Gang Stalking World

United we stand. Divided they fall.

Do we want to win?

Do we want to win?

I was watching the news the other day and a reporter asked a question. He wanted to know if the war in Afganistan was winnable? Can we win, and he was told we could win, if we made it into a home game. Meaning don’t treat it as an away game, make it into a home game. I was watching that clip, and thinking, Wolf Blitzer is asking the wrong question. The question is not can we win, the question should be, do we want to win?

For me that answer is no, not at any cost. Not because I am a defeatist, not because I want the other team to win, but because I am a realist and I know the price that winning is likely to be too high. Not at the continued loss of life of the troops, not at the continued loss of moral, and democratic freedoms that I see being eroded in these democratic countries. The economic cost of the war is also not great, the monies being spent to secure these victories, could have secured a hundred small victories for those in need at home. Feeding the poor, helping the sick and homeless, but instead those monies are put into the war machines. I personally believe that that price is too high.

Do the people want to win this war? I don’t think they care to, I think what concerns the people most is getting the troops home, that’s what they really want. I don’t think they care if it’s a home game, away game, or whatever. There is no victory when the cost is so high for both sides, and the cost has been high. Not just financially, but in freedoms.

These wars began with the premises that if we don’t go in there and don’t destroy the enemy on their turf, they will destroy us. I include the U.K., Canada, and all the other allied countries in this. The problem is that Iraq was not invaded due to the 9/11 terror scare. It was very much invaded on the false premise that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, which was false, but regardless, he is gone, some troops are still there, the situation is still messy, and though battles can be fought and won, the question with the remaining war is do the people want to win?

The last time I checked the American election was won not based on can we win, but it was won on the promises of we will end this war. We will get the troops home. That is where the hearts and minds of the American people were, it was not on can we secure a victory in some far away land. The other factor is not even if a victory can be secured in some far away land, because while that battle is being fought far away, the war at home is being lost. It is being lost in freedoms and liberties. These wars were supposedly fought to secure freedoms, but if you look at these democratic countries several years later it’s hard to recognize some of the freedoms that are supposedly being fought for, when these countries are starting to resemble mini fascists states in various ways. It makes no sense to secure a victory abroad, if freedoms are lost at home.

Is the other side going to benefit from this great war? Are we really securing freedom for these people? Do these people really want these occupying forces in their land? Looking at the Iraq war, things were not great under Saddam Hussein, but several years later have things truly been made better in the long run? When all is said and done, the people have been brutalized, their spirits were broken, the women raped, children tortured, civilians killed, lives destroyed. Out of this sick and sin, they have been infected with an informant network, which will destroy the internal character of their country, the way it is destroying the internal character of these countries, and will the end results be worth it? Will the ends really justify the means, there or at home in these democratic countries?

Do the people really want to win? Soldiers are coming home from these wars, and getting into conflicts with these militarized police forces that have sprung up, they are coming back to cities that they don’t always recognize. I have read of a few different cases where men who have served abroad came home, only to be brutalized, humiliated, or killed by some of the newly militarized forces at home. Is this truly what they are off fighting for? There is no victory, there is no win, if the freedoms that are supposedly being fought for are evaporated. We can win, but at what price, and at the end of the day, do we want to win?

Iraq is being rebuilt. From this great sick and sin a great city will be spawned, but will the price have been worth it? Someday the great city of Babylon will be rebuilt and rebirthed, if rumours are correct. Will the loses be worth a true victory?

When WWII was being fought, the danger was real for many people. They knew that if the Germanic forces were not stopped, they might well lose their way of life. The threat and danger was very real for people in the U.K., and in other nations. The war was coming to those shores and if victory was not won, the way of life would change. During that time, people were engaged, the objectives were clear, and the threat was very real, and securing the victory was the only option.

Today people are not as engaged as they were in many ways. Most kids care more about their Xbox 360 than if this war will be won. Some people are so far removed from this war, that they probably have trouble remembering that there is war ongoing. The world has changed, people’s views, values and perspectives have changed, and today, I am not sure that the question is can we win? I think the question today is do we want to win?

http://157.166.255.31/TRANSCRIPTS/1006/29/sitroom.02.html

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/war_on_terror_update

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/mar/19/iraq.topstories3

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1907831,00.html

http://icasualties.org/iraq/index.aspx

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/05/us/05list.html

July 5, 2010 Posted by | 9/11, Iraq, Police State, Politics | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Welcome to our worlds

After reading this article, it’s like all the pain and all the trauma of the last two years, just comes back.

Being in your home and being burnt for hours on end, and not knowing what was happening, or being able to do anything about it at first. Then realising that your fellow human beings were partaking in this, and were psychotically enjoying what was happening.

Trying to write to organizations such as Amnesty and others to get help, trying to other responsible agencies, not at first realising that you were the testing ground for something that was yet to come.

