Press them for specifics
Yep! I agree. Glenn Greenwald:
But the more important question is the one these chest-beating politicians and pundits notably refrain from addressing. If Russian election meddling is on par with the Pearl Harbor and 9/11 attacks, then should the U.S. response be on par with its response to those attacks? Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor prompted U.S. involvement in a world war and, ultimately, dropping two nuclear bombs on Japan; 9/11 initiated wars in multiple countries that still, 17 years later, have no end in sight, along with a systematic and still-worsening erosion of basic civil liberties.
So far, argues Greenwald, we've got a lot of political chest-puffery about how Russia did this and Russia did that and this is war y'know. So let's press them for specifics. Greenwald concludes:
At the very least, no politician or pundit should be able to get away with issuing rhetoric of this type without being required to specify what they think ought to be done.
What's the plan? Launch the nukes? Blast Russia to smithereens? Regime change and occupation like with Iraq? Maybe a few sanctions? Impeachment? Military coup in the US and nationwide blacklisting of suspected Russia-lovers? What's the plan? One thing to remember, as we read Greenwald, is that this is a consensus. So when we talk about this sort of thing we aren't talking about something new. I suppose we could start with the last thing that happened, with the programs for nuclear modernization initiated by Obama. The "rhetoric" thing looks like a stage, like how Hitler ratcheted up the rhetoric against Poland on the eve of the Blitzkrieg. Maybe the anti-Trump stuff is part of that stage, too, if the consensus is that Trump is really the wrong guy to carry out the consensus decision (you know, the one they aren't telling us about, the one about what they think ought to be done).
But this is a consensus. One place to look for the consensus is in elite sociology, starting perhaps with the Atlantic Council as gjohnsit discussed it; then we can proceed to the other consensus organizations, such as the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, the World Economic Forum, and so on. The people behind these people own our government and are working to close the deal on what's left of our planet that they haven't already taken over.
Or maybe we should go back to Kees van der Pijl's The Making of an Atlantic Ruling Class, a good book describing how in 20th-century historical time the elites of US and of Europe slowly built alliances allowing them to become a unified global elite, which then had to deal with the new challenges of international capital outside of the Atlantic circuit. I'm sure that by now they've come to terms with Chinese and Indian capital, made a deal to split the proceeds (the solidity of the deal doesn't matter as much as the ideological consensus symbolized therein), and are now going after Russia as the last great remaining source of what Jason W. Moore calls "cheap nature." Cheap nature is the notion that, for the consensus built up through the expansion of capital, the world needs to be taken, and taken as cheaply as possible, with the smallest possible consolation prize for the rest of nature and with as little of what Karl Marx called the "organic composition of capital" as is possible at any time or place. Thusly the world is to be converted into a great production machine for the greater glory of the investor class that is to accumulate it therein.
But war? With Russia? That sounds like more like large-scale theft for the consensus. We might assume that, like with any human consensus, the consensus behind war with Russia has a collective personality. Perhaps we could say that the consensus is narcissistic, bellicose, compulsive, united behind capitalism. So certainly if the mouthpieces of the consensus have decided to babble on about war with Russia, the consensus has something in mind. Let's ask the mouthpieces what it is, shall we?
Comments
The new factor is US voter rebellion supporting Bernie & Trump
The new factor is the 2016 US voter rebellion supporting Bernie & Trump. Like a slowly heated frog surprising the cook by trying to jump out of the pot. Because of this, and because of the rapid electoral cycle, the most likely near-term result of the anti-Russian consensus will be moves to shore up barriers preventing US voters from electing a President not pre-approved by the establishment.
As for shooting wars with Russia, the most rational near-term result would be simply changing Russian casualties in Syria, and perhaps a few other borderlands between spheres of influence, from being a 'bug' to a 'feature' of US intervention there.
On the other hand, now that Putin has been forced into alliance with China, it is likely that medium-term trends will continuously erode the US advantage over China in war-fighting ability (and even faster in global political influence). These trends could become so intolerable to US elites that they seek a military showdown sooner rather than later, despite the likelihood that, while everybody would be a loser from this, it is precisely US elites (and their European and other foreign BFFs) who have the most to lose as a quick consequence of such a showdown.
I have recently been avoiding this whole subject
since the first 24 months of their assertions that Russia meddled in elections was either baseless or based on evidence so laughable that it practically proved the reverse. They have not behaved like reliable narrators.
I take it that Mueller has now dug up evidence that is convincing? To a rational person, I mean.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
No. Quite the opposite.
