King is naked
Everybody is praising Bush for coming to Baghdad for Thanksgiving. Bush is called a very brave man. Well, if he is brave, sneaking, like a thief in the darkness of night, what would you say about Rumsfeld, who was not afraid to come in the open, did not limit his presence by airport only and even traveled to another city? Is he super-brave?
Nobody dares to say that the king is naked: Bush has always been a lousy coward, he was hiding underground on September 11, and he was behaving as a coward on Thanksgiving. Why should a President of the most powerful country in the world be so scared, that he was ready to turn back, if any of reporters would break their silence? Even when he was already in Baghdad, no reporter was allowed to tell the world.
Here is a comparison from history. On November 7, 1941, Stalin was standing in the open on Red Square during military parade, while Hitler's army was about 20 km away. The parade was not a secret, it was broadcast all over the country.
Taking public for stupid
1. A tiger attacked Roy, almost killed him. Roy had to undergo numerous surgeries and several months later is still in the hospital. The story seems to be clear, well, not so fast. If you listen to the media, the tiger did not attack Roy, on the contrary, he tried to save him. Save from who? Some spectator made a suspicious move, so tiger grabbed Roy by the neck, as tigers take their cubs, brought him behind the curtain and released. Wow, it is so amusing to see Larry King listening to this nonsense and nodding his head. Do you believe King to be so stupid? Nobody dares to ask, how come, none of tiger cubs ends up in a hospital fighting for his life after being carried by the neck?
I guess, Zygfrid understood, how stupid the "protection from stranger" explanation looked, so he invented yet another story. Now Roy had a high blood pressure and was about to have a stroke. His tiger was so smart, that he understood that Roy was in mortal danger, he grabbed him by the neck and punctured Roy's artery by his teeth, thus decreasing blood pressure and effectively saving Roy's life. I have never heard anything as absurd as that.
Nobody has the decency to say: "Stop this nonsense: you did something wrong to the tiger and he took his revenge. Have the courage to admit it!"
2. Back in November, two US helicopters were reported to fall down, killing a number of US soldiers. Major investigation was launched to find out, why it happened. Media repeated many times, that they probably collided. Does one really need a major investigation? Five soldiers survived, ask them, what happened and this would be the end of investigation. There is one more detail: the helicopters fell 250m apart. When two helicopters collide, they fall together. US military consider it too humiliating to admit that Iraqis have managed to shoot down 2 helicopters simultaneously, and yellow reporters do not have the decency to tell the obvious truth.
3. There was an explosion in Saudi Arabia. The very next day their police have arrested about 20 people, and everyone arrested admitted being involved in explosion. There were couple of explosions in Turkey. The same story. More than that, they captured a man they called a mastermind of those explosions. The very next day, the media recorded this man standing at the place of explosion and allegedly telling police, how he did it. Wow! Is not all this remarkable? FBI is still unable to find anyone related to anthrax mailings. Is police in Saudi Arabia and Turkey so much better than FBI?
Ask yourself a very simple question: why would anyone admit being involved in terrorist acts, knowing full well that upon admission they would get death penalty? The answer is obvious: they were tortured into confession. Are they really guilty? I bet, not. Police in both Saudi Arabia and Turkey just grab any 20 people they knew to be critical of government and then torture them into confession, and voila, the crime is solved. Well, if they could arrest all involved in explosion the very next day, why could not they do it the day before? This way, they would have prevented the explosion.
Are our yellow journalists really so stupid not to understand all this? Of course, not: they are yellow, not stupid.
4. US military brag that their excellent "analytical work" enabled them to get Saddam. For God's sake, who they are kidding! They tortured the information out of their prisoners. How much "analytical work" is required for torturing people?
Interview with an American hero
It was astounding to watch: the most often repeated phrase was: "I was so scared, that I prayed to God." She claimed that her gun jammed, so that she could not shoot. Do you believe this nonsense? Even if a gun jams, you clean it up and continue shooting. Military weapon is quite reliable. Your friends get killed, take their gun and shoot. When she awaken up in Iraqi hospital, her thoughts were again: "Please, don't hurt me!" She was so paranoid, that she refused to eat any food, which was not sealed fearing that Iraqis would poison her. She was also so stupid, that she could not understand that if Iraqis really wanted to kill her, they had so many options to do so, including sticking a little needle into sealed and packaged food and poison it.
Some people say: "What do you want, she is just a young girl". Nothing, just do not make her a hero, she is a sorry excuse for a soldier, she should have never been enlisted in the first place. Some people give her credit for being honest and not claiming to be a hero. This is also not so: when she was rescued, she pretended not to remember anything. This was a trick: everyone declared her to be a hero killing many Iraqis, she knew this to be false, but had no courage to tell the truth. She was waiting to see, what will happen, and when she learned that all her friends were outraged telling that she never fired a shot, she decided to tell the truth, well, not all: her book is titled "I am a soldier too". This is a lie.
