Debate over

Well, I've made up my mind. How about you? Yes, I know, it's hard to believe that someone who writes here could actually be undecided. Honestly? I probably decided I didn't like this president when I could not find a job after 9/11, when my unemployment run out, and then my extension run out, and then my kind of job went oversees, and then I lost my health insurance AND when this administration decided to attack another sovereign country that had not attacked us... I could go on. I just wanted to be sure that John Kerry could lead. He can.

You might ask, if you're so sure about the lies, why would you be undecided about booting the liar out of office? Excellent point. I concede it. Would I have preferred Howard Dean or Wesley Clark? I don't know. I just wanted someone that could beat Bush. I think Kerry can do that, but he must do a couple of things also:

Bush and the republicans, continue to lie. I wish that John Kerry will flat out call George W. Bush a liar. He did not mislead us into war. He flat out lied us into a war. This is Imperial Hubris (a book, I am by the way, currently reading -- yes, I know, I am a prolific reader -- One day soon, I'll even post reviews on this blog). Kerry should not be afraid to use the "L" word.

You know, the last President who was accused of lying was almost impeached.

Second, John Kerry must not be afraid to stand up to the withering attacks from the soundbites. Bush kept repeating, "the wrong war, at the wrong time, at the wrong place". I have never heard Kerry use that, but even if he did, he's right. The problem is that the spin machine takes these soundbites and twists them. Most people will not (either because they can't, or because they don't want to) think hard enough to see past that deception.

Bottom line. John Kerry said the right things, was consistent and he delivered what I wanted to hear from him. But that is the crux of the problem. Did he deliver with other people, and especially with those who have been lied to by the current administration? I sure hope so, because if he didn't, we have to face four more years of a regime that is bent on oppressing its own people, lying to them, and engaging in foreign wars. Sound familiar? Yes, I am talking about the USA.

Spaceflight

One of the most important milestones in humanity's quest for the stars is about to be achieved. If Spaceship One manages to successfully fly into space, again, within the coming week, they'll win the X-Prize. This is a prize of 10 million dollars for the first successful, private, spaceship to reach space. In order to reach space, one must go higher that 62 miles straight up, a height, generally considered as the outer edge of the Earth's atmosphere.

There are those who believe that this historic occasion is a more important story than all others today. Read Glenn Reynold's opinion at Slate. I tend to agree.

At the very least, this story gives one hope, something we're severely lacking right now.

And, if someone was to tell me that I am forgetting to mention, poverty, war, famine, elections, prosecutions, debates, unemployment, and all those other things that SHOULD occupy our thoughts and prayers, I will say: You've missed the point.

An event of the magnitude of what Spaceship One is about to accomplish is why there are human beings on this planet and why the future is bright. As long as there is hope, as long as we can reach beyond ourselves and accomplish more than we are, there is a future. As long as a person will help someone in need and as along as people will try the impossible, there is hope. Then, it REALLY does matter.

Debate Time

It's here. This election's most scripted, best organized, by the book event is finally, tonight. The Presidential Debate. I wonder if we'll learn anything worthwhile tonight. I've already had a bunch of people tell me they won't watch. That tells me one of two things: Either people are disgusted with the whole process, or they have already made up their minds.

Myself? I haven't decided yet who to vote for and I am definitely going to watch tonight's debate.

Asymmetrical Warfare

The problem in this country is that neither side wants to talk about any issues. All they want to do is smear each other.

It seems to me that we all felt that the election of 1992 had some similar issues affecting our nation as we see today, though we do have a foreign war and the threat of terrorism hanging over our heads today. At that time though, we all felt that election was so important. I do not remember, if the media had already anointed Clinton the winner, but I do remember long lines at the polls. I was lucky enough to live at an apartment complex next to the polling station. I got home around 6 pm and the line was wrapped around the block. I got in line and voted around 7:30 pm (the polling station closed at 8 pm). I felt elated to had participated in what I thought was an important election for the future of our country. It was important then for the candidates to address the issues affecting us. Two of those candidates did. Ross Perot, although a long shot, did address all the issues that mattered. Clinton picked up the theme from Perot, addressed the issues and ultimately with that focus, won the election. The elder George Bush, I seem to recall, only had time for attack ads.

Now, this election, pits two candidates that nobody can get excited about, against each other. The one from the right has whittled the issues down to a few points:
1) Flip-flop (I swear, I do not own a pair!)
2) If the other guy wins, we'll get attacked again ("The Russians are coming, the Russians are coming!" syndrome.)
3) The liberals are attacking our country's morals and principals, they are attacking God.
The focus on these three points is intense. People can mimic, exactly, what they hear in the soundbites or on the TV commercials.

