12 August 2014

The White House is a torture chamber!

A torture chamber called ‘The White House’
No, don’t get us wrong, no one is getting ‘rendered’ in the White House, no fingernails are being pulled out, no ‘water treatment’, no truncheons in the anus and such.  But someone does get tortured there all the time.  Right now it’s a man called Barack Obama.  He tortures himself (self-flagellation, we believe it is called).  The man doesn’t know what to say, can’t defend himself and his words, slick though they are, indicate moral confusion. 

Obama says ‘We tortured some folks’.  That must be again some convention the USA is signatory to, but he doesn’t seem to mind.  He says ‘We did some things that were contrary to our values’.  He doesn’t know that the word ‘values’ has no meaning in US foreign policy, except to the extent it is associated with ‘profit’.  He says it may have been due to the pressure felt by people responsible for national security. 

Let’s break it down for Barack.  It’s ok to compromise values and torture people if the torturers are pressured to secure the nation.  Get it?  That’s a blank check folks. 

Back in 2009, Barack speaking on the subject Barack said ‘I want to look forward, not backword’.  That’s another Double-O deal: license to kill.  The moment after the fact of torture, assassination, drone-attack, the fact begins to gather a dust called ‘Past Tense’.  You can look to the future from that point on. 
Obama might have made a good James Bond if only he divested himself of his liberal pretensions. 

Upul Jayasuriya’s ‘followers’
President of the Bar Association Upul Jayasuriya is being followed.  That’s serious folks; not because he’s Upul Jayasuriya or the President of the Bar Association, but a citizen of this country.  No one should have to look over his or her shoulder.  If anyone has to then it indicates a serious flaw in the law and order apparatus of the country.  Jayasuriya’s political affiliations are known.  His antipathies are no secret.   If he’s being hounded for these reasons it’s indicative of a jittery regime.  

That said, it is not inappropriate to comment on followers and following.  Jayasuriya has a following; after all there are lots of lawyers in this country.  Jayasuriya also follows.  His outfit gets oodles of dollars from a foreign country.  In the name of ‘development’ of course. Developing what, we do not know.  So is he a pawn?  And if he IS a pawn then what’s the point following him?  What it means is that his flock is being taken for a jolly good ride.  Also, his detractors are clearly after the wrong guy.   


Managing climate change
That’s the new NGO buzz term: climate change.  It’s all about man and nature. It’s about violence unleashed on the natural world by the human species.  Now we are told that the private sector is going to be a key player in remedying the situation.  That’s rich (pardon the pun!).  The ‘Private Sector’ (read, ‘capitalists’) destroyed and continues to destroy the environment in pursuit of profit.  And now they are set to make another killing.  All in the name of managing climate change.  Some people are laughing all the way to the bank, we are told.


India’s love and hate for DRS
Jadeja and Anderson had a spat during a cricket match.  Jadeja was fined, Anderson was not.  That’s the black and white of the new world order or, if you want to call it that, ‘The Big 3 Dominated ICC’.  Nothing ‘new’ about it, one might say.  Anyway, India objected.  The fine was withdrawn.  Anderson benefited from the fact that the ‘action’ was not caught on camera.  India is now whining about the absence of cameras.  Hold on, hold on! Isn’t this the same country that stands in the way of universal application of the DRS system?  Well, you can’t have it both ways, can you M.S. Dhoni?  Sure, this is not about a grassed ‘catch’ or a tight decision over a runout appeal, but still it’s the same principle.  Something happened, you want to know the ‘details’ and you refer footage.   
So what now, Dhoni?  A review of India’s stance on the Decision Review System? 



Jayalalithaa’s love letters
Jayalalithaa is mad that there was a reference to her sending love letters to Narendra Modi.  One can take issue with the MoD for publishing such commentary, but satire is not illegal.  Politicians are caricatured.  They are grist for the cartoonist’s mill.  Part of the deal. Goes with the territory.  If that was objectionable and warrants legal action then Jayalalithaa, given her obsessions and penchant for putting both feet in her mouth would have nothing else to do apart from litigating.  She might as well set up a party office next to whatever court she prefers to file action in. 

But what’s most interesting about this affair is that ‘love’ is a bad word.  The woman is consumed by hatred.  It’s hard to imagine Jayalalithaa being in love (forget writing ‘love letters’) with anyone or anything.  Except of course with hate.   ‘Jayalalithaa in love with hate’.  Wonderful headline, eh?



Reactions:

0 comments: