Posterous
himwiththecyst is using Posterous to post everything online. Shouldn't you?
Aa_audiokitty02_thumb
 

AUDIOKITTY

'Life'

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   The Infinite Tapestry Of Life  
Posted November 29, 2009
// 0 Comments

'Them' And 'Us' And Disconnected Thinking.

The piece from Salon.com below is mainly about this man: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Friedman but it could be about any one of a number of 'public thinkers' who demonstrate this disconnected thought process.


Tom Friedman can declare with a straight face that "anyone who shoots up innocent people is ... mentally imbalanced" without seeing how clearly that applies to himself and those who think like he does.  It's that self-absorbed disconnect -- seeing Hasan's murder of American soldiers as an act of consummate evil and sickness while refusing to see our own acts in a similar light -- that shapes most of our warped political discourse.  And note the morality on display here:  Hasan attacks soldiers on a military base of a country that has spent the last decade screaming to the world that "we're at war!!," and that's a deranged and evil act, while Friedman cheers for an unprovoked war that killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians and displaced millions more -- all justified by sick power fantasies, lame Mafia dialogue, and cravings more appropriate for a porno film than a civilized foreign policy -- and he's the arbiter of Western reason and sanity.

But even worse is the glaring dishonesty driving everything Friedman writes here.  Our perpetual war cheerleader today laments that there is a "Narrative" plaguing the Muslim world that is a "cocktail of half-truths, propaganda and outright lies about America."  These crazy, stupid, irrational Muslims seem to believe "that America has declared war on Islam, as part of a grand 'American-Crusader-Zionist conspiracy' to keep Muslims down," when the reality is that "U.S. foreign policy has been largely dedicated to rescuing Muslims or trying to help free them from tyranny."  They see devastating attacks launched by the U.S. and Israel collectively on six Muslim countries in the last decade (including Gaza) -- all of which Friedman (along with his fellow Muslim-condemning NYT colleague) supported, naturally -- and those Muslims simply refuse to understand why they deserved it and why it was all for their own Good.  According to Friedman, these benighted Muslims simply refuse to see the truth:  that our two post-9/11 wars were "primarily to destroy two tyrannical regimes -- the Taliban and the Baathists -- and to work with Afghans and Iraqis to build a different kind of politics."

Six months into the war, Friedman proudly proclaimed that "the real truth" was that we invaded Iraq to take out our "big stick" and tell them to "Suck On This," to take a 2-by-4 across their heads, and that we attacked them "because we could."  In his 2003 explanation with Charlie Rose, did he even mention what he now claims was the war's "primary" purpose:  "to destroy two tyrannical regimes ... and to work with Afghans and Iraqis to build a different kind of politics"?  No.  In a very rare moment of candor for this rank war-loving propagandist, he announced very clearly the real purpose of the war, only for him to now turn around and accuse Muslims of being blind and hateful because they heard his message loud and clear, and because they don't express enough gratitude for all the gracious Freedom Bombs we've dropped -- and continue to drop -- on their homes, their villages, their families, their children and their society.  Apparently, they heard deranged, chest-beating bellowing like this from America's Top Foreign Policy Expert and took it seriously:

 

No, the axis-of-evil idea isn't thought through -- but that's what I like about it. It says to these countries and their terrorist pals: ''We know what you're cooking in your bathtubs. We don't know exactly what we're going to do about it, but if you think we are going to just sit back and take another dose from you, you're wrong. Meet Don Rumsfeld -- he's even crazier than you are.''

There is a lot about the Bush team's foreign policy I don't like, but their willingness to restore our deterrence, and to be as crazy as some of our enemies, is one thing they have right. It is the only way we're going to get our turkey back.

 

It's certainly true that -- as all government leaders do -- Muslim tyrants and radical Islamists exploit foreign threats to distract attention from their own shortcomings and entrench themselves in power.  Being able to depict the U.S. as a war-mongering and aggressive threat to the Muslim world is a benefit to oppressive Arab leaders as well as radical Muslim groups.  But nobody fuels that message more than the Tom Friedmans of the world, whose hate-mongering words and bloodthirsty policies endow that message with more than a sufficient amount of truth.  

