A Conundrum for the Ages

I realize I haven't written for a while.  I've been trying to branch out my talents and techniques, to encompass a broader variety of mediums.  I hope you've enjoyed my recent offerings.

So, dusting off the ol' cobwebs, I thought I'd share the most recent mental query loop I've been stuck in.  

I'm often very frustrated and conflicted between my beliefs, my thoughts, and reality. Sure, I realize that EVERYONE has these conflicts... that's what makes up half of our existence on this planet! Through a series of questions, I will demonstrate my current prevailing enigma... then, maybe someone ELSE can contemplate it as well, and I don't have to suffer this alone.

Question #1:

Is it ever ok to advocate for the death of someone (this includes capital punishment and/or murder)?

Question #2:

There are LEGITIMATE threats to society, due to lack of Psychological and/or Psychiatric treatment. Sometimes, they snap and shoot up movie theaters, malls, or schools. These people will never be re-introduced into society, and will likely only go on to kill more people in prison. Is their life as precious as yours or mine, if they are going to spend their life taking your life or mine?

Question #3:

Some of the most mentally deranged people are also the WEALTHIEST people. They use their money to ensure that the rest of the “unwashed masses” never see a dime. This is one of the effects of the recently coined term, “Affluenza.” These people are entirely destructive to society, and likely have no chance at rehabilitation. This is something that they WILL pass on to their children, further contributing to the problem. What should be done with them?

Question #4:

Given the political power these wealthy people have, it's likely that they will never see a courtroom for their crimes. If they DO somehow see a courtroom, they'll just pay a fine and continue to do what they are doing. This does NOTHING to solve the problem. If our Government and courts have been so deeply corrupted by the neutering money of the wealthy, how can we trust them to hold the wealthy to any kind of accountability for what they have done to us?

Question #5:

Given the level of corruption of governments (notice the plural) and destruction to society and the environment, which threatens us all, is this a matter that the World Court should take on as “Crimes Against Humanity”?

Question #6:

If our governments CAN'T act, and the World Court WON'T act to hold these people accountable for their crimes, including slavery, treason, global wealth theft, racketeering, bribery, extortion, and class genocide (their unwillingness to allow the poor the dignity of medical assistance, food, or basic needs by actively fighting against it while seeking greater wealth from the governments for themselves, IS a genocide of the poor!), at what point does it fall upon the duty of the PEOPLE OF THE WORLD to exact their justice from these people?

Question #7:

If the people were to do such a thing, what would justice be? Some form of “People's Court”? A tribunal held by the MASSES, rather than the courts they've corrupted? What good would that do, if we have to go through the Government and Courts to uphold any verdict?

Question #8:

Even if “the people” find these corrupt bastards guilty, their banks still have to be garnished. There would be no way to hold them accountable. What then?

Question #9:

Consider Bastielle day... the French Revolutionaries stormed the Bastielle, freed their friends and families who had been unfairly imprisoned, and then raided the Aristocracy and beheaded every rich asshole they could find; after which balance was restored to the distribution of wealth. But consider this... there were no BANKS back then! Everything was handled through precious metals!

Given the prevalence of banks in today's world, beheading the wealthy ruling elite really wouldn't accomplish anything more than kicking their fortunes down to their Affluenzic, worthless blueblood kids, and we face the same problem again. The only difference would be, the wealthy would protect themselves better, because they can afford better walls and landmines.

Result: nothing gained; problem potentially escalated. Wealthy get worse and more indignant. Hunger Games is created to give poor people SOME hope.

So, if our Governments CAN'T act, the World Court WON'T act, our own tribunal would accomplish NOTHING, and assassinations would only make things WORSE...

What should we do?

What CAN we do?

Are we just completely, incurably fucked?

Bile-boilingly Revolted

Somehow, “disgusted” just doesn't seem to cut it... I think I'll have to invent a new word to truly express my thoughts right now.

