User login

Who's online

There are currently 10 users and 67 guests online.

Online users

  • JstPlnOnry
  • Laurian
  • Guglielmo
  • Dylan Carlson
  • Katherine
  • mary roberts
  • Judith
  • Kay
  • oldtimeydave
  • levi clayton

Support OlyBlog

OlyBlog is run by volunteers who care about Olympia. If you like what we're doing, make a donation:

OlyBlog is powered by:

Who's new

  • mary roberts
  • iriebassist
  • Uyry
  • powercreative
  • phatfunkjazz

    Creative Commons License
 
Submitted by Bert on Mon, 08/25/2008 - 12:23pm.
Prowar Demonstrators

Click on the picture for further commentary.

»

Looks more like...

...a sidewalk to me.

I wonder what winning looks like to them?????

»

What winning looks like...

I imagine that, to the prowar element, winning looks something like no more "terrorists".

The image of victory, however, might be more extreme - it might include a world in which there is no opposition to America's policy of global dominance.

Good question. Maybe you can show up next week - they have been there on the corner of 4th ave and Water st on Fridays from about 4pm until 6pm for the past year or so.

(By the way, this is a counter-protest designed to express an opposing viewpoint to the Peace Vigil (which allegedly does not support our troops) that has been occurring on the other side of the street - on Percival Landing - for over 10 years.)

»

I wave to them everytime I drive by

...I wave to Bert too.

As far as I can tell they are voicing their opinion about the war just like Bert and his friends.

»

Errrrr.

I do not like those people...
»

Isn't that special!

n/t
»

The two..

On the left look like they're about military-age. They should sign-up.

With that said, I still don't understand why people stand outside with a sign or two. When I was at Fort Huachuca, every once in a while a half dozen people would stand outside the front gate with signs expressing their displeasure with torture and other intelligence gathering techniques and methods.

Honestly, it looked goofy more than anything.

»

haha

Never ceases to amaze me how liberals stick their foot in their mouth by protesting protesters, or stretch the facts into their own contorted reality.
»

Stretching the Facts to fit Contorted Reality

I am interested in examples of how and when 'liberals...stretch the facts into their own contorted reality.'

For example, protesting a policy of global dominance. Is that stretching the facts to fit a contorted reality.

I am just unclear. Thanks.

»

The example you offered

The example you offered makes my point, its rhetoric and just as f'd up as the rhetoric taking us into this war. Where is this policy of global dominance? Is it an actual document? Please clarify and let me know why you stay in this country you describe? I like it at the top of the food chain don't you?
»

Policy of Global Dominance

No worries Scott - and yes, it is a document - it is many documents. Perhaps most prominently it figures in the Project for a New American Century's programs...

Check out this blog: Understanding Each Other

In particular, I would point you toward the Harper's Magazine article by David Armstrong entitled, "Dick Cheney's Song of America"

I think you'll find, upon a thorough and comprehensive analysis of the relevant political themes and discourse - that I am telling you nothing but the truth. It's not rhetoric. It's reality. There are people in high places who expressly seek global domination.

»

Understanding eachother

Cool, thanks for the link on understanding each other,this is a good thing and I will not take anything to a personal level, if I do, its not intentional. Now Bert, sir, I still haven't found that document that says we are seeking global dominance. You sent me out to read magazine articles and I quickly ran across more rhetoric and came to the realization that my philosophy isn't going change based on your opinion, because your opinion is based on magazine articles. I choose to side with the declaration: "to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles." - Something I found on the internet :o)
»

I'm confused

I don't know what you're saying. To me it appears that you have been swindled into following an ideology that, while claiming "moral clarity", simultaneously advocates a posture of economic and militaristic dominance. It's just Orwellian. Some people claim that their actions are altruistic even while they are in the act of killing someone in cold blood.

I advise that you be very careful about your sources of information. Make sure people are telling you the truth. Don't make judgments based on words alone. You must look to actions.

Project for a New American Century




»

Swindled?

You sure like to use a lot of funny words Mr. Bert and run on a lot of assumptions. You have yet to answer my questions. You just keep piling on the rhetoric. I am bored here.
»

boredom

Sorry to hear of your boredom. It's not rhetoric. The fact that you object does not detract significantly from my argument. I have provided supportive evidence. The existence of a policy of global dominance is accepted by many credible and trustworthy individuals. Please tell me exactly why my argument that the current foreign policy is rhetorical. To me, it is obvious that global dominance is the policy. So I don't understand where you're coming from. What is your primary source of information?




