There are those who would call me a conspiracy theorist. And it's partially true. I try not to just go with the popular ideas without trying to investigate the unpopular ones. I admit to relishing non-conformity more than accuracy on occasion. But I think if more people did ANY investigating or questioning of popular "thinking", they'd find it might not be as popular as we are told it is. I just enjoy alternate points of view. Especially when they involve some controversy. And where there's smoke, there's almost always fire. Maybe not a raging inferno but fire nonetheless.
One of the coincidences I have seen over and over again is apparent diversionary media events when the banks, opinion makers, government, filthy rich, or as George Carlin calls them, "our owners", are trying to slide something past us regular folk. It's to the point now that when I see a media frenzy, even if the story really IS something interesting enough to warrant the attention of every newspaper, internet site, TV station, radio broadcast etc., I start wondering what is happening that by default is NOT the top story any more.
Now I'm not about to say that the Boston bombings aren't a big story. They are tragic and emotional. That's news! I'm certainly not going to even imply that the bombings were orchestrated to coincide with any underhanded politics or violations of human rights that somebody wanted as a secondary or thirddary news story if at all. I would never do that! But I just know I'm not the first to notice that this might be the absolute perfect time to do some unsavoury, unscrupulous, unpopular, unmentionable things with as near to public impunity as can be manufactured.
It seems more than mere coincidence that virtually simultaneous to the Boston bombing media frenzy a couple things happened that I think might be even larger stories. And, hey what do you know, they involve underhanded politics and possible, (translation: probable), violations of human rights. You may not have heard about them.
The first story is the CISPA bill that was quick pitched past the American citizens at the plate just trying not to let the political hurlers rob them of basic human rights. This is the euphamistically named, Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act. A little less than a year ago it was proposed in the American senate and vetoed by the Obama government on the grounds that it lacks civil liberty safeguards and confidentiality. Amazingly, a year later, the same president with the same advisors passed the thing. Was the determining factor the media cover fire laid down by the extensive reporting on the Boston bombings? Who can say?
If it were up to me, I'd let my government see that 90% of my internet time is spent surfing www.hellokitty.ca . Other than my online banking, I don't care what ANYbody sees me doing online. If the government could catch one malicious hacker or even, (oh if it could only be so!), eliminate just one of the 15 passwords everything online requires, full cyber transparency would be worth it to me. But this might be one of my opinions that is not so popular. I'm pretty sure there will be a lot of people who are not so thrilled with the possibility of the government not using the freedoms this legislation affords them solely to protect the people. Spying on the general public is now legal, so why not do it? Now I'm not saying that's going to happen. I'm not saying the government of the U.S. of A. would ever try to bury this story in columns about the Boston bomber's upbringing and school projects or TV interviews with relatives and neighbours or internet chat sites about how long it will be insensative to have happy occasions in Boston or screen movies with explosions in them or have any James Bond film "marathons." I'm just admiring their uncanny timing is all.
The second story you may not have noticed is one that Barack Obama is actually ashamed of. There were some clever political manouevres, manoover, manure, minervas, uh strategies employed by just a few congressmen that allowed an absolutely obvious gun control reform amendment to remain unpassed. The amendment called for more background checks on gun purchasers and a ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines. Now this means clips that hold many many bullets, not the Playboy Christmas issue.
This is a pretty big issue in and of itself. But the HUGE story here is the fact that so many senators, with full knowledge that poll after poll showed the American public around 90% in favour of this kind of gun control reform, voted so as not to piss off the massively powerful, and increasingly extremist gun lobby. Yet another perfect example of the people being forced to settle for fake democracy.
Though the irony would be 100% pure Canadian maple syrup sweet, I am not saying Charlton Heston paid the Boston bombers to create a distraction while about 40 U.S. senators earned their N.R.A. paychecks. That's not what I am saying. But again, timing. Why do you suppose this was voted down April 18th?
Is the story of the Boston bombings being overblown? Is it really the horrible tragedy the media is portraying it as? Again, it is not my place to say. I don't think I had any loved ones involved so I can only imagine how those who did feel right now and mourn for them all. It is certainly tragic and I can partially understand the frustration and anger but there is no way of truly relating. Please don't mistake my levity for apathy or hard-heartedness. I feel awful about the Boston bombings and my heart goes out to all involved. But I will say that there are people in Iraq or Syria and probably dozens of areas throughout the world who on the day of the events might have said, "3 dead? 179 injured? That's not so bad." Almost every day there are so many instances of killing, bombing, torture, starvation and all manner of tragic circumstances that I can't help but think surely the human suffering is more devastating than that felt by the people in Boston right now! I can only be grateful and count my blessings that I have no way of knowing.
Perhaps the greatest tragedy of the Boston bombings was pointed out by my friend Heather in one of her daily Facebook entries. She noted the bloodlust and pure venom being spat in posts and comments all over the internet by people demanding the capture and punishment of those responsible. Some want to "bring back racial profiling," because it will stop things like this from happening. Even the uncle of the two suspects called his nephew losers and wished they had never existed, though at this point it would be almost suicidal for him to say anything else. Heather brought up some verses in the book of Matthew which say that the sun rises and rain falls on all alike. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Even the tax collectors do that! (I just love that part!) The point of Heather's post was that we should love everyone, even those who are our enemies. Or who bomb our cities and people. Easy to say but excruciatingly difficult to master!
I suggested that although I am fully behind the sentiment perhaps it is a little bass ackward. Wouldn't it be amazing if we didn't live in a fear-based, everyone-is-my-competitor world and we could spiritually evolve away from the chaos a world like that creates into a minimal entropy, love-based, everyone-is-my-brother/sister world where we didn't kill or blow each other up so much? In a paradise like that the internet would not be flooded with stories and comments about a few of "US" dying when so many of "THEM" are dying elsewhere. It's so much easier, and sensible, to love each other and PREVENT these tragedies than to do our best to love each other AFTER they take place!
Leastaways, that's what I reckon.
No comments:
Post a Comment