[Previous entry: "Story of a Guantanamo "detainee" and his lawyer"] [Main Index] [Next entry: "Cory Maye's Justice Fund -- balance $0"]
01/17/2007 Archived Entry: "Only too human"
Patton wrote that he felt a greater sense of kinship toward Rommel than toward his own chain of command. A number of Civil War generals expressed similar sentiments. I would never equate myself with the battle hardened Corps Commanders of history -- but then again...
Hi, it's me, PSM.
First, thanks to Thunder for finding this damning indictment of our government's true reasons for invading Iraq.
I'll try not to give away spoilers, but there are a couple things here that I want to mention. This exposition resonated with me far more deeply than all the conspiracy theories I've read elsewhere on the web, even my own beloved TCF. Yes, I'll admit, I'm not invulnerable to the siren's call of high production values and a subtle, foreboding instrumental accompaniment. But much more than that, it gave me an insight into WHY the populace fell for the ruse.
"I'm from the old school," says a grieving father bent on avenging the 9/11murder of his son. "To me, certain people walk on water. The president of the country is supposed to be one of those."
One can easily identify with his ordeal. A blue collar Joe Sixpack wants his son's killers brought to an end. The national leadership pounds home the premise that Iraq is a harborer of terrorists. Joe Sixpack requests his son's name to be put on one of the bombs used in the war, you know, the war on terror.
And so it's easy to imagine his outrage when, after the conquest of the Iraqi government, the national leadership drops another bomb, this one on all the starry eyed believers, that they never linked Iraq with 9/11. It was never about avenging 9/11. It was never about liberating a country. It really was about imperialism from before the beginning.
All this speaks to a basic human need -- the need to trust in one another, to think the best of those we place in positions of leadership.
Perhaps it echoes in my spirit because I too have experienced the same bitter disillusionment of discovering that the Something Greater Than Myself that I believed in with all my heart wasn't real. I had to learn many hard lessons before I finally was no longer able to justify, excuse or look past all the lies and crimes of .gov. And it weren't for lack of trying, neither. How I wanted to believe in the mythical country of Superman, the middle class and amber waves of grain. Now I know, with pain in my heart, that that country never existed in real life.
Watching someone else go through the same thing at a very personal level, it was impossible not to be revisited by all the hearbreak of betrayal that I had to experience before I could see our country for what it is: it's Rome.
I don't hate the "sheeple." I pity them. I pity them because I identify with their need to believe. They're looking for something that isn't there, something they need. I know they're wrong, dangerously wrong. But they probably sleep easier than I do.
Now juxtapose that with Ed Brown.
Here's a man whose cause is on the side of right if ever there was one. Come hell or the IRS, Ed Brown is going to be a free man, whether living or dead. So why can't I work up much sympathy here for a man who is prepared to fight, literally, for freedom from a criminal, unaccountable, mafiose tax collection entity?
Because Ed Brown should know better. Ed Brown doesn't appear to have entered this arena encumbered with the illusion that the IRS was acting in error with the good faith intention of correcting its honest mistake.
What is his goal here? To beat the government at its own game, on its own turf? Naw, he can't be that naive.
Is it to draw attention to the tyranny of government of the people, by the yada yada yada? Because there's plenty of tailor-made examples to that effect already, and they weren't premeditated on the parts of the victims, and more to the point, they aren't having much in the way of success, if success is defined as a sea change in the conduct of government.
I haven't communicated personally with the man. It appears to be too late for that. But his actions, and some of the "Come and die alongside the Glorious Patriot if you really believe in freedom" rumblings I'm reading lead me to believe that this man has some sort of Randian death wish fantasy. It appears to me that he entered with eyes wide open into a fight he knew he could not win, even to the point of ruining his marriage.
I don't suggest that freedom can be won only by peaceful means. Sometimes the tree of liberty must be refreshed by the blood of tyrants and patriots and all that. Sometimes the town hall has to mysteriously blow up in the middle of the night with no witnesses. Am I an apologist or a compromiser because I'd like to see us fight battles we can win and avoid battles we can't win?
I respect his conviction. I wish him the best. I hope he strikes a crippling blow to the enemy. But even so, my sense of kinship is greater toward a scared, confused, bumbling sheeple who was blindsided by the loss of his son than toward a Towering Giant of Shining Freedom who seems determined to martyr himself and his wife for no gain.
Ed, let your life be your testament, not your death. Let's do this without creating anymore convicts or anymore martyrs. Let's be around to enjoy life post-.gov.
Posted by Penguinsscareme @ 01:10 PM CST