As always, Caveat Lector! The material presented in the linked articles does not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the owners of Cassiopaea.org. Research on your own and if you can validate any of the articles, or if you discover deception and/or an obvious agenda, we will appreciate if you drop us a line! We often post such comments along with the article synopses for the benefit of other readers.
The links will open a new window. To return to this page, simply close the new window.
The most successful tyranny
is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one
that removes the awareness of other possibilities, that makes it
seem inconceivable that other ways are viable, that removes the
sense that there is an outside.
It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong. --Voltaire--
Faith of consciousness is freedom
Life is religion. Life experiences reflect how one interacts with God. Those who are asleep are those of little faith in terms of their interaction with the creation. Some people think that the world exists for them to overcome or ignore or shut out. For those individuals, the worlds will cease. They will become exactly what they give to life. They will become merely a dream in the "past." People who pay strict attention to objective reality right and left, become the reality of the "Future." [Cassiopaea, 09-28-02]
March 9, 2003 Today's edition of Brought to You by The Bush Junta, Produced and Directed by the CIA, based on an original script by Henry Kissinger, with a cast of billions.... The "Greatest Shew on Earth," no doubt, and if you don't have a good sense of humor, don't read this page! It is designed to reveal the "unseen." If you can't stand the heat of Objective Reality, get out of the kitchen!
CIA - Attacks planned on US soil. The Central Intelligence Agency has warned that terrorists based in Iraq are planning attacks against American and allied forces inside the country after any invasion, The New York Times says in a story on its Web site, prepared for its Sunday editions. The Times cites government counterterrorism officials. Comment: Again we see that this seems to be exactly what the US administration wants. This information makes a mockery of the idea that war with Iraq is about creating a peaceful world. I mean, hello?! Is anyone else getting this? The events in Nazi germany and the second WW were a dress rehersal for what is to come, except this time Hitler is being played by George Bush, and the final scene includes a cast of billions.
"Earth: R.I.P." Good morning, class. We're here to discuss your next assignment in abstract imagination. First, I'll give you the background.
Early in what is called the twenty first century, the planet Earth entered its darkest period. Up to that point, the history of mankind had been filled with war, conquest, enslavement, brutality on massive scales -- all interspersed with incredible progress, astounding acts of humanity and intelligence, boundless creativity wrought by the human spirit. While many people assert that it officially began to come apart at the seams on one day in November 2000 (Earth year), the downfall actually began many years earlier.
Our historians have tried to piece together where the breakdown started but arriving at a definitive point has proved elusive. Much of the record was sanitized or destroyed by the masters of the day, trying to hide what they had done, from their people, and much was lost in the massive conflagration that followed. The records that have survived were clearly not meant to tell the truth although they appear to have been the popular form of news dissemination at the time; it seems that people were easily persuaded that trust and integrity were the same thing as pretty faces and good hair styles so they easily assimilated the official information released by the writers of history.
We know from the history of other worlds that the story is usually written after the events but on Earth history was often being scripted before the occurrence and very quickly rewritten if something didn't go quite according to plan. [...] But on that November day in 2000, the most powerful of all the political entities on Earth (they were called countries), chose to put their fate and their trust in someone who has come to be known to history as The Village Idiot. That appears to have been the final straw in a long series of misadventures that had plagued the history of the planet.
That man, or VI as I like to call him, was only really the mouthpiece for a cabal of some of the most evil men ever to have graced Earth. It is hard to tell if he was a willing pawn or just plain stupid but he let those evil men lead the world to the beginning of its final days. He picked a vicious fight for no reason other than the fact that he could, and the resulting conflagration put the whole thing up in smoke. Battle after battle erupted everywhere and all those weapons that they had all been building for so many years finally got to do what they were made to do: kill everybody.