 

UPDATE:  Foreign Policy just released a survey from what it calls its "Top 100 Global Thinkers," a list that includes Friedman, Robert Kagan, Henry Kissinger, and David Petraeus, among others, and here were the results for this question:  "What is the Most Dangerous Country in the World":

 

Ten percent of Foreign Policy's so-called "Smart Crowd" say the U.S. is "the most dangerous country in the world" (tied with Iran and Somalia), while 4% say it's Israel (tied with North Korea).  It seems that the mentality Friedman condemns as the province of primitive, paranoid Muslims extends a bit farther than that.

 

UPDATE II:  George Orwell, in describing "political speech and writing in our time," perfectly captured what Tom Friedman does and who he is -- along with most of our most prominent establishment political writers (see the last comment here).

 

UPDATE III

Tom Friedman, The New York Times, today:

"Major Hasan may have been mentally unbalanced -- I assume anyone who shoots up innocent people is."

Tom Friedman, The Charlie Rose Show, May 30, 2003

"ROSE: Now that the war is over, and there's some difficulty with the peace, was it worth doing?

FRIEDMAN: I think it was unquestionably worth doing, Charlie. I think that, looking back, I now certainly feel I understand more what the war was about . . . . What we needed to do was go over to that part of the world, I'm afraid, and burst that bubble. We needed to go over there basically, and take out a very big stick, right in the heart of that world, and burst that bubble. . . .

And what they needed to see was American boys and girls going from house to house, from Basra to Baghdad, and basically saying: which part of this sentence do you understand? You don't think we care about our open society? . . . . Well, Suck. On. This. That, Charlie, was what this war was about.

We could have hit Saudi Arabia. It was part of that bubble. Could have hit Pakistan. We hit Iraq because we could. That's the real truth."

 Tom Friedman, NPR's Talk of the Nation, September 23, 2003 (via NEXIS):

"That's what I believe ultimately this war was about. And guess what?  People there got the message, OK, in the neighborhood. This is a rough neighborhood, and sometimes it takes a 2-by-4 across the side of the head to get that message."

 

 

Loading mentions Retweet
Posted November 29, 2009
// 0 Comments

The Island of the Dolls...

Known as “La Isla de la Munecas”, by the Spanish, The Island of the Dolls is perhaps the creepiest tourist attraction in Mexico. Located within an extensive network of canals, south of Mexico City, the island is a place of mystery and superstition.

Almost every tree growing on the island is decorated with old, mutilated dolls that give anyone the feeling that they’re constantly being watched. The story behind the Island of the Dolls began when a hermit by the name of Don Julian Santana moved here. Although he was married he chose to live the last 50 years of his life alone.

Don Julian used to say he was haunted by the ghost of the little girl who had drowned in one of the canals around the island. Some say he used to fish the dolls from the water because he though they were real children, but the truth is he was collecting and placing them around his home as a shrine for the spirit that tormented him. At one point he even traded home grown fruit and vegetables for old dolls.

Ironically, in 2001 Don Julian Santana was found dead by his nephew, in the same canal that he said the little girl drowned in. Now his Island of the Dolls is one of the world’s weirdest tourist attractions. Some tourists who visited this place claim the dolls whisper and you must offer them a gift upon setting foot on the island, to appease their spirits.

via Bizarre

Island-of-the-dolls

 

Island-of-the-dolls2

Island-of-the-dolls3

Island-of-the-dolls4

Island-of-the-dolls5

Island-of-the-dolls6

Island-of-the-dolls7

Island-of-the-dolls8

Island-of-the-dolls9

Island-of-the-dolls10

Island-of-the-dolls11

Island-of-the-dolls12

Island-of-the-dolls13

Island-of-the-dolls14

Island-of-the-dolls15

via odditycentral.com

 

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   Stomach-Churning   The Infinite Tapestry Of Life  
Posted November 29, 2009
// 0 Comments

Festivus Gift Ideas, Part II: Mom 'n' Dad! (NSFW)

                     

LIKE, REALLY N.S.F.W. - OR ANYWHERE ELSE, REALLY...

Find out more at:

http://www.cracked.com/article_17372_18-more-worlds-most-disturbing-sex-toys.html#

http://gspothowto.com/2009/11/the-creepiest-sex-toys-ever-made/

Loading mentions Retweet
Posted November 29, 2009
// 0 Comments

Planet Now Festivus Gift Ideas. (You Know, For Kids!)

