Wed May 21, 2008 at 06:27:57 PM PST
According to Ray McGovern these NeoCons of yours were known throughout Washington, well before they got elected not once but twice, as the ‘crazies’ and at this phase we can all say rightfully so. Name a nuttier group in history. I know you’re gonna say it was the Nazis and yes, they had their own particular vision of how the Earth should be dominated by the Nation they served and yes, they did nutty, awful things because nobody was able to stop them, but would you say they were nuttier? Have you read "Project for the New American Century?" Maybe not the same game but certainly in the ballpark. You know, 'the Global Domination/Damnation' ballpark?
What if the only significant structural differences between Neocon and Nazi was that Adolph Hitler was but one man, whereas the PNAC were MANY of the most powerful men on earth?
Do I have to wait until they’re actually as bad as the Nazis before I can make a comparison? Because that’s not how it works in pro sports! "This guy might be the next Michael Jordan! Wayne Gretzky! Muhammed Ali! Babe Ruth! Jenna Jameson!" We do it in sports and porn but not politics or history? Why? Oh yeah, there’s just some comparisons we’re not supposed to make until it’s already Too Late, until the Damage has Been Done and the bootheel’s on my freaking neck? Well, fuck you, I guess. That doesn’t sound like a decent plan to me.
The biggest 'What If' of the early 2Ks is actually this: what if Rummy hadn't totally screwed up the Iraq War, what if it was somebody that actually knew what they were doing, somebody that had planned for the Post-war? What if America won? You think they would have stopped their mideast rip at Iraq? Or at Patriot Acts 1 and 2? Or at Abu Graib? Or at the Suspension of Habeus Corpus? Or at the utter shredding of the Constitution? Hey, insert your fave hideous neocon action/law/power-grab(s) here, Citizens, and a big seig-howdy right back atcha! Am I wrong? Wanna invoke Godwin on all this? Go right ahead but you'd be wrong to do it.
The point, if I do indeed have one here, is that there are not just one but many possible comparisons to be made between Bush and the NeoCons and Adolf and the Nazis and to label any argument in this vein as useless strictly on the grounds of some smarmy, blogworlde pseudo-law that you're probably not even using properly is actually dangerous. It comes down to one of those 'not knowing history being doomed to repeat it' scenarios. Don't kid yourself. Like maybe you think everything’ll always somehow get better, maybe through God or through some kind of latent Positivist leanings or you’re still just hungover from that Last Great Rip before the American Dream floats right down the shitter to be replaced by it’s polar opposite, the American Nightmare. A SuperPower turned Desperate and Depraved, a citizenry turned to troubled sleep.
Or not? Good news is it seems the worm has turned, these are the Last Days of Disco for the sick, neocon freaks and their sick, neocon dreams. But the point is that it happened. They happened. And they happened on your watch. As a citizen. Which means they can happen again. And if you think your doing yourself some kind of favor by turning a blind eye to all they have done to your planet, to your country and most importantly, YOUR CONSTITUTION, you're as wrong as it gets and closer to the citizens of Germany in the late thirties than any population before or since. Chew on that and then tell me to go fuck myself. I'm cool with it. I said my piece.
Righty oh. All for now.
-iSC
Poll: Any comparison between Neocon and Nazi
should be discussed on its merit
66% 22 votes
is ridiculous on its face
24% 8 votes
Godwin. Godwin! GODWIN!!! whew...
9% 3 votes
| 33 votes total
Showing posts with label global warming. Show all posts
Showing posts with label global warming. Show all posts
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Android to Ostrich: On the General Ashtraying of the Planet
Sun Mar 30, 2008 at 09:40:22 AM PST
Dear [XXXXXX]
Will blog a response to this eventually (no names, no need for it. I represent the one side of what is becoming one of the dominant issues of our time and you the other), but have one thing I'd like some clarification of. It's certainly not shocking to me to hear someone from the status quo side use a term like 'Great Climate Change Religion' but it is when it comes from an intellectual like yourself and especially from someone with something of a scientific background, who actually knows what a 'theory' is, what 'peer-review' means etc.
To me, (and this may make you laugh, I haven't the slightest clue) but the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is the end-all be-all on it. They are the global consensus of dudes with the white coats and bunsen burners. If such a maassive amalgamation of subject-specific minds from another discipline, say Astronomy, came to me and said I should move because an asteroid is about to hit my house, well, you can bet yer ass I'd be moving. Pack up the kids, the bigscreen, the dog, the wife and what-have-you and I'm outta there. I haven't a doubt in my mind you'd do precisely the same thing and so would each and every sane human being on earth. The guy who didn't would be considered a nutcase and we'd all be saying he'll deserve it when he and his get reduced to molten space slag.
'Scientific American' and 'Science Magazine' both said the facts were in, the debate was over and Human Climate Fuckery is a dire reality. These are publications that I know both you and I have always respected, quoted extensively in our individual scientific endeavors because we knew the articles were backed wherever possible by peer review articles. Now they are what? Partisan rags? How? What on earth for? Is there some kind of conspiracy theory on this? And if so, why on earth do you believe it?
Seems like the other guys, the status quo guys that travel around the world on the oil company's dime quasi-refuting these things are the ones that can't even really nail down what a scientific theory or peer-review paper is. Whole thing reminds me of these Creationist idiots in the final analysis; "Ooooooh, you have a theory. Well, I can have a theory too. Everybody can have a theory on everything and mine is that the world was created by a benevolent, invisible, superhuman master to whom we must all bow and pray to or we will be sent to an eternity of fire and pain."
