2003-02-13 01:19, by Julie Solheim-Roe
Ming talks about an old Monty Python favourite, Terry Jones. I heard a great parody on kpfk a week ago ... it was on the radio in the UK recently and I can't find it on-line. If anyone knows how to find it, pleaes advise. The theory was an itemization of how Iraq should pay for being bombed by the most powerful and expensive army in history. It went into price for head wounds and infant deaths, etc. Bravo.
This is his latest article which Ming spoke of. The idea is that Britain should have treated Ireland and the IRA the same way Bush's 'War on Terrorism' is waged in the Middle East:
Here is a commentary he wrote in the Observer this week: Having bombed Dublin and, perhaps, a few IRA training bogs in Tipperary, we could not have afforded to be complacent. We would have had to turn our attention to those states which had supported and funded the IRA terrorists through all these years. The main provider of funds was, of course, the USA, and this would have posed us with a bit of a problem. Where to bomb in America? It's a big place and it's by no means certain that a small country like the UK could afford enough bombs to do the whole job. It's going to cost the US billions to bomb Iraq and a lot of that is empty countryside. America, on the other hand, provides a bewildering number of targets.
Should we have bombed Washington, where the policies were formed? Or should we have concentrated on places where Irishmen are known to lurk, like New York, Boston and Philadelphia? We could have bombed any police station and fire station in most major urban centres, secure in the knowledge that we would be taking out significant numbers of IRA sympathisers. On St Patrick's Day, we could have bombed Fifth Avenue and scored a bull's-eye. From here, found some great articles at The Observer under 'The Bush Files'. Check out the stuff on the way his evangelism runs his Whitehouse. Somewhere I saw something on Bush being a dry-drunk. I have had experience with that energy -- and I'd say there is something to this theory. Angry without admitting it to yourself; acting 'compassionate' whilst finding righteous reasons to destroy; telling lies that you almost believe... you begin to believe them and wish them so to be true; the constant denial that compells one forward... in these dangerous webs we weave whilst we pracice in deceit.
|
|