"Facts? We Don't Need No Stinkin' Facts!"

"And in case we do need facts, we'll make them up as we go along!" - sayeth the wankers of both the Canadian and American MSM.

It is now well established that the current state of the American MSM is plainly and depressingly appalling. However, the Canadian MSM has sunk as well to that same level of fatuous, superficial, insipid, fact-free and disinforming, bottom level of incompetence.

Thanks to the blogosphere, we've all been informed on how so-called serious American MSM journalists, pundits, reporters and news-heads all too often act as propagandists or dumb stenographers, aiding and abetting right-wing nuttery and far-right christianism - even going so far as to make up facts to help promulgate their own intellectual sloth-driven petty interests or ignorance-based agendas (some latest examples here, here, here, here, here and here).

In short: the U.S. MSM is all about hair cuts, manly masculinity and other assinine subjects, including outright memes/lies, all meant to establish meanings and portraits of political personalities - with a bias clearly against progressives. It is all about propaganda (many examples, such as here, here, here and here), all about enabling the warwagers, warmongers and chickenhawks, all about fawning over Da Decider/Leader, all about never calling out bald-faced contradictions or lies (examples here, here, here, here and here), all about parotting right-wing, inept pundits (more examples here, here, here and here), all about being unable (or unwilling) to be accountable to itself (let alone respecting its own ethics or acknowledging its mistakes), and all about infotainment but certainly not about information.

Not to be outdone, the Canadian MSM is apparently doing everything it can to keep pace with the American MSM in the downward race to utter irrelevance of the 4th estate.

To support this last point concerning the Canadian MSM, here are three recent examples for your reading pleasure:

Let's start with this guy at the Globe and Mail, and his piece titled "Spare the global-warming sanctimony: Hey Canadians, stop calling the kettle black - Americans are taking action and leaving you behind". This piece of rag goes on to defend the Bush administration and, of course, the equally neocon Harper government, by actually quoting false facts to support the non-reality that green house gas emissions of the U.S. have declined significantly since The Leader took office - and consequently, the Mini Leader is doing good at following in his footsteps. As I outlined previously, the Clear Skies Act of 2003 (and the 2005 proposed revised version) of the Bush Administration actually resulted in the gradual increase of carbon dioxide emissions since its passage into law. That is not taking into account the policy of the Bush administration to systematically censor, or even rewrite, the scientific facts on Climate Change.

But the final nail in the coffin for this poor excuse of a news columnist is this: the Bush administration itself, in March of this year, had no choice but to admit that emissions by the U.S. of gases that contribute to global warming will grow nearly as fast through the next decade as they did the previous decade!

How's that for irony? The problem is that fools like this so-called journalist remain oblivious to their utter incompetence. The really scary thing is that he is not alone at making up facts to either support a thesis or in the act of defending neocons in power (whether Canadians or Americans).

Here's another example: my very own (neocon) Minister of the Environment, John Baird, likewise made factless, non reality-based statements to defend the (non)record of BushCo on the environment - without being called on it by anyone in the MSM.

And last, but not least, let's read a single quote (among many others) from this guy, also of the Globe and Mail : "(...) certainly Al Gore's film has been criticized for basing a lot of his warnings on predictions that have only a small percentage chance of coming true in the distant future. I'm not a scientist, but my own sense is that certainly there are some citizens — sometimes children — who now wrongly fear many cities will soon be under water etc." (Emphasis mine).

How's that for blatant truthiness? He and the rest of his vapid ignorance-based incompetent clowns are not scientists, yet they believe the "truth from their own sense (or guts)" that the predictions in Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth "have a small percentage chance of coming true in the distant future". Too bad this idiot did not bother to read the very newspaper he works for, let alone actually search the (so-easily available) facts, before pontificating as he did.

In any case, Q.E.D.: the Canadian MSM is as rotten as its American counterpart.

The question is, how can we change things when the MSM won't even report on conferences aimed at analyzing its (pathetic) performance?

But more importantly: how is it that our MSM (Canadian and American) is such a hack for neocons while, not coincidently, both the U.S. and Canada have neocons in power?

Answer: convergence.

There is not a single day that I am not thankful for the blogosphere at having taken up the torch as the truly competent, alert, discriminating, analyzing, fact-based and fact-checking, 4th estate.

Otherwise, we would be done with our democratic societies already.


(Cross-posted as a DKos Diary and at Diatribune)

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Whither Goest Thou, America? (Dkos/Diatribune Edition)

The U.S.A. keep on inching ever closer to becoming a souless and heartless despotic state with only the illusion of freedom and democracy.

How dare I make such a damning claim? Let us ascertain the evidence accumulated so far:

The U.S.A. torture or send their "captives" to places where they will be.

The U.S.A. deny habeas corpus and even seek to deny lawful legal representation.

The U.S.A. detain indefinitively. Furthermore, like any typical fascist state, it is much easier to be swept up for detention than to be released, even if you are innocent.

The U.S.A. cheat and steal from their friends.

The U.S.A. react with chicanery against friends who refuse to follow them in their reckless adventurism.

The U.S.A. will even make plans to invade their friends ("just in case").

The U.S.A. censor science to suits their purposes (examples here, here, here, here, here, here and here).

The U.S.A. reneg international treaties that they have signed (one lone example here, among many).

The U.S.A. make arbitrary no-fly lists based on the silliest of reasons - especially finding guilt in those who use their right to free speech. Same thing with watch lists. Not surprisingly, it is much easier to be put on a no-fly list than to be removed from one, even if you are in no way connected (even remotely) to terrorism.

The U.S.A. has become apparently so hermetically-isolated upon themselves and suspicious of everyone that they refuse help from friends and goodwilled people when disaster strikes.

The U.S.A. keep lying to cover/excuse their ignorance-based, catastrophic mistakes or their corrupted ways.

The U.S.A. view and wage wars like games. Any excuse, especially oil, is good for waging war.

The U.S.A's own Constitution has been severely diminished, if not actually rendered quaint twice all over.

The politics of incompetence, lies, and of ignorance and fear, rule the day in the U.S.A.

Voter suppression is in vogue, in the U.S.A.

Reason and social responsibility have all but been thrown away, in the U.S.A. In this respect, intellectual sloth reigns supreme.

And then, there are too many instances like this.

Whatever happened to compassion? To decency? To reason?

This is not about "falling from grace". This is rather a matter of an ignorance-, paranoid- and fear-fuelled slow march toward authoritarianism ... if not actual fascism.

The U.S.A. have definitively lost their way and have become the enemy that they have been loathing ever since September 11, 2001.

What a shame ...

Addendum Rationalizations to excuse uncivil, unlawful or even inhumane acts may be satisfying from a lawyering point of view and grant some measure of righteousness and legality, but the fact remains that such rationalizations constitute nothing more than base mendacity and hypocrisy.

Enemy combatants?

Ask yourself this: how is it that even unlawful combatants (which are, by definition, much worse than the convenient "enemy combatants") are still protected under the Geneva Conventions by having to be "treated with humanity and, in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial", because they are still covered by GC IV Art 5.?

Could it be that the term enemy combatant constitutes a "quaint" rationalization to excuse barbarity?

Ah yes - authoritarian states with their rationales, their "lists" and their irrational refusal to suffer humanitarian help ... lest they look incompetent, inept or downright callous, in the eyes of the rest of the world.

Remember the old USSR and their Tchernobyl? How about North Korea?

Hence, the U.S.A. has essentially become no better than any other barbarous, uncivilized regime.

Now, you can blame the Bush administration, the center-right democrats, the lobbyists, the fundamentalists, et al., for such a dismal state of affairs - but the hurtful truth remains that, in the end, the blame lies primarily with the voters.

Mea culpa, mea culpa, vox populi indeed.

Nevertheless - there is hope still. Furthermore, the 2006 mid-term elections were but a first, small step towards redemption - never forget this, because so much work remains to be done and such travails can not be achieved under a mere five months.

Hence, do take heart and keep on climbing the mountain to reclaim your honor, your dignity and your moral authority - come back to the light ... your friends (like these guys and gals) are waiting for your return.

'Nuff said.

(this diary is a revised "DKos/Diatribune edition" from an original entry at here)

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Iran Brouhaha: About Bloody Time, Eh?

Glenn Greenwald today published a lenghty discussion on the possibility of the Bush administration launching attacks against Iran and how staying in Iraq is the cornerstone strategy for such a plan.

Funny thing is that I wrote almost a week ago on this very subject, including subsequent follow-ups/updates, the lenghty entry of which was published here (my home-base blog), here (as a DKos Diary) and here (at Diatribune).

I got nary a peep of alarm from my entries. In fact, ironically, one comment at my DKos Diary said this:

You seem very upset

Have a nice cup of warm milk (organic, of course) and get some sleep. You know, a graham cracker would be a good idea, too.

Be sure and scream about the destruction of the Republic, torture, habeas corpus, Blackwater, KBR contractors, obstruction of justice, New Orleans, Hatch Act violations, and so much more.

War with Iran? Eh, I think that was possible before they made the mistake of appointing Admiral Fallon as Theater Commander. The new War Czar seems unlikely to recommend more war. Bob Gates is a "cut-out" between Cheney and the Joint Chiefs.

Iran is so very April 2007.

Now, to be fair, there had been Dkos Diaries before (and even after) mine - however, they essentially discussed individual news items whilst I attempted to put it all together as best as I could, including linkage with Iraq being used as a spingboard for the launching of the Iran War.

Following on Mr. Greenwald's entry, now the blogosphere suddenly seems ablaze with the subject - take this recommended DKos Diary as example.

While I am somewhat disapointed that my entry on the subject remained essentially lettre morte, I am nonetheless genuinely glad that finally the progressive blogosphere is taking serious notice of the very real possibility of an Iran War - and sooner at that than we may think.
As I asked before: will we embrace such mendacity again?


(Cross-posted as a DKos Diary and at Diatribune)

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Serve Us, Not The U.S.!

(Updated below)

Dixit Environment Minister Baird:

"The United States has done more to reduce greenhouse gas emissions than Canada did under the previous Liberal government."

