Asturian-American Migration Forum

I was watching Chris Mathews interview a panel that included Woodward the man that wrote ‘State of Denial’, it occurred to me that the state of denial is much, much, deeper than what it would appear from what the book intends to communicate. For instance, United Statesians call themselves Americans denying their true roots, Football, one of their favorite sports is played 95% of the time with the ball in somebody’s hands yet they call it football denying the true nature of the game, soccer is played 99.9% of the time with the players feet yet they refuse to acknowledge it as a football game. They firmly believe that their Constitution is paramount, yet there was not one public protestation over the elimination of Habeas Corpus a common law right that precede’s the Magna Carta of 1215. Although excessive taxation (at 3% on what we know as sales tax and pay 4.5%) was the reason for the British Colonies of America to secede and seek their independence, the average man today pays in excess of 35% (on personal income, then pays sales taxes and property taxes) of his income in taxes in one form or another, United Statesians firmly believe at the same time that the reason for the war of independence was justified, and that not paying your taxes (over ten times higher than what people went to war seeking independence over) is unpatriotic. The same man will get upset if you criticize the United Statesian military actions in Iraq / Afghanistan and vigorously defend Bush and his reasons for the war and occupation, he will claim the inalienable right these people have to be free and live in a democracy saying things like “that’s what our sons and daughters are dying there for!” however, in the same breath tell you he doesn’t want those ‘rag heads’ here, “they just got to go!”. Advocate separation of Church and State, yet claim the right to display the ten commandments on public property. Claim to live his life upholding Christian values, and advocates the death penalty. Likes to believe he is an intelligent man/woman yet spends hard earned cash in cigarettes that stink and produce cancer, wants to loose weight but eats sugar, realizes drinking is stupid but does it anyways.

Is it possible that the ‘State of Denial’ is not something that is limited to the Bush administration, but that it is intrinsically intertwined with the fabric of our society, and that the current administration is simply doing as everybody else does, however, because of their position it is impossible to ignore? Could it be that the Bush administration is not a mistake, but this nation finally being led by the common folk and not the elite? Are we in a ‘State of Denial’ in denying this?

Elí wrote:Is it possible that the ‘State of Denial’ is not something that is limited to the Bush administration, but that it is intrinsically intertwined with the fabric of our society, and that the current administration is simply doing as everybody else does....
Could it be that the Bush administration is not a mistake, but this nation finally being led by the common folk and not the elite?

Ha ha. Very funny (the idea that the Bush administration may not be a mistake). I can see how Bush's intelligence and abilities certainly are commonplace, but he's definitely blue blood (a member of the wealthy class).

I have seen plans to protest the end of Habeas Corpus. I'm sure we'll see that this week, in fact.

I think the explanation for all of this is simpler. It has nothing to do with this culture or society. It is the way all human beings are, and how all human cultures are. That's because we all operate mostly by emotions, although many of us snear about how much more rational we are than the next person. I'm sure there are subtle cultural and societal differences, but any one who thinks their own culture or society does this better is... in a state of denial!

I wonder, will there be other doors opened with the end of Habeas Corpus? What will be next, wire tapping without a warrant?

“any one who thinks their own culture or society does this better is... in a state of denial!” Interesting you’d mention that, the society were I came from did just that, denied there was a problem brewing and refused address the issue. That society neglected to see and confront the issues until it was too late to do anything about it, today it no longer exists, it’s members spread all over the world integrating themselves into other cultures. It is possible to deny there are problems until it is too late.

Wiretapping without warrants, that’s not too bad because they only wiretap the terrorists that want to hurt you, they would never wiretap you... then they’ll wiretap the criminals that want to steal from you, then they’ll wiretap the bad citizens that don’t have your best interest in mind, then they’ll wiretap those that don’t vote like you do. But you, you are OK.

About wiretapping...have you all read about the wiretapping scandal in Italy, where the president of the telephone company and the chief of the intelligence services had millions of Italians wiretapped just for the heck of it? The telephone company, which is also Italy's main internet server (much like Telefonica in Spain) even tapped the bank accounts of most of them. Among the people affected are the rich and powerful too, to include businessmen like Luciano Benetton, football coaches like Fabio Capello, and of course most politicians.
Now if that ain't scary! And you know that if this happened in Italy it is happening in the USA and everywhere else.

Wily Elí wrote:It is possible to deny there are problems until it is too late.

Yep. That's true.

There's a book out about how many cultures fail to heed the warnings and then die out as a result. The book supposedly looked into why some cultures decline and others don't. I don't recall what the difference between them was. (I didn't read it.) Maybe I'm overly pessimistic in thinking that all cultures are eventually doomed?

Elí, in your example of Peru (?), what exactly happened, who left and why?

