy...

These are no small examples...it is _YOU_ who does not know history...who
does not really understand the true purpose of warfare...you think it's
only in the "win"...who has the strongest arm, not the wisest strategy and
the noblest, most honourable purpose...and that is why you've _ALREADY
LOST_...

[ snip ]
> So....did you climb aboard one of those 'free' buses, and ride
> to London for the 'peace march?'
>
> Yeah; didn't think so. Hehehe!

Bzzt! Wrong answer...again...your "superiority complex" is, once more, your
very weakness and makes your conclusions and predictions always _wrong_
because you presume that as you have no principles or backbone and nothing
but shameful complacent apathy for your life and country that others are
the same as you...misunderestimating the "enemy" is exactly the first
mistake in losing a war..._always_ understand and respect your "enemy" at
all times...de-humanising them may make torturing and killing them easier
to your frail and fragile psychology but it's a serious strategic mistake,
not to realise that your "enemy" is as ever bit - if not more so - as
intelligent and determined as you are...

My travel arrangements were other than the "free buses"...but I did,
indeed, ride to London for the "peace march"...we passed the American
embassy this time - they allowed it, this time, which they had not
previously - and, boy, you should have seen the amount of police, barriers,
police dogs and other "protections" that surrounded the American embassy
(Metropolitan police too, so it's all British taxpayer money paying for
it)...it seems they were either expecting serious trouble or, more likely,
trying to _PROVOKE_ it with an intimidating police presence because if the
"peace march" was to attack the embassy in any regard then we'd all be
easily dismissed as "crackpots" in the media (and it would also scare
others joining future marches, by trying to paint us in the same light as
those violent "anti-globalisation" marches, who ruined their own cause with
their violence)...the strategy was clever...but didn't work...

The rally afterward featured the families of soldiers who had died
speaking...the parents squarely blaming the Blair government, not the Iraqi
who killed their son, because they said that, simply, if Iraqis were
invading our country then we would also, understandably, take up arms
against the aggressors too...that the parent could understand others also
simply protecting their families and friends...and could forgive this, as
it was not done in malice...but blamed the government and their orders to
place their son in that situation in the first place, to force that Iraqi
into that decision...

Also, soldiers took to the podium (well, there was no actual "podium" but
you know what I mean) to declare that they would outrightly refuse action
in Iraq and accept whatever consequences - court martial, jail or
whatever - that would come from that...because the solider said that,
simply, he had signed up to _DEFEND THE NATION_ and that he saw that this
action does no such thing and may even make attacks more likely in
"retribution" to the injustices and crimes - such as torture - inflicted on
that nation, based on what are now 100% _KNOWN LIES_ that were put
forward...that he would happily serve and signed up to sacrifice his life
in that goal, in any war for the defence of the nation or just war...but
not for a lie...

Backing up the UN's judgement that the war was illegal, the British
Attorney General - who's "war advice" has turned out to be nothing more
than a single A4 *** containing 9 paragraphs only - has been put in the
spotlight here because, in a resignation letter (resigned "on principle"
that the government was clearly performing an illegal action), that was
made available by our new "Freedom of Information Act" had a paragraph
blanked out, claiming "national interest"...the original text of this
paragraph was leaked, though, revealing that this was a _LIE_ designed to
simply _cover up_ the other _LIES_ that the war was "legal"...as the
paragraph reveals that the Attorney General himself changed his mind
repeatedly about the legality of the action - not as "concrete" a case as
suggested by Tony Blair - and had _AGREED_ that it was "illegal" on the
exact points of law that someone else of that opinion put forward to make
the action _illegal_...

Coupled with the Butler report, which demonstrated that the government
_DID_ alter the contents of the "dodgy dossier" to present a "rock solid
case" for war when, in fact, they were openly _NEGLECTING_ to include the
serious "caveats" that the intelligence services actually had that the
information was _NOT_ trustworthy...this reveals that, on Blair's end of
things, the war was unjustified and illegal - AND THEY _KNEW_ IT - but
"massaged" the dossiers and "legal advice" (which they still refuse to
release under the "Freedom of Information Act", which would settle the
matter one way or the other...claiming "national security" but the blanked
out paragraphs that have been "leaked" demonstrate that there is _NO SUCH
CONCERN_...that, as suspected, governments _DO_ and _DID_, in this case,
use this "excuse" of "national security" simply to cover up and hide their
other _LIES_) in order to present a case for pre-determined military
action...

As such, the action itself was / is a war crime...the torturing of the
prisoners in Abu Grahib is a war crime...the concentration camp in
Guantanamo "unconstitutional" (Supreme Court ruling)...Belmarsh a violation
of Habeus Corpus (Law Lords ruling)...the refusal to fulfill the
obligations of the Geneva Convention of an occupying army to count the dead
another war crime...these are not my "opinions", these are legal _facts_...

If "rule of law" is to be maintained, then they should be had up in front
of the war crime tribunal in the Hague for their actions...whether you
believe the action was "correct" or not, this is an inescapable fact...they
have committed repeated actual, outright _war crimes_ - before we even
reach the more "moral" stuff of lying to the people and trying to cover
this up and such, which are actions against democratic rule itself - to
which democratic representatives have no excuse but to face the rule of law
and court for what they have done...it is the foundation principle of true
_civilisation_: NO-ONE is above the law...and, if they truly believe that
they did the correct thing, then why are they not willing to _ACCEPT THE
CONSEQUENCES_ of that? Coalition troops - who's courage cannot be
disputed - have happily declared openly that they will fully stand
accountable for the consequences of their actions and decisions...