Aside: How come, I don't get to see the candidates up close? How come they don't visit my state? How come they've given up on my state "because it is already decided"? Why do I have to learn from the cable channels what the candidates are really saying? Why do I only see the commercials through news items about them?

Anyway, on to the left. They also have narrowed their focus to a few issues:
1) W stands for "Wrong".
2) The war was wrong and we haven't caught Osama yet.
3) It's the economy stupid (all over again).

So, it's strike and counterstrike. During the Democratic Convention, I heard some fantastic things from the Democrats. They actually focused on issues. They actually had some things to say. A month later, I heard nothing like that from the Republicans. They began their convention with an attack. They ended their convention with more attacks. There were no discussions. There were no issues. There were no solutions.

A vast segment of the population of these Great, United States of America have already made up their minds. The 3 points from the Right has already won them over. Without thought, like automatons, like people that can be led around by a leash (or is it a noose?), they have decided to vote for the guy from the "Right". Even my wife. When I sit down and try to discuss the issues with her, try to explain to her what it all means, why the choices we make in November's election will affect our children's futures, she will come back with things like: "Well,
the Heinz company moved all these jobs oversees". This, of course, is a total lie.

But see, through the dumping down of America, the "Right" knows how to push the proper psychological buttons of those people who DON'T REALLY WANT TO THINK FOR THEMSELVES. The "Right" can just say those things that "scare" people about believing anything that the "Right" wants them to believe. The wool is thick and heavy over the eyes of those who do not want to think. It's like pulling a safety blanket on, when it gets cold in a bedroom. It's a reaction the body takes. It's emotional. It is almost primal. But there is NO THINKING behind it. And those who write the attack ads for the "Right" know their art very well.

In this Asymmetrical Warfare, the battle has already been won. Fear has triumphed over reason. And anything I might write in this blog, does not really matter.

Am I addicted to the news? I don't think I am addicted to the news...

This is an ongoing discussion between me and my wife:

Her: "Turn that mess off, there is nothing good on, they are talking about the same stuff and there is nothing you can do about it."

Me: "This is the most important election of our time."

Her: "You know it upsets you when you watch the mess."

Me: "But I have to know what's going on."

Her: "You know whoever gets into office will be the same as the last guy."

Me: "But, but, but....." (And I have a million "buts" in my head, spinning, always spinning.)

I'll tell you who she is going to vote for later, but I wonder, if there is a segment of politicians, a group, a party that likes this attitude (prefers this attitude) and hopes that more people "feel" like my wife does, and then "acts" on those feelings. I call it voting by emotional proxy.

But that is a subject for another post...because like my wife says, it does not really matter. Or does it?

Distracted but not confused. Are you?

It is hard to keep your wits about you, what with all the important news going on around the world. I wonder sometimes, if there were no irrelevant news and the only things reported were the things that mattered to us, if we would be too confused to lead a normal life. OR maybe we'd be informed. How does a story about a motorcyclist going fast and getting a ticket for it rate so high in the news? It's on all the websites. Why is that?

Maybe being distracted is like a drug to some people. "Insulate me from the reality of the world around me," they seem to say. "Keep all the bad news away from me." And maybe, those of us in the blogosphere are the ones that are confused, because we try to crunch so much info and to understand so much of what is around us. OR maybe that is the wrong thing to do in today's security conscious world. Maybe we should all watch our manners and keep our mouths shut like good and responsible citizens. Maybe, we should stop trying to understand the world around us. Maybe, we should give up trying to let the truth out. And then, just maybe, our world would be a better place.

You think?

Distractions

In every period of history, whether we're talking about the Byzantine Empire, or the Roman Empire or the Athenian Empire of Classical Greece there have been distractions. I submit that there is also a movie that was made about the subject of distractions a few years ago called "Wag the Dog". Yes, indeed, in today's world we're being stopped from seeing what really matters. The tail is wagging the dog. Just as in past societies, people stopped seeing the truth, either because they did not want to, or because they were stopped from seeing it by others.

In Roman Times, Emperors, whether insane or simply not fit to command, used the games at the Colosseum as a distraction for the populace. You say that our glorious empire is crumpling about us, well, just visit the Colosseum be entertained a bit. Watch the majesty, watch the courage, watch the strength of the Gladiators. And when the right Gladiator won, the emperor was even known to open the Imperial Treasury and give money to those that attended the games or where Roman "Citizens". This was the perfect way in which to keep people from finding the bad news. Bad news such as that the Empire was crumpling, outpost by outpost. There had not been any conquests for over 200 years. The treasury was actually kind of bare. When the end came, it actually lasted a long time. Great Empires sometimes take a long time to fall apart. But in these accelerated times, I wonder.