»

Bert, are you arguing a version of False Consciousness here?

Sorry, but your post smacks of hubris and pride. Saying someone has been "Swindled" into believing something is no way to win friends or build influence. One reason it may seem flat around here are scorched earth comments like this one.
»

Sources

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/16/AR2006031600679.html

"President Bush issued a new national security strategy today reaffirming his doctrine of preemptive war against terrorists and hostile states with chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, despite the troubled U.S. experience in Iraq.

The long-overdue document, an articulation of U.S. strategic priorities that is required by law, lays out a robust view of America's power and an assertive view of its responsibility to bring change around the world. On topics including genocide, human trafficking and AIDS, the strategy describes itself as "idealistic about goals and realistic about means."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss/2006/nss2006.pdf

Among some choice quotes from the introduction:
"Free governments do not oppress their people or attack other free nations." "America must continue to lead."

From the document itself:
"It is the policy of the United States to seek and support democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world. In the world today, the fundamental character of regimes matters as much as the distribution of power among them. The goal of our statecraft is to help create a world of democratic, well-governed states that can meet the needs of their citizens and conduct themselves responsibly in the international system."

It's my (and I would imagine Bert agrees in general) interpretation that this is an avowed interventionist strategy and as such is essentially evil. That is to say that I oppose it for its own sake, distrust and reject the ideals claimed as motivating it, and I don't think that it is actually a good thing to do even if it is motivated by the ideals claimed. I believe that if people in Cuba elect Fidel Castro, that it is illegal under US law and international law for the DOD or its assigns to seek to kill Fidel Castro or subvert the lawful government of Cuba. Your opinion might certainly differ. But the fact is, that is exactly what the US military attempted time and time again (as came out in the Church Committee hearings in the mid 1970's). We could repeat that example in a hundred nations over the last 120+ years of United States History. We could go a little farther back in time and talk about Olympia and the Nisqually people, and that conquest, too. History. Not rhetoric. There is a difference.

»

Ending Tyranny

It's all well and good to end tyranny. But Bush's policies are hollow. They enable him to label as a terrorist anyone who opposes his own policies of elitist economic dominion. There's the rub.

This is not - I repeat: not - rhetoric. It is well understood that President Bush and associated interests pursue a policy of global dominance.




»

why you stay in this country you describe?

If you're paying close attention, a country which is trying to dominate the political choices of all other nations is not simply escaped if one crosses the borders. We're talking about a government which kidnaps "high value targets" and transports them via "extraordinary rendition" to third party nations whose regimes are in thrall of the US Empire.

Why would I want to move from a place where I have at least legal rights on paper, to one in which I have not even that paper protection? I'd rather save what we can of the Republic, and I'm heartened by the fact that most of the pro-imperials are so situated intellectually that they cannot even mention the name of Empire without being struck by cognitive dissonance. They can't support "empire" so they have to label that critique "rhetoric."

You might call that rhetoric, I call it history. The difference would be the reading we've each done, I would wager.

»

Drew, why you stay in this country you describe?

I don't mean that as a slap but as a genuine question. If this country is as evil as you have repeatedly described why do you remain here? Surely Cuba or Venezuela although far from perfect have governments more in line with your hopes and dreams.

So here it is. What do you like about America? 

I've opened up a new thread here so as not to hijack this one. 

»

Not the country which is evil - the government. NOT the same.

This is a continent called "America" and I critique a government, known as the United States. Your question has been answered in two separate ways - on two different threads. The Country Question is answered on the other thread. The Political Question was already answered above.

The prime reason you don't hear my critique of Venezuela is that I don't live there. I don't assume as you do that it is better just because it has politically conscious self interested anti-imperialists in its government. For one thing I speak English and not Spanish so much...

»

Thank you

Thank you for your strong opinions, I respect you for sharing thoughts.

I didn't want to offend anybody personally, I get frustrated with humans in general and the wacky political views some have.

I asked for documentation that proves the United States is seeking global dominance on this thread when the fact is that there isn't one. Also Global Dominance isn't something we've sought or are seeking, its something we've achieved! I can't believe that being second best is anybodies goal, I just can't believe that.

 

My glass isn't half full nor is it half empty, someone gave me too big of a glass,...who's responsible for this?