Being unable to prove in many cases what was happening, having only the word of other targets to back each other up, on what was being done to us, the violations that we were experiencing, that for the most part just went unheard, trying to explain to you the general public that these weapons existed and would someday be used on you. People just dismissing the idea as crazy without doing any research or investigation.
That someday might be closer than you think.

These things should not be used on anyone, in any capacity whatsoever. These things, these none lethal weapons are cruelty and they are torturous, and they should not be used on anyone. Of course as I have already documented, permission was granted to use the none portable kind on the people of Iraq over a year ago, and there have been horrible reports of bodies, burnt on the inside out.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2005-07-24-nonlethal-weapons_x.htm

The portable kind in small doses no doubt would be ok, but that will not be what happens. Just like with tasers they will be over used, and abused. The animals that were capable of remotely torturing myself and other Targeted Individuals for hours at a time, days at a time, months at a time, years at a time, will have no problem doing so to others.

The general public will just have to try to learn how to shield like many Targeted Individuals have had to learn to do.

Anyways it’s just a brief article, but it just reminded me of so much of what’s happened over the last two years.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16339-us-police-could-get-pain-beam-weapons.html

US police could get ‘pain beam’ weapons

[quote]The research arm of the US Department of Justice is working on two portable non-lethal weapons that inflict pain from a distance using beams of laser light or microwaves, with the intention of putting them into the hands of police to subdue suspects.

The two devices under development by the civilian National Institute of Justice both build on knowledge gained from the Pentagon’s controversial Active Denial System (ADS) – first demonstrated in public last year, which uses a 2-metre beam of short microwaves to heat up the outer layer of a person’s skin and cause pain.

‘Reduced injuries’

Like the ADS, the new portable devices will also heat the skin, but will have beams only a few centimetres across. They are designed to elicit what the Pentagon calls a “repel response” – a strong urge to escape from the beam.

A spokesperson for the National Institute for Justice likens the effect of the new devices to that of “blunt trauma” weapons such as rubber bullets, “But unlike blunt trauma devices, the injury should not be present. This research is looking to reduce the injuries to suspects,” they say.[/quote]

December 26, 2008 Posted by | Active Denial Weapons, Electronic harassment, Gang Stalking, Gangstalking, High technology, Iraq | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Strange shoe throwing incident

Strange shoe throwing incident.

Instead of oops upside the head, or a spanking parents will now threaten their children with a shoe upside the head, in a strange shoe throwing incident that happened earlier today.

An Iraqi reporter named “Muntazer al-Zeidi” listening to G. Bush explaining how he had liberated the country, and put them in situation of independence, one where they would now be able to defend themselves, finally had it and snapped. He took of his shoe, and aimed one after the other at George Bush.

Saying this is for the widows and the orphans, you dog. It’s not clear which widows or orphans he was referring to, but it’s assumed it’s the almost 1 million widows and orphans of Iraq that have been left fatherless since the wars.

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/04/07/8134
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=42858

[quote]The Asharq al-Awsat Arab media channel estimated in late 2007 there were 2.3 million widows in Iraq. These include widows from the 1980-1988 war with Iran in which half a million men were killed, the U.S.-led invasion and occupation of Iraq, and from ‘natural’ causes. The news outlet cited the Iraqiyat (Iraqi women) group as a source for their figure.

For a widow, all things are the same, dark.

“Being a widow means being dead in Iraq today,” a professor from Diyala University, speaking on condition of anonymity, told IPS. “This is because of the tremendous responsibilities cast upon her.”

The widows have become victims of the occupation, but also of social codes. Women are not supposed to commit mistakes, and when they do, their mistakes are rarely forgiven. Women are easily accused of doing ‘bad things’, regardless of proof.

Widowed women have a tough struggle on their hands, beyond the loss they have had to live through. They are not easily allowed to work, or even to carry out normal daily activities.

“When a woman breaks these rules, she loses the respect of others, or might be spoken of badly,” a local trader told IPS. “This is because much of rural Iraqi society is primitive and undereducated.” Like most others, the trader did not want his name used, for fear of retribution.

“Islam gives respectable freedom to the woman when she loses her husband,” a religious cleric told IPS. “But because of their ignorance, people place severe restrictions on the woman.”

Millions of lives have been shattered during the occupation. Two groups, Just Foreign Policy in the U.S. and the Opinion Business Research group in Britain estimate the total number of Iraqis who have died due to the occupation to be at least 1.2 million. [/quote]

 

Apparently throwing a shoe in Iraq is the greatest insult one can issue to another person.

Bush was able to duck and stay clear of the shoe and joked with reporters about it later on, but as you will see in the video below it was a very close call indeed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxCXBVwUeKk

December 15, 2008 Posted by | 9/11, Controlled society, Corruption, Iraq, Mind Reading | , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

   

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 250 other followers