                   

via http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/27/15-toys-not-to-buy-your-k_n_351369.html?fbwall&slidenumber=mOUGXKuMGkw%3D

 

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   Planet Now   Stomach-Churning   Stupid Pictures  
Posted November 29, 2009
// 0 Comments

I Love My Meshies...

Loading mentions Retweet
Posted November 29, 2009
// 0 Comments

This Is How We Should Look When Annoyed.

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   Stupid Pictures  
Posted November 29, 2009
// 0 Comments

The Great Silence.

Earlier this week there was a noticeable silence from the media (except the Guardian and Press Gazette) following the award of nearly £800,000 to a former News of the World journo who suffered from a 'culture of bullying' led by former editor, now Conservative head of communications, Andy Coulson.

Given Coulson was Editor during the phone-hacking scandal, it seemed there were questions to be asked of him and his new political masters. But no-one wanted to ask them.

And it's not the only story to have been ignored this week.

Yesterday, a man admitted 22 charges, including six under the Terrorism Act, after 54 homemade ball-bearing and nail bombs were found in his West Yorkshire home, along with guns, ammunition and weapons manuals. The charges included:

  • four counts of making explosives
  • four counts of possessing explosives
  • three counts of manufacturing prohibited weapons
  • four counts of possession of prohibited weapons
  • one count of possession of ammunition without a certificate.

Now it doesn't take a genius to work out that if this man was Muslim, this would be all over the media. But he isn't and so, apart from three Yorkshire papers, it hasn't been mentioned at all. By contrast,
 this Muslim woman only had a memory stick with explosives manuals on and the Mail reported that. But they ignored this.

And the reports from Hope Not Hate and Searchlight that this bombmaker (Terence Gavan) was also a member of the BNP should only heighten the news interest. Or so you would have thought...

At the start of October, this blog noted the desecration of Muslim graves in Southern Cemetery in Manchester. Although covered by the BBC, it was ignored by everyone else in the mainstream media.

Now, the BBC are reporting the graveyard has been targeted for a third time, as 20 headstones were pushed over. The BBC says:

Det Ch Insp Steve Eckersley called it "mindless racist behaviour" that was being treated as a hate crime. On 29 September, 26 Muslim headstones were vandalised and three days later 27 were targeted.

So at what point does this become news to the newspapers? Or is it because the targets are Muslims that it never does?

There was lots of coverage (300 articles on Google News) of the case of Phillip Laing, who was photographed peeing on a war memorial. The Mail ran five stories on him, including one revealingHow one war memorial is desecrated in Britain every week.

But when there have been seventy-three acts of desecration in a single cemetery in around sixty days, the Mail doesn't think that is worth reporting.

They - and the rest of the print media - couldn't be more wrong.

via http://tabloid-watch.blogspot.com/

Loading mentions Retweet
Posted November 27, 2009
// 0 Comments

The Billion-Pound-O-Gram.

The UK's budget. In billions of pounds.

Look at the 'NHS' figure.

Now look at the figures for Lloyds, RBS, Northern Rock, Bradford & Bingley & HBOS.

(Puke wherever is convenient.)

Loading mentions Retweet
Posted November 27, 2009
// 0 Comments

PLEASE...

...take some time out.

If you saw this today:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1231150/Mapping-strain-NHS-243-sick-babies-treated-London-hospital-ward---just-18-mothers-born-UK.html

If you could just cast an eye over these slightly alternate perspectives:

http://www.fivechinesecrackers.com/2009/11/disgraceful-fact-free-scaremongering.html

http://enemiesofreason.blogspot.com/2009/11/its-not-about-truth.html

http://www.mailwatch.co.uk/2009/11/27/a-short-letter-to-readers-of-the-daily-mail/

http://www.angrymob.uponnothing.co.uk/home/43-somethingmademeangry/805-paul-dacre-must-die

- you may learn even more about the horrific and despicable ways in which the Daily Mail is staffed and editorially directed by scum.

Thank you.

Loading mentions Retweet
Posted November 27, 2009
// 0 Comments