»

Wrong frame

This isn't a race with a winner and losers. It's more like a ship on heavy seas. In a ship, someone must trim the sails, man the con, pump the bilge, look out for land, etc... If any one of these jobs isn't performed, then the ship sinks and EVERYONE DROWNS. Such is our fate if countries don't start working together instead of trying to dominate one another.


Beware the terrible simplifiers.
Jacob Burckhardt
»

rhetorical trope, are you guys taking turns?

This language that directly compares seemingly unrelated subjects is the simple rhetoric used to skate around issues with no solution offered.
 
I am still waiting for documents here and reasons these people don't move to another country, etc...
 
The notion of re framing sounds manipulative doesn't it?
How is framing different from spin or propaganda? Whoops I just asked another question that won't be answered.
I am going to stop asking questions and watch as your opinions get swept away and forgotten, let me know if I can help collect rhetoric for you.  
 
What is the plan of the non-conservative? Whoops, dag namnit! I asked another question that won't be answered.
 
When I arrived to this thread I was leaning towards Obama, now I am going to try again to listen to that old war hero with the same rhetorical BS, its too early to decide for me.
»

Sounds like you have an issue

Not sure that rhetoric is the issue though.

Peace.




»

Backatchya

Peace.
»

The issue isn't me

Please stay on the topic and answer the questions without metaphors and rhetoric.
»

If your question is...

...where's the documentation, the answer was provided: The Project for a New American Century. To quote: "At present the United States faces no global rival. America’s grand strategy should aim to preserve and extend this advantageous position as far into the future as possible."

Or did you have a different question?


Beware the terrible simplifiers.
Jacob Burckhardt
»

Global Dominance

I still haven't seen a document whereas it states The United States is seeking global dominance. You know why? Because there isn't one. You may be confused with what is talked about and what is policy. This is like kicking a dead horse to me. Signing off. Scott
»

Exactly who do you think...

...has been running this country for the last 8 years?


Beware the terrible simplifiers.
Jacob Burckhardt
»

Republicans, remember?

What a silly question. Do you think that the small town mayor, soccer mom of five is in on that global dominance magazine article along with the entire Republican Party for that matter? How far did they get with that global dominance project anyway? They have 3 more months right? Is that enough time? Maybe soccer mom is going to clean up Washington...When you give a woman power and maybe 150 million bucks to lead in search of alternative energy I am sure the money won't be wasted. Who knows where that money will go with the Democrats. I say give the money to that small town mayor lady.
»

Really?

I think you might benefit from looking at some of the recent analysis of how the Republicans have bilked the US for BILLIONS of your hard-earned dollars over the last eight years. It seems to be the only thing that the Iraq war was actually good for.


Beware the terrible simplifiers.
Jacob Burckhardt
»

Stay on the topic

The topic was this policy of Global Dominance and other spooky stuff liberals come up with - see above.
»

See response...

...below.

»

and

I won the debate.
»

Winning

So, you're a winner. How does it feel?




»

And those who forget the past....

The Democratic party by it's very nature and ideology is constantly evolving and moving forward. As of late that evolution has been retarded because we have had to fight so hard against the retrograde and destructive policies of the neo-con wing of the Republican party instead of moving to a more compassonate and just world.

Fighting rear guard actions by the discredited, and surely there is no group more discredited than those who lied their way into this war, takes a toll on the forces of peace and progress. A local example is the PMR movement. Olympians were forced to resist militarization of our Port, a battle that should have never been fought because this nation never should have invaded and occupied Iraq.

As a community we are still arguing over the the tactics and goals of PMR, a silly and distracting exercise when it is clear the prime mover of that discord, the Iraq war, was clearly wrong. All that heat and passion should have been expended toward ending homelessness, enacting a living wage ordinance, or building the social and economic infrastructure to support organic food production and consumption, just to mention a few issues that could have real impact on the quality of life in Olympia.

Although I agree with the anti-imperialist agenda I feel taking on local issues is more important and productive because in the end prepares the populous to take on those large issues. I hope that a Obama presidency will be an effective force against the nation forces of retrogression so that we Olympians can open up the discussion of what really hurts and helps us here at the terminal of Puget sound.  

»

can't read?

Scott, you are impossible to talk with...

...sounds like you are really, really in denial...do you love the war? do you love Bush? WTF Scott?

...folks have posted over and over the EXACT document that is the blue-print for the new world order, but you seem to not be able to comprend that...which is too bad, but I guess the average for an American.