How "right" he is - why, the Clear Skies Act of 2003 (and the 2005 proposed revised version) of the Bush Administration resulted in the gradual increase of carbon dioxide emissions since its passage into law. That is not taking into account the policy of the Bush administration to systematically censor, or even rewrite, the scientific facts on Climate Change. Nonetheless, the Bush administration in March of this year had no choice but to admit that emissions by the U.S. of gases that contribute to global warming will grow nearly as fast through the next decade as they did the previous decade.

Added to Baird's propaganda/disinformation service for the Bush administration are reports that Prime Minister Harper is poised to join President Bush in scuttling or watering down any statement on climate change from the G8 summit of next month. In fact, the (neo)con games played so far by the Harper government on Climate Change (including their proposed fuzzy Kyoto-Ultra Light plan) have been such that Canada's actual position on the G8 climate declaration remains a mystery to the rest of the world.

To this effect, Minister Baird refused to comment on this controversy, instead inanely mumbling empty words about Canada's leadership on Climate Change and acting as a bridge between the U.S. and the Europeans partners of G8 on the issue.

I suppose he and P.M. Harper (a.k.a. Mini Leader) are too busy following in the footsteps of BushCo, if not actually emulating The Leader, to notice that Canada has lost a significant amount of credibility with regards to Climate Change already.

Consequently, when I witness Baird's disassembling in obvious attempts at defending the indefensible tract record of the Bush administration on Climate Change, coupled with our Mini Leader evidently planning to extend the Afghan mission of Canadian troops (beyond their scheduled 02/2009 pull out) seemingly in order to relieve The Leader from redeploying U.S. troops back to Afghanistan so he can keep them in Iraq, and with the Mini Leader's openness for a greater integration of Canada with the U.S., I find myself actually wondering the following:

Is the Harper government in the service of the Bush administration or of Canada?

With federal elections possibly (hopefully) coming soon, I suggest that we make use of this opportunity-to-come to boot Harper and his neocons out of government so that they may understand once and for all that they were supposed to serve us, not the U.S. ...


Addendum: Here and here are other/different takes on Minister Baird's disassembling.


Update: 05/28/2007 - More takes on Minister Baird's lies and incompetence can be found at My Blahg here and here.

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

U.S. V.-P. Cheney Publicly Condemns Bush, Neocons And Himself

It is well understood that neocons are adpet at accusing others of doing/thinking what they are actually guilty of doing/thinking.

Yesterday, U.S. V.-P. Dick B. Cheney gave a commencement address at the United States Military Academy in West Point, New York. Maybe he drank the wrong brand of tea that day, or perhaps he slightly over-medicated himself - in any event, he came out and revealed publicly the motus operandi of the President, himself and their neocon administration, condemning all they stand for, their ideological agenda, and everything they have been doing in the process so far. As reported, Cheney delivered his remarks in the context of moral and ethical lessons that the graduating cadets at West Point had learned in the course of their studies. Dixit Richard (Dick) B. Cheney:

"(...) you will ... face enemies who oppose and despise everything you know to be right, every notion of upright conduct and character, and every belief you consider worth fighting for and living for."

By his own damning words, Cheney condemns the facts that A) President Bush, himself and their administration have stipulated that the President has the constitutional authority to decide for himself whether to conduct surveillance without warrants and therefore does not need the consent of Congress to do so; B) President Bush has brushed aside hundreds of laws already with his signing statements; C) President Bush and, especially himself, did not only promulgate the use of torture but were instrumental in making such an uncivilized practice legal; D) President Bush, himself and all of their administration took positions and actions in rendering legal the death of habeas corpus; and E) President Bush has entrusted himself with leading the entire federal government, not just the Executive Branch, in case of a catastrophic emergency. Hence, Cheney candidly admited to the graduating cadets that Bush, himself and their administration "oppose and despise everything known to be right".

However, Cheney's words were not only damning in their blatant condemnation of himself, Bush and their administration, but his declaration was also quite sweeping. Indeed, he bluntly admitted with these same words his (and Bush's and their ilk's) despise and opposition to "every notion of upright conduct and character". Obviously, he was referencing the Katrina disaster and the numerous scandals of wrongdoing on his administration's part (such as the U.S. attorneys scandal), among many other things such as their lies, dishonesty, incompetence, as well as their arrogance, expediency, mendacity and boorish behavior (one small example here) - and so on and so forth.

In fact, so intent was Cheney on his self-condemnation that he went as far as to flatly admit to the graduating cadets that he (and Bush and the administration) despise and oppose "every belief considered worth fighting for and living for". Indeed, Cheney is a chief proponent of the Unitary Executive doctrine. Furthermore, everything he, Bush and their administration have promulgated and achieved (like Patriot Act and the Military Commission’s Act, as two examples) have been meant to diminish the U.S. Constitution in favor of a Commander Imperitor Presidency (or, if you prefer: Imperial Presidency).

And to make certain that the cadets understood him fully, he added onto these self-damning words with the following condemning tirade, still speaking of himself, Bush and their administration as "they" in a clear attempt to distance himself from ... his own guilty reasonnings/actions, as well of those of the President and all of their neoconservative ilk:

"Their cruelty is not rebuked by human suffering, only fed by it. They have given themselves to an ideology that rejects tolerance, denies freedom of conscience, and demands that women be pushed to the margins of society. (...) By force and intimidation, they seek to impose a dictatorship of fear, under which every man, woman, and child lives in total obedience to their ideology. Their ultimate goal is to establish a totalitarian empire (...)."

Yes, yes - in truth, Cheney was speaking of terrorists. But like I said at the top of this entry: neocons excel at accusing others of doing what they are actually doing.

Clearly, such Freudian flat-out admissions of impeachable offenses on Cheney's part constitute a desperate cry for relief from a conscience too long suppressed.

I suggest that we show some sympathy for the Devil and actually help him out.

After all, this would be the humane thing to do - no?


(Cross-posted as a Dkos Diary, at Suzie-Q, and at Diatribune)

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Enter The Mini Leader

After The Leader, enter: The Mini Leader.

Maybe it's just me, but seeing priviledged politicians, who have never served one nanosecond as a soldier in an actual live war theater, and trying to play Mighty General, or Supreme Commander, for all to see, admire and fawn over - well, this simply grinds my stones.

I can't help it: I find such poseurs (and typically chickenhawks) who use patriotism and military servicemen/women like P.R. props, while in so doing putting the lives of said servicemen and women in grave danger, absolutely disgusting and nauseating.

If you think that I am refering to President G.W. Bush, Vice-President Dick B. Cheney and all their neocon ilk - you would be right ... and wrong.

I am specifically speaking here of my very own (Canadian neoconservative) Prime Minister, Stephen J. Harper.

Yes, Harper went to Afghanistan this week in a surprise visit (again) for a photo-op in military gear, to give a pep talk to our troops and to parrot the usual neocon Bush-like talking points - like "stay the course".

For a while now, I have repeatedly illustrated how Harper keeps on following in the footsteps of Bush - such as with regards to the Afghanistan War or Climate Change, as two examples among many.

Not convinced of this, yet? Then let's compare again some of Harper's words with some of Bush's:

S.J. Harper (05/17/2006): "We honor those who take risks and make the ultimate sacrifice by making a commitment to staying the course".
G.W. Bush (04/05/2004): "(...) So we've got tough action in Iraq. But we will stay the course".

S.J. Harper (05/24/2007): "We can't set arbitrary deadlines (to get out of Afghanistan) and hope for the best".
G.W. Bush (11/30/2005): "(...) setting a deadline to pull out (of Iraq) is not a plan for victory".

S.J. Harper (05/23/2007): "I don't have to tell you ... the risk that terrorism will come home if we don't confront it here (in Afghanistan)".
G.W. Bush (07/04/2005): "We're taking the fight to the terrorists abroad so we do not have to face them here at home".

S.J. Harper (03/13/2006): "You (the soldiers) have put yourselves on the line to defend our national interests; protect Canada and the world from terror (...) it is in our national interest to see Afghanistan become a free, democratic and peaceful country".
G.W. Bush (11/30/2005): "We will not turn (Iraq) over to the terrorists and put the American people at risk. Iraq will be a free nation (...) and this will add to the security of the American people".

S.J. Harper (03/13/2006): "(...) cutting and running (from Afghanistan) is not your way. It's not my way".
G.W. Bush (04/21/2004): "We're not going to cut and run (from Iraq) if I'm in the Oval Office".

And to think that one MSM journalist had the gall to report that Prime Minister Harper's "words no longer echoed the gunslinger idiom favored by U.S. President George W. Bush" in this week's speech to the troops. Are you kidding me?!?

Then again, this should not come as a surprise since the MSM was (predictably) largely fawning over the Prime Minister's staltwartness and historic bravery for being so near the front lines of the war (examples here, here, here and here).

Impolitical calls Stephen J. Harper "the Mini Bush". I could not agree more (as an aside, I recommend the reading of Impolitical's entries on Harper's latest visit to Afghanistan here, here, here and here - but I digress).

Still not entirely convinced? Then how about this: Prime Minister Harper is poised to join President Bush in scuttling or watering down any statement on climate change from the G8 summit of next month.

Better yet: while The Leader is quietly implementing a second surge of U.S. troops in Iraq, The Mini Leader is coyly planning to extend the Afghan mission of Canadian troops beyond their scheduled 02/2009 pull out. Why? Because "the work is not complete yet" (sayeth both The Leader and The Mini Leader).

Meanwhile, more soldiers die in Iraq and Afghanistan day after day after day after day, while those who keep sending more of them to their deaths parade and pose in military gear in order to dazzle the intellectual sloth-driven electorate with their boastful (but empty) patriotism and their politics of incompetence and lies, of ignorance and fear.

The final question is: when The Leader finally starts the Iran War, will The Mini Leader follow?

I keep hoping for (Canadian) federal elections ... soon.


(Cross-posted as a DKos Diary and at Diatribune)

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Update Notice - 05/25/2007

Time for one of them Update Notices, folks:

Quick One: Dinos and Men, Living Together ...: one update;

Incompetence and lies rule like ignorance and fear: two updates;

The incompetents strike back in force: five updates;

Caesar crosses the Rubicon: the sequel?: two updates.


Enjoy!

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Quick One: Dinos and Men, Living Together ...

(Updated below)

A new museum in Kentucky aimed at refuting the process of evolution is now open. Exhibits show dinosaurs living side by side with humans.

Sayeth the museum's spokesman: "The mission is to tell people that the Bible's history is true, and if its history is true its message of the gospel is true. ... It's a book of history and you can trust its science." (Emphasis mine)

Nice. Very nice.

Except that this fool, and all those likewise others who funded and designed this ignorance-based, laughable excuse of a museum, should know a little secret: the Bible is not science.

Science is science. Look it up, please!

One more proof that intellectual sloth, and the ignorance and fear it fosters, is truly insinuating itself into every aspect of our societies.


Update: 05/20/2007 - A similar intellectual sloth-driven, ignorance-based museum will be opening in Big Valley, Alberta. The museum's sponsors claim that it will be filled with "scientific evidence" that the flood in the Book of Genesis and other biblical events actually happened, and that people walked the Earth at the same time as dinosaurs.

It's official: Canada is being invaded by rampant religious fundamentalism. Maybe we need to say it louder, with more frequency and increasing insistence to those poor ignorance-driven, fearful souls out there: creationism is not science - it is quackery.

We should remind them that the current year is 2007 C.E. - not 1307 C.E.


(Cross-posted at Diatribune)

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Incompetence And Lies Rule Like Ignorance And Fear

(Updated below) (Update II)

Here is the official position of Alberto Gonzales on the damning revelations (at the hearings on the current US Attorneys scandal) that he may have tried to shape Monica Goodling's testimony: he was only offering a shoulder to cry on.

Compare this with Andrew Card's pathetic "clarification" to James Comey on the attempt by Card and Alberto Gonzales to take advantage of a sick and drugged John Ashcroft and "force" him to sign on an illegal warrantless domestic spying program: he and Gonzales had visited Ashcroft just to wish him well.

Incompetents are ruled by expediency - driven by intellectual sloth, they seek the easiest routes to achieve whatever objectives they have set out to accomplish. To them, the end justifies the means - which include (of course) lying, cheating, or simply ignoring the rules (or the law).

When such people constitute key government policy-makers, secretaries/ministers and executive Presidents/Pime Ministers, then a democratic society is doomed to slide slowly but surely into authoritarianism. Why?

Because only incompetents abuse power.

Even worse: when caught with their lies and wrongdoings, incompetents will simply deny their lies and further disassemble - in an obvious attempt at mudding the issue, at sowing confusion and thus forstering uncertainty. Aided and abetted by an equally intellectual sloth-driven incompetent media (one recent example here), the politics of ignorance, fear, violence (war) and expediency rule the day.

To the damnation of democracies and in favor of the whims of the Mob.

Not convinced? Let us take another quick gander:

Did President G.W. Bush and/or Vice-President Dick Cheney publicly claimed the existence of links between Saddam Hussein, Al Qaeda and 9/11? No, sayeth White House press secretary Tony Snow, despite this. No, sayeth the President, despite this, this, this or this (among so many other examples).

Incompetence and mendacity go hand in hand - that is because the incompetent is an instant gratification-seeking, listless, and anxious, slave of expediency.

Still not sure? Then look at what is happening with the politics of ignorance and fear with regards to Iran - all perpetrated by the same incompetent would-be Caesar and his loyal lieutenants.

Q.E.D.

Or, if you prefer: I rest my case.


Update: 05/24/2007 - As the Commander Guy harps on with his fearmongering (speaking of Osama bin Laden - since when has he become of importance again?!?) and his nonsensical answers to excuse/hide/justify his incompetence, we catch a glimpse into the intellectual sloth-driven incompetent thinking of those Democratic Senators and/or Representatives who backed down from imposing upon the Leader a deadline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops.

Bis: incompetence, lies, ignorance and fear. Political expediency rules supreme - definitely.

Woe to the republic.


Update II: It is simply amazing to what levels intellectual sloth-driven incompetents are willing to lower themselves in order to sell their mendacious follies and fallacies as "the right thing to do".

Meanwhile, President Bush lies again concerning Osama bin Laden. Not sure about this one? Refresh your memory here.

Lie and cry: the new motus operandi of the incompetents.

Spread the word ...


(Cross-posted at Diatribune and as a DKos Diary)

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

The Incompetents Strike Back in Force

(Updated below) (Update II) (Update III) (Update IV) (Update V)

This is what I have previously written concerning incompetence and violence:

"Ignorance breeds fear. Fear fosters hate. In turn, hate leads inevitably to violence.

The History of Humanity constitutes a sad and tragic testament to this senseless and vicious progression. Incidentally, there is a further underlying, self-evident axiom to this assertion which posits that violence is the last refuge of incompetence - incompetence as nations, as communities, and as thinking, reasoning human beings.

Therefore, when will we acknowledge the fact, once and for all, that it is the incompetents among us who consistently promulgate violence as a solution for anything, to everything?

For the sake of our continued existence, we must strive to forget nevermore that rationalizations supporting the use of violence - other than the need for the rightful exercise of self-defense when set upon by a genuinely clear, present and immediate danger - invariably constitute deceitful fabrications meant to conceal, disguise or justify incompetence ...

... including our very own for embracing such mendacity."

The reason I am quoting myself here is very simple: several developments have occured in the last five days or so which further prove the point that "violence is the last refuge of the incompetent". Let us look at just one of them, shall we?

Item: The rattling of sabers in support for a military confrontation with Iran have been sounding louder of late, with increasing frequency at that. It appears that everything is being done to justify a military intervention against Iran or to provoke Iran into firing the first salvo - including covert operations. The corridors of Power in Washington have been whispering in earnest that an uptick in tensions between the US and Iran could emerge this fall, especially if the Iraq 'surge' is deemed to be ineffective.

Consequently, behold the propaganda machine already working its magic in full steam mode in order to sell an Iran War:

Iran is secretly forging ties with al-Qaida elements and Sunni Arab militias in Iraq in preparation for a summer showdown with coalition forces intended to tip a wavering US Congress into voting for full military withdrawal, US officials say. "Iran is fighting a proxy war in Iraq and it's a very dangerous course for them to be following. They are already committing daily acts of war against US and British forces," a senior US official in Baghdad warned.

Not surprisingly, other incompetents are (or have been) anticipating, promoting, advocating, justifying and cheering - if not actually singing about - the prospect of war with Iran.

Why? Because in their intellectual sloth-driven minds, war-solves-all-problems.

Obviously, the Iraq theatre would serve as a springboard for an attack on Iran - it is therefore not surprising that the US Pentagon has been making plans to keep bases and troops in Iraq for decades to come.

Forget the fact that fundamentalist-shiite Iran has always had "problems" with sunnis. Forget also the fact that going into Iraq to begin with was idiocy at best and that the surge is (predictably) not working - more war is needed to serve oil-obsessed interests. As much as it was sheer incompetence to go into Afghanistan (instead of Pakistan) and stay there, the never-ending Iraq War proves that incompetence knows no bound. Hence, a war with Iran will tragically confirm the rule.

Let us not forget that the politics of ignorance and fear still rule the day ... and that these not only prevailed in the cases of Afghanistan and Iraq, but that they are running the same script in order to prevail in the case of Iran as well.

Unless, that is, we awake in time to shake off our collective intellectual sloth and prevent such a catastrophy from being perpetrated in our names.

Hence, the critical question is: will we embrace such mendacity again?

Update: 05/22/2007 - News are out that the Bush Administration is "quietly implementing a second Iraq troop surge that would nearly double the number of combat troops in Iraq this year (increasing the total number of U.S. troops in Iraq from 162,000 now to more than 200,000)". Iraq as a springboard indeed. Proof again that incompetence is nothing but consistent with itself.


Update II: 05/22/2007 (bis) - This just in - no more deadlines for the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. While I am not one for conspiracy theories, I do find this development rather ... convenient, with regards to the subject discussed in this entry - no?


Update III: 05/22/2007 (rebis) - Interesting - according to ABC News (via Think Progress), President Bush has directed the CIA to carry out covert operations both inside and outside Iran and aimed directly at weakening the Iranian regime. I hate to say "I told you so", but ...


Update IV: 05/23/2007 - Two US aicraft carriers have reached the Persian Gulf. 'Nuff said.


Update V: 05/24/2007 - Darth Vader is clearing a path to bomb Iran. Here we go again indeed ... Gulf of Tonkin, anyone?


(Cross-posted at Diatribune and as a DKos Diary)

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Update Notice - 05/17/2007

Time yet again for an Update Notice, folks:

Politics Of Fear And Ignorance: Alive And Well: one update;

It's Official: We *Are* Indeed Here.: one more update.


Enjoy!

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Politics Of Fear And Ignorance: Alive And Well

(Updated below)

Raw Story reports that the Commander Guy met privately with approximately a dozen Christian right leaders last week, in order to rally support for his policies on Iraq, Iran and the Global War on Terror (TM).

Here is what Focus on the Family Founder and Chairman James Dobson conveyed to the flock and for all to hear (emphasis mine):

“I heard about this danger [from Iran] not only at the White House but from other pro-family leaders that I met during that week in Washington. (...) Many people in a position to know are talking about the possibility of losing a city to nuclear or biological or chemical attack. And if we can lose one we can lose ten. (...) If we can lose ten we can lose a hundred, especially if North Korea and Russia and China pile on.”

Of course, Dobson then equated current Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad with Adolf Hitler ...

(Where do I even begin with all of this?)

Well, I will simply say that A) this is the same insipid, dubious and mendacious rationalizations/justifications/excuses for war that we've come to know so well in the case of Iraq (mushroom cloud as a smoking gun, anyone?); B) again we have to trust "people in a position to know" (sure ... fool us once, shame on you - fool us twice ...); and C) this is the most outrageously conflated (and pathetic) attempt yet in promoting a confrontation with another nation by overplaying fear and ignorance.

The Bushies did it for Iraq and they are still doing it for Iran (while at the same time continuing their attempts at restoring a cold war mentality with regards to Russia, China and North Korea).

How desperate can the Commander Guy be when he seeks to stir up support for a war with Iran (and China and Russia and North Korea and Cuba and Mars and Alpha Centauri and etc., etc., etc.) among people who are not only wishing to live in a dominionist theocracy, but also waiting for such a conflagration - because it will mean (to them) that the Rapture is at hand? (Then again - G.W. Bush is essentially one of them, so ...)

I wrote before that it is the incompetents among us who consistently promulgate violence as a solution for anything, to everything. Methinks this holds quite true still, especially with regards to Iran (see in a previous entry of mine here).

And of course, the best weapon to promulgate warmongering is ignorance-based fear - something religious fundamentalists like Dobson et al. simply can't live without.

It is what defines them.

It is what drives them.

It is what gives them purpose*.

Consequently, we can thank Pres. Bush, V.-P. Cheney and all neocon chickenhawks for demonstrating that the mendacious politics of ignorance and fear are quite alive and kicking - even still in 2007.

(And we can thank them as well for being such undeniable paradigms of incompetence).

Unfortunately, it is this very kind of politics which inevitably leads the way towards the ascent of authoritarian/facist regimes.

Food for thought, eh?


(* I know, I know ... I was channeling Agent Smith and his speech in the movie Matrix: Reloaded there. I just could not help myself in this specific instance.)


Update: 05/16/2007 - C&L reminds us that Da Decider/Commander Guy met with another loony Christianist fundamentalist leader in March 2003, Pat Robertson, a mere few weeks before launching the invasion of Iraq. Bis repetita with regards to Iran? It might just be indeed ...

In related news: Jerry Falwell, yet another pro-eminent Christianist fundamentalist loony leader, passed away. To remember him by, here he is in his own words.

Then, for fun, compare Falwell's wisdom with that of Robertson's and Dobson's.

Enjoy (sarcasm intended) ...

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Update Notice - 05/15/2007

Indeed - time for another Update Notice at Another Point of View:

It's Official: We *Are* Indeed Here.: one update;

Mr. Duceppe: Laughable/Monsieur Duceppe: Risible: one update.

As always - enjoy!

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

It's Official: We *Are* Indeed Here.

(Updated below) (Update II)

In three previous entries of mine (here, here and here), I discussed on the current state of our Canadian MSM and how quickly it was becoming as superficial, fatuous, vapid, asinine and fact-free as the American one has become.

Well, I now feel comfortable enough now to say that, indeed, our MSM has fully become as fatuous, vapid and incompetent as its American counterpart. Take two examples taken from today only:

Bloviating Defies Logic
Peter Worthington, a news columnist, wrote a column in the Toronto Sun, titled: "New isolationism defies logic". Let us read his first four opening lines:

"Opinion polls show that an increasing number of Canadians think we should pull our military out of Afghanistan if casualties rise. That new isolationism appeals to many media commentators and politicians, eager to defeat the government, regardless of merit or logic."

What actually defies merit and logic here is that Worthington conflates the desire of the majority of Canadians to see their troops out of Afghanistan (and back home) with some sort of intangible phenomenon he christened "new isolationism", and which he invented out of the addled reasoning centers of his brain, in order to posit that such a new phenomenon is being used by those who are eager to defeat the neocon Harper government.

I will put this as succintly as possible: Worthington's conflation has as much merit, and is as logical, as accusing me of "new pyrophobia" - meant of course to defeat the Harper government - for desiring to pull my hand out of a burning fire.

Worthington then follows up directly with the following mind-boggling assertion:

"Whether we, as a country, should have gone to Afghanistan in the first place, almost as a sop to the Americans for refusing to join the English-speaking alliance of the U.S., Britain and Australia in Iraq, is a valid but pointless argument."

First, we did support/go in Afghanistan in the first place, which occured wa-ay before Iraq, Monsieur Worthington (Afghanistan invasion: 2001; Iraq: 2003). Then ....

"English-speaking alliance"? What about the Italians, Polish, Romanians and those other non-english speaking partners who constituted the so-called Coalition of the Willing for the invasion of Iraq? I wonder if Worthington can spell "fact" correctly ... And then -

"Valid but pointless"? Sounds the same as saying that my supper tonight was "good but bad".

Perhaps Peter Worthington likes to live in a fantasy-universe vacuum, where one does not bother to verify facts nor debate bad decisions and mistakes of the past, because, well, gosh darn it, what's done is done, it's a fait accompli and there is no use for crying over spilled milk! Such an attitude is plainly parochial and wrong on so many levels, if only because all of us who actually use the brains that we were born with know that we must know and understand the fact-based past, in order to not repeat its mistakes and see clearly where we are going in this reality we live in. But apparently, the glorious news columnist that Worthington thinks he is would have none of such pointless argumentations.

Besides, such arguments are only meant to defeat the Harper government - says Peter Worthington. It is glaringly interesting how he does not expound on such an insipid rationalization with something like ... you know ... facts? Furthermore - who's fault is it if a government keeps screwing things up in order to follow in the footsteps of the neocon Bushies and the Commander Guy himself? The only thing that is defeating the Harper government is ... itself.

And not surprisingly, Worthington then goes on in his column to argue for the all-time favorite neocon line of all: "stay the course".

In other words: we are in this Afghanistan mess and the best way to get out of said mess is to ... stay in it. Bravo, Monsieur Worthington! Heck of a job as a news columnist: your column of today was completely fact-free, full of outright falsehoods, devoid of any in-depth analysis whatsoever, filled with impressions and pontifications, full of logical fallacies and gratuitous attacks, and, most "important" of all, in full Harper defense-mode.

Just like he did so dutifully in attacking Al Gore who dared to criticize the Harper/Baird Kyoto-ultra-light plan some two weeks ago.

At least, Worthington is quite consistent in his incompetence.


Attack and Smear Them Traitor-Leakers!
Then, there is news columnist Ezra Levant who wrote today in the Calgary Sun a column titled "Anarchist leaker covets disorder", concerning Jeff Monaghan, the communications worker in the federal environment department who leaked a confidential draft of the Harper government's policy on Kyoto.

Right off the bat, Levant categorizes Monaghan's leak as illegal, without any basis whatsoever and even mentioning one paragraph after that the leaker was arrested but not charged with anything! Maybe Ezra Levant needs to take a good, long look in the dictionary concerning the definition of "illegal", eh? I mean, if you are not charged with anything, maybe - just maybe - you did nothing illegal and did not deserve to be arrested in the first place, right? Seems to me this is as simple as 1-1=0, if one puts aside his intellectual sloth and actually takes the time to think about it (But then, what is the use of writing a smear article if you can't insinuate, conflate and bloviate without basis, right? Right. But I digress ...)

In any case, the serious, thoughtful Levant goes onto an adolescent tirade to demean as much as possible the leaker and, in the process, to fully discredit him - because, once again, the government must be defended and protected by the MSM, right? Forget about the simple truth that leaking the Harper/Baird Kyoto-ultra-light plan did one thing and one thing only: embarass the Canadian neocons in power by exposing their duplicity and incompetence with regards to Climate Change.

But no, no, no, "says" Ezra Levant - the leaker is a ba-a-ad guy and ... and ... and don't mind the Harper Kyoto plan because it is good-good-good and the leaker is bad-bad-bad and dangerous: that is how Levant's insipid column of character assassination can be summarized. Heck of a job, Ezrie!

Of course, serious news columnist Ezra Levant was not alone in doing his duty to smear the leaker in order to defend Harper and his neocons. Take for instance today's comment from Lorrie Goldstein, who used a different approach: he first grandly writes that "Every whistleblower is different. Some are noble. Some brave. Some frightened. Then there are the pompous jerks." Care to guess in which category he places Monaghan? (And yes - this is the same Goldstein who also dutifully attacked Al Gore for daring to criticize the Harper/Baird Kyoto-ultra-light plan some two weeks ago).

In conclusion, these examples illustrate all too clearly that our Canadian MSM is now:

All about propaganda;

All about enabling the warwagers, warmongers and chickenhawks;

All about fawning over Da Commander Guy-emulator;

All about never calling out bald-faced contradictions or lies;

All about parotting fact-free right-wing, neocon mindless spin;

All about infotainment and certainly not about information.

All about being unable (or unwilling) to be accountable to itself, let alone respecting its own journalistic ethics/standards or acknowledging its mistakes.

In short: the Canadian MSM is currently failing as the 4th estate.


The feuilles de chou that I have used as examples herein are proof enough of that. As I have written before: we must remain ever vigilant - lest we end up as far into the propaganda and disinformation zone as our neighbor south of the 49th ...


Update: 05/15/2007 - Nothing to see here, move along now. Three days ago, Scott Taylor of the Toronto Sun (is it just me or is there a pattern here, with regards to Sun Media/Québecor?) penned this article titled "No signs of torture", with regards to Afghan detainees captured by Canadian soldiers and handed over to the Afghan National Directorate of Security and/or Afghan police officers, then being tortured and mistreated by their own in Afghan detention centers. In his article, Taylor was given a tour (approved in advance by the Afghan government and supervised by Afghan officials - wink, wink) of the Kandahar Detention Center and he consequently describes his "findings". Of course, concludes Taylor, there were no evidence of torture or mistreatment of detainees and thus the "liberal media" has been conflating everything in order to assault/embarass wrongly and maliciously the poor Harper neocon government Taylor played the perfect, attentive stenographer and moutpiece (for both the Harper government and the Afghan government) without bothering to do any actual investigative journalism ... like, for instance, visiting a detention center completely unannounced, maybe?

Once again: Q.E.D.


Update: 05/17/2007 - Lorrie Goldstein goes again with all guns blaring against Al Gore. His primary source? Discredited, abyssmal ratings-generator, right wing nutt Glenn Beck, ladies and gents - I kid you not! Yet once again a superb example of incompetent journalism in our MSM.

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Mr. Duceppe: Laughable/Monsieur Duceppe: Risible

(Updated below)

The saga of the PQ leadership continues.

After stirring up the hornests' nest of the séparatiste passions of Québécois by jumping onto the Shane Doan non-affair two years after the fact, Mr. Gilles Duceppe was obviously angling to drop his BQ leadership in order to jump onto that of the PQ - but former PQ leader André Boisclair saw through that and expressed his displeasure ... as Duceppe hypocritically denied having ambitions to seek the PQ leadership. Consequently, Boisclair earned for himself the dubious honor of being forced to resign his leadership, as Duceppe backers began to "sell" their man as next next savior of the PQ.

Predictably, Duceppe bowed out of federal politics and announced officially his candidacy to become the next PQ leader - no doubt the would-be King expected a quick and easy coronation. However, the would-be Queen of the PQ, Pauline Marois, let it be known that she was seriously considering to come out of her one year-old retirement from provincial politics to run for a third time, in order to grab at last the PQ crown for herself.

Ascertaining the greater popularity of Marois not only within the party but among the Québécois at large as well, Duceppe backed down and dropped out of the race for the PQ leadership yesterday, citing his lack of desire to cause dissentions and chicanery within the PQ - among other so-called noble reasons. Of course, Marois officially announced today that she will be seeking the PQ leadership - no doubt expecting in turn a quick and easy coronation, with the dissasembling and mendacious Duceppe bowing out.

Within the span of a week of so, Gilles Duceppe has shown himself to be not only ridiculous, but now laughable as well. He should retire from politics altogether and simply fade away.

Vous êtes risible et ridicule, Monsieur Duceppe - faites donc une faveur à la politique Canadienne et Québécoise, et prennez votre retraite de la vie politique. Merci bien à l'avance.

In the meantime, the fatuousness, pettiness and fickleness of the PQ leadership continue to be a gift that keeps on giving, ever showering with ridicule the separatist movement of Québec.


Update: 05/15/2007 - Of course, Mr. Duceppe blamed a lot of factors for his ephemereal candidacy for PQ leadership - first, it was because one of the potential contenders susceptible to run also and thus drain support from Mme Marois decided not to run; then it was because of his political opponents and the MSM journalists; and then, he finally acknowledged that he had made a mistake, that he miscalculated and that he let his emotions call the shots. All the while, his fellow BQ (and pro-eminent PQ members as well, including Marois herself) praised his "courage" as they welcomed him back as the BQ leader. It is a good thing that no one can die from ridicule - or else, many people would have croacked these last two-three days, with Monsieur Duceppe first among them.

Meanwhile, the Queen-to-be of the PQ, Pauline Marois, outlined her conditions (for her coronation) which include shelving the notion of a deadline for a future referendum and returning the party to its social democratic and sovereignty roots. Although the séparatistes hardliners within the PQ have decided to keep a low profile for now, you can bet that they will be howling with outrage the moment Marois's coronation ceremony is over and done with. As they say: stay tuned ...

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Update Notice - 05/12/2007

That's right, folks - yet one more Update Notice:

Round'em up: added several sub-items;

We interrupt this program ...: one update;

Quick one: gimme liberty or death!: one update;

Politics and journalism joined at the hip by intellectual sloth: two updates.

Enjoy!

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Round'em Up

Time for a round up of current events, folks:

Oh, U.S.A.!
Item 1: The U.S. is still peddling it's useless Missile Defense Shield. Canada said "thanks, but no thanks" already. Looks like the U.S. found their third good sucker.

Item 2: The Chickenhawk Supreme fearlessly, bravely and courageously rattled his sabers in support of his lusting want (or need?) for a military confrontation with Iran. My question is this: is he trying to distract the good ol' folks back in the U.S. from his impending woes (see also this previous entry of mine), or is he ramping up the rhetoric in order to make justifications before the fact (see also here)?

Item 3: Ann Coulter, the Premier Queen of Filth and Loud (one latest proof here), is truly an example of honesty, correctness and upmost lawfulness (gotcha!). Q.E.D. (also here).

Item 4: Oops? What does it mean when your Excellent General and (hoped for) Quagmire-Savior advocates against torture? Considering the way things are currently (see also here), I wonder if Gen. Petraeus will not go the way of his predecessors? Speaking of "retired" Generals, this brings me to ...

Item 5: CBS hired ret. General Batiste as a military expert. The problem? When he displays his expertise, CBS fires him because "he may come across as anti-Bush". Then, they claim that he is guilty of overt advocacy, even outright lie about him, to justify his firing. Forget that CBS regularly makes use of pro-Bush advocates (another one here), without disclosing them as such. Here's what Linda Mason, the CBS News Vice President, Standards and Special Projects, said about Batiste: “When we hire someone as a consultant, we want them to share their expertise with our viewers (...)". But if he "shares his expertise" with others, it is wrong? Furthermore, is it his fault if experts like him and reality itself keep screaming that the Iraq War is wrong and the US has to leave? Apparently, the obtuse-minded person that is Linda Mason thinks that she knows better what military expertise is than ret. General Batiste: indeed, Mason goes so far as to belittle Batiste’s opposition to Bush’s Iraq policy, suggesting it is not “an analytical approach.” Linda Mason: one more example of incompetence and the glaring proof that the MSM and the neocons are joined at the hip.

Item 6: Lou Dobbs proves that the MSM does not just make up facts and numbers (or, at the very least, that they use shoddy sources because of their intellectual sloth-driven incompetence). Meanwhile, neocon Richard Perle attempts to rewrite pre-Iraq War history with the complicity of the MSM. Q.E.D. (again).

Item 7: While Da Commander Guy keeps doing the Benchmark Samba With No Strings Attached, everyone can now forget about being awaken finally from the Iraq War nightmare when September comes.

Item 8: Some good news at last on the restoration of the US Constitution: the House passed a bill which bans warrantless wiretapping. Will Da Commander guy veto this or make use of his infamous signing statements? We shall see ...

Item 9: This just in - more indications that the Iraq War was for nothing else but oil.


Oh, Canada!
Item 1: Canada will now have its very own no-fly list. Just like our neighbors south of the 49th (more here). At the same time, the gap between the rich and the poor has increased in our country. Meanwhile, our would-be-Commander Guy neocon of a Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, carps that the current worries and outcries about Afghan detainees belittle our troops and their courage/heroism, while he is being hypocritical concerning government leaks by using a party/ideology-defined double standard. Oh, well - no need to worry, right? After all, the Canadian neocons are not like their American counterparts, right? I mean, they would never shut down the due democratic process and oversight, especially when the subject of discussion is the integration of Canada in the U.S., right? (oh - they did? Never mind, then). Hmmmm ... why does all of this sound oh, so familiar to me? Which brings me to ...

Item 2: Today, Linda McQuaig of the Toronto Star wonders whether or not we're slipping into U.S. orbit. Gee, ya think? Which again brings me to ...

Item 3: Industry Minister Maxime Bernier sweeps aside consumer concerns about the current high gasoline prices. In other words: nothing to see here - move along now (and keep paying). At least, the Québec government is seeking means to contain those artificial, profit-grabbing hikes.

Item 4: Not surprisingly, Gilles Duceppe announced that he would seek the PQ leadership. Equally not surprising, Pauline Marois will do the same ... yet again. Let us all sit back and enjoy the chicanery and ripping apart that is to come, thus heralding the coming end of the PQ as a unified social-democratic séparatiste party. Just like the continents, the various separatist, sovereignist and autonomist groups who unified under the social-democratic PQ banner will fragment away (it has already begun with the ADQ, Québec Solidaire and this new party).

Item 5: Meanwhile, there be lots of spying going around in Canada - but fear not: CSIS is on their case (or are they? What about them terrorists?). Maybe this is why CSIS is seeking actively to boost his human resources ...


This concludes today's edition of Round'em Up.

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

We Interrupt This Program ...

(Updated below)

We interrupt this program for the following breaking news:

Bush, Cheney, guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors.

To which I reply: duh.

We now return to our regularly scheduled program ...


Update: 05/11/2007 - While impeachment of President Bush appears to remain only wishful thinking, despite some 40% Americans supporting this, the impeachment process of Vice-President Cheney looks to be moving forward and gathering momentum.

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Quick One: Gimme Liberty Or Death!

(Updated below)

The Hallowed Halls of Democracy are weeping blood today. Dixit what the so-called "good ol' American Patriot" is clamoring on radio airwaves these days:

"(...) every Muslim immigrant to America who holds a green card, a visa, or who is a naturalized citizen [should] be required by law to wear a GPS tracking bracelet at all times," and that the government should "bug their places of work and their residences" and monitor "[a]ll mosques and community centers." (...) "If they don't like the idea, or if they refuse, throw their asses out of this country."

This was in response to the news that terrorists planning to attack Fort Dix were caught (legally and all ... without having to trample on the Constitution).

Of course, far right-wing pundits have jumped on this and are going all wild with their serious suggestions as to what to do with terrorists in Iraq. Take this nut, for instance.

At the same time, the U.S. Attorney General himself admits to not spending much time (at all) dwelling on non-important things ... like habeas corpus.

Words fail me to comment further on such intellectual sloth-, insanity- and incompetence-driven reasonings (for lack of a better term ...). Rather, I re-direct you folks to these previous entries of mine (from oldest to newest):

Democracy and intellectual sloth;

Home-grown terrorism and fear;

Right-wing pundits have finally gone insane;

Say - I was just thinking ...;

Say - I was just thinking (III) ...;

Ten steps into death of Democracy and Hell;

Whither goest thou, America?;

Caesar crosses the Rubicon: the sequel?;

Politics and journalism joined at the hip by intellectual sloth.

I will conclude with the immortal words of Benjamin Franklin:

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain
a little security will deserve neither and lose both."

'Nuff said.

Addendum: I just found another Canadian take on this - for your reading pleasure (I aim to please - even when this self-described "professional" blogger would not publish my humble comment on this very same entry ... oh well - 05/27/2007: I humbly apologize to said professional blogger, Mr. Werner Patels. A glitch was responsible for my comment not being published - obviously, I was wrong in my assumption. As they say: "live and learn" ...).


Update: 05/11/2007 - Apparently, the Fort Dix Six may have been nothing more than victims of entrapment from an undercover F.B.I. agent trying to score a big one.

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Update Notice - 05/09/2007

That's right - time again for an Update Notice, folks:

Politics And Journalism Joined At The Hip By Intellectual Sloth: two updates;

An Example Of Utter Stupidity And Incompetence: one update;

Monsieur Duceppe: Ridicule/Mr. Duceppe: Ridiculous: one last update.

Enjoy!

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Politics And Journalism Joined At The Hip By Intellectual Sloth

(Updated below) (Update II)

As I have written before, intellectual sloth reaps ignorance. In turn, ignorance festers fear which, as we know all-too-well, acts as a powerful motor in driving irrational thinking and actions. Furthermore, fear is quite expert in the exercise of nullifying any semblance of intellectual and emotional maturity in people – in other words, fear transforms a supposedly adult person into an irresponsible, reactionary, intolerant, judgement-impaired, and comfort-craving, child (or adolescent). One who searches for easy and absolute answers, who demands his instant gratifications.

Incidentally, the search for the quick-and-easy and instant gratification fuels egotism, lure of gain, covetousness and greed which, in turn, stimulate further the search for instant gratification ... and so on. Consequently, the prevalence of the search for the quick-and-easy, and thus prevalence of intellectual sloth, constitutes a genuine scourge that affects all human activity in our modern societies.

It is the pre-eminent reason why everything today is about marketing and easy, quick and low-cost solutions - instead of those complicated things that we should be doing, like reasoning, dialoguing, discussing ideas and searching for solutions that are both practical and durable, however complex and difficult these may be.

To this effect, everything today is about marketing. We are therefore offered only what the majority apparently asks for, or we are pushed by demand-created marketing ploys.

Among the many ills caused by such a sad state of affairs, one of the most devastating is the result in the recurrent election of too many incompetent demagogues who "make us feel good, make us feel secure, make us feel at ease".

Indeed, as in the case of journalism and televised entertainment, politics have become nothing short of a product that is pushed to the spoiled, instant gratification-searching children that we are.

Election campaigns? The time has long passed since the days when public debates (televised or not), characterized by their depth of content, were the norm. Nowadays, it is all about easy formulas and easy answers. Everything is about the 30 seconds soundbite that can be shown in those degenerated news shows which now predominate the waves. The same applies as well to the political messages - or rather, "political advertisements" - which cost millions upon millions of dollars. Should we be thereafter surprised and shocked by the monetary collusion between special interests and too many (corrupted) politicians?

As in the case of an overwhelming majority of journalists, there is a too high number of politicians who also go for the quick-and-easy way: indeed, there is nothing easier than using fear, corruption of facts and attacks against opponents - especially since intellectual sloth, ignorance, fear and the search for instant gratification are prevalent among the electorate of our societies.

In summary, our intellectual sloth generates our ignorance, our fear, our selfishness, our intolerance, as well as our search for instant gratification. Consequently, we have become akin to spoiled children with short attention-spans and which must be serviced, instead of the mature human beings endowed with capacities for reasoning, discerning and critical thinking, that we are supposed to be (here's a typical recent example of ignorance- and fear-fueled paranoia here).

Hence our current tabloid journalism and tabloid politics.

Not convinced?

Well then, here are yet more examples (direct or via other observers) of intellectual sloth-driven journalistic incompetence here, here, here, here, here, here and here. These recent examples constitute paradigms of what is wrong with today's media. It is all about parroting the meme du jour. It is all about no fact-checking and certainly no questioning. No information either, but instead puerile disinformation and propaganda. And change your position only if it has become all too evident that you are on the wrong side of an issue - but pretend you were always right anyways. More examples are mentioned/linked to in previous entries of mine here, here and here.

And what of politicians? For recent examples of intellectual sloth-driven political and/or governing incompetence, read this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this and this. Stupidity, pettiness, spin, cowardice, self-righteousness, mendacity, hypocrisy and expediency rule the day. Not counting other examples mentioned/linked to in previous entries of mine here, here, here and here.

I wrote before that only the incompetents abuse power.

We only have ourselves to blame, really. We get what we want or what we are being pushed, in a lazy, instant gratification-style. This is especially true for us in Canada and the USA, in light of the overwhelming numbers who voted in France's last presidential elections.

It is up to all of us to stand up for our democratic principles-founded societies - before it is too late and we end up living under de facto authoritarian regimes.


Update: 05/09/2007 - First, Digby (who else?) expands on the very core of the subject herein. In addition, here are several items which serve only to posit Q.E.D. with regards to what I wrote in this entry:

a) Republicans attacking House Speaker Pelosi with no facts (again), knowing that the MSM stenographers journalists will print the accusations without fact-checking;

b) One more example of a corporation playing stooge to Big Brother;

c) One more example of Bush' WH bad management (and obligatory blame-game to escape responsibility);

d) More on the hypocrisy, mendacity and hubris of neoconservatives (and more here);

e) One more example of neoconservative honesty (more on it here) ... this puts Iraq (if not Afghanistan as well) in a much clearer perspective, no? (Read: o-i-l);

f) One more example of hypocrisy, mendacity and hubris of MSM Antoinettes and neocon pundits (heck - here is yet one more for fun, and still another one, for the road), for whom the spin goes on;

g) Proof here that Climate Change denialists will attack anyone to further their ignorance-, intellectual sloth- and incompetence-based denying;

h) It looks like it is going to be "Iraq Forever":

i) But in the meantime: I wonder how the Bushies will respond to the Iraqi Parliament's imposing of a deadline for the withdrawal of US troops (without barely a peep by the US/Canadian MSM, by the way)? Will Da Commander Guy veto this as well?

j) Lastly, here is the US military at its finest, folks - and how about the army and neocons conspiring to propagandize the war or stiffle the media? These are yet more examples which support the point I made previously;

Here is another interesting item: a good discussion on how honesty and owning up to your mistakes beat mendacity and hubris anytime, anywhere, anywhen.

And finally: proof again here that you don't need to trample on freedom, civil liberties and human rights to catch terrorists. Regular investigative, constitutional police work is required, but absolutely no need of armies, gulags, denying of habeas corpus, illegal spying, or invading/destroying countries.

Q.E.D.

Yet meanwhile, grass-roots democracy has risen to petition for the pardon of a pseudo-celebrity, drunk-driving, found-guilty, socialite. This is the pathetic state of society, folks.

Nonetheless, hope remains still. As I have written before: it will always be up to citizens to ensure that democracy prevails in their societies.


Update II: 05/10/2007 - Accidental Deliberations has a very interesting post touching on the core of the subject of this entry of mine - this time with regards to Afghanistan. In addition, more musings on the complicity of the MSM here, on the obtuse-thinking of pundits here and here, as well as on the lying politicians and their lying lies here. In the meantime, US soldiers keep on winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi youth while the MSM looks the other way - the soldiers are probably venting their frustrations at being deployed/redeployed indefinitely or at being shot at/blown appart/killed (but still - urinating on dead Iraqis? This is Section 8 stuff!). Meanwhile, House republicans have a sit down with Da Commander Guy ... not about getting out of Iraq, nor about those major covert ops he approved without telling the House, but about telling him to speak no more about it and let propaganda do its thing. This is deep-thinking at its best, folks. Also, republicans prove again to be living in a fantasy world. Lastly, the AP has woken up to the fact that Iraqis want a timetable for troop withdrawal ... how sharp of the AP (see above), eh?

And the best for last: serious, thoughtful considerations and suggestions from a Canadian MSM opiniator to Stéphane Dion, on how to better connect with Canadians at large (yes folks, it is all about image and perception - these are the things that matter the most to our political journalists and pundits, like their American counterparts. My question is finally answered: we are indeed here now).

To paraphrase Atrios - I am documenting the atrocities. Enjoy.

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

An Example Of Utter Stupidity And Incompetence

(Updated below)

By way of Crooks and Liars (Emphasis mine):

"Woman tricked into sex by penis cream treatment: A Syrian-born airline pilot allegedly tricked a schoolteacher from Haverfordwest into having sex with him by pretending he had to administer ointment on the end of his penis, a jury heard yesterday (...) Huw Rees, prosecuting, told Swansea crown court: 'The allegations here are of rape by deception'."


Rape by deception?!?

What's next?

Rape by charming?
Rape by duplicity?
Rape by foolery?
Rape by lying?
Rape by swooning?
Rape by seduction?
Rape by smooth-talking?
Rape by breaking up?
Rape by failure-to-commit-in-a-relationship?

How about this: rape by stupidity?

Why is it that I just can't shake off this nagging suspicion that all of this is being brought upon the "rapist" because he is ... Syrian-born?

There are difficulties enough for rape victims to come forth in order to report what was cowardly (and usually brutally) done to them and, even more so, testify about it in court - this stupid prosecutor and his silly prosecution is doing nothing less than utterly demean the process of going after real rapists.

And as for the so-called victim: shame on you for having perpetrated such a gross disservice to all those other real victims of sexual aggression. It is no one else's fault but your own if you failed to use the brains you were born with. You are certainly not deserving of sympathy - in fact, all you deserve is to be an object of ridicule.

Shame as well on those women who cry "rape" falsely in a petty act of revenge for being scorned, in a base attempt at seeking large monetary compensations, or in retaliation for perceived wrongs. Such false accusers also commit an enormous disservice to their "sisters" who have been actually victimized.

That is without considering the terrible harm done to those who are being falsely accused.

Shame as well to the parochial-minded, nincompoop of a judge who did not throw out the case, as it should have been in the first place.

But most of all: shame on you, Huw Rees. You are a prime example of an intellectual sloth-driven incompetent.

(I better stop here. Otherwise, I will be writting all over again what I have written before about the scourge of intellectual sloth in our societies)

This whole thing is so ludicrous, it is not funny - not even slightly amusing.


Update: 05/09/2007 - Digby expands excellently on another example of prosecutorial utter stupidity and incompetence (albeit, this is related to the US Attorneys scandal).





(Backtrack link to StageLeft)

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Update Notice - 05/05/2007

Yes, folks - it is indeed time again for an Update Notice:

Canadian Goregate: Disingenuous Bloviating : one update;

Monsieur Duceppe: Ridicule/Mr. Duceppe: Ridiculous: one update;

Caesar Crosses The Rubicon: The Sequel? : one update.


Enjoy!

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Canadian GoreGate: Disingenuous Bloviating

(Updated below)

Let us recall the "now-infamous" words of former U.S. Vice-President Al Gore Jr.:

"If somebody would have told me there was going to be a third nation to go into the dunce box with the U.S. and Australia, and say, 'Guess which nation is going to walkout on its international obligations,' Canada would be the last country I would guess. (...) Canada has always been a leader and I just refuse to believe that the Canadian people will go along with what the minority government here seems to want to do."

"In my opinion, (the Harper government's proposed plan to reduce greenhouse gases) is a complete and total fraud (...) It is designed to mislead the Canadian people."

