everything is a remix

"So are north & south Korea just going to flip a coin?" - ChrisC

Not really sure how the above question relates to either my posting or any prior posting on this thread, but I will go with it anyway - Something of a change of direction...

"So are north & south Korea just going to flip a coin?"

No, IMO - Theyr going to continue spending their peoples money on developing and buying weapons, backed up by those making money supplying the technology and weapons.. And we can only hope that the spectre of mutually assured destruction keeps the "coin" from ever being flipped..

Its a state of lunacy which determines our destinies - a mental illness fed by generations of paranoid thinking .. We have enough of the tools, and enough science and the understanding of psychological processes and social interactions, to have a reasonable chance of restoring sanity (by applying well tested mediation practices and techniques like NLP and Emotive Rational Therapy - to name just the most common - there are many more, deeper methods and studies) if given the chance to do so..

But doing this, sorting out our underlying ills - Well, that wouldnt serve what other sick, mad, and greedy elements of our "game" want.. And "they" have the power... "they" dont want conflict to end - Without conflict and paranoia and insanity they would be out of business..

Sadly, they too are delusory - Their whole game depends on keeping things more-or-less in balance, so that they can harvest the spoils without these being burned in the fires they create..

Fred.

 Fred.

More in answer to Coalport's "Monopoly" question/allegory. Seems to me that after all the posturing etc some people in power just want to throw the board (world) across the room!

Haven't you ever played MONOPOLY? That's how the game always ends. Someone ends up owning Boardwalk and Park Place, and everyone else is either in debt, in jail, or ruined.

The really interesting part of the game is when someone grabs the MONOPOLY board in frustration and throws it across the room, or simply doesn't want to play anymore.

"More in answer to Coalport "Monopoly" question/allegory. Seems to me that after all the posturing etc some people in power just want to throw the board (world) across the room!" - ChrisC

Aha! .. I see where you are coming from .. But I dont agree ;-) LOL.

Its not the ones winning who want to stop the game, its the ones forced to play against their will, the ones who never have any possibility of "winning", the ones upon whom the whole game depends, and without whose "participation" the "winners" could win no more... They are the ones who would end the game and throw the board across the room - IF they had, or believed they had the power to do so.

It is US who allow the game to continue. Oh, we have good reasons to do this - When the board is in pieces, those of us who are reasonably "ok" (even the poorest person in th UK at present is not likely to starve to death or be deprived of the fundamentals for survival) may find our situation becomes a lot worse..

But when we THINK things can get no worse, and if we believe we may be able to overturn the game, Then we might act..

There are many people on earth who are at that point, or getting there.. If enough (particularly in the developed world) get to that point - or enough of us who are "ok" but refuse to tolerate the continued abuse of those who are not "ok"  act with them to throw the board across the room, it could happen.

Fred.

"There are many people on earth who are at that point, or getting there.. If enough (particularly in the developed world) get to that point - or enough of us who are "ok" but refuse to tolerate the continued abuse of those who are not "ok"  act with them to throw the board across the room, it could happen."  - FredM

Many have an inkling that something at the very core is amiss, but can't get off the gerbil wheel they were born on long enough to make any real sense of it.  Our betters don't want the golden egg laying goose to die, hence the endless barrage of smoke screens, distractions, straw men, etc. in the media which seems to be getting exponentially worse lately.  Otherwise entirely rational people have very carefully trained to piss their pants and scream like a banshee when the word "socialism" is brought up in polite company.

The road out of all of this is pretty clear and the present situation isn't sustainable, but I suppose it will last long enough to make a very few people a lot of money, at an incalculable cost to the rest of us and the environment.

I miss the days when investment bankers had the good sense to jump out of high windows after crashing the world economy.

Ok - Pre-Rant warning! Re UK politics, Tony Bliar, Socialism, Iraq..

" Otherwise entirely rational people have very carefully trained to piss their pants and scream like a banshee when the word "socialism" is brought up in polite company." - Dewster

LOL ;-) .. That reminds me of the election we had here in Eastleigh a month or two ago..  Our MP went to jail, and there was a scramble by a huge number of candidates to take his place (not in jail, I should add ;-) so we had these candidates personally knocking on our doors..

The Labour candidate had the misfortune to meet me (I was a Labour supporter before Tony Bliar took the UK on a killing spree and descimated a foriegn nation on false pretenses)..

Candidate: "Are you likely to be voting for Labour"

Me: "Are you a socialist? - I want to vote for a socialist party which defends the NHS"

By this time a number of people had gathered..

Candidate: "Labour created the NHS, you should vote for us"

Me: "Are you a socialist, and is Labour a socialist party?"

Candidate: "Labour created the NHS.."

Me: "That was LABOUR, LABOUR was a SOCIALIST party! You have no right to claim that the party you are part of, created the NHS - it didnt! The party that created the NHS was a socialist party - You cannot even say socialist without embarrasment! - New Labour is not Labour !"

I really hate it when some liar takes control and, like sheep, people who have spent their whole lives on some ideal, follow blindly, and create a "new" version of that "thing" - and strip away the core ideals in this process.. There are some people who really have this "gift" and are able to decieve good, intellegent committed people.. and to silence those like Clair Short who could have called him to check.. Only Robin Cook stood his ground clearly and publicly..

Oh - I am talking about Tony Bliar - He should be tried for treason and then tried for  crimes against humanity, and be locked away until he dies.

Fred

I'll see your Tony Blair and raise you 8 years of W and a close brush with Sarah Palin. 