Trust your original instincts.
This phase of the bullshit follies is Mueller's dog and pony show, where he trys to get Americans to forget about the whole "Russia hacked the DNC" psyop that was foisted on them a year and a half ago.
I correctly predicted that when that was thoroughly debunked, they would immediately focus intently on "Internet trolls" (the silliest thing I could think of at the time) and never again mention hacking, which has proved to be the most cynical lie of the century, right up there with Saddam Hussein's secret stash of WMD.
The real story of the "SEO keyword advertising sales scheme" that this utterly ridiculous indictment is based on, will make you weep with shame for America once you come to understand it.
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
OK, now I've read the article.
They're still talking about creating social media accounts and staging political events. That may be disturbing to some, but it isn't election rigging.
I agree that I don't want foreign nationals having much influence over who gets elected here. But if we're going to be upset about them creating social media accounts and staging political events, shouldn't we be even more upset that they are donating large amounts of money to candidates? Are we going to crack down on that practice? It seems far more damaging than creating social media accounts.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Not to mention...
this latest "bombshell" is (once again) the EXACT same thing Correct the Record and other groups were doing on behalf of HER. The difference being, HER people were greater in number and had more resources. It's be nice if just once a mainstream source would point this out.
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
Exactly
That's one of several very large elephants in the room.
The smaller the mind the greater the conceit. --Aesop
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!
Sounds like a classic distraction to me.
"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"
I'm sure in some parallel universe
Concerns about foreign interests donating large sums of money to a U.S. candidate is addressed copiously in the indictment. Here, not so much.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Large sums?
Here are the figures for 2016 the WaPo has. How much are they claiming for "Russians"?
“The Democrats and Republicans want you to believe they are mortal enemies engaged in a desperate struggle when all the time, they are partners with a power-sharing agreement.” - Richard Moser
@Cassiodorus So, are we claiming,
So, are we claiming, then, that it's horrible for Russians to influence elections, but not horrible for Saudis and Chinese and Israels and who-the-fuck-ever to influence them?
I've got no fucking patience for this seven-layer-shit-dip. If they want another Cold War--or a hot one--they should just have one, without all this codswallop. It's not like we can do anything to stop them, anyway. I'd just prefer it if we spent our twilight years not being inundated with this meretricious disingenuous shit.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
My comment was directed --
at the notion, obvious when one looks at their claims, that Russian influence in the 2016 election can't really be anything more than a drop in the bucket when compared with the enormous amounts of money spent by US Presidential candidates. (And does any of this money equal "control"? The Koch brothers spent a pretty penny on Trump's opponents in the primaries, and for what?)
“The Democrats and Republicans want you to believe they are mortal enemies engaged in a desperate struggle when all the time, they are partners with a power-sharing agreement.” - Richard Moser
@Cassiodorus I'm entirely in
I'm entirely in agreement with you. For one thing, as Henry Wallace used to say, the accusations themselves should be in question. It is not election rigging to post opinions on the Internet, nor is it treason, even if said opinions belong to a foreigner or even a foreign state. This remains true regardless of whether the American government (or shadow government) likes the opinions or not, or whether said opinions are convenient to Hillary Rodham Clinton.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
why in the devils undershorts
does the fact that US intelligence muddles in dozens of foreign elections for US interests not become an issue? If there was a way to quantify in dollars the amount dark ops spends on influencing the outcomes of our neighbors, it may shock the russiagate shit right off the charts.
Except for Israel
Israel doesn't need to plant some puppy ads on Facebook to get people to vote for a different candidate than the one they thought they wanted. No, Israel gets to interfere by demanding that anyone elected to congress commits to kissing Israeli butt.
One thing that I have watched during this over a year long farce is that the people who believe that Putin put Trump into the presidency are convinced that votes were changed and that Putin has absolute power over Trump. This has been spread by the news media and the various websites that were vested in a Hillary presidency. Just look at some of the breathtaking headlines we have seen during this farce. They will scream that "Yes Russia hacked into voting machines", but inside the article is the words attempted to... ad nauseum.
How so many people could have fallen for the latest propaganda act to get people to be okay with yet another war is something I will never understand.
ETA: This proves my point about those who believe wholeheartedly that Putin installed Trump into the presidency:
But the thing that should trouble us all is the fact that fellow Americans (using the term fellow Americans rather loosely, given the context) do not see the influence campaign by Russia, the (successful) efforts to install a puppet regime in the oval office, as problematic.