I know you have seen the pictures of the planet as it is today and have been shocked by the devastation these people brought upon themselves. But there was a time when it was green and blue, things grew, it was full of animals and fish of all kinds. Now, there are ruins and uninhabitable areas; scrabble and scrub is the only vegetation; the predominant species is the insects. The few humans who survived the last war are pathetic. Read more Comment: I would like to mention something here about the "end times" as are talked about in the bible and just about every other "religious" text. Most people agree that, whether it is preordained or part of a grand cycle of human expereince or not, the idea of the "end of the world" is something that is altogether possible. Okay so our scientists tell us that the earth is not due for natural death for 5 billion years, but no one will deny the fact that there are many other ways that we can all go to "meet our maker" and it is not so much about the end of the world anyway but rather the end of our individual or collective lives since to each of us the cessation of physical existence is tantamount to the "end of the world", for us anyway. The question I would like to ask is, if the "end of the world" were "nigh", and by this I mean the imminent destruction of vast numbers of humans on earth, how would we know? Could we predict it? How much advance warning would we need in order to attempt to prepare ourselves or even change the outcome? Without doubt we would need to be on the lookout for any "signs of the end times" as it were. If we give any credence to what is said in the bible we can expect it to come as "a thief in the night", with us not knowing "the day or the hour". With this in mind I suggest we all take a moment and suspend wishful thinking and look objectively as just what is being setup right now with the impending war in Iraq and the likely domino effect it will have, and ask ourselves if it is possible that what we see happening now is in fact exactly what is alluded to in the many religious texts .
'Mr. Bush goes for the kill' Mr. Bush is right, Saddam Hussein is a nasty man and nobody I know has the least objection to Mr. Bush killing him. It's just the way he proposes doing it that worries me. Dropping 3000 bombs in 48 hours on Baghdad is going to kill a lot of other people who, as far as I am aware, are not nasty at all. That's the bit of the 'moral' argument I don't follow. It's a bit like the police saying they know a murderer comes from the south of England so they are going to execute everybody in Epsom.
Then again why does Mr. Bush need to drop 3000 bombs on Saddam Hussein? I would have thought one would have been enough to take him out, if he knows where Saddam is. And if he doesn't know where he is, what on earth is the moral justification for dropping any bombs at all? Doesn't Mr. Bush realise they are dangerous things and tend to kill people when they land?
Or does Mr Bush simply enjoy the idea of taking out a lot of Iraqis? I appreciate Mr. Bush's argument that because Saddam Hussein has refused to take any notice of the UN, Mr. Bush should teach him a lesson by dropping a lot of bombs on him. But now he's telling us that if the UN won't give him permission to do it, he's jolly well going to drop a lot of bombs on Saddam anyway. In which case won't Mr. Bush be guilty of the same thing he's accusing Saddam Hussein of? Apparently not because, according to the President's advisers, if the United Nations won't give him permission to drop a lot of bombs on Saddam Hussein, it will have ceased to be a Responsible World Organization and therefore he doesn't need to take any notice of it.
But doesn't the same thing go for Saddam Hussein? If the United Nations ceases to be a Responsible World Organization how can the fact that Saddam Hussein has refused to take any notice of it be something so evil that it justifies dropping bombs on the poor people living under his heel? And that's another thing - everyone seems to be very certain that dropping a lot of bombs on Baghdad will get rid of Saddam Hussein. But will it? - any more than devastating Afghanistan (and killing maybe 20,000 people) got rid of Al-Qaeda? A recent UN report reckons that if and when the US starts bombing as many as 100,000 Iraqis will die.
I can't really believe that the President of the United States gets his rocks off by having people killed. That's more like Saddam Hussein. And yet it worries me that Mr. Bush says that one of the reasons he wants to kill a lot of Iraqis is because Saddam Hussein has also been killing them. Is there some sort of rivalry here?
Back in 1988 Saddam killed several thousand at once, in the town of Halabjah. Since then he's been carrying on the good work, but on a piecemeal basis. In fact, for all I know, since his 1988 spree, he may not have killed any more of his own citizens than George W. Bush did as Governor of Texas. When Mr. Bush became Governor in 1995, the average number of executions per year was 7.6. Mr. Bush succeeded in quadrupling this to a magnificent 31.6 per year. He must have had the terrible chore of personally signing over 150 death warrants while he was Governor. I suppose the advantage of killing Iraqis is that you don't have to sign a piece of paper for every one of them. Just one quick scribble and - bingo! You can kill a hundred thousand and no questions asked! What's more, nobody is going to quibble about some of them being mentally retarded or juveniles, which is what happened to George W. Bush when he was Governor of Texas.
I'm not saying that George W. Bush shouldn't be allowed to kill as many people as he wants. After all he is the unelected leader of the most powerful country on earth, so if he can't do anything he likes, who can? And, in the years to come, we can confidently look forward to a lot more killing all over the world - certainly a lot more than ever Saddam Hussein managed in his own country. Comment: Plenty planned for the mainland US too. Comment: Check out these facts relating to the US and Iraq
Eight people were shot and others were stabbed and trampled early Sunday when fighting broke out inside a nightclub above a Times Square arcade, police said.
