Ah well, destabilising the Middle East and North Africa did
achieve its goal of protecting the European beach-head in Palestine; but the
agents of destruction are now about to pay for that achievement. Or, rather,
their citizens are. The end result will probably be the Greater Israel of
Zionist dreams – in effect, a Jewish Caliphate with no fixed borders. It will
flourish, as long as it has the support of every Western politician willing to commit
to Big Brother’s perpetual war – and willing to take responsibility for a few
million displaced persons...
The process has already cost the Western nations their moral
reputation; what virtue is there in democracy, if its politicians engage in the
wholesale slaughter of civilians? The demise of the international human-rights
experiment is a bonus for their leaders. The eventual total cost will
include their demographic balance, as we read in all our daily newspapers.
Slaughtering civilians in faraway lands is morally corrupt: most of us
presumably know that from our personal upbringings. It’s a tragic truth,
though, that most citizens of the guilty nations take the matter lightly, and
feel no shame for the blatant atrocities done in their names.
After all, we’re at war, right? And, as our politicians and
their corporate sponsors regularly explain to us, war excuses atrocities of all
kinds. Human rights almost never triumph over tribal and national rights. The
dominant precept is my country, right or wrong – “my country” being “my”
politicians and their sponsors.
The chief opposition party in Britain has just elected a
leader who actually does subscribe to the concept of international human
rights, and who believes that there is no moral virtue in wars of aggression.
That’s a refreshing stance, although those factors wouldn’t have played much of
a part in his election. The British MSM predicts that his principles rule out
any chance of his becoming Prime Minister. What kind of retard is this man, to
be against wars of aggression? God help us!
Unfortunately, human rights have been a passing fancy.
Anybody who believes in them can never become Prime Minister – or President, in
nations that don’t have Prime Ministers.
For some time now, all but a few of Europe’s politicians have
been obedient minions of US emperors. They jostle to out-do each other in harassing
America’s designated enemies, with scant regard for the interests of their own
constituents. Thus, the chaos of Europe’s current invasion by refugees landing
on Mediterranean shores in the tens of thousands, and swarming across the
hinterland. Blowback, indeed, from NATO’s military interference in their
homelands.
But wait! Why should the citizens of NATO nations be
punished for the crimes of their leaders? Isn’t that collective punishment? Don’t
we have the right to elect sociopaths, without accepting responsibility to take
care of their victims? If the psychos whom NATO citizens elect – and re-elect ad
nauseam – if they hand our tax moneys over to the military-industrial
complex instead of to their victims, what’s that to us? After all, that’s what
politicians do, in a corrupt system.
In a corrupt society, the only electable politicians are
corrupt ones. Vice feeds upon vice. A society that consents to wars of
aggression, and the destruction of civilians’ homes and livelihoods, must
expect at least some of the victims to come calling. I mean, surely!
Should the reluctant hosts demand that their politicians
divert some of their war-budgets to providing the innocent victims with food
and shelter? Or should they (the hosts) toss them back in the sea, and vote for
ever more brutal military adventures?
One way or another, people have to pay for their fun
activities. When their fun involves destroying homes and lives, the payment can
turn out to be a heavy one. Our children and grandchildren will curse us for
our idea of fun.