One guess where I read this.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
@snoopydawg Why in the name of the
Why in the name of the devil's undershorts do you still go to that site?
That's rhetorical; IMO, you have, of course, the right to go wherever you want to.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
To see how far it's fallen since the sane people left
I have friends there still who I keep in touch with through the messages and after I reply to them I read scan the site and read some topics to see what new theories they come up with. It's entertaining.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
Excellent essay.
Yes, agree, we should ask them, and in fact should be like a pike up the @ss and really confront them in every way possible.
However, we probably already know the answer: no real plan, just perception management for profits.
...
Heh.
A truth of the nuclear age/climate change: we can no longer have endless war and survive on this planet. Oh sh*t.
Tom Meyer knows his weapons --
but he doesn't understand money or value or any of the stuff Marx wrote about. There's no such thing as "unsustainable spending." We "afford" a $700 billion Pentagon budget the same way we "afforded" all of the previous Pentagon budgets. Congress directs the Fed to print more money under the "principles" of fractional reserve banking, and spends the money on the Pentagon. The banks hole up the money to protect the investment values of those that own them, and inflation is controlled in such a way. It's called "dollar hegemony," and no amount of babbling by media pundits will make it go away.
You know, all of this "control the deficit" rhetoric is the patent of the anti-poor folks of the Peterson Foundation, another consensus organization.
Look, Ross Perot (when he was running for President) panicked when the national debt was $2 trillion. Now that it's $20 trillion and the sky hasn't fallen yet, when are we supposed to panic?
“The Democrats and Republicans want you to believe they are mortal enemies engaged in a desperate struggle when all the time, they are partners with a power-sharing agreement.” - Richard Moser
He got this part absolutely correct
A truth of the nuclear age/climate change: we can no longer have endless war and survive on this planet. Oh sh*t.
Right.
I suppose they just keep handing out the bribes so that the Pentagon doesn't overthrow our politicians and impose its own direct rule.
“The Democrats and Republicans want you to believe they are mortal enemies engaged in a desperate struggle when all the time, they are partners with a power-sharing agreement.” - Richard Moser
@Cassiodorus I'm panicking, all
I'm panicking, all right, but not because of that.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Exactly. $20 Trillion and climbing,
where is the "top," the "ceiling?"
One economics thing is for certain:
without debt there is no growth.
None.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
This is my question too.
I'm tired of the hyperbolic language. Really sick of it. It seems like the only logical response to someone claiming what they allege happened is on the level of 9/11 or Pearl Harbour is to ask "what are your proposing we do in response?" I'd really love to hear those answers.
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
Or maybe we should just assume the worst and try to stop
the bastards. They're obviously trying to set up something big. It's not like we don't have a track record to work with. We of course won't get them to say they want to wage WWIII and we won't get them to say they are setting up an Orwellian state where any dissent is closely monitored and squashed like a bug. They won't say they're trying to scare the public into another ten year military industrial complex buying spree similar to the ten year spree they went on after 9/11. And they won't say that they're distracting the masses from the real issue which is this isn't democracy anyway so what the fuck is everybody worried about. How does one meddle with a fraudulent election anyway?
I'm not sure what good any specifics are going to do us anymore, we just keep moving from one thing to the next while they, our rulers, do whatever the hell they want.
But that's what Greenwald and most "alternative" political writers do, they keep the outrage going on the topic du jour to keep their gigs going without discussing possible solutions. His idea of a solution is to ask the politicians what they're really up to? We already know what they're up to, we need to find ways to stop them.
Stop them?
They are a consensus, right? How about if we expose them for what they are, first? Maybe use a little social network analysis? The consensus can be divided up, I suppose, by the type of toys they operate -- so for instance you have the media consensus (& here one thinks of CIA associate Anderson Cooper), the financial consensus, the investor consensus, the political power consensus, the military consensus...
Let me suggest an analogy here if I may. One of the reasons the Zapatistas typically decline to endorse candidates for the office of the Presidency of Mexico is that, as they themselves argue, the whole culture of Mexican electoral politics is rotten through and through. And the folks at the top in Mexico are typically educated at Harvard or Yale. Think what you might about the Zapatistas; the fact of the matter is that they are still around, which is pretty meaningful given that their country is a war zone.
“The Democrats and Republicans want you to believe they are mortal enemies engaged in a desperate struggle when all the time, they are partners with a power-sharing agreement.” - Richard Moser
@Cassiodorus I have a lot of
I have a lot of admiration for the Zapatistas.