Some of her CLOSE friends even decided to make money and sold her naked pictured to Larry Flint, and then Flint decided to be patriotic and not to publish naked pictures of American hero.
Only in America!
Fighting for contracts
US declared, that only Coalition countries would be allowed to bid for contracts for Iraq reconstruction. Canada, Russia and others are outraged: they should be allowed to bid too. Some agree and some disagree, nobody is saying what should be said: only Iraqi companies should be eligible to bid for these contracts. Is not this obvious? It is their country, they are perfectly capable of doing it and, in addition, they can do it cheaper, than anyone else, because Iraqis would agree to work for less than one-tenth of American pay.
Whenever an American (or a Canadian)
says: "This is not about the money", have no doubt, in majority
of cases, it is about the money.
Very well organized crime
No, I am not talking about Mafia or bikers; I am talking about political parties. They are very well organized, and their real goals are criminal: they want to grab power and then to rob and pillage the country as much and as long as possible and generally, with impunity. They do more harm to the country, than Italian, Irish, Russian and every other Mafia and all the bikers taken together.
Just look at the last event of merger of Conservatives and Alliance. They do not hide, that their only reason for merger - hope to be able to grab power. One party already showed itself as crooks during Mulroney years, the other party consists of redneck bigots, who did not show themselves as bunch of crooks for one reason only: they have not been in power yet. This does not mean that Liberals are any better.
What seems astounding to me, is that people of
Northern territories understand all this very well and all their legislators
are independent. All the political parties were
soundly defeated there. How come the rest of Canada is so stupid not to
understand such a simple thing?
Am I missing something?
Bush has accused Syria of harboring
terrorists. Which Syria is he talking about? Is
this the same Syria, where he deports Canadian
citizens suspected in ties with terrorists, so that Syria would torture
them? As we know, Syrians do torture people suspected in
terrorism at the request of Americans, and they do it well.
Do the words torturing and harboring mean the same? Is Bush's English
God loves you
Latest proofs: earthquake in California - as a Christmas
present; and recently, a devastating earthquake in
Iran. Imagine 2 Gods: one, who created planet Earth
as it is, and the other, who could have created planet Earth
without faults, so that it would not
be prone to earthquakes. Now, which God is more loving?
CNN has declared that one of detainees in
Guantanamo is suspected of being 20-th hijacker. Do I recall correct,
that somebody else is already in jail for almost 3
years for the same reasons - Moussaoui? What is interesting, CNN did not
mention this little detail.
Spectacle in Ottawa
RCMP has raided office and house of reporter O'Neill, searching for sources of leaks of classified information. Immediately, 2 opposing opinions emerged: one group is saying that freedom of the press is breached and this is unacceptable, while the other is saying that reporters are not above the law and should be held responsible, like everybody else. Well, there is the third side of the story, the real one. Let us look at the whole situation.
An innocent human being was sent to Syria to be tortured into false confessions by US on advise of Canadian RCMP. After long torture, he was finally released and came back to Canada. RCMP does not look good. What to do? To leak information maligning Arar to reporters they trust. It is not a secret, that each newspaper has at least one reporter, who made a deal with the devil: RCMP (CISIS) gives them scoops (leaks), and they in exchange provide favorite spin in the newspaper. O'Neill was obviously one of those "spinners". She got the WELL AUTHORIZED leak and did the requested spin, maligning an honest and innocent man Arar and whitewashing RCMP.
Now, do you sincerely believe, that RCMP is so insane as to create trouble to one of its "spinners"? Of course, not. So, what the whole spectacle is all about? To raise credibility of the spinner. Prior to this "investigation", nobody in the country knew, who O'Neill was, she was a nobody and nobody was very much interested to read, what she wrote. Now she is a celebrity, everybody is taking an interview with her, everybody knows her name, she is almost a hero.
I see this kind of things on a regular basis in jail: a spectacle confrontation between a jail informant and guards. It is designed to raise informant's reputation and credibility among prisoners, and it usually works. O'Neill obviously works for police, and they are doing their best to enhance her reputation.
Norman Lester is another police informant, and he describes in his book similar spectacle harassment; he even blurts out, that he was warned in advance about police search, so he had enough time to hide whatever he needed to hide. (Of course, Lester does not admit of being police informant and neither he admits, that it was a spectacle harassment). I wrote a review of his book, which can be found in the big files section of this website.
