First. . .

. . . of all. . .

  It was the wrong and cowardly thing to do.  It was extreme.  When all is said and done, it will not contribute to the accomplishment any possible goal held by the perpetrators of the murders. But the situation is much more complicated than that (much, much more complicated) and requires more than a simple ‘John Wayne’ response from a reputedly ‘responsible’ and ‘respectable’ public figure for such a response accomplishes no more toward a resolution than the initial, violent action.

Let’s start at the beginning.  A film.  A piece of ‘entertainment’ or ‘diversion’, if you will.  Whether or not in the guise of educational or informational material, merely a film.  Offensive to someone?  Hell yes!.  An excuse that someone with an agenda may use to further their cause, however justified or unjustified it may be. (More on that later.)

So a film was made and exhibited via the Internet.  The origin of the film is extremely hazy and involves individuals from many and disparate origins including a former Marine and longtime religious-right activist (from a group called Courageous Christians United), a Coptic Christian, 15 key players from the Middle East) Syria, Iraq, Turkey, Pakistan, Iran), an alleged Israeli-born, 56-year-old, Jewish writer and director and who knows how much of this information is accurate.  In any case, all or many involved are now quite frightened of the backlash their venture has unleashed.

First and foremost, in reasonable, rational and educated 2012, a film is a film. A document conceived, written, performed, directed, filmed, manufactured and distributed by human beings.  Mere human beings.  Nothing more, nothing less. Irrespective you spiritual, religious or cultural beliefs, in reasonable, rational and educated 2012, a film is still a film. Nothing more. Any ‘holy’ book that instructs one to kill another over a matter such as this is surely misguided at best. In fact, most ‘holy’ books, to the best of my knowledge, instruct their readers to be merciful; to forgive.  In short, be virtuous; the better man and set the example as opposed to reactionary, vengeful, vindictive and violent.

What do YOU think?
http://www.rayjozwiak.com/guestbook.html

You can NOW download your
very own copy of Ray Jozwiak's
newest release:
AMBIENCE & WINE

Please visit
http://www.rayjozwiak.com

Tweet

War criminal? . . .

. . . how many OTHERS are there out there Mr. Rumsfeld???

from msnbc.com staff and news service reports
updated 8/31/2011 5:11:31 AM ET 2011-08-31T09:11:31

"Dick Cheney was "president for all practical purposes" during George W. Bush's first term in office and "fears being tried as a war criminal," according to Colin Powell's chief of staff during his time as secretary of state.

Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, who has known Cheney for decades, told ABC News that Cheney was a "very vindictive person." "I simply don't recognize Mr. Cheney anymore," he added.

In his memoir, "In My Time: A Personal and Political Memoir," which was released Tuesday, Cheney claimed Powell had undermined Bush, by criticizing policy to people outside the administration. Cheney told NBC News that the book would see "heads exploding all over Washington."

Speaking to CBS Sunday, Powell accused Cheney of taking "cheap shots" at him.
In the ABC interview, Wilkerson suggested Cheney was adopting a tough stance in an attempt to forestall criticism or even prosecution.

"What really sort of got my attention was this way in which he characterized it (the memoir): it's going to 'cause heads to explode,'" Wilkerson said. "That's quite a visual. And in fact, it's the kind of headline I would expect to come out of a gossip columnist, or the kind of headline you might see one of the supermarket tabloids write. It's not the kind of headline I would have expected to come from a former vice president of the United States of America.

"I think he's just trying to, one, assert himself so he's not in some subsequent time period tried for war crimes and, second, so that he somehow vindicates himself because he feels like he needs vindication. That in itself tells you something about him," he added.

"He's developed an angst and almost a protective cover, and now he fears being tried as a war criminal so he uses such terminology as 'exploding heads all over Washington' because that's the way someone who's decided he's not going to be prosecuted acts: boldly, let's get out in front of everybody, let's act like we are not concerned and so forth when in fact they are covering up their own fear that somebody will Pinochet him," Wilkerson added. . ."

I think the former administration failed to answer MANY questions after the events of 9/11/2001. . .




Download your
very own copy of
ANOTHER SHOT
by Ray Jozwiak

Please Visit
http://www.rayjozwiak.com


Tweet