March 8, 2003 Today's edition of Brought to You by The Bush Junta, Produced and Directed by the CIA, based on an original script by Henry Kissinger, with a cast of billions.... The "Greatest Shew on Earth," no doubt, and if you don't have a good sense of humor, don't read this page! It is designed to reveal the "unseen." If you can't stand the heat of Objective Reality, get out of the kitchen!
North Korean Has More Than 100 Nuclear Bombs and Will Make More: North Korea's unofficial spokesman, Kim Myong Chul, disclosed at a professional luncheon at the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Japan yesterday that North Korea has more than one hundred nuclear bombs and will likely declare its nuclear-power status sometime this year unless the Bush Administration agrees to hold bilateral talks with North Korea.
Kim Myong Chol is a Japanese-born Korean whose impoverished parents from Cheju-do immigrated to Japan. Kim received a PhD from Kim Il Sung University for his research on North Korea's military doctrines. He is close to Kim Jong Il's inner circle, and his writings and speeches are required readings for North Korea's elite. A year ago, he correctly predicted that North Korea would withdraw from the IAEA and start up its nuclear facilities.
Kim said that the strategic goal of Kim Jong Il is to neutralize and remove the American influence from the Korean Peninsula. He said, “The dream scenario for the achievement of the goal is to have a peace treaty concluded with the United States. The second best scenario is neutralizing the American nuclear threats by acquiring nuclear capability.”
He also stated that North Korea will soon have the capacity to rain ballistic missiles loaded with weapons of mass destruction down upon most cities in the United States. The US and South Korean armies are currently holding massive war games near the demilitarized zone that divides the two Koreas, and North Korea sees the exercises as the initial phase of the US invasion of North Korea.
Kim warns North Korea will retaliate if Bush mount "surgical strikes" against North Korea's nuclear facility at Yongbyon. North Korea will mount an immediate retaliation against the US homeland, leaving "Washington, New York and Chicago aflame." He states: "North Korean missiles can reach any part of the United States of America. There is no safe place for Bush to hide." But if Bush agrees to talk, Kim Jong Il will accept US-led inspections and the eventual reunification of Korea, which inevitably will lead to a democratic, unified nation. After unification, Kim Jong Il will step down and let the people of Korea elect their national leader. Kim says what Kim Jong Il wants is to unite Korea and kick out US troops from South Korea; Kim Jong Il does not need or want any US economic aids. Comment: The common consensus as to just why the Bush is taking such an agressive stance towards Iraq is that he wants the oil and the economic supremacy that this would give the US, but is that really all there is to it? Can that really justify the extreme agressiveness and belligerance that we see the Bush administration displaying? For most of the last century the US has waged a secret war on the world and maintained its economic dominance without pushing the world towards armageddon. So why the change of tack now? Why does the US seem hell-bent on making enemies of just about every other nation on earth, and throwing the world into a "war without end". We assume that Bush knows very well that the likelihood of an attack on the mainland US is much greater if he pursues his current agenda. North Korea has nukes a plenty and we cannot rule out that Saddam has some nukes stashed away, perhaps outside of Iraq, just waiting to unleash them when he is pushed into a corner by the US. It is a complete nonsense to suggest that Bush is making the world safer by picking fights with everyone he pleases, obviously the opposite is true. Might then we to conclude that it is fully part of the US government's plan to provoke such attacks by other countries on US cities and towns? Or perhaps is it to provide a pretext for clandestine groups within the US to perpetrate such attacks themselves as has been suggested was the case with the 9/11? For sure there have been plans in the making for years with PNAC group giving the clearest description of just what is in store. Yet this still does not answer the question as to WHY this would be desired. Why would those in power in the US want to kill thousands if not millions of US citizens? The first thing that comes to mind is Kissinger's plan for "depopulation". The second significant benefit is fear. Bush and Co have benefitted greatly from the instillment of fear among the US population as a whole. It has allowed them to pass draconian laws such as the patriot act that wipes out, with a stroke of the pen, fundamental civil liberties that have been sacrosanct since their inception. Fear also provides support for a "war without end" from a bewildered public who protest that "something must be done" about this apparent threat to their lives. There are "others" that apparently have a vested interest in the fear given off by masses of people also, and this is discussed further on this site. Yet we must again ask the question "why?". The conclusion I come to is that in some way, for some reason the ground is being prepared for the introduction of a radically different world than the one we know now. It seems to me that the current world events are designed to, and will, lead to the overt and complete enslavement of the human race, and in true machievellian style it will be at their own request. Just what lies in store for us after this plan is complete is not yet fully undestood, but the signs will surely become increasingly clear over the next few years, and it is for each to decide whether to choose to see what IS and prove they see by acting, or continue to sleep, believeing the lie. If you opt to continue the dream then you do so at your peril.