In light of the news reported yesterday, irrefutable PROOF that our government... all the way up to the President, himself... KNEW that the invasion of Iraq was built on LIES! There were no “WMDs” in Iraq... Saddam Hussein had NOTHING to do with 9-11... AND THEY KNEW IT!!!

I'd like to start by asking the Republicans a question: How can you trust your party, when they LIE to you so blatantly? They claim to be “fiscal conservatives,” but they just got done handing a couple trillion dollars to their billionaire buddies, and LIED TO YOU to make you let them.

… and that's just the money...

Consider the fact that more lives were lost in the Iraq war than were lost on 9-11, itself... American lives... true patriots, who believed they were defending their nation; when they were actually defending Halliburton's oil stakes...and over 30,000 physically injured. There's also no way of knowing yet, the toll that PTSD will take on our brave countrymen.

Consider the innocent Iraqis...somewhere between 100,000 and 170,000 dead... OVER ONE MILLION PEOPLE displaced, having their homes destroyed, or fled to other countries. Saddam Hussein killed 600,000 Iraqis HIMSELF.

… so, if they lied us into war... which is beyond reproach... what ELSE were they lying to you about??? How the hell can you POSSIBLY trust them???

I think, though, that there are a lot of us who DID see through the lies. Some of us were fooled at first but caught on later, as more evidence was revealed (which is understandable... we'd LIKE to be able to TRUST our government to AT LEAST not do THIS).

Here's what I'd like to know, though... how far down the timeline do the lies go? If they were lying about Iraq, then they MUST HAVE lied about other things as well; to make their “big lie” more believable... so where does the chain begin?

Well, let's see here...

We now know that they lied about the intelligence leading us into Iraq. Is it possible they lied to us about Afghanistan, too? I mean, at one point, George Bush HIMSELF said he really didn't spend much time thinking about Bin Laden... which, after all, was SUPPOSED to be the reason we were in Afghanistan IN THE FIRST FUCKING PLACE!!!

… but then, why the fuck WOULD he? I mean, he knew it was really only a stepping stone into the place he REALLY wanted into... which we now have PROOF of!

We know that there was a memo that TOLD HIM 9-11 was going to happen, and he IGNORED it...

We know that during Dick Cheney's“Energy Task Force,” they divided the Iraqi oil fields among the oil douchebags...

We know that this was done about seven months before 9-11, so they HAD to know that we were going to invade before then.

What about the Supreme Court decision that put him in the White House?  Could that have been part of the lie?  I mean, we know that there are OBVIOUSLY corrupt members of the Supreme Court... who could have been paid to put Bush and Cheney there by people like the Koch brothers.

We know that in an interview BEFORE HE WAS ELECTED, he said that he wanted to invade Iraq.

Of course, there were other revelations, as well... but those are the big ones that we know about... it starts to build a timeline.

So, as far as we know, the lies could have started as far back as 1999... they had to make a lot of things line up, for them to make a full-scale invasion of an innocent nation seem justifiable.

Let's be honest, here... this isn't going to be settled in American courts... this will ultimately fall to the World Court to decide. The trials will go on for YEARS; just like they did after WWII.

Let's be clear, here... we're witnessing a landmark in world history. Genocides are usually reserved for Religious zealots. This may be the first time, though, that genocide was committed in the name of corporate profits. Is there ANYTHING MORE CONCEIVABLY DISGUSTING than war purely for greed?

I will concede the fact that Donald Rumsfeld used Bible Verses in his Iraq briefings to “President” Bush leading up to the war; although, while there were religious themes (and some people STILL see it as a war against Muslims), this was not necessarily a holy war.

So, what word or phrase should one use to express the outrage, nausea, heartache, and pure vitriol that come with such a revelation? May I recommend “Vomit-raged”... what about “en-swine-trified” (unable to cope with the swine you've been forced to cope with)... perhaps “bile-boilingly revolted?” I think that sort-of covers it... it comes closer than anything else I can think of...

George W. Bush's true legacy:

Genocide for profit.