Introductive Summary

Intuition. Perception. Notion.
Whatever you call it, I’m here for it.

My reviews are for you to peruse, analyse and critique ― open for discussion.

The categories are self-explanatory, what isn’t so is you =)

I want to hear YOU ― your takes, views, or even your differing opinions on my worldly concerns. Otherwise, shut the fuck up.  

One thing to note, I write objectively. Sometimes either in a necessitarian-like manner, other times like a libertarian. Verily, I don’t believe in not believing the thing you write thoughtlessly ― those are the works of news agencies and fiction authors, I am not interested in them. 

The underlying principle, however, is a question.

While certain national dailies are rigid with no true platform(s) for critical thinking (otherwise, limited), why is it that whenever a discussive topic is printed, broadcasted or podcasted in public forums, the outcome of it all are more often than not, lip-serviced or just “taken into consideration” by any regulatory authority or supreme power?

Ever consider that there is a certain direction? The OBJECTIVE(s) and their corresponding ACTION(s) that is. Where at worst, any raised concerns by members of the public falling onto deaf ears, results to the loosening of the purpose and value of critical thinking itself. Consequently, leaving us ― people to dwindle in societal decadence. Be it even in stable political countries with world-class governments ― You’d be surprise with the statistics.

Thus my framework objective is the contrary of George Herbert’s ,”He who knows nothing, doubts nothing” metaphysical poetry.

Thereafter, resulting to a stand after much system clearances from credulous reports, rumours, writings and speeches.  Doubts are loopholes, let this be clear. Eventually everyone has to place his or her foot somewhere. Sitting on fences will surely provide a clear support for that shaky equilibrium. Until the fences break, me hearties!

A gentle reminder, my writings are but of my solid opinions: understandings, concepts, conceptions, policies, philosophies, faithfully manifesting into a particular belief system after some time. Words that you have just registered are pennies for your thoughts, neither a consensus nor law.

=)

“Zest with Direction is Ambition
Zest without Direction is a fool’s adventure” – The Good Garfield, Khai

The troops are out, so why the hoo-haa on U.S. being in a shambles?

Are we at fault for withdrawing or not withdrawing troops out of Iraq? The question is not the fault(blame), but the faulter.

Click here to get a gist of the “Conditions permitting that U.S. combat forces could leave Baghdad by July”-Reuters.

What ”conditions” are there, sir Petraeus? The bottom-line is, whether is it going to be Obama or McCain reigning supreme after this November, current efforts of the Bush administration are already underway to ensure that the US presence is still predominant over the Iraqis and their way of life.

This is done by engaging supposed “bilateral relations” with the Iraqi government, in view that they are sourcing for information about purchasing thirty-six F-16 fighter aircraft manufactured by Lockheed Martin Corp (US Defense Arms Contractor)- click here 

Note that the US Pentagon were the ones who initiated steps to form a new Iraqi government (in the name of establishing a civil administration), according to Robin Wright who is a chief diplomatic correspondent for the Los Angeles in Online NewsHour: Reshaping Iraq, April 15 2003.

Hence, I am not surprised at why “Qaeda still remains undefeated” because in the first place, there are references of the term Qaeda being attributed to someone else, or in this case- to another party who aren’t a part of US’s game plan to rebuild the new Iraq.

Thus, the reason why Petraues says Qaeda still remains undefeated- because as the report states, the US Military has only manage to expropriate 11 of the 18 Iraqi provinces from the Sunni Arab Insurgency. The latter group, my dear readers, has been tacitly implied as Al-Qaeda terrorists.

See below for more details as to why the terrorists’ watchlist are expanding and why in today’s context, the term “terrorists” has been used loosely, therefore also redefining Bush’s concept on his War on Terror based on loose factors.

From Source- Julie Snider, USA TODAY; Government Accountability Office:

The number of terror watch-list records [1] more than quadrupled over roughly a three-year period,

June 2004	158,374
May 2005	287,982
June 2006	515,906
May 2007	754,960

[1]: One record reflects one name but not necessarily one person.

 

From Additional Sources: Mimi Hall, USA TODAY; October 24^th 2007-

“Senate Homeland Security Committee Chairman Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., “serious hurdles remain if (the list) is to be as effective as we need it to be. Some of the concerns stem from its rapid growth, which could call into question the quality of the list itself.”

So here’s what I think: Yes, the neighbouring countries of Iraq should be concerned that Iraq is planning to gain new grounds in military technology (minus the fact that they are still facing internal turmoil). “Flush with billions of dollars from oil sales, Iraq is emerging as the biggest client for a wide range of U.S. weapons” -Reuters

Or do you think, these countries should be more concerned on Pentagon’s efforts to supply more arms to Iraq? “F-16s would let Iraqi forces conduct airstrikes of their own on insurgent positions rather than relying on U.S. forces to do so”-Reuters

Keeping in mind that the Iraqis in the new government are only puppets and the US are the puppetmasters, do you really think that for once, this is not an Al-Qaeda issue? Which of course directly upturns the claims of General David Petraeus- besides the wipeout strategem “to oust Saddam Hussein”.

The final analysis? It is also one way of the US gaining control over one of Middle East’s richest oil suppliers, letting the Iraqis destroy their own civilization, as decreed by the American Civil Law via the Civil Administration.

Takes the sociological term, “Americanization” up to a whole new level, don’t you think?
Makes me wonder: Irrespective of how popular you are, I am the writer, illustratively speaking. So, the big hoo-haa here is me, should I be worried of me or you with regard to ANY rebukes regarding my concepts/writings?

I mind if it ain’t my fault. So why need I be worried of something I didn’t do wrong?
And then I wonder: Why the sullen faces when other ~Presidents smile when they do lip-service?

~Provide real life scenario of any IMPORTANT President yang pernah sound orang putih.

So why the Americanization mentioning?
In simpler terms, according to my

understanding

, this is where Americans call Americans STUPID.

Before we blame others on publicity issues like the likelihood of aiming *Israel due to poor backing reasons for their “neutral” military infiltration efforts, we must know EXACTLY what are the policies that defines AMERICA.

Otherwise, the SOCIOLOGICAL term Americanization, will be likened to that of Imperialism, where states are robbed out of their identity. Hence resulting to accords that will not suffice to explain the poor showcasing
of who exactly is She.