this is a time when things get a little fuzzy around the edges.
We forget, or we fail to recognize, that out of our inherent civility and political correctness, our president has deep seated allegiances, in blood, with Muslims around the world.
Anyone care to discuss this itty bitty factor, or is our new start, domestic meets foreign policy strategy simply to ignore it?
Just to be clear -- this isn't a put down; this isn't a "mark" against the man, as if I pronounce all Muslims, and their intent, bad. I do not feel that way at all; and you would have me and what I am saying entirely wrong.
It is simply a fact, based upon our president's life experiences and family heritage -- he is, whether we want to discuss all of the idiosyncrasies and propensities about it aloud, or not, half Muslim.
Now you know I love The Daily Bell -- a place where profound libertarian, free-thinking opinion is shared with the world, and sometimes with a deafening pitch; at times though, their perspective seems so outlandish, often I find myself faced confronting the difficult task of believing every word -- truth has a funny way of creeping up on us like that. But quite honestly, there are numerous times I simply surrender with the greatest of ease thinking, oh my gosh, no way, that's radical, dude, everything makes so much sense now.
And the last few days have been no exception. can we get a whoa, far out, on this little number.
So, think about it...there are so many levels of not knowing the reality behind closed doors... happening all around us... everyday.
Much like the Bell's articles of late hemorrhaging on the antics of the Federal Reserve, the Davos meetings, and anything else going on around the world that screams raw western elitism at play -- or how America's juvenile European jealousies, with tendencies immediately to follow, wreak havoc on the global front. Everyday, according to the staff and the guest editorials, The Daily Bell paints a vivid, sometimes gruesome picture, traveling the unpredictable mine-fields, and MIND-fields, of the times.
Egypt, and the entire Middle East, is a powder keg of conflicting energies of resistance and rebellion, relationships and revolution, seeking change. What happens in the coming days may change everything
...did the U.S. really promote the uprising? is this for the betterment of future diplomacy, or a break up? are we letting go of the past alliances and making new friends, or just making more enemies?
Who are our friends, really? For another interesting take on Egypt...and the Muslim Brotherhood...read this.
Is this a time when a half Muslim president rides in on a white horse and saves the world, demonstrating the very attributes bestowed upon him, as the Nobel Peace Prize recipient, before ever really doing a thing -- based solely upon the 'perception' of a man, rather than gut reality of a true leader? Time will tell, right?
I was amused watching a really old movie over the weekend -- Nighthawks, from 1981 -- by the looks of the bad cinema lighting, the disco dancing, and the clothes, it still reeked of more the mid seventies than parading in what would become a decade of over indulgence and the uprising of the young, upwardly mobile, professionals... use of the word 'professionals' highly suspect; now that it's over, and coming from the heart of the movement myself...looking back, I fear we have grounds to make such claims of professionalism seem downright absurd. Everything came way to easy, and way to fast, if you ask me...
for now look at us.
Anywho, getting back to the flick, what a little wonder this turned out to be. First, the players, Sylvester Stallone, Rutger Hauer, Billy Dee Williams, Lindsey Wagner, it dripped handsome super power heroes and villains. But hey, that was just the packaging -- the substance, the lines, the story brought to us thirty years ago! priceless.
After quickly setting us up with the plot, to catch a terrorist, a British Interpol officer comes to New York City to instruct a couple of undercover guys and apparently, NYC's finest -- partners, Sylvester and Billy Dee -- on how to catch the bad guy, Rutger Hauer; and when I say bad guy I really do mean, one, bad, guy. Just one guy. It's just the way it was played out, back then, in the aftermath of the Weather Underground, and all.
At one point, Wolfgard, Rutger Hauer,a.k.a the terrorist, says "I speak for the oppressed... I am a liberator!" Nearly capturing the essence of the Weathermen of yesteryear in one fell swoop -- that the wealth of an empire belongs to the people, to the oppressed who made the wealth... redistribute the wealth! redistribute the wealth! (and if you say it like Van Jones, it makes it really fun to say) or we will rise up against you and bomb bridges, buildings, babies -- whatever it takes.
The Interpol Brit outlines the mission saying things like, "[you] might have only one time...to catch him vulnerable...gotta take the shot..." or something like that. The point he was making to Sylvester and Billy Dee, was that we have to be just as ruthless as the terrorist -- for they are banking on our civility, our rules of engagement, our pledge to treat others the way we want to be treated; and basically -- flipping things around a bit -- terrorism is always waiting for our vulnerability to show first.
He added a sounding alarm, saying "[they will] come after what we love...", before sending the good guys off on their way, against all odds, not even knowing what this guy would even look like anymore (following the way of Hollywood and the oldest terrorist story in the book: just before leaving London, or was it Paris? Wolfgard had plastic surgery to protect his identity, leaving a murdered doctor in his wake... like we didn't see that coming...).
The thing is, that was made for Hollywood, thirty years ago -- what have we learned? what has changed? Something tells me the seriousness of the matter has elevated to way beyond a couple of beat cops from New York City, and you?
But more enlightening is coming face to face with the reality of the what we knew THEN, as general knowledge and movie research begs to tell us everything we ever imagined, and more, three decades ago.
I'm just saying, as elementary as it may seem, if we were supposedly "thinking like a terrorist" then -- what, pray tell, is our excuse now?
I don't want terrorists having a foothold anywhere in the world; I don't want radical extremism leading the way, and coming after the things we love, for any country around the globe -- whether it be Egypt, Tunisia, Lebanon, or New York City.
The movie declared something stark and unimaginable -- "gotta come at the violence with greater violence..." or something like that.
For just a girl, who really only wants to live in a world that values world peace, the very thought of that seems utterly frightening -- and even though I know it was just a movie -- I am left with wondering, what if it's true?
Hearing the Interpol Brit preaching in my ear again, he said "that's the technique of terror, how do you like it?"
wish we could all have milk and cookies and talk about it like reasonable people.
Make it a Good Day, G
and really, if a half Muslim, half Christian, president can't get this right...what are our true hopes, and future, built on? sand?
Adele, rolling in the deep, is playing on GTV, with a click on Dear America. REALLY hot song...love love love this girl -- just trying to leave you on a high note... with a song that won't get out of my head...and it ain't disco. enjoy.