It is based on very old information, though. They could have changed, I suppose.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Zapatistas and ANC
were too socialist to get a good rep by the info rulers. The benefits of those movements won't change. Same with Chavez, Castro and others. Mericans don't see the good being done by Cuba for the Caribbean nations nor the good results Argentina made. It all seems to be framed in Imperial terms.
Jill Stein's take, here.
A truth of the nuclear age/climate change: we can no longer have endless war and survive on this planet. Oh sh*t.
My response
My response to Russiagaters is to tell them that if they don’t want to be influenced by foreigners then they should stay off the World-Wide Web.
"Please clap." -- Jeb Bush
@Outsourcing Is Treason Very nice.
Very nice.
I particularly find it hilarious when Twitter, which is largely owned by a Saudi billionaire, gets sanctimonious about banning "election meddling" by foreigners from its service.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Glenn Greenwald
Brings up a very salient point. We should be pressing them for specifics exactly because the public needs to hear the horrifying scale our war machine plans to ramp us up to.
Unfortunately, the professional sycophants whose job it is to ask the chest beating war mongers those questions are too busy spending the lavish salaries they're paid for being sycophants who don't ask horrifying questions.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
This seems like an opening though.
If they themselves are going to talk about war, then maybe it starts with protest signs saying "what kind of war do you want?" George W. wanted war, and so we got war; but that war built upon a troop foundation already in place in Kuwait, which itself built upon a war the US inflamed by funding both sides in the conflict. The Barackstar wanted a sort of low-intensity war, and so we got that. It doesn't seem to be a matter of great difference so much as, at any particular time, the politicians push through a stage of warmaking already approved by a consensus of one type or another.
“The Democrats and Republicans want you to believe they are mortal enemies engaged in a desperate struggle when all the time, they are partners with a power-sharing agreement.” - Richard Moser
there is a consensus
within the walls of this freedom prison. War is not the answer. War is bad for the world. War is only good for those that profit by it. IIRC, that is illegal in our rules. Problem lies in the lack of voice to counter the rulers. Need a new language -- not the net. Protests en mass can not be ignored. Press for specifics from the liars, sure. Set it up on new terms, not the covers they use. Lies are only followed by more lies.
I agree
In theory that we should definitely have protest signs asking "What Kind of War?". Problem is, without effective coverage showing people with signs asking that question, it becomes the "if a tree falls in the forest and there's no one to hear it, does it make a sound kind of question.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
What gets me is the cynicism and arrogance.
Those Intelligence bastards are assured that Americans don't have enough tech kmowledge to realize that they are being bamboozled — in the first place. This conversation could have been cut off at the knees over a year ago.
Anyone, ANYONE, can take a look at this document and see instantly how much bullshit is being thrown at them regarding Russia's original hacking of the elections.
https://nef4rhc.wordpress.com
But Americans don't have the IQ to understand it.
They cannot function as citizens in the 21st century. One cannot trust them with their life.
If you're asking politicians for specifics on how to punish Russia, you've already surrendered your life and your future.
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
Happy to see you have enough IQ
to recognize the lack of IQ in others :-). Thanks for making a good point Pluto.
We are being dumbed down purposely for the potential malleability of the mass mind. The operation is performed for the benefit of the mind masters. It is not that we are stupid so much as the psyops have tapped into vulnerabilities inherent in individualistic thinking. Good thing is they haven't yet figured out how to erase critical thinking.
It's not IQ for me.
I was born with a so-far useless gift that has never earned me a dime. I am completely immune to propaganda of all kinds. It's not some hazy notion. It slams into me like a speeding truck, even if I know nothing about the topic at hand. It's not a nice thing to live with, believe me. It's some sort of quantum misunderstanding I'm caught up in.
The discomfort of it is compounded by my inability to pull others out of the path of the impact. There's nothing I can say or do that matters.
That aside, the critical thinking issue — Americans have that capability. Unfortunately, they are repelled by it, making the effort is repulsive to them. Who knows why. It's what it is. They do vote, however.
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
Wear your hard hat with pride
innate bullshit protectors are valuable in these times. Could it be that the repulsion to critical thinking you see in other people may be associated, somehow, with your clarity of truth? I'm frequently amazed at the perceptive abilities of my fellow mercans. More so at others around the globe that are not as socially squished as we.
Yes. This happens, too.
And it's astonishing. For a moment in time, there is no other sound. But on the whole, it doesn't mean anything. It is sparks without fire. Out in the world, prescient understanding seems to shine brighter.
