Some in the conspiracy camp (which includes me. sorry, no reference here, but most likely) have speculated that bin Laden’s death could serve as a ruse to get more votes come election day. My economics professor – in regards to oil prices – would tell you the same thing: people up top are simply manipulating prices to fit in with their political agendas. The main thing I’d like to point out here is that neither case is without its merits. As someone who believes bin Laden is a likely pawn used by the PTB to drum up support for the war(s) abroad, the bin Laden issue, even with Bush’s imminent retirement, is likely to continue indefinitely. Remember, it was being groomed as a much broader “War on Tyranny”, which, in the words of Donald Rumsfeld,
It will be a long, hard slog. Wikiquote: Donald Rumsfeld
Right. A hard slog that Americans like himself won’t have to go through, right? The neocons in the White House are turning the conservatives of this nation into an army of armchair generals. Allow me to close with this thought (if anyone could find a source on this, it would be appreciated): in the game of geopolitics, soldiers are seen only as throwaway pawns to achieve the objectives of the elite.
PARIS, Sept. 23 — French officials said Saturday that the government could not confirm intelligence information published in a French newspaper that the terrorist leader Osama bin Laden died in Pakistan last month. Continue reading
While the People’s Daily Online coming up as the most updated site on a Google News search would be a small lesson in propaganda for another day, the actual story registered as only a blip on my personal radar screen. High-rise elevator TVs, on the other hand, were another matter.
I did find it intriguing that an early-20-something average-working-joe friend of mine became alarmed enough to say to me, “Man I don’t wanna be anywhere near [the Sears Tower]. Did you hear about the [terrorist plot]?” – especially when the only things he really talks about are hot girls and how much money he’s making.
(Would he be willing to exchange more of his freedoms for a greater sense of security?)
I love how everyone says “China is gonna be the next superpower” without actually sitting down, beer in hand, and crunching some numbers. Yes, they do have a million-man standing army. Yes, they do hold a massive amount of the US’ import debt. Yes, they do have nukes. But is that enough to ensure a 21st-century USA-style global domination? Maybe. Then again, probably not.Why not, you ask? Here are some reasons:
1. “Chinese people” don’t all speak “the same language”. They can read the same language – but that doesn’t quite come off the same when you want to pull off a Nuremberg rally. A recent poll showed that only around 50% of people had learned Standard Mandarin, the official government-sanctioned second language, despite a recent massive ad-blitz advocating proficiency.
This article sure has undertones of “666”/one world government to it, in one sense. But realistically, such an ordinance would be impossible to enforce, especially with six billion people, corrupt authorities, and the implausibility of free-market rationing. More on this in another post.
David Adam and David Batty
Wednesday July 19, 2006
The environment minister, David Miliband, today unveiled a radical plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions by charging individuals for the amount of carbon they use.
Under the proposals, consumers would carry bank cards that record their personal carbon usage. Those who use more energy – with big cars and foreign holidays – would have to buy more carbon points, while those who consume less – those without cars, or people with solar power – would be able to sell their carbon points.
(Note: Sorry if you couldn’t read this properly. If you click here and scroll to the bottom, you should be able to read the whole question and available answers.)
[5/4/2013 update: sorry, dead link]