For the Byzantine Empire the end came slowly also. It started in 1204 AD during the so called Fourth Crusade against the Arabs. In effect, this was a crusade against Christians. But, in this post, I am not so much concerned with the sacking of Constantinople, but rather with the downfall that action brought about. Within 250 years the Byzantine Empire was no more and Constantinople fell to the Turks. During the fall, distraction was what the last Autokratoroi (Emperors) used to mislead the people into believing that greatness could be theirs again, if only... And there were many ifs during those times. Chief among them was the belief that God would save the Empire.

For the Athenians who founded the Athenian League after the defeat of the Persian fleet in Salamis in 480 BC the future looked bright. The strength of the Athenian expansion and the Classical success was the democracy of Athens. But it can also be said that the failure of Athens and Classical Greece was that same Democracy, a Democracy of limits (or as I like to call it a Benign Oligarchy). Athenians believed that the strength of their success came from the individuals who achieved concesus within the city and who managed to build the strongest Naval Fleet of its time. That fleet was unparalleled in human history up to that time and it essentially gave the Athenians complete control of the Mediterranean Sea. That strength and the win in Salamis also gave Athens the dreams of conquest. A dream of conquest based on the belief that in order to secure the peace, in order for the government to protect the people from any further attacks from oversees invaders, the strength of the republic must be directed outward for a two fold mission. First, to secure allies who would contribute materiel, personnel and moneys to help in a future war. Secondly, to achieve a stronghold of bases to be used in protection of the republic. But military might is not always equivalent to security.

What each one of these periods of time teaches us about today is, I believe, very important:

First, the people can be misled, appeased and placated with entertainment, gifts from the treasury and false pronouncements about the strength of the Republic. I ask you to question whether we have seen this in today's United States of America.

Second, religion can be held up to be both a crutch and a shield. If we believe, then God will protect us from all enemies...as if God is concerned with what happens to another Empire on this planet. In addition, God's strength will shield us and our property from the worst. But if one was to really study God, one would find that God asks to embrace disaster, succumb to the worst, suffer the martyrdom, because only then would our soul be freed from the material world and enter the spiritual plane. God does not wish to shield us from the horrors of war, because God does not wish to shield us from material things. This life is ephemeral at best, temporary at worst. In its quick passage we're asked to prepare for eternal life by not asking for material protection in this life, but by accepting the things that we can not change and embracing the things that can lead us into the next. Somehow, this message has been twisted, and we now believe that God will shield us from those who hate us here on Earth and will protect our possessions. Oh, how many empires (even other than the Byzantine Empire) had mistakenly believed this and have fallen, only to be remembered by history.

Third, and most important, strength does not derive from conquest. Vanquishing our enemies before they attack us does not guarantee security. There is ample evidence to prove that all great empires of history started failing because they simply did not believe that their own strength was not enough to conquer all. There was always one more conquest. But "what does it profit a man to conquer the whole world and lose his soul"? Similarly, what does it profit a country to conquer the whole world and lose its sanity, lose its morals and lose its collective soul. Once, there was a country that believed it had a manifest destiny. It used this belief to gather the brightest and the best people of the world within its boundaries. It used these people to construct the world's most vibrant nation, a democracy, a country ruled by morality and laws. A country for which the price of admission was freedom of expression and freedom of thought.

Now, like those Athenians of centuries ago, those few in power, the Oligarchs, have taken upon themselves that strength that was given to them by the people and turned it into conquest.

We live in a country where I, along with another 45 million people go without medical insurance. Folks, that is 18% of the population. And that figure is growing. Soon, people will start losing their jobs, simply because their employer can not afford to pay their medical insurance. You see their company is worried that the increasing insurance costs will cut into their profit margin and the executive's bonus check.

This week, my doctor who I went to see, asked me if I was working on getting medical insurance. I have been without insurance for almost 3 years now. I told her that insurance eludes me still. With the jobs I have been able to get in this "robust" economy, medical insurance is still outside my grasp. Most of these companies that hire, simply, are not willing to pay me a little more to be a permanent employee and have insurance coverage. Therefore, they hire me as a temp employee, giving them the flexibility to do the work they need without investing in me. This story is repeated millions of times across this vast and powerful country, called the United States of America.