Bush is no "tough Texan"; He is a _COWARD_ from Maschusettes, who
constantly projects _LIE_ after _LIE_ to "dupe" people into believing
him...sorry, it is _YOU_ who is "naive"...and, worse, you've demonstrated
you don't believe the lies either and know full well what they are...you,
therefore, are a _WILLING_ accomplice in war crimes and cannot absolve
yourself of your criminality in supporting the conspiracy to enact them...

Really, you should accept "sadist" because that has a more understandable
basis in mental disease to "excuse" you than for what appears to be true
that you are simply a coward and a criminal...there was no defensive
motivation in this action, so you cannot cling to any "just war" excuse, as
all definitions of such exclude selfish aggression...

There was also an appearance by the group "Faithless" at the rally to
perform the following song:

"Whether long range weapon or suicide bomber
A WICKED MIND is a weapon of mass destruction

Whether you're soar away Sun or BBC 1
MISINFORMATION is a weapon of mass destruction

You could a Caucasian or a poor Asian
RACISM is a weapon of mass destruction

Whether inflation or 'globalization'
FEAR is a weapon of mass destruction

My dad came into my room holding his hat
I knew he was leaving,
he sat on my bed told me 'some facts, son.'

'I have a duty, calling on me
You and your sister be brave, my little soldier
And don't forget all I told ya
You're the mister of the house
now remember this:
And when you wake up in the morning
Give ya Momma a kiss'
Then I had to say: 'goodbye'

In the morning woke Momma
With a kiss on each eyelid,
Even though I'm only a kid
Certain things CAN'T BE HID

Momma grabbed me
Held me like I was made of gold
But left her inner stories untold

I said, 'momma it will be alright
...When daddy comes home, tonight'

Whether long range weapon or suicide bomber
WICKED MIND is a weapon of mass destruction

Whether you're soar away Sun or BBC 1
MISINFORMATION is a weapon of mass destruction

You could a Caucasian or a poor Asian
RACISM is a weapon of mass destruction

Whether inflation or globalization
FEAR is a weapon of mass destruction

Whether Halliburton or Enron...or ANYONE
GREED is a weapon of mass destruction

We need to find COURAGE, OVERCOME:
INACTION IS A WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION
INACTION IS A WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION
INACTION IS A WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION

The skin under my chin is exploding, again.
I'm getting stress from some other children.
I'm holding it in, we taking sides, like a politician
and if I get friction, we get to fightin'.

I defend my Dad he's the best of all men
An' whatever he's doin' he's doin' the right thing...
It's frightenin' but it makes me mad, why do all
Of these people seem to hate my Dad?

An' if that ain't enough, now I've got these spots.
I go to sleep every night with my stomach in knots.
And what's more, I can hear Mama next door
Explore the radio for reports of war.

And all we ever seem to do is hide the tears,
Seems Daddy been gone for years.
But he was right, now I'm geared up for the fight
An' he would be proud of me...
...if Daddy came home tonight.

Whether long range weapon or suicide bomber
WICKED MIND is a weapon of mass destruction

Whether you're soar away Sun or BBC 1
MISINFORMATION is a weapon of mass destruction

You could a Caucasian or a poor Asian
RACISM is a weapon of mass destruction

Whether inflation or globalization
FEAR is a weapon of mass destruction

Whether Halliburton or Enron or ANYONE
GREED is a weapon of mass destruction

We need to find COURAGE, OVERCOME:
INACTION IS A WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION
INACTION IS A WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION
INACTION IS A WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION

My story stops here, let's be clear:
This scenario is happening EVERYWHERE

And you ain't going to Nirvana or Farvana
You're coming RIGHT BAC HERE to live out your 'karma'

With even more drama than previously, seriously

JUST HOW MANY CENTURIES HAVE WE BEEN
WAITING FOR _SOMEONE ELSE_ TO MAKE US "FREE"?

And we refuse to see
That people overseas SUFFER JUST LIKE WE

BAD 'leadership' and ego's unfettered and free
Who FEED on the people they're supposed to lead

I don't need good people to pray and wait
For the Lord to make it all straight

There's only now, do it right.
'Cos I don't want your daddy...
...leaving home tonight

Whether long range weapon or suicide bomber
WICKED MIND is a weapon of mass destruction

Whether you're soar away Sun or BBC 1
MISINFORMATION is a weapon of mass destruction

You could a Caucasian or a poor Asian
RACISM is a weapon of mass destruction

Whether inflation or globalization
FEAR is a weapon of mass destruction

Whether Halliburton or Enron or anyone
GREED is a weapon of mass destruction

We need to find COURAGE, OVERCOME:
INACTION IS A WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION
INACTION IS A WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION
INACTION IS A WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION

INACTION IS A WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION
INACTION IS A WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION
INACTION IS A WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION
INACTION IS A WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION

INACTION IS A WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION"

[ "Mass Destruction", Faithless ]

Beth :|