Monday, May 30, 2011

Memorial Day

UPDATED (II)

Tell me, how hypocritical, Orwellian and deceitful does this sound (emphasis mine):
President Obama and 2012 presidential candidates will honor America's veterans by participating in services and events on Memorial Day.

President Obama will visit the Arlington National Cemetery today where he and his wife Michelle Obama will participate in a wreath-laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknowns. After the ceremony, they will join a Memorial Day service at the Memorial Amphitheater at the cemetery.

In his Memorial Day proclamation, Obama declared May 30 a day of prayer for permanent peace and called the nation to unite in a time of prayer at 11:00 a.m. local time Monday. He also asked all Americans to observe the National Moment of Remembrance beginning at 3:00 p.m. local time on Memorial Day.

"On this Memorial Day, we honor the generations of Americans who have fought and died to defend our freedom," the president said in this proclamation issued Friday.

"On this solemn day in which Americans unite in remembrance of our country's fallen, we also pray for our military personnel and their families, our veterans, and all who have lost loved ones. As a grateful Nation, we forever carry the selfless sacrifice of our fallen heroes in our hearts, and we share the task of caring for those they left behind."
Literally everyday on TV, in the media, and even in daily interactions with others we are asked to "remember our heroes" and "support our troops."  Especially on Memorial Day, a national holiday dedicated to commemorating U.S. military personnel who have died in service, Americans are asked to blindly support the military, which has been used to launch criminal wars of aggression and other atrocities initiated by the Zionist FALSE FLAG/INSIDE JOB on 9/11.  Why would anyone want to support these types of abhorrent policies?  And how can President Obama ask us to pray for "permanent peace" when he is the commander in chief of the very military forces waging an endless war against a manufactured enemy?

I flat out reject the notion that we must blindly and uncritically support the troops, summarized quite nicely by Lucinda Marshall:
One of the guilt factors that continues to keep the mostly white and privileged anti-war movement supporting the troops is the argument that many soldiers come from impoverished circumstances and are motivated to join the military because of the education and job benefits that are marketed by recruiters and glossy advertisements. Implicit in this angst is the assumption that it is racist and classist to deny the 'benefits' of military service to those who choose to enlist just because of our own ideological objections to the military industrial complex.

There are several major problems with this line of reasoning. First, the benefits aren't all they are cracked up to be. For some, military service has been a positive experience on a personal level, but for too many others, it has not. Many military personnel receive no educational benefits at all and only a few receive full benefits.

In addition, while the military boasts about job benefits, the reality is that, according to the Veteran's Administration, veterans' actually make less money in civilian life than those without military experience. They also make up 1/3 of homeless men and 20% of the nation's prison population.

How then can it be appropriate to support recruits who sign up for benefits that are overstated if not totally illusory? By saying that we understand that they signed up because of the benefits, we are buying into the myth of the military as a tool for social betterment. In essence, we are excusing them (and ourselves) from questioning the morality of their participation in a system that was designed to wage war. [...]

[...] Would we not better support those who join the military for the job benefits if we insisted that our spending priorities emphasize education and job training, rather than cutting those funds so that the only option left is the military?

By supporting those who sign up for the benefits, we are saying that we think they are so low on the totem poll that the only way we are going to give them a chance to better themselves and lead a productive life is if they first risk their lives for something that we don't actually even believe in. And then maybe, possibly, depending on the small print at the bottom of their contracts, they might get the benefits.

Most importantly, supporting those who sign up to serve their country totally excuses the immorality of justifying the unjust as patriotism. There can be no excuse for enriching the coffers of the likes of Halliburton while bleeding dry our human capital and the resources of this planet.

It is not now nor has it ever been in the best interests of our country, any other country, or indeed the planet to kill innocent people, to poison the environment with nuclear weaponry, to destroy cities and deprive people of their health or the basic necessities of life for any reason. It does not matter what their religion or skin color is or what language they speak or how much oil is under their sand.
Amen to that.  Can any rational person disagree with the position taken here?

Just this morning, we learn of yet another disgusting atrocity committed by the military we're supposed to blindly support and cheer on, as if these wars are some noble endeavor being undertaken:
NATO air strikes have killed at least 52 Afghans over the past 24 hours, including 32 civilians and 20 members of the police. The deaths came in two strikes, one in the Helmand Province and another in Nuristan.
Can anyone justify supporting a military that commits outrageous crimes like the one described above?  What is so noble and righteous about these sorts of activities?

Can anyone justify supporting a government that prosecutes these sorts of crimes?  Can anyone justify supporting anyone who uncritically passes on the government line about these wars, and the justification for them?

It's always important to remember that war is a racket, as Major General Smedley Butler famously said:
WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small "inside" group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes. [...]

And let us not forget the bankers who financed the great war. If anyone had the cream of the profits it was the bankers. Being partnerships rather than incorporated organizations, they do not have to report to stockholders. And their profits were as secret as they were immense. How the bankers made their millions and their billions I do not know, because those little secrets never become public — even before a Senate investigatory body.
Indeed, the Rothschild owned Federal Reserve system that controls the U.S. money supply has been behind virtually every war and economic depression in the past 100 years at least.

Let's stop buying into this fake patriotism.  Let's stop supporting people that pursue these policies.

UPDATE: Deborah Dupre, of the Human Rights Examiner, points out a brazen example of the tyranny at home our soldiers die to defend:

3 comments:

  1. Amen

    Deborah Dupre runs some good stories.

    ReplyDelete
  2. She sure does. Always has interesting stuff.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hey John Friend,..Resistance is ESSENTIAL!

    Excellent Post!

    veritas

    ReplyDelete

Thanks for reading! Comments are welcome but are not guaranteed to be published. Please refrain from using curse words and other derogatory language. Published comments do not always reflect the views of this blog.