The Overton window is so far to the right here that many people actually believe Obama - a corporate lackey inside man ever so slightly to the left of Reagan and barely arguably the lesser of two evils - is a flaming liberal!  To experience this first hand is to be in a state of continual astonishment at how widespread and effective the ruse is.  Most Americans wouldn't know a socialist if one bit them in the ass and refused to let go.

 There are some people who really have this "gift" and are able to decieve good, intellegent committed people; and to silence those like Clair Short who could have called him to check.. Only Robin Cook stood his ground clearly and publicly.

Fred

I was never a great fan of Robin Cook on moral grounds.................like he didn't have any!

Robin Cook's ex-wife has launched a devastating personal attack on him, accusing the foreign secretary of having several affairs before leaving her for his secretary.

In a book serialised in the Sunday Times, Margaret Cook gives intimate details of the pair's troubled love life.

She accuses him of taking six lovers, including his secretary Gaynor Regan - the woman he married after his divorce.

She also claims her 52-year-old ex-husband had a habit of drinking heavily, in one incident in 1987 passing out on the floor of a hotel with a brandy bottle.

As for George 'W' Bush and Tony Blair........................

George W Bush has a heart attack and dies. Obviously he goes to hell, where the Devil is waiting for him.

'Hmm - I'm not sure what to do,' says the Devil. 'You're on my list, but I have no room for you.  As you definitely have to stay here, I'm going to have to let someone else go. 

"She also claims.... "

Hmmmm... A real reliable source of information - an ex-wife selling a story to a Murdock paper ;-) .. Oh yes, News International really loves socialists of Robin Cooks brand!

But even if the story was "true" - So what ?  We get so focussed on personal life scandal and "immorality" that we blow these out of all proportion - Which is more "immoral" - Having extra-marital affairs and passing out drunk once in a while, or invading and decimating a country based on "evidence" one knows to be false?

If "morality" is assessed on damage done to peoples lives, of sufferring caused - If it is immoral to lie to parlament and the people who elected you, - if putting the interest of a foreign nation and commercial benefactors above the interests of the nation of which you are premier is immoral.. If violating international law is immoral..

Then give me Robin Cook's morality (even if the tales of his failings in his personal life are all true, and even if the truth were far worse) rather than the "morality" of the likes of Tony bLIAR any day!

I loathed Sadam - He was a despot like Bliar and Bush and all the others who should be in the Fletcher Memorial home.. But it was only the society and lack of law / democracy which made Sadam any worse than Bliar or Bush would be if placed in a similar environment.. If (say) Cuba was to bomb the cr*p out of London because our PM was a despot, and because we have weapons of mass destruction, would this be any less "right" or any less"moral" than what we did to Iraq ?

Sadam/Iraq never had any part in 9/11, never was any threat to the USA or UK, Never had any WMD's - And all these facts were known by both the USA and UK prior to our invasion.. In fact, the invasion was a massive gift to those who carried out the 9/11 attack - It accelerated further destabalization of the ME which has strengthened AQ to a degree they could only have dreamed of -- A real gift to them.

And those who engineered the invasion knew this! They KNEW that the result would be an increase in terror! .. It was never about oil or security or revenge or even ideology - IT WAS ABOUT ARMS SALES! .. You sell more hardware if there is a real and visible threat or enemy! .... And the financial interests of those who set the outrage in motion, and their determination to launch the assault despite UN inspectors requesting more time as the existance of WMDs was doubtful.. These are the issues that should be on the table when there is a trial of these vile people for their crimes, including mass murder (genocide).

The Fletcher Memorial home is too good for those scum.. I hope I live to see the day that Bliar and Bush and all those who murdered a nation for the money they made from it, are hanging from gallows... But I wont. Hanging is too uncivilised for our tastes - Strange that bombing innocents isnt.

"Sadam/Iraq never had any part in 9/11, never was any threat to the USA or UK, Never had any WMD's - And all these facts were known by both the USA and UK prior to our invasion.."

I was completely flabbergasted they didn't even bother to conflate some rusty old can of mustard gas left over from WWI into a WMD smoking gun.  Colin Powell had his UN extravaganza where aluminum rocket tubes were hyped up into uranium enrichment centrifuge parts or whatever, complete with ominous vials and satellite photos of basically nothing.  Anyway, I kept waiting for it and it just never happened.  And after all the trouble they went to to destroy Hans Blix's credibility.  They missed a key propaganda opportunity, but I guess by that point the press was completely in the bag, so mission accomplished.

"I was completely flabbergasted they didn't even bother to conflate some rusty old can of mustard gas left over from WWI into a WMD smoking gun." - Dewster

I heard a rumor at the time, through the "underground", that they did acually find a small quantity of illegal gas.. But chose not to disclose this, because it was gas supplied to Sadam by the USA, for the explicit purpose that Iraq used it against Iran.. Sadam in fact used the majority against (I think it was ) Iraqs Kurdish population.

My reading of this tale (and it may be BS) is that the USA did not want the facts exposed..  That the only WMD's Iraq ever posessed were WMD's supplied to Sadam by the USA.  And that the purpose for which these WMDs were supplied were illegal and genocidal - that the USA was, by proxy, intending an attack on Iran using banned weapons (WMDs).

If any of the above is true, then another possible additional "reason" for the invasion of Iraq comes up on the radar - A demonstration to all the other corrupt despots being supplied with "goodies" and instructions from the USA ..  " Dont f*ck with us! We will wipe you out if you cross us or play a different game to what was agreed!"

Maggot Hatcher died today. One of the few times I almost wish there was a hell!