Terechu, it's pretty clear that the US government is using electronic eavesdropping on its citizens, although we don't know to what extent.

----------------------

Elí El Astuto wrote: [Trans. Art... as if Elí needs help!!] Es posible negar que hay problemas hasta que sea demasiado tarde.

Sí, señor. Es verdad. Hace poco había un libro sobre cómo unas culturas no pueden ver a las advertencias y después mueren como consecuencia. Supongo que el libro estudiaba la razones que algunas culturas declinan y no otras. No recuerdo las diferencias entre estas culturas (no lo leyó). ¿Quizás he estado demasiado pesimista en el pensamiento de que todas las culturas están condenadas con el tiempo?

Elí, en tu ejemplo de Perú (?), ¿qué sucedieron exactamente, quienes salieron y porqué?

Terechu, está bastante claro que el gobierno estadounidense escucha por electrónico escondido a sus ciudadanos, aunque no sabemos en qué medida.

Eli el astuto... well... yeah... actually... you know what, let’s make that Eli the Great (as in Alexander...)
I should make the distinction between culture and society for this post. Within a ‘culture’ there are many ‘societies’, for instance it could be argued that in the US the folks in one of the New York Barrios, the folks in the backwoods of Tennessee, the folks in the mountains of Kentucky and those yachting in Kennebunkport are all members of different societies, although they are members of the same culture (generally speaking). During and after the military socialist coup of the late 60's early 70's most of the folks that had anything were suddenly confronted with the expropriation of all their assets be them houses, cars, farms, factories you name it, if it had any value it was expropriated. Naturally these people did what they could in order to survive, if they had some cash stashed anywhere that the government didn’t get a hold of it, they used it to flee the country. Most went to Argentina, Chile, Australia, US, Mexico, Spain in more or less that order. The ‘society’ that was made up of the very people that the nation needed the most, were now scattered around the globe trying to make a living. Although very strong incentives were put in place decades later trying to get them to go back for the most part that never happened. Yes of course some people came back like the owner of ‘El Banco de Credito’ few people will say no to a couple hundred million bucks just for moving back into a nation, but, generally speaking they are were they landed then.

That society didn’t need to face that, if they would’ve simply recognized that the early 1800's were over, it is likely that the pendulum would’ve never swung that far to the left. Peru had a ‘European’ population and a native one, today, it is starting to look more like Mexico as those of European descent now freely mix with the native population.

When leaders turn stupid
from http://tinyurl.com/y4hz8g

U.S. policy opens door to space weapons

Updated Wed. Oct. 18 2006 10:50 AM ET

Brian Jackson , DiscoveryChannel.ca

The first U.S. National Space Policy amendment in a decade was made with no public announcement Oct. 6 and ensures "freedom of action in space" for the superpower, the Washing Post reported Wednesday.

The new policy will oppose any future arms-control agreements that would limit U.S. space weapon options. It would also deny access to space for anyone "hostile to U.S. interests."

"Freedom of action in space is as important to the United States as air power and sea power," the policy's introduction states.

The U.S. logic is that since there is currently no space arms-race, there is no treaty needed to limit space weapons. Though officials say there are no plans to start launching death lasers into orbit just yet.

"This policy is not about developing or deploying weapons in space," a senior administration official told the Post.

But President Bush has acknowledged the policy paves the way for his planned missile defense system.

In the 1980s, the Regan administration famously invented a "Star Wars" missile-defense system involving satellites that would intercept any missiles headed towards the States.

The plan has become closer to reality during the Bush administration. They've conducted successful tests using ground-based missile interceptors.

Changing the policy will increase suspicions the U.S. is planning to deploy weapons in outer space, critics say.

Possible weapons could disable satellites by shooting them with a laser or simply smashing into them.

The new policy reflects the U.S. military and commercial dependence on satellite-based communications, a National Security Council spokesman told the Post.

Just how incredibly stupid is that?

Do they really expect the rest of the world to stay put while the US puts weapons in space? In what mind that is an option? As soon as the US puts a single confirmed armed satellite in orbit the counter defenses will go up. Of course not every nation will have the technology to intercept ballistic missiles in two days... I'm not genius but if I wanted to put an anti-weapon satellite in orbit all I'd do is put a satellite in orbit armed with 10 shotguns. Yup simple comon everyday shotguns, the type that shoots hundreds of little pellets you shoot them in the general direction of the satellite you want to hit you shoot a couple hundred shots, each pellet traveling at 26,000 kilometers per hour has the kinetic energy of a hand grenade. If a single pellet gets to hit the satellite down it comes. Trouble is, this approach will also knock out all other satellites it encounters, ALL OF THEM. And it gets to do it for less than ten bucks.

Just how stupid can our 'leaders' be? unreal.