Hey, believe what you want, just don't try to call it science unless it's jumped the necessary hurdles, right? And there's the difference. Human Climate Fuckery has jumped the necessary hurdles. It's official. The consensus amongst people that know about these things is that this is the Real Deal and the debate is done and it's time to figger out our way outta this. Or to at the very least accept the general ashtraying of the planet and saying you like it that way. I would respect that more than abject, baseless denial and ostrichery.
Seems like the only actual scientists that represent the status quo side are not climatologists but geologists. Why do you think that is? Am I wrong? Gore's got legions of the world's finest climatologists backing what he has to say but who's the big status quo champ on this, what's the name of the Bizarro world Gore? I'd love to check his background out and read what he has to say, if in fact he's an actual climatologist or backed by actual climatologists and not just some fiendish stooge on the oil company's dole. Any leads you can provide me will be ruthlessly tracked down but I doubt you can offer anyone up...? Hey, prove me wrong, you know?
Regardless, I would speak more on this with you, in this laid back fashion that is the email. The tech is perfect for such a thing, given that we're both busy with all manner of things, respond when the spirit strikes you and I'll do the same. And by all means, feel completely free to call me an android so long as I may in turn call you an ostrich, and, as such, I'll just go ahead and offer the following warning about sticking one's head in the sand: it leaves your ass exposed and some day you're just bound to get fucked.
Forever your friend,
-iSC
Poll: Why is Global Warming still denied in spite of all evidence to the contrary?
Fear of Change
8% 2 votes
Fear of Comfort Level Disruption
48% 12 votes
Fear of Imagined Costs, Though New Industry Always Means New Business and New Jobs
16% 4 votes
Big Media has a Very Base and Obvious Interest in Creating Debate Where There is None
28% 7 votes
| 25 votes total
Dear [XXXXXX]
Will blog a response to this eventually (no names, no need for it. I represent the one side of what is becoming one of the dominant issues of our time and you the other), but have one thing I'd like some clarification of. It's certainly not shocking to me to hear someone from the status quo side use a term like 'Great Climate Change Religion' but it is when it comes from an intellectual like yourself and especially from someone with something of a scientific background, who actually knows what a 'theory' is, what 'peer-review' means etc.
To me, (and this may make you laugh, I haven't the slightest clue) but the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is the end-all be-all on it. They are the global consensus of dudes with the white coats and bunsen burners. If such a maassive amalgamation of subject-specific minds from another discipline, say Astronomy, came to me and said I should move because an asteroid is about to hit my house, well, you can bet yer ass I'd be moving. Pack up the kids, the bigscreen, the dog, the wife and what-have-you and I'm outta there. I haven't a doubt in my mind you'd do precisely the same thing and so would each and every sane human being on earth. The guy who didn't would be considered a nutcase and we'd all be saying he'll deserve it when he and his get reduced to molten space slag.
'Scientific American' and 'Science Magazine' both said the facts were in, the debate was over and Human Climate Fuckery is a dire reality. These are publications that I know both you and I have always respected, quoted extensively in our individual scientific endeavors because we knew the articles were backed wherever possible by peer review articles. Now they are what? Partisan rags? How? What on earth for? Is there some kind of conspiracy theory on this? And if so, why on earth do you believe it?
Seems like the other guys, the status quo guys that travel around the world on the oil company's dime quasi-refuting these things are the ones that can't even really nail down what a scientific theory or peer-review paper is. Whole thing reminds me of these Creationist idiots in the final analysis; "Ooooooh, you have a theory. Well, I can have a theory too. Everybody can have a theory on everything and mine is that the world was created by a benevolent, invisible, superhuman master to whom we must all bow and pray to or we will be sent to an eternity of fire and pain."
Hey, believe what you want, just don't try to call it science unless it's jumped the necessary hurdles, right? And there's the difference. Human Climate Fuckery has jumped the necessary hurdles. It's official. The consensus amongst people that know about these things is that this is the Real Deal and the debate is done and it's time to figger out our way outta this. Or to at the very least accept the general ashtraying of the planet and saying you like it that way. I would respect that more than abject, baseless denial and ostrichery.
Seems like the only actual scientists that represent the status quo side are not climatologists but geologists. Why do you think that is? Am I wrong? Gore's got legions of the world's finest climatologists backing what he has to say but who's the big status quo champ on this, what's the name of the Bizarro world Gore? I'd love to check his background out and read what he has to say, if in fact he's an actual climatologist or backed by actual climatologists and not just some fiendish stooge on the oil company's dole. Any leads you can provide me will be ruthlessly tracked down but I doubt you can offer anyone up...? Hey, prove me wrong, you know?
Regardless, I would speak more on this with you, in this laid back fashion that is the email. The tech is perfect for such a thing, given that we're both busy with all manner of things, respond when the spirit strikes you and I'll do the same. And by all means, feel completely free to call me an android so long as I may in turn call you an ostrich, and, as such, I'll just go ahead and offer the following warning about sticking one's head in the sand: it leaves your ass exposed and some day you're just bound to get fucked.
Forever your friend,
-iSC
Poll: Why is Global Warming still denied in spite of all evidence to the contrary?
Fear of Change
8% 2 votes
Fear of Comfort Level Disruption
48% 12 votes
Fear of Imagined Costs, Though New Industry Always Means New Business and New Jobs
16% 4 votes
Big Media has a Very Base and Obvious Interest in Creating Debate Where There is None
28% 7 votes
| 25 votes total
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