This "police investigation" is the best thing which could happen
to both O'Neill and Ottawa Citizen, they
certainly made a lot of money on publicity
and increased circulation. O'Neill,
in addition, is guaranteed the top
journalistic award this year, and this is exactly what government wants
for a journalist, who maligned Arar.
This is not the America I know
This is the phrase repeated most often these days, when the mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners is being discussed. They want to emphasize, that America do not degrade its prisoners. Really? Let me tell you about the Canada I know, and suspect that America is not much better.
Almost every Canadian jail has a special cell, where jailers place prisoners totally naked. I learned about such a cell hard way: I was placed in one at the Regional Reception Center, Ste-Anne-des-Plaines, Quebec from April 12 to April 14, 1994, I was tortured for total of 33 hours by cold and deprivation of sleep. I was subjected to a degrading treatment: I was placed totally naked in a filthy cold cell, with no amenities or bedding, no furniture, and the front wall all glass, so that anyone entering could see me naked, and a security camera pointed at me, and a female laughter coming from the speakers. Clearly, administration wanted to show me, that it was a female watching me through the camera. Unlike in Iraq, jailers did not have any excuse, like they needed to soften me up for an interrogation. Jailers only purpose was to humiliate me.
I have reported this incident to several judges, to the police, to the Civil Liberties Union, to the Office of Prisoners' Rights. No reaction. The very first sentence of the Mission Statement of the Correctional Service Canada says: "We respect the dignity of individuals ...” Section 69 of the Corrections Act reads: "No person shall administer, instigate, consent to or acquiesce in any cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment of an offender".
It looks like a very nice arrangement: the members of Parliament adopt a legislation which makes them feel good, which they can proudly demonstrate to the whole world, which allows them to criticize other countries for torture, and at the same time allows Correctional Service to continue their practices of torture and degrading treatment of prisoners, and all this is being done with silent blessing of the so called Office of Prisoners' Rights.
Now, if Canada treats its prisoners in such a degrading manner on a regular
basis, do you really think that Americans are any better? As usually, the
media does not pose a really important question: how do you treat your own
Idiots in medicine
Over 20,000 patients were studied in several countries and the doctors counted, that over 80% of heart attacks are observed in people, who has at least one risk factor: smoking, high blood pressure, lack of exercise, etc. At the same time they are admitting, that 80% of population has at least one risk factor. Their conclusion: to prevent heart attacks, the population needs to eliminate the risk factors.
Really? Imagine, that we have a population with 80% of people having blue eyes. Presume, that heart disease affliction does not depend on the colour of the eyes and is equally distributed between the blue-eyed and non-blue-eyed. Now, if you take a random sample of the heart attack victims, what would be the most probable percentage of the blue-eyed victims of heart attack in this sample? You got it - 80%.
More food for thought. They say, that heart disease is the leading
reason of deaths. Indeed, it is, but if you look at the numbers, only
about a quarter die of heart disease, 75% die for other reasons. Now, if
the so-called risk factors were really responsible for heart attacks, should
not we have 80% of people dying of heart disease?
Does smoking cause lung cancer?
I looked at the relevant statistics and found something quite surprising. On the one hand, majority of people dying of lung cancer are smokers. On the other hand, from 1930 to 1990 the number of smokers DECREASED by half, at the same time, the number of people dying of lung cancer per 100,000 population INCREASED about 10 (TEN!) times. If smoking does cause lung cancer, should not these numbers decrease?
Yet another statistical fact: over 20% of adults smoke every day; the percentage of people dying from lung cancer is about 6%, which means, that majority of smokers do NOT get lung cancer.
I have never smoked and I hate the smell, but are not we doing great harm to
medical research by blaming smoking for lung cancer, instead of looking for
Is the sun responsible for skin cancer?
I remember about 20 years ago, all the commercials were praising Coppertone for helping to get sun tan. Now we have gone in another extreme: sun all of a sudden has become an enemy and we all need protection, otherwise we get skin cancer. People are spending billions on buying sun blockers. Let us see, what is the evidence that sun causes skin cancer. As usual, there are some statistics to support it: Southern states have more cases than Northern, white people more often have skin cancer than blacks.
On the other hand, skin cancer often appears on the parts of body, which are
never exposed to sun. Less than 10,000 people die from skin cancer in US
each year. To place this in proper perspective, people in US are 10 times
more likely to be killed in a hospital due to a medical error or twice as
likely to be shot to death by a gun. People are now spending billions on
the so-called sun-blockers, trying to save themselves from something, which
does not threaten them at all: out of 300 sun-baders, 299 never get skin
cancer. If the sun was really responsible for skin cancer, should not the
number be much greater? Last, but not least: if sun were the cause of
skin cancer, introduction of sun-blockers would have significantly reduced the
cases of skin cancer. It did not.