Israel is our ally. We're the muscle that stands behind them making sure none of the other kids at the Middle Eastern playground pick on them. But why?
Why do we defend them when Netanyahu keeps building settlements to intentionally encroach on Palestine's territory, and why do we support them when they threaten to ally with terrorists to attack Turkey.iding
It's hard to say.
We should be supporting peace in Israel, not just supporting Israel. I'm not going to talk about the creation of Israel. It already happened, and no one can change that, so why anger people with my opinion on that? Rather. I'll simply propose completely redividing that region.
Divide it so both Palestine and Israel get an equal share of good farmland--for completely secular reasons--and divide Jerusalem between the two states--for completely non-secular reasons.
And even if we don't take action against Israel, let's at least not support them if they threaten to use terrorists, start wars, or threaten to ally with terrorists. What other country do we do that for?
Saturday, October 8, 2011
My View: What's Really Going on with Occupy Wall Street
The media seems hell bent on portraying the wall street protesters as unorganized and unfocused, not knowing why they're there or what they want. Do some of the people not know why they're there? As Cenk Uygar would say, "Of course," but a vast majority of people do know why they're there, and the people who started the movement certainly know why they're there. Even the small percentage of people who might not know why they're there, realize the fundamental reason why they're there: Economic inequity and political corruption.
That is the real reason they're there in a nutshell, but I'm not such a hardcore liberal that I won't admit that just knowing the words economic inequity and political corruption doesn't mean that they know why they're there. Maybe most people don't even know why they're there further than that extent, and some people don't even have any demands other than just allowing their "mobocracy" to take control. However, the Occupy Wall Street Movement does have 22 Declarations officially for why they're the there. It can be likened to the Declaration of Independence for our own country; except instead of airing grievances against the king, it states the problems of corporations, banks, and politicians. View their grievances here http://www.thetruthdenied.com/news/2011/09/29/the-declaration-of-the-occupation-of-new-york-city/ . Once these problems have been resolved, the movement would end.
These problems will not be solved however, because occupy wall street has been slandered by the media and by pro bank people like Erin Burnette, who seem to think these poor peasants on wall street shouldn't be bothering their rich friends on wall street. Wait, do they think they're bums, or do they think they're rich hypocrites? The media seems to contradict itself on that too.
Occupy Wall Street portrays a fundamental problem with our country, especially when compared to the tea party. Both were grass roots movements against the unfair advantages politicians are giving to the rich, but the tea party was bought and turned Republican, while the wall street movement will not be bought. And since the wall street movement will not be bought, they have no money, and since they have no money, they have no power and no voice.
That is the real reason they're there in a nutshell, but I'm not such a hardcore liberal that I won't admit that just knowing the words economic inequity and political corruption doesn't mean that they know why they're there. Maybe most people don't even know why they're there further than that extent, and some people don't even have any demands other than just allowing their "mobocracy" to take control. However, the Occupy Wall Street Movement does have 22 Declarations officially for why they're the there. It can be likened to the Declaration of Independence for our own country; except instead of airing grievances against the king, it states the problems of corporations, banks, and politicians. View their grievances here http://www.thetruthdenied.com/news/2011/09/29/the-declaration-of-the-occupation-of-new-york-city/ . Once these problems have been resolved, the movement would end.
These problems will not be solved however, because occupy wall street has been slandered by the media and by pro bank people like Erin Burnette, who seem to think these poor peasants on wall street shouldn't be bothering their rich friends on wall street. Wait, do they think they're bums, or do they think they're rich hypocrites? The media seems to contradict itself on that too.
Occupy Wall Street portrays a fundamental problem with our country, especially when compared to the tea party. Both were grass roots movements against the unfair advantages politicians are giving to the rich, but the tea party was bought and turned Republican, while the wall street movement will not be bought. And since the wall street movement will not be bought, they have no money, and since they have no money, they have no power and no voice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)