Join News Letter

Iraq War

Peak Oil

Climate Change

US Imperialism

Palestine

Communalism

Gender/Feminism

Dalit

Globalisation

Humanrights

Economy

India-pak

Kashmir

Environment

Gujarat Pogrom

WSF

Arts/Culture

India Elections

Archives

Links

Submit Articles

Contact Us

Fill out your
e-mail address
to receive our newsletter!
 

Subscribe

Unsubscribe

 

SHOUT OUT, "NO MORE!"

By Ted Bohne

23 November, 2004
Countercurrents.org

As I crisscross the cyber "landscape" I can't seem to stop stumbling over articles who's authors, though historically very accurate, and in exactly the right direction in terms of content, continue to use such soft terminology seemingly as to not offend the Bush administration. I've enjoyed reading a bucket load of excellent articles, and offer the highest praise of their work. One thing mystifies me to this day, though. It's not a new phenomenon. This oddity precedes the first Bush catastrophe, election wise anyway. It's the use of terms such as "mislead" for lie. It isn't that the data in question haven't been vetted properly and clearly exposed as deliberate, bald-faced LIES. Bush didn't mislead the congress. He LIED to congress, as did most, if not all of his cartel, which is a FELONY. Bush didn't mislead the American People, He LIED to the American people, with premeditation, and malice. Virtually every statement these people makes falls neatly into the narrowest interpretation of the word LIE. This is a much more direct term, the impact which is desperately needed in this ever diminishing country. Bush WAS NOT ELECTED IN 2000. This isn't in contest by non-ideologues. It is historical fact.

Another term used frequently today is "suspicion," or "suspicious" in referral to the "possible" miscount of the presidential vote. Well, given clear irrefutable examples of this blatant malicious behavior, then one may freely and with blissful abandon, to dispense with the term "suspicion" and freely proceed with the FACT that the presidential election was fraudulent. If only ONE example of this malfeasance is present, then fraud DOES exist, one no longer be "suspicious" about it. It's FACT, and as it turns out, the country is rife with such examples. It follows, therefore, that yes, the election of 2004 is as corrupt and fraudulent as in 2000. These disreputable SOB's have had four years to streamline their "act."

I would suggest that writers raise this fact to a shrill level rather than this sadly cowed whisper. For God's sake, if the time for exposure and action isn't now, well, I cannot imagine a time better. Changes to the sociopolitical landscape and economic landscape of the most disastrous magnitude are being made this very instant. How many more bricks shall we hand the republicans to fortify the wealthy in ways that can never be changed. How many more American dead will we tolerate in Bush's clearly unnecessary crusade in Iraq? How many more BILLIONS of dollars will we give to a feckless thug and his mob before we SHOUT OUT, "NO MORE!" Or will we continue to mumble and write because we want someone else to do it.


The author can be reached at [email protected]


 

 

Google
WWW www.countercurrents.org

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Search Our Archive



Our Site

Web