Meanwhile, we're all distracted from this and other facts. We're told to embrace God because our Commander in Chief is guided by him as they share a 21st century direct line. We're told that our futures are being secured, because the richest 1% are receiving tax cuts which they will use to re-invest in society where even "low lives" like me would have a temp job and bounce from assignment to assignment. Finally, we're told that the country is protected from our enemies, because we have taken the battle to him and our nice suburbs are free so that we can drive our nice SUVs to Wal-Mart and buy lots of nice little widgets made in China.

I hear the fall of the Empire all around me. I wonder how many people really have their ears unstopped to hear it too.

A note on history: I do not know that much about Empires that flourished in other parts of the world. The reader is welcome to add comments on other examples from history.

Who am I?

I had to post this for the curious and uninitiated. No, my name is not really Pavlos. Yes, I will eventually reveal my real name.

Who was Pavlos Melas? Well, let's just say he was a man after my own heart, a pure man, an honourable man. At heart, he was a freedom fighter. But though he fought for the freedom of his people, he really, truly fought for his ideals. He proved, that ideals CAN NOT die in the transition from adolescence to adulthood. That the ability exists for one man to latch on to an idea and transform himself, that idea, and those around him with it.

I believe very strongly that we are in need of such people today, therefore, my assumed persona is meant to galvanize in a similar fashion as Capetan Zezas did 100 years ago.

Pavlos died of a gun shot wound sustained in an ambush set-up by his enemies, almost exactly 100 years ago today in the Northern part of Greece near a town called Siatista. His sacrifice inspired a nation.

But for me, I feel his sacrifice on a personal level. He taught me that more can be done with less. He taught me that I should rekindle the idealism of youth. He taught me that what I believe in is more important than the propaganda around me and my beliefs must not be subverted by lies. The truth can be hidden but not suppressed. The truth will liberate you because if you believe that the right way is the way then the answer becomes obvious. The sacrifice has not been in vain. The effort was not only honourable but vital.

I have used and I am trying to use his principals to not only revitalize my life, but those around me. Since, I have not yet added a counter to this site, I have no way of knowing if anyone has read, and if they did, if any of the words here have made an impact. I believe that if you affect even one grain of sand, if you change the flight of even one butterfly, you can change the course of history.

The Web is an amazing medium. The Web in time will become a self-aware medium and then through it we will better understand ourselves as residents of this planet. But for now, I take it as my responsibility to try to unearth some of the truth that I believe is being suppressed. I try, with these words, to be a small Pavlos Melas, to pull the wool from people's eyes, to let them peer into what it all means.

Heavy stuff you say? But the reality is, if I don't do it who will? Those who write blogs to further their agenda? Or those that write simply to stroke their pride?

And what if no one cares, what if no one reads it? I am not as vain as that. Because (and the cliche has been said a thousand times) the effort, the journey is what matters. Would anyone remember Pavlos Melas or Gandhi or Che or a thousand other "freedom" fighters if they had never undertaken the journey?

So I undertake the journey, in the hope that IT REALLY DOES MATTER and maybe some day, I will discover my voice through it all.

Something for everyone...

You know, I thought I had something intelligent to say today (about politics and such), but my head has frozen up. I have a bad sinus infection and my head feels like it's inside a barrel. So, I am taking these ERY-TAB antibiotics with a warning on the bottle: "DO NOT TAKE WITH CISAPRIDE. And I am going: "Am I taking this medicine, what is this medicine?"

Turns out, I am not taking this medicine, but I scared myself reading this article. I am glad, I am not taking this medicine after all.

The only reality show I watch ended yesterday. The Amazing Race is trully a good show. I wouldn't even mind competing in it.

Conspiracy Theory

My theory is that this story is true.

Why would I believe such a story? Because I think the following maxim is true (and has been true since the beginning of time): "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely".. I believe, that the current administration in the White House WILL DO ANYTHING within its power (legal or illegal) to stay in power.

Am I being paranoid? Am I buying the hype of this Conspiracy Theory? You decide.

Weekend woes.

On a personal note, I had a rough weekend. My favorite football team lost this past weekend.

On top of that, I was suffering all weekend long with a head cold. My head is still not clear. Maybe that's why all my posts are so...off?

Or maybe no one cares what I think. Am I like Neo, the only one who can see, and the wool has not been "pulled over my eyes"? Could be.

Lie, lie and then lie some more...