Here are but a few examples of false-pride mixed with disingenuity types of responses, which were served to us Canadians throughout the MSM media and blogs:

From Investor's Buisiness Daily: Al Gore, Ugly American;

From the Toronto Sun: Time to muffle Al Gore's exhaust pipe;

From Cerberus: Mr. Gore, with respect, butt out;

From the Toronto Sun (again): Fraud? Yeah, right.

Please take note that, with the exception of Cerberus' post, all these "fine" folks did nothing but spew ad hominem attacks on Mr. Gore, all meant to dimish him thoroughly, in addition to employing ignorance/quack-based Climate Change-denial arguments. Some even resorted to dusting off the usual MSM-spread memes, fabrications and lies which acted as the weapons of character-assassination of Mr. Gore and which were responsible for his loss in the year 2000 U.S. elections, in an intellectual sloth-driven and incompetent attempt at furthering their hateful points.

Of course, the full-fledged neocon/right-wing/christianist/contrarian/anti-Climate Change media "stars", journalists, pundits, quacks, fringe scientists and bloggers had a field day as well - on both sides of the border. If you have the stomach for it, peek at a few examples here, here, here, here and here.

My point is this:

A) Mr. Gore was dead on target with his evaluation of P.M. Harper's and Environment Minister Baird's Kyoto-extralight plan. The numbers simply do not add up, especially when our emissions are already 30% higher than those of 1990. By definition, this plan is indeed a sham, not a balanced one. Score one for Mr. Gore.

B) If we Canadians have the right to indulge in the criticism of other countries (including the U.S.) about democracy, human rights, freedom of the press, Climat Change policies/attitudes, and so on and so forth, via our media outlets and our blogs, then who are we to balk, to protest and to become all puffing and indignant when non-canadians criticize us (and rightly so in this specific case, I might add)? Are we that shallow, that fragile, that much hypocritical? I like to think not - and consequently, I humbly enjoin all of us to behave as the mature adults that we are and get down from our high horses.

and C) If one can't offer counter-arguments intelligently without resorting to ad hominem attacks in order to make a point, then please show some small measure of consideration and do spare the rest of us with your intellectual sloth-driven incompetence. Thank you very much.

In conclusion, our Canadian GoreGate was nothing more than a self-indulging excercize at bloviating in a disingenuous and fatuous manner - all meant, ultimately, to strike a blow at the reality of Climate Change. Too bad reality always comes back to bite you in the arse, eh?.


Update: 05/05/2007 - The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released the third part of its Assessment Report. Of course, the right-wing/neocon/fundamentalist christianists and other such denialists keep going full throttle with their usual non-debating tactics in order to further their ignorance-based attempts at debunking Climate Change, especially by attacking Al Gore. This is going on not only in the U.S. but in Canada as well (one little example here).

It is no wonder that 3 out of the 10 current G.O.P. presidential candidates do not "believe" in evolution (as if this is actually a matter of belief, instead of a scientifically-demonstrated fact of reality).

Denialists: know thyselves ...

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Monsieur Duceppe: Ridicule/Mr. Duceppe: Ridiculous

(Updated below) (Update II)

Talk about attempting to milk as much controversy as possible from a non-event.

Whether Shane Doan said what he is alleged to have said, or not, remains to be established in court.

It certainly not has any place in the debates of the House of Commons.

But of course, Gilles Duceppe is doing all he can to foster as much controversy as he can about this, in a blatant attempt to outrage les Québécois que nous sommes.

After all, the PQ got trounced in our last provincial elections and the whole idea of a referendum on Québec's sovereignty is not only on a back burner, it appears to be on life-support.

In addition, Monsieur Duceppe's mendacity is plainly there for all to see, thanks to his very own words:

"(...) (Doan) says he told Joseph: "Four French referees in Montreal, Cuje, figure it out." And Joseph has backed up his story. But Duceppe called even that comment unacceptable. He said his party is right to demand answers from Hockey Canada. "That's what you call racial profiling," Duceppe said."

It looks as if the BQ leader has never played a single minute of hockey (let alone any team sport) in his parochial, little life.

I have played hockey (for a long time) - "heat-of-the-moment" curses, cusses and slurs are time-a-dozen during a game, especially in a hotly disputed one. By Mr. Duceppe's ludicrous reasonning, I have therefore been often guilty of profiling when I called English-speaking adversairies "Bloke!" ou "Tête Carrée!".

And what did it make me when I shouted slurs, cusses and curses at opposing players who were French-speaking players - like moi? Was I still profiling, Monsieur Duceppe?

Am I proud for having said such idiotic things during all those games of hockey, soccer, etc., that I have played? Of course not - besides, I never meant a single one of such silly, infantile words. They are (and were always) meant to throw the other players off their games (or to express outrage at bad referees). And Mr. Duceppe? Such things are done not just in hockey, but in virtually every team sport!

You, as well as all those who have gotten onto their high horses on this non-issue, are revealing yourselves as the intellectual sloths that you truly are.

Either that or you are disingenuous hypocrites.

Such simpleton, asinine and insipid rationalizations (which come right out of the book of "Demagogues for idiots") that you and others like you are throwing at us constitute nauseating noises that are insulting to everyone else's intelligence.

Monsieur Duceppe - shame on you. Resign or learn to control those bouts of intellectual sloth-driven hyperbole of yours.

Vous êtes ridicule, Monsieur Duceppe, et vous faites honte à tous les Québécois raisonnables.


Update: 05/05/2007 - I knew Duceppe's hypocritical hyperbole was a calculated attempt at rekindling the séparatiste passions in Québec - and then some. Of course, PQ leader Boisclair is not amused. Therefore, Monsieur Duceppe denies everything.

Meanwhile on Parliament Hill, M.P.'s have finally returned their attention to more serious business ... yeah, right.


Update II: 05/09/2007 - Boisclair is now out ... will Duceppe step in? The PQ keeps on using its leaders as sacrificial lambs on the Holy Altar of Séparatisme.

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Some People ...

(Updated below)

An idiot ripped off the former name (and URL) of this blog *and* litterally plagiarized one of my older posts (in french).

Here's the thief and his plagiarized post.

Here's a cache of my older blog and specific post.

I posted in the comments of this thief's blog in french and english, demanding that he removes the post (at the very least).

To everyone else: beware - some people are up to no good.


Update: 05/03/2007 (11:35 PM) - Looks like the thief responded to my request and deleted the blog and entry (or he is hiding it behind a login, which amounts to the same desired result) - hence the reason why the link I provided above does not work anymore. Good.

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Caesar Crosses The Rubicon: The Sequel?

(Updated below) (Update II)

How did the Republic of Rome fall?

It can be argued that what truly heralded the coming, final end of the Roman republic, and the subsequent birth of the Roman empire, was when Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon to enter Rome, in utter defiance of the prevailing laws and customs of the time - and from that moment on, because of this action, everything would go downhill with regards to the old Roman republic, including civil wars which would culminate with the corronation of Octavian (Caesar's nephew and adopted son) as Augustus, first Roman emperor (for a nice run-down of the history of Rome, as well as Humanity's History per se, go to MacroHistory).

Of course, there had been already an ongoing gradual series of changes in Roman laws prior to Caesar, each internal crisis or external threat (real or perceived) validating arguments within the republic for the necessity of strong and powerful leaders being vested with vast powers, in order to ensure the safety and security of Rome. Thus the slow but ever-forward erosion of the laws and principles of representative republicanism in favor of a king-like one-man rule - the title and office of "Commander Imperitor" (from which the English word emperor is derived).

Now, it is no secret that the U.S.A.'s institutions were modeled heavily on Roman ones - in other words, the Roman republic served as a template for the founding of the American republic and its system of separate-but-equal branches of government (the legistlative, executive, and judiciary).

Let us fast-forward to today and focus on the following recent news items:

A) President G.W. Bush considers himself not just the Commander-in-Chief , the Decider and the Decision-Maker anymore, but also simply the Commander Guy;

B) The Bush administration has stipulated that the president had the constitutional authority to decide for himself whether to conduct surveillance without warrants and therefore does not need the consent of Congress to do so;

C) This is in line with the fact that President G.W. Bush has brushed aside hundreds of laws already with his signing statements;

D) Congress has already put in the books the Patriot Act and the Military Commission’s Act, both giving the President the power to deal effectively with America’s enemies (powers which include looser surveillance restrictions, indefinite detentions, use of torture, loss of habeas corpus, etc.);

E) President G.W. Bush, in defense of his veto of an Iraq war spending plan passed by the Democratic-led Congress that would have forced him to begin pulling U.S. troops out of Iraq, sent the message to Congress that he considered the legislation unconstitutional because it infringed on his presidential powers;

and F) Meanwhile, cries continue to clamor for the need of a Unitary Executive, of a strong and powerful leader who must be above the quaint laws of the republic, because "in stormy times, the rule of law may seem to require the prudence and force that law, or present law, cannot supply, and the executive must be strong".

With these items in mind, go read the U.S. Constitution (especially Articles I-III which define the powers of the three equal branches).

One does not need be a Constitutional lawyer or expert to understand that, especially with regards to item E), President Bush is essentially claiming that the constitutional roles and powers of the Congress are unconstitutional.

In short: the President stands above the Rule of Constitutional Law - particularly in times of crisis presented by external (re: global terrorism) or internal (re: home-grown terrorism) threats.

History clearly shows that such points of view and radical interpretations of the separation of powers within a republic, along with the slow erosion of the rule of law and the clamor for a single strong and powerful leader in times of crisis, have lead to the downfall and de facto end of the Roman republic.

Has President George W. Bush effectively crossed the Rubicon?

Do these days represent the critical period which will lead eventually to the end of the American republic?

You (and the rest of the world) can watch, wait and see - while hoping this does not happen.

Or, you could roll up your sleeves further up your arms and keep on struggling to restore the full Rule of Law and of the Constitution, thus ensuring the survival and maintenance of the Republic. As I wrote before:

(...) let it be known ad nauseam: living in a democratic society is a right and a responsibility.

And yes, this responsibility requires effort. But which is better: having your back bent by the effort required to keep on living in a democratic society, or letting leave for complacency and find yourself one day with a back bent under a totalitarian regime (however benevolent it may be)?

Unfortunately, too many are already losing faith as the current Democratic landscape in Congress seems to voluntarily demean itself before the grandeur of the Iraq War. And through it all, whispers of an Iran War increase in frequency and intensity.