Germany, they first came for the Communists and I didn't speak up
because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I
didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the
trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't in a union.
Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I
was a Protestant. Then they came for me and by that time no
US lets N. Korea get nuclear data Transfer pact stays in effect The Bush administration has not suspended or revoked the authority of Westinghouse Co. to transfer documents related to nuclear technology to North Korea, despite the fact that the Asian nation has admitted that it violated terms of a nonproliferation agreement it signed with Washington in 1994, US Department of Energy documents show.
Some Republicans have
blamed the Clinton administration for the nuclear standoff with
North Korea, arguing that the 1994 agreement calling for an end to
the North's nuclear program in exchange for food and fuel was
hopelessly optimistic and naive. But Department of Energy documents
released yesterday to Representative Edward J. Markey, Democrat of
Malden, indicate that the Bush administration quietly worked under
that agreement and rejected a chance to repudiate it in May 2001,
when the Department of Energy extended for five more years the
authority for Westinghouse to transfer nuclear technology to North
Read more Comment:
Here we have evidence that the idea that the
Bush adminsration actually WANTS a nuclear conflagration on its own
soil, is very likely the case! So in the case that our own
government is working against us what chance do we
Can you "see" any sociopaths around you? If not, this will help you "spot" them! "See" any similarities? Antisocial Personality Disorder is also known as psychopathy or sociopathy. Individuals with this disorder have little regard for the feeling and welfare of others. As a clinical diagnosis it is usually limited to those over age 18. It can be diagnosed in younger people if the they commit isolated antisocial acts and do not show signs of another mental disorder. Antisocial Personality Disorder is chronic, beginning in adolescence and continuing throughout adulthood.
There are ten general symptoms:
learning from experience
People with this disorder may exhibit criminal behavior. They may not work. If they do work, they are frequently absent or may quit suddenly. They do not consider other people's wishes, welfare or rights. They can be manipulative and may lie to gain personal pleasure or profit.
They may default on loans, fail to provide child support, or fail to care for their dependents adequately. High risk sexual behavior and substance abuse are common. Impulsiveness, failure to plan ahead, aggressiveness, irritability, irresponsibility, and a reckless disregard for their own safety and the safety of others are traits of the antisocial personality. Socioeconomic status, gender, and genetic factors play a role. Males are more likely to be antisocial than females. Those from lower socioeconomic groups are more susceptible. A family history of the disorder puts one at higher risk.
There are many theories about the cause of Antisocial Personality Disorder including experiencing neglectful parenting as a child, low levels of certain neurotransmitters in the brain, and belief that antisocial behavior is justified because of difficult circumstances. Psychotherapy, group therapy, and family therapy are common treatments. The effects of medical treatment are inconclusive. Unfortunately, most people with Antisocial Personality Disorder reject treatment. Therefore, recovery rates are low.
Salim Hoss compares George W. Bush to Hitler Former Premier Salim Hoss on Friday compared US President George W. Bush’s conduct towards Iraq with that of Adolf Hitler during World War II. A statement by Hoss accused Bush of showing sympathy toward Israeli suffering and justifying the Israeli backlash against the Arabs, but failing to do the same for the Palestinians. After the bus bomb in Haifa Wednesday, the US president condemned the Palestinians. However, the “Israeli massacres that followed the bombing are described by Bush as justified,” Hoss said, yet “Bush describes the Israeli Premier as a man of peace.” The former premier said that “if that is not excessive racism, what is?”He accused the United States of being “not only a supporter of Israel, but also a partner in crime.” He said that Bush was acting like Hitler, “who conquest of Europe was motivated by a superiority complex.”