Have fun in "ignorance is bliss land buddy"

chad360

»

Yes I do love bush

BUT NOT GEORGE BUSH! JEASUS CHRIST!
»

I wonder if they even know

I wonder if they even know that now Bush himself is proposing an exit timeline for June?
»

Relevant Questions

As far as it goes with the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq - the most relevant questions to ask are:
  • Did Iraq pose an imminent threat (that would have justified taking action in self-defense) to the national security of the USA prior to the launch of the 'shock and awe' invasion?
  • What did members of the Bush Administration know of the threat, or lack there of?
  • Were the facts (in re: the threat posed by Iraq) deliberately "fixed" (by Cheney, Bush, et al.) to satisfy the policy of invasion (ref. 'Downing Street Memo')?
»

Ironic

Does it seem ironic to anyone else that a man of a certain age and apparent Japanese heritage is holding a sign thanking the US military for his freedom, much as he might NOT have in, say, 1943? I'm just sayin, you know, that Stockholm is a nice city but a weird syndrome.
»

apparent Japanese heritage

It would be even more ironic if he were American.  Or not.

You don't really know his heritage unless you ask him.  Maybe this Friday.

»

Hate to tell you...

Most of the folks who went into US Concentration Camps in 1942-1945 were "Americans." Many (I don't know percentages) were even US Citizens. Most are still "Americans" in today's concentration camps, too. They're not US Citizens, necessarily (some are) but they are Americans. Mostly.
»

Peter

I don't know about his ethnic heritage, but Peter said that he was in the Vietnam War. He's an interesting guy, and very nice. It just happens that Peter and myself have some very different understanding of the facts - maybe just different "facts" entirely. In his world, the USA is truly the good guy. The terrorists are the bad guys and they are out to stop the good-meaning Americans.

There is some truth to what he says - but I am (perhaps obviously) of the opinion that his view is quite distorted.

He handed me a flyer pamphlet from Calvary Church that asked whether or not I had been "saved." Unfortunately I lost it. Maybe I can get another one next Friday.

I talked with Peter for a while, and I would have been interested in talking with him longer, but I had to be somewhere. Maybe I will put aside my own vigil for a while and talk to him sometime.

Anyway, I encourage anyone who is interested to talk with these people. They don't bite, and they seems to be pretty nice people, or at least they're tame when they are sign-holding in Downtown Olympia (I have seen Shelley Webber get pretty angry and lash out).

They're on the street from around 4pm until about 6pm. Don't be shy.

Of course, the weekly peace vigil (Sponsored by the Olympia FOR) is also on Fridays from 4:30pm until 6pm. There are almost always extra signs and good company, and good opportunity to interact with the larger community.

»

Hey white boy

I'm sure Peter wouldn't be offended by your assumption if he were of Chinese or Korean heritage. Who knows, maybe his family was being raped and murdered by the Japanese in Nanking. None of us will know until we talk to him.
»

Hey yourself

but I'm pink, not white.
»

I see five people standing on the corner for different reasons.

Interesting body language going on...has anyone noticed that?

Look at their feet/stances.

 

 

»

OK...

...Arts from the Hearts:

That's an interesting way to have a discussion. I'm sorry, but you don't get to choose what's relevant here. I find it very relevant that the same folks who put together the mission statement for the Project for a New American Century were the same people who've been running the country for the last eight years. You can ignore that, but you'll be missing a big piece of the puzzle. While the goal of the PNAC was clearly world domination, their incompetent execution of their plan has resulted in a huge loss of power and status for the US. Check out some of Kevin Phillips last few books. Interesting stuff.

Here's an interesting article titled: The Ideology of American Empire. Here's a snip:

The president of the United States has committed his country to goals that will require world hegemony, not to say supremacy. In numerous speeches and statements since September 2001, President Bush has vowed to wage an exhaustive, final war on terror and to advance the cause of a better world. ‘‘Our responsibility to history is clear: to answer these attacks and rid the world of evil.’’ In the president’s opinion, the United States represents universal principles. He summarizes them in the word ‘‘freedom.’’ As mankind’s beacon of political right, the United States must, he believes, remove obstacles to freedom around the world. Accomplishing this task is associated in the president’s mind with using American military might. Even before 9/11/01, in June 2001, he informed the Congress that the ‘‘Department of Defense has become the most powerful force for freedom the world has ever seen.’’ Since 9/11, the U.S. government has relentlessly mobilized and deployed that force far and wide, with effects that remain to be seen.

Happy reading!


Beware the terrible simplifiers.
Jacob Burckhardt
»

Please,..no more magazine articles

I don't think its possible for me NOT to choose whats relevant here sir.