I am disheartened by the amount of lying going on in the news media. Are you not? The great network CNN is stooping lower than FOX. Two of its commentators (from Crossfire) are on the staff of Presidential Candidate, John Kerry -- even if unpaid. Is that to counteract the huge lies coming from the other "great" network, FOX, I guess? Where can one find truth in these days? Does anyone even know what truth looks like? As long as "truth" is the destruction hurricanes cause where a picture does say more than a thousand words, the TV news people can actually find "it".  Otherwise, if truth is what you're searching for regarding IRAQ, Korea, Iran, WMD, War, Vietnam Service, you will NOT find "it" on the TV networks these days.

I am worried that it will all NOT MATTER in the end...

Can it happen in this country?

Apparently yes....

I have now read a couple of accounts about this story. Another account can be seen here.

And some important commentary is available at Slate.

I never thought that we could live in a country where you can be prosecuted (at work no less) for your political beliefs. It IS NOT the bosses' job to tell me who to vote for, just as it is not government's job to tell me who to believe in. This story shows how in every aspect of society, our minds are being controlled. We're being told what to think, we're being told how to think, and sometimes we're being told when to think. Even worse, sometimes we're being told when to FEEL, and what those emotions should be.

Does anyone else find this disturbing?

Personally speaking...

No! I am the Batman...

Seriously though, I am very VERY tired as I worked all weekend long. Doing what you ask? Well, it was a festival, and it was sort of ethnic. I leave it up to discerning readers to figure out what kind of ethnic festival it was. Since I am tired, I am not in too great of a posting mood.

On the other hand, does anyone buy all the explanations we've been getting on this Korean (nuclear?) subject. Me? I have two thoughts on the subject:

If it was a nuclear blast, shouldn't some of the government's KH-11 birds have caught a hint of it from space? I am sure N. Korea is the most photographed country from space in the past 10 years or so. Also, don't nuclear blasts register (even imperceptibly) on some seismic monitor somewhere?

But, even if it is as N. Korea says it is...they must have used some huge quantities of explosives, or some rather large explosives. That by itself is scary (they have explosives that can do that?!!!), and I would dare guess, even as you demolish a whole damn mountain, that action should register on a seismic activity monitor somewhere in that region.

So what are we not being told?

And tell me again how this story first broke? Who leaked what? Why?

Is the wool being pulled over our eyes again? What are we missing here? Or am I being paranoid? You decide...

When the truth is being suppressed...

One more thing...

I am not a journalist, so I have not checked these stories, but someone did.For a more complete story, read this. It makes you think, doesn't it?

Similarly though, this story has some interesting implications. A news organization makes claims, presents a story (I freely admit, I did not watch this story), but does not check their facts. I mean, as far as REAL journalism is concerned, there seems to have been none for this story...

How then, are we to trust journalists?

What I am talking about has clearly been evident in Paula Zahn's show on CNN all week long. She introduces the subject, then she introduces the guests. One guest is from the left, and one guest is from the right -- how predictable! Then she asks -- essentially -- the same question of both guests. Obviously, each one of the guests will spin away their answer.

Does this accomplish anything? I would suggest that it does not. I would suggest that this kind of journalism is the worst kind. This kind of journalism does not report on anything, does not explain anything, and does not provide viewers with any answers.

I want the Journalist to say: "NO! Mr. So-and-so! You're wrong! Here is what the numbers suggest, here is the truth, here are the statistics that matter." But no! Today's journalist, can only ask the questions, but does not analyze the results. If the guy on the left is wrong, I want to know. If it's the guy on the right, I want to know. I want the so-called journalists of today to stop making up news, to fully investigate their stories, to stop reporting what a press secretary or press advisor has just told them. I want the truth. Do you agree?

All this spinning has my head hurting... Bye for now.

So, I have been fascinated by the current election process in the United States of America. I am trying to understand what it all means. I am trying to keep up with as many news sources as I can. One of the main news sources I use is CNN. However, a lot of people think that this news organization is too liberal. I also balance my news by reading (and watching) Fox News. Of course, a lot of people think that they are too right wing, too conservative, follow the dictates of the Bush government too closely.

The biggest problem I have with news today is that they try to "balance" all opinions and present all sides to let you decide. The problem with this is that not all opinions are valid, not all sides have merit. In most cases, equality of opinion does not equate to a correct outcome. There is a right and a wrong. Attempting to let people decide what that is can be a huge mistake. Most people want to be told what the "right" side is. They don't want to figure it out for themselves. This is what really bothers me about today's political climate. There is "no" political correctness. To be politically correct is to not offend anybody, even when they are wrong. This does not work in practice. Why? Because people who are wrong, who could be the minority, could influence the majority. And I ask you: Is that morally right?