As the saying goes - one must remember and understand history in order not to repeat the mistakes of the past.

It remains to be established whether Americans will stand up for their republic or let fear and paranoia sweep it away in lieu of despotism.

Addendum: What happened to the Roman republic also happened already (at least once) with the French republic: cries for the need of a strong and powerful leader in times of crisis lead to the corronation of Napoléon the First as Emperor of the French. Although the French republic eventually recovered, the price for having embraced such folly tallied too many human lives that were destroyed or lost ...

Addendum II: Someone else wrote the following, which is very à propos with regard to what I am discussing herein:

"The danger lies in the military becoming increasingly discontent with a society that doesn't reflect its values ... discontent that could extend also to elements in the civilian leadership. In such a case the military may begin to drive its own agenda in a more forceful manner and try to increase its influence with political leadership. This type of internal influence doesn't amount to a coup, but it could certainly pose a threat to constitutional rights and freedoms. It's little wonder that the religious right in the US is so staunchly pro-military. Increasingly they view the military as a bastion of values that for some represent 'true American values' rather than what they are seeing in the media and on the street. It is this increasingly graphic split that is the most dangerous aspect of the culture wars that have been raging over the past few years."

Indeed. This is even more haunting when one takes into account that the U.S. troops are currently showing signs of serious ethical standard problems, in addition to being dominated with far-right, fundamentalist evangelical christianists among its ranks and considering the media as a threat to America. Considering the current mood for fawning over manly leaders oozing with manliness and strenght, the profusely used tactic of accusing of treason those who do not support the Iraq War (and thus not supporting the troops and the Leader) and fundamentalist christianist values, and the perversion of the apparels of government in order to benefit the Leader, all of these elements put together with what I already outlined herein constitute a recipe for the possible ascendancy of a Commander Imperitor.

In short: Fear + Need for security + erosion of the rule of Law + religious fundamentalism + militarism + intolerance for opposing/dissenting opinions and beliefs + calls for a strong and powerful leader = a republic facing possible overthrow in favor of despotism.

Viva la intellectual sloth.

Humanity's recorded history bears this equation all over its pages. Especially with regards to the Roman and French republics ...

Update: 05/24/2007 - The Congress and Senate have officially backed down from imposing upon the Leader a deadline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops. Iraq forever indeed. At the same time, the politics of lies, ignorance and fear with regards to Iran and Global Terrorism(TM) roll on largely unchallenged. Meanwhile, President Bush entrusts himself with leading the entire federal government, not just the Executive Branch, in case of a "catastrophic emergency" . Did someone say dictator powers? Failure of (democratic) leadership indeed.

And so it goes ... unless the People keep the faith and remain steadfast in the fight to preserve and maintain the republic.

But contrary to what some say, the only effective method currently available is to continue to press forth with patience, engagement and convincing argumentation. No more, no less. A shunning or tabula rasa will serve nothing in the long run except for having to do the same ... all over again.

Patience trumps expediency.


Update II: 05/24/2007 - Two more takes on the Roman parallels can be read here and here.


(Reposted as a DKos Diary and at ProgressiveHistorians)

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Update Notice - 05/02/2007

That's right folks: time for another Update Notice ...

A Quick One: How NOT To Help Shaping Climate Change Policy: two updates;

Uh-ho ... Are We Here Now? (Part Deux): two updates;

Whither Goest Thou, America?: one more update.


Enjoy!

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

A Quick One: How NOT To Help Shaping Climate Change Policy

(Updated below)(Update II)

Is Green Party Leader Elizabeth May seeking to sabotage any progress in implementing proper policies to attaint Kyoto Protocol targets in Canada?

First, she channels televangelists to promote Climate Change awareness.

Then, she goes on record equating the foot-dragging of the Harper Government on Climate Change with pre-WWII Nazi appeasement.

Resign, Ms. May. All you are doing is feeding the irrational, ignorance-based, contrarian-driven and obtuse-minded Climate Change deniers with your drivel.

( On a side-note, here is another example of how deniers latch onto anything, including false arguments, to make their unfounded case against Climate Change - more examples of ignorance-base arguments and how easily they are debunked can be read here).

But I digress - suffice it to say, Ms. May, that you are certainly not helping the conversation in trying to convince P.M. Harper and his neocons that they are off-base with regards to Climate Change.

Resign, please. Otherwise, do learn to make your points in a rational and enlightened way (hint: less hyperbole and more logical, fact-based arguments).

One can be driven with reason and pragmatism and still be passionate, you know?


Update: 02/05/2007 - Other reactions to Ms. May's intellectual sloth-driven hyperbole, including another instance where so-called royalty should think long and hard before inserting foot into mouth.

Not surprisingly, P.M. Harper is using this sad episode to score political points (and that is fair game, I suppose - although it conveniently distracts from the crux of the whole issue of Climate Change and the fact that the deficient plan of his Environmental Minister Baird is being shot down in Parliament and from abroad).

Meanwhile, Ms. May is incompetently and stubbornly standing by her words.

Heck of a job, Lizzie!


Update II: 05/03/2007 - In the comments, Mark Francis reminds me that while some politicians are calling for Ms. May to retract her remarks, many politicians (Canadian and American ones) have often used comparisons with Hitler, Chamberlain, Churchill, Nazis and WWII in sad attempts at making a point - in recent years and in the recent past. Too many pundits (journals, tv, radio) do so as well.

My point remains the same: if you can't forward or defend your argument without using asinine and insipid hyperbole, then you a) have no point to defend; or b) are not helping your argument at all by making yourself pass off as pompous, irrational and/or intellectually lazy.

All these politicians (and pundits and MSM personalities) should look at themselves in the mirror before demanding retractions and such when they themselves (or their party/affiliation colleagues) are equally guilty.

It is called integrity and competence, ladies and gentlemen. Look it up. Thank you very much.


P.S. Ms. May finally apologized for her remarks. She still should have known better.

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)

Uh-ho ... Are We Here Now? (Part Deux)

(Updated below) (Update II)

This entry is a follow up of my previous discussion on the state of the MSM in Canada (and that of the USA as well).

For almost 10 years now (if not more), U.S. media coverage about politics has been (and still is) all about hair cuts, manly masculinity and other assinine subjects, including outright memes/lies, all meant to establish meanings and portraits of political personalities - with a bias clearly against progressives.

The U.S. MSM has been all about propaganda (many examples, such as here, here, here and here).

The U.S. MSM has been all about enabling the warwagers, warmongers and chickenhawks.

The U.S. MSM has been all about fawning over Da Decider/Leader.

The U.S. MSM has been all about never calling out bald-faced contradictions or lies (recent examples here, here, here, here and here).

The U.S. MSM has been all about parotting right-wing, inept pundits (more examples here, here, here and here).

The U.S. MSM has been all about infotainment and certainly not about information. Incidentally, this is what I wrote last year:

"(...) Similarly and in parallel to tv entertainment,the serious aspects and the integrity of news in tv, radio and newspapers has gradually left way to tabloid products, not only imitating the talk-show and infotainment formulas but their practices as well. (...)

Let's talk instead of celebrities, of crimes, of sports, of "heartwarming" stories and, especially, of the fear du jour. And forget about verifying facts. Why do you think the majority of journalists seems nowadays only able to regurgitate propaganda (or spin) from our leaders, from corporation-paid-for organizations or corporations proper? Three reasons: a) to preserve a supposed "access" (which constitutes the formula used by infotainments with regards to studios, celebrities, etc.); b) too many journalists, editors, or producers search for the quick-and-easy; and c) too many journalists, editors or producers have fallen under the lure of gain and fame (after all, we should not forget that they too come from the same cultures as ours). Incidentally, the majority of those presumed investigative reporting shows are likewise suffering from superficiality or propaganda regurgitation, even disinformation. (...)

We find ourselves right in the middle of the tabloid universe where the one who screams the loudest, who is the most incendiary, and/or the most controversial, turns out to be the one most watched or listened to - all media confounded. Lastly, I will spare you the explanations as to how some of those televised news networks, especially Fox News, constitute paradigms of tabloid tv, bias, propaganda regurgitation and disinformation. The fact is that too many journalists nowadays simply do not bother to report the truth and reality anymore. Instead, they play the spin game while nitpicking facts and discarding those deemed "unpleasant". Once again, how have we come to this? Ratings and profits, baby. And, of course, the prevalence of the search for instant gratification which dictates said ratings and profits."

But I digress - to continue:

The U.S. MSM has also been all about being unable (or unwilling) to be accountable to itself, let alone respecting its own ethics or acknowledging its mistakes.

In short: the U.S. MSM has failed miserably as the 4th estate.

And in the meantime, US media convergence rolls on, unabated.


Convergence is also happening in Canada. In addition, talk of celebrities, of non-celebrities, of crimes, of sports, of "heartwarming" stories and, especially, of the fear du jour are increasingly the norm in our Canadian MSM. Therefore, and as I wrote previously:

We must never forget to remain ever vigilant - lest we end up the same as our neighbor south of the 49th ...


Update: 02/05/2007 - What Atrios, Sirota and Digby said, while The Daily Howler exposes more examples of the fatuous ways of the MSM folks. Lastly, here is another Canadian example of how a so-called "serious thinker" uses false outrage to pontificate with ignorance-based arguments in order to ridicule a very serious issue. Examples like this are multiplicating throughout the Canadian MSM - papers, magazines, radio and tv.

Distilled to its pure essence, the true purpose of the non-partisan and progressive blogospheres is to maintain a continual conversation and exchange of ideas based on facts and reality, not on right-wing spin, religious fundamentalist regressive dogma or fantasy-based viewing of the world. Perhaps one day the MSM (especially the U.S. one, although our Canadian one is coming along the former's sad way - unfortunately) will wise up and act like an adult again, instead of an instant gratification-seeking/providing tweenie.

Our democratic societies will only be the healthier for it.


Update II: Yet one more shining example of intellectual sloth-driven thinking by an esteemed member of the MSM - I guess he never read the Geneva Conventions, let alone any one of the civilized Laws of War in the books, eh?

And then, here is a glaring example of the dangers our Canadian MSM is facing: read this article filled with fatuous and petty considerations, while being low on facts and objectivity. I will spare you the full dissection of this feuille de chou ...

(Click to unfold the rest of this article)

(Click to refold this article)