The fact is that I choose to object to this strange behaviour of people on the far (right or left) and all the bullshit/rhetoric that comes with it. 

 I choose not to have my intelligence insulted by an idiot that tells me 'Have fun in "ignorance is bliss land buddy".'

 I choose not to make insulting personal comments and it lowers the credit to all with your view.  

The topic was this policy of Global Dominance that does not exist!  Next your going to tell me that hockey mom is all for this bullshit.C'mon people!

 

»

Here Scott, HEAR

Let me try to make this as easy for you as possible.
The Plan was published in unclassified form most recently under the title of Defense Strategy for the 1990s, as Cheney ended his term as secretary of defense under the elder George Bush in early 1993, but it is, like Leaves of Grass, a perpetually evolving work. It was the controversial Defense Planning Guidance draft of 1992—from which Cheney, unconvincingly, tried to distance himself—and it was the somewhat less aggressive revised draft of that same year. This June it was a presidential lecture in the form of a commencement address at West Point, and in July it was leaked to the press as yet another Defense Planning Guidance (this time under the pen name of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld). It will take its ultimate form, though, as America's new national security strategy—and Cheney et al. will experience what few writers have even dared dream: their words will become our reality.
Link Provided: http://olyblog.net/understanding-each-other#comment-65281




»

Dear Bert and Rick

....... We seem to be getting personal here. Have you ever been to Disneyland? Well, your home now!

Where does it say that America is on a policy of GLOBAL DOMINANCE? Remember? That was what we were talking about my friend. Maybe your confusing the words Defense and Dominance. Scroll up :o) Checkmate!

I was honestly leaning towards casting my vote for Obama but you have perhaps turned me away from voting Democrat for quite some time.

HOW DID THIS HAPPEN? Well, certainly there are less intelligent people out there that would fall for this BS.

The platform you stand on has some wonderful ideals, yet your erratic way of garnishing support flouts societal norms, it kinda lets the air out of your tires, now that wouldn't make Barrack Obama very happy now would it?

Be true to yourself and re-think your core intent, being that of which is 'honest and genuine'. My 'issue' is with the extremists and how to control them, you are extremists and I honestly feel I need to refuse your opinions.

I will continue to call you out every time you get out of control. Good luck and better days ahead.

                              Scott Westerback

                                    Olympia

»

Game on, Tenzing

Arts from the Heart, you're not American.

Well, your home now!

And you've made the same error twice!

Maybe your confusing the words

I was honestly leaning towards casting my vote for Obama

Please, don't vote at all. It's clear that you cannot distinguish between "your" and "you are." You really don't need to be casting a ballot to decide who the next President of the United States will be.

Stick with the middle school student body president.

»

your sour grapes

I must have walked 'round

In a real fog

I was your best friend

Now I'm a real dog

I never thought that now

Would ever catch up with then

I've been a bad boy again.

 

I deeply appologize for mispelling 'you're', it will never hapen again!

»

Scott: stop baiting

No one cares who you're going to vote for. But it would be nice if you contributed something substantive to the conversation, instead of shooting spitballs. You still haven't elaborated on what you think about any of this. We're all ears.


Beware the terrible simplifiers.
Jacob Burckhardt
»

Nah, this is funnier

My intellagance wuld be compremi, comprh.. comprimized :o)...if I entered a debate with...I don't know what you call them.

I'd rather just put them in their place.

What I am doing here is entertaining myself at the expense of a few wacky extremists, its quite fun and there is a mountain of material here. I choose to use my intelligence and humor or lack thereof for the benefit of myself and Joe Public.

Today you are Joe, listen to what I am saying Joe, I listened to you.

»

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

OlyBlog.net

OlyBlog is devoted to citizen journalism, including hyperlocal news and discussion specifically about Olympia, Washington. If you care about this community and are tired of corporate media, then this is the place for you.

If you'd like to contribute, please register for an account. Here is a list of local news beats that need to be covered. You can post your news as a personal blog entry, and it will be reviewed (and possibly edited) for promotion to the front page. Once you've established a record of responsible blogging, you can become an autonomous user. You can also send news via email. All members of OlyBlog agree to abide by our comment and fair use policies. If you are frustrated about something said in a comment thread, go here.

Now playing at:

Get Firefox!


More Flickr photos tagged with "olympia" and "washington"

OlyBlog is a site for news and discussion about Olympia, Washington.
free hit counter