Mind Our Own Business How would you feel if you woke up one morning and all the TV news outlets were blaring that Russia and China, in a joint declaration, had said that America's weapons of mass destruction were a threat to world peace, and unless they were destroyed, Russia and China would disarm the United States and change its government?
I expect it would make your cornflakes taste sour.
Now, it's very hard to say anything good about the government of North Korea. If ever a government mimicked the totalitarian nightmare described by George Orwell in his novel "1984," it is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Even its name is Orwellian, since it is neither democratic nor a republic. The people are controlled and indoctrinated every waking hour from the cradle to the grave.
Even so, we have no right to tell North Korea that it can't develop nuclear weapons. As a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, North Korea has every legal right to withdraw from it. There are provisions in the treaty for just such an event. As a sovereign nation, it has every right to develop any kind of weapons it wants.
When the United States, Great Britain, France, the Soviet Union, China, Pakistan, India and Israel developed nuclear weapons, they did not ask the world's permission. As sovereign states, they did what they thought they had to do.
You know what's wrong with this world? We're trying to run it. Sometimes we act unilaterally, sometimes we use the United Nations as a cover, sometimes we use NATO, but the bottom line is we presume the right — simply because we are powerful — to intervene and to interfere in the internal affairs of other nations. So long as this remains true, there will never be peace in the world, and Americans will continue to lose their liberty as the country metamorphoses into a permanent war state.
Don't laugh at the North Koreans. Unless we reverse this trend, future Americans will be goose-stepping down Pennsylvania Avenue and shouting praises for their own Great Leader. Status quo is a myth. Governments are always moving either in the direction of freedom or in the direction of more power and more control. I don't have to tell you that there are no libertarians in the Bush administration.
This is not a new position for me. Back in 1991, I opposed all the restrictions imposed on Iraq. It would have been proper to exact a promise from Iraq to respect Kuwait's boundaries and even to pay reasonable reparations for actual damage done. But to tell Iraq what kinds of weapons it could have infringed on Iraqi sovereignty. It is from that infringement of Iraqi sovereignty that all the subsequent conflict — and now, it appears, a new war — flows. It was not then, and it is not now, any of our business what kinds of weapons Iraq has.
We have only one right in regard to other nations: the right to self-defense. Period. There are no more. Thus, our correct position would be to say to other nations: Build whatever weapons you want, but if you use them on us or threaten us with them, you'll wish you hadn't. It's none of our business what kind of government another nation has. The communist government in North Korea doesn't cause us any harm, nor does Saddam's dictatorship. Those are internal problems of the Korean and Iraqi people, respectively.
Even humanitarianism is not a legitimate excuse for intervention. Politicians being what they are, even that excuse will always be distorted by propaganda, as it was in the Balkans. No matter what somebody else is doing to somebody else, it is none of our business, and we have no right to interfere. Our government exists to serve our people and our land and no other.
you want peace, if you want freedom, then you're going to have to
force the American government to mind its own business. Otherwise,
our future will not be a happy one, because, as my pappy used to
say, the problem with being a tough guy is that, sooner or later,
you run into somebody who's tougher than you are. It should be
noted that there are still nuclear and other weapons installations
in Russia that no American is allowed to see, agreements to the
contrary notwithstanding. Comment: to all
Americans thinking that they are safe and that this war is
happening to others people. The war will soon be on your
Dictator Bush and his wimpy
quisling suckups at the New York Times,
CNN, and Fox have proved that Adolf Hitler's strategy was right -
if you tell a lie enough times it soon becomes the truth in the
unsolved anthrax murders had already dissapeared as a story from
the mainstream media, once the trail of suspicion led straight to
the U.S. government's door. A permanent rigor mortis had already
set into the 9/11 probe and the unsolved sudden murders of more
than 3,000 Americans. But Enron and Halliburton's troubles seemed
to be percolating a bit, as many business executives who had stolen
millions from innocent but greedy Americans seemed to be headed for
embarrassing questions in various courts. It was not until later
that a Bush-appointed appeals court judge's order would take the
heat off Cheney for engineering that whole deal that stole billions
in energy costs from the people of California. Cheney never liked
California; he's a Wyoming boy. What the criminal administration
needed was a distraction from all this consternation, and Iraq has
been that and more.