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
@Pluto's Republic No fuel, and the
No fuel, and the oxygen's being sucked out of the room. Makes it hard for the fire in the fireplace.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Pluto's Republic I feel much the same,
I feel much the same, but it's more like I see organized troop formations and everybody else keeps telling me it's just a couple of guys taking an evening stroll.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@QMS It is not that we are
It is not that we are stupid so much as the psyops have tapped into vulnerabilities inherent in individualistic thinking. Good thing is they haven't yet figured out how to erase critical thinking.
Excellent analysis.
They have figured out how to erase critical thinking for many people. Just not everyone. They keep trying.
I should be writing about this, but as you can imagine, it's a depressing topic so I often avoid it.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
In case this is a grammar issue:
Greenwald suggests that we ask the mouthpieces for the consensus how THEY wish to "punish" Russia. Yes, let's get them to admit that they wish to invade Russia and plant American flags atop the Kremlin, or whatever it is they want to do. The operating principle here is that an honest oligarchy is better than a dishonest one.
Now is that what's got your goat?
“The Democrats and Republicans want you to believe they are mortal enemies engaged in a desperate struggle when all the time, they are partners with a power-sharing agreement.” - Richard Moser
I could be petulant about it
...and insist that this sort of mind-fuck engagement will of course be perceived as tacit progress and approval by your overlords. It might even make some fellow citizens enthusiastic about an opportunity for punishment, as they've been brainwashed to be. ("That Putin's a thug, doncha know. He gassed his own people, or something....")
But since we've never tried this technique before, you know, communicating with the Neocon think tanks of the Deep State that tell the mouthpieces what to think — I'm open.
While he's at it, perhaps Greenwald can get whistleblower, Reality Winner, freed from a life of incarceration, due to the Intercept blowing the whistle on her, in their clumsy attempt to fellate the Deep State. That's what happened to my damned goat.
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
@Pluto's Republic Are you certain of
Are you certain of the facts in that case?
I wouldn't ordinarily ask that, not of you, but a lot of the facts as presented smelled to high heaven.
I was inclined to believe that "Reality Winner" was living a nice life under another name in some Caribbean resort.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
LOL!
I wish I hadn't heard the weasels at Intercept making excuses about their whoops moment, "who couldda foreseen they might arrest her. I wuz just checkin to make sure she wuz using a real name. Ya know? Making sure she really wuz really working there, and all.""
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
@Pluto's Republic It all felt
It all felt incredibly engineered to me. One more implausible narrative for our delectation.
Nobody with any sense would have bothered to leak that document, anyway, which was just the NSA chattering to itself about its own claims without providing any basis.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
American education system dumbing down students
America's greatest 'enemies' are eating our children's school lunches.
At this rate, the US will fall completely off the chart in a few years.
Now you know why 25% of Americans believe the sun revolves around the earth and less than 40% believe in evolution.
Hopefully, within a decade, Americans will lose the ability to make explosives. They've already lost the ability to make almost everything a modern society requires - from socks to washing machines to trains.
Americans will lose the ability to make explosives
One has to hope.
@Pluto's Republic Well, obviously some of
Well, obviously some of us do.
Do you know how many of us? I don't.
My guess is it's far fewer than I'd like, and far more than you think.
The real point is that those of us who have sufficient intelligence to see through this shit have few places to express ourselves, and few connections with each other. We also have little power and no vehicle for our beliefs.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
The reason
it's important to ask these mouthpieces what exactly they think Trump should do, if meddling puppies equal Pearl Harbor and 9/11, is to get them to describe the war they envision, at which point we or our Military will point out the effects of Mutually Assured Destruction.
The American people swallowing this garbage do not seem to understand that we and Russia each have enough nuclear weaponry to destroy life on earth. Ignorance is calling attention to itself as a danger to our survival.
Are you sure?
Are you sure they don't understand?
Maybe they're thinking, "Welp, better dead than Red."
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
That may be
the only other way to understand this. If they do know that war with Russia means the end of baseball and everything else we hold dear, the end of humanity, and they want Trump to initiate it, I guess that's the only way to explain their point of view. They'd rather we were all incinerated than for Russia to punk us online.
I'm afraid of OUR oligarchs.
I'm more afraid of OUR oligarchs than Russian oligarchs. Our oligarchs, starting with lying us into Iraq, have already caused more sectarian destabilization than the West will ever recover from. All for greed.
OUR oligarchs are a greater threat to the world than Russian (or anyone else's) oligarchs.
Mike Taylor
Mike,
you have summarized the entire problem we face clearly and succinctly. Thank you!