Subject: Are we more dumb or are we more evil?
I realize it’s a combination of the two, but which is it more of?
To the First Lady of the United States, 4-14-06:
Dear George,
Question: When a man can’t admit he’s wrong, what is he?
A) Strong
B) Stronger
C) Strongerer
Generic:
Let me explain something to our American soldier that apparently nobody seems to know: In war, when you kill an innocent person, another is always justified in the eyes of God / reality to kill you. They would not be justified in the eyes of God to kill “your” innocent people, only you. That’s what’s called “ethics.” Now, the definition of “stupid” is an American soldier that kills innocent civilians when invading a country; then when he has taken his city, doesn’t understand why people are trying to kill him. Another definition of stupid is an American soldier that still maintains his blind faith in a leader which has been proven wrong. Another definition of stupid is any political, news and/or religious leader that believes the same way.
I don’t see how you can explain to the insurgents that you’re there now just to rebuild / improve / help. Maybe you can drop some fliers out of an airplane explaining it. I don’t think any of them are going to believe it, though, as long as Saddam Hussein is still in jail. You say, if people kill our innocent civilians than we are justified in killing their innocent civilians. That just shows that it’s all just a game, relating to geographic boundaries. You see, stupid people are unable to reckon much on their own, therefore have to rely on trusting other idiots. Killing another’s innocent civilians makes you “just as evil.” Another definition of stupid is the vast majority of people who don’t realize that; e.g., feeling the terrorists are the worst kind of evil while you still don’t feel the same way about our President who has done the same thing. I realize I’m passing you all up.
For the next war, let’s just watch some football instead. Yeah, I know, we’ll have to treat others in the world “fair,” like we do with Russia and China. But it oughta be a good game. Hopefully it will absorb that kind of need.
If New York City was in another country, then the “game” would disallow American players to feel the same degree of emotional reproof for 9/11. For example, the large terrorist attack in Spain didn’t seem to emotionally grip American minds.
As for Saddam Hussein, someone should tell him that in the United States a person is innocent until proven guilty. In his case, he is guilty after being proven innocent. Pathetic. Are we more dumb or more evil?
I don’t know, when somebody kills children to obtain gain in a war to help children, are they more dumb or are they more evil? Giving the order sitting back in their big chair in their office, they don’t actually see or feel the pain and suffering they are inflicting, so maybe they’re just “dumb.” When they do consciously realize that innocent people are going to die for their endeavor, but they justify it by simply thinking “I don’t care,” that makes them “evil.” And when they justify it by placing the blame on the leader they’re at war with, this would make them both dumb and evil; because, in the worse case scenario, it ethically makes them just like the other leader. So which is it, are they more dumb or more evil?
George W. Bush recently said that we can’t leave Iraq now because that would give a message to the rest of the world that we are weak. I think the only message we have given the rest of the world so far is that we are evil, and do whatever we want. You see, we thought Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, and we were scared, so we killed and maimed thousands of innocent people to let them know that we aren’t weak. That’s right. And we will make country musicians into superstars for writing songs telling how brave we are. And we will believe it. Because. Now, the question is, are we more evil or are we more stupid for believing our own lies? Which is it, let me know?
I do tap my toes to some of the patriotic songs I criticize; but, God comes first, and my toes second.
After listening to the news today, Iran appears to be quit intimidated because of our ruthless air strikes and invasions of other countries, especially concerning weapons of mass destruction, so maybe our Presidents have been doing the right thing all along. Smart!
Exactly what is the ethical difference between this Moussaoui (9/11 terrorist) guy and any American soldier? If an American soldier was on trail in Iraq for attempting / planning to kill Iraqi civilians (by just being part of the invasion, or by just following orders from the President), would he show remorse: is showing remorse when captured standard military protocol? Many of us want the death penalty for Moussaoui. Yet, we don’t have the slightest idea why Iraqi insurgents are wishing the death penalty for our American soldiers. Are we more dumb or more evil?
The person who screens these emails is now smarter than his/her boss.
If the innocent person in Iraq (or any war) was the American soldier’s own mother, brother, daughter, etc., then would they kill them, even if to obey orders from the President? I’m sure there’d be a few exceptions, but I think the overwhelming answer would be “no.” So, are the American soldiers more evil or more stupid? Especially today, since they’ve all been hoodwinkered?
Again, hurting innocent people, or taking a stance which will hurt innocent people, for bias, self-centered reasons falls (mostly) in the “evil” department.
Bush’s approval rating might be down, but most Americans don’t think he should be impeached for starting an unjustified war. However, the majority of Americans did believe that Bill Clinton should be impeached, not for his bombing raids, but for sexual relations outside of marriage. The difference between the two scenarios is one killed and maimed thousands of innocents people, including Americans; and the other one: absolutely no one was harmed in any kind of way. In other words, no one missed any meals because Bill Clinton got a blόw job in the White House. The only possible victim in adultery is the spouse, and she said she was okay with it. The public and media were the ones who actually victimized his wife and family by making such a big deal about it. Is the public and the media more dumb or more evil? Minds that thing the Bill Clinton scenario in more evil than George W. Bush’s, are they more dumb or more evil? Also, no one was deprived of any meals because he lied about it. Technically, we are all taught in this society that personal sexual preferences, embarrassing whimsical desires (cigars, etc.) are “nobody else’s business.” If a person asks such perverted questions, he should be lied to. Most of us need to “learn” what can really hurt us and what can’t. Tailgating, eating too much animal product, falling down the stairs, etc. can hurt us. I suggest that the media stress on those points (when there’s nothing going on) instead of frivolous matters. The Republicans harp about all the “frivolous lawsuits” in this country, but they supported the Monica Lewinsky thing. Are they more dumb or more evil?
The best thing for this country today is the two party system. One will keep the other somewhat in line. But, if the conflicts were based more on reality instead of dumb and/or evil, it’d work even better.
To you conservative apple-polish Bush supporters, have some real pride and quit being a whore for this man. Think outside your box, or you’re gonna lose your Republican advantage. You’re trying to fit a square peg into the round hole. Flushing the toilet in the White House isn’t gonna work unless “George W. Bush” is in it.
As President, George W. Bush’s doesn’t work for the benefit of all Americans, he just works for the benefit of his own image, that’s all. But, he still got reelected. Voters: dumber or evil?
When a President starts an unjustified war, it doesn’t make Americans safer in the world, and safer from things like 9/11, it makes them less safe and more vulnerable to people who wish rightful revenge. I think the “less” justified enemies we make in the world, the better. People who disagree: are they dumb or dumberer? People who think we’re always in the right: dumb or dumberer?
I think the government, media and religious leaders of our country today need to have Dr. Phil tell them all, that they first have to “admit” they are dumb, gullible, bias and evil before any ethical improvements can be made. Do you all really think and hope people a thousand years from now will think / be the same way? Is that what you really hope? If you do, then ethics should just keep getting worse. I tell you, they will use you people today to show their young of what not to become like, using examples of simple action, cause and result. They will have no problem showing them the real filth that you are.
Mr. Critical, some people don’t like me.
PS: Again, to comply with the Golden Rule, I definitely welcome constructive criticism, especially if you’re dumb and/or evil about something.
“Gonna … say what needs sayin', cause we're only here for a little while” –Billy Dean, 1990.
-- Home (Index) --