United Nations itself, consisting of representatives of all the
countries on Earth, looks with favor on this newest lie, that Iraq
is the threat to the world and needs to be divested of its leaders
and its resources. So, the whole world agrees to participate in
this lie, presumably in exchange for future political advantages
from the aggressor government that seeks, as is its usual custom,
to perpetrate this particular lie for its own geopolitical and
financial gain, yet couches its motives in phrases of perfunctory
and insincere nobility.
Bin Laden sons'
arrest denied Pakistani and US officials
have denied reports that two of Osama Bin Laden's sons have been
wounded and captured in a clash on the Afghan border.
Earlier, Sardar Sanaullah Zehri, the Home Minister of Balochistan - the region at the centre of the search in Pakistan - told the BBC US forces were engaged in operations across the border in Afghanistan. Comment: More lies from the Bush Cabal
Bush: Clap me or no EU speech. George Bush
pulled out of a speech to the European Parliament when MEPs
wouldn't guarantee a standing ovation. Senior White House officials
said the President would only go to Strasbourg to talk about Iraq
if he had a stage-managed welcome. A source close to negotiations
said last night: "President Bush agreed to a speech but insisted he
get a standing ovation like at the State of the Union address. "His
people also insisted there were no protests, or heckling. "I
believe it would be a crucial speech for Mr Bush to make in light
of the opposition here to war. But unless he only gets adulation
and praise, then it will never happen." Mr Bush's every appearance
in the US is stage-managed, with audiences full of supporters. It
was hoped he would speak after he welcomed Warsaw pact nations to
Nato in Prague last November. But his refusal to speak to EU
leaders face-to-face is seen as a key factor in the split between
the US-UK coalition and Europe. The source added: "Relations
between the EU and the US are worsening fast - this won't
help." Comment: this would be hilarious if he wasnt the
president of the most powerful, bloodthirsty and destructive
government on earth. As it
stands it is very frightening that there appears to be a
in the whitehouse.
Countdown to war, er, massacre begins. You know what I feel like? I feel like one of those passengers on those doomed jets that were hijacked on 9/11. I don't mean to belittle that tragedy, or the fate of those passengers. I don't think I'm personally facing imminent death, and hope that doesn't happen until I'm good and ready. The same goes for you, dear reader.
However, I do very much feel like the unlucky passenger in a jet that has been hijacked, and piloted for over two years now, by religious maniacs who, I am gradually concluding, are on a path to kill us all -- along with a great many other innocents on the ground -- on the way to fulfillment of their obscure religious and political agenda. That's what it feels like as all signs point to a massive United States military invasion of Iraq, possibly a week away, perhaps more, perhaps less. Should this attack takes place, there will without any question at all be at least four immediate results:
1) A great many Iraqis will die, probably more than we'll ever know. It is a number the current U.S. administration has good reason to not be interested in, and for a long time nobody else will have access to count the bodies. The U.S. is also likely to be uninterested in the number of its own soldiers who die in the coming years, irradiated or psychically wounded by their experience.
2) The government of Israel will launch a brutal new round of attacks against the essentially defenseless Palestinians in their bantustans. It scarcely matters whether the "crackdown" will be unprovoked or ostensibly in response to demonstrations or terrorist acts prompted by the U.S. invasion. The end result will be the same.
3) Hatred of the United States will sweep the world, among not just ordinary citizens but whole governments, composed of those countries' ruling elites. Alliances will become former alliances; business as well as political relationships will be irrevocably damaged. In the Islamic world, with relatively few exceptions, "fury" will be the moderate reaction; fuel for decades' worth of terrorist activity, against the U.S. and its corrupt, brutal puppets, lies at the other end of the spectrum. The patient groundwork that the Bush Administration has laid over the past two years to make the United States an international pariah will be fulfilled. We will no longer be one nation among many, but an empire, with vassals; often, what we want we will only be able to obtain by force.
4) The economy, both globally and in the U.S., will also be badly damaged. It's already worsened dramatically in the last year, a fact obscured by all the Bush talk of Iraq. Investors are horrified, international trade is taking a backseat to global lockdown, and the world's biggest economy is retooling itself for permanent wars it cannot possibly afford; things are, by almost every serious economists' reckoning, likely to be made far worse.
economic fallout -- far more than any concern over mere human lives
-- is why so many of the world's political and business elites
stand opposed to the Bush folly. And yet, on this as on each of
these other points, the political and media giants of the U.S.
appear to be in a state of delusional denial.
Fair Use Policy
Contact Webmaster at signs-of-the-times.org