And She Responds...
I had an blogspot comment argument in a friend's realm the other day. In debriefing the situation later, we decided it best to post only on topics we feel we have enough fervor and passion to potentially argue, if need be.
I got this from Anonymous, at 4:04pm yesterday:
"They've had video games where you hunt and kill Osama and Saddam, both of whom are 'innocent' as they have not been convicted of anything. I do not see anyone getting upset over that. I do not see anyone getting upset that every thriller movie ever made uses sexual women to bear the brunt of the knife, every
single
time.
A president is no better a man than anyone else. Fair "game", I say. And besides, it's Scotland. The only reason anyone even knows this game exists is because people are flipping out about it ---- and they're reaping the reward."
I had enough fervor and passion in writing it to respond:
Dear Anonymous,
"A president is no better a man than anyone else." (your words)
Is man created equally? Yes, the Comrade believes so. Does a man, or woman, have the potential to achieve greatness, or be the sum of destruction in his or her lifetime? That's up to the individual. Did John F. Kennedy try to achieve greatness? I don't think he tried; it just happened. Did he try to create a universal peace? A better America? A tyranny and war-free world?
Yes, he most certainly tried.
My problem is: In the name of profit and poor taste, this company created an "interactive and educational tool" designed to kill someone, repeatedly, who was the embodiment of good. He simply understood he had a responsibility to his people, something men and women of power simply don't understand anymore. This game, beyond absolute and horrific poor taste, is just another example of how refined and opiated this culture is. This "fair game", you speak of, is just another shortsighted ideal of how making money, while abandoning thought, reverence and a social conscience, is the New American Way.
In your Osama and Saddam innocence statement, I'm glad, dear Anonymous, that you used the word "innocent" in quotations. In just judicial systems, you're right, a person is innocent until proven guilty. But you have to catch them first. Or have the right friends in the right places. Separately they all have a hell of an argument for why they've done what they've done, but in the World's Court Saddam, Osama and Bush are ALL technically war criminals. Convicted? No. Innocent? No. They've either not been caught, or they've changed the rules and in the process been granted immunity. Some are the Super Power, after all.
The right wing and its proponents have always needed simple answers. Black and white. Wrong or right. Good or bad. In addition to the upset in my preceding statements, there is overwhelming evidence that the murder of this man was more than likely by his own government, who more than likely covered up this conspiracy with lies, deception, and deflection. The government teat-fed the populace with America's need for immediate gratification in naming a responsible party right away. Then along comes a foreign company with no intention of seeking truth, nor educating a new generation of free thinkers. They've denied the abundant and plentiful evidence of how this act, by one lone gunman, was impossible to do. This company is trying to "educate" our children in a falsified history, not the truth.
History is written by the victors. Always has been, always will be.
Speaking of fiction, I was checking the imdb.com for the top thrillers, just to prove or disprove your theory of sexy chicks brutally biting it in the end.
These were the Top 10:
1. Rear Window (1954)
2. Cidade de Deus (2002)
3. The Usual Suspects (1995)
4. North by Northwest (1959)
5. Memento (2000)
6. Psycho (1960)
7. The Silence of the Lambs (1991)
8. The Third Man (1949)
9. Vertigo (1958)
10. M (1931)
Watch them again, if you've watched them at all. "Sexual women" didn't get it in the end in most of these films. Sometimes chaste virgins got it. Sometimes kids got it. Sometimes guys got it. Sometimes nobody got. Am I upset that these things are being made? No. It's FICTION. They're stories, not potshots taken on a life bent on good, based on a historical event that saddened the world.
I liken this to having a videogame called The Twin Towers: The Return of the King, if we're all about stealing the titles of other films. In it, the player controls the planes flying into the World Trade Center. The first player who flys the planes at the exact angle and kills exactly the same amount of people as the real event WINS $100,000. Special mentions go to those who can nail groundlevel passersby with office furniture!
Money... forever the great motivator and justification in whatever heinous and morality-free decisions we make - because, hell, as long as we're making money... it's the right of every American. Who cares how it's done?
I got this from Anonymous, at 4:04pm yesterday:
"They've had video games where you hunt and kill Osama and Saddam, both of whom are 'innocent' as they have not been convicted of anything. I do not see anyone getting upset over that. I do not see anyone getting upset that every thriller movie ever made uses sexual women to bear the brunt of the knife, every
single
time.
A president is no better a man than anyone else. Fair "game", I say. And besides, it's Scotland. The only reason anyone even knows this game exists is because people are flipping out about it ---- and they're reaping the reward."
I had enough fervor and passion in writing it to respond:
Dear Anonymous,
"A president is no better a man than anyone else." (your words)
Is man created equally? Yes, the Comrade believes so. Does a man, or woman, have the potential to achieve greatness, or be the sum of destruction in his or her lifetime? That's up to the individual. Did John F. Kennedy try to achieve greatness? I don't think he tried; it just happened. Did he try to create a universal peace? A better America? A tyranny and war-free world?
Yes, he most certainly tried.
My problem is: In the name of profit and poor taste, this company created an "interactive and educational tool" designed to kill someone, repeatedly, who was the embodiment of good. He simply understood he had a responsibility to his people, something men and women of power simply don't understand anymore. This game, beyond absolute and horrific poor taste, is just another example of how refined and opiated this culture is. This "fair game", you speak of, is just another shortsighted ideal of how making money, while abandoning thought, reverence and a social conscience, is the New American Way.
In your Osama and Saddam innocence statement, I'm glad, dear Anonymous, that you used the word "innocent" in quotations. In just judicial systems, you're right, a person is innocent until proven guilty. But you have to catch them first. Or have the right friends in the right places. Separately they all have a hell of an argument for why they've done what they've done, but in the World's Court Saddam, Osama and Bush are ALL technically war criminals. Convicted? No. Innocent? No. They've either not been caught, or they've changed the rules and in the process been granted immunity. Some are the Super Power, after all.
The right wing and its proponents have always needed simple answers. Black and white. Wrong or right. Good or bad. In addition to the upset in my preceding statements, there is overwhelming evidence that the murder of this man was more than likely by his own government, who more than likely covered up this conspiracy with lies, deception, and deflection. The government teat-fed the populace with America's need for immediate gratification in naming a responsible party right away. Then along comes a foreign company with no intention of seeking truth, nor educating a new generation of free thinkers. They've denied the abundant and plentiful evidence of how this act, by one lone gunman, was impossible to do. This company is trying to "educate" our children in a falsified history, not the truth.
History is written by the victors. Always has been, always will be.
Speaking of fiction, I was checking the imdb.com for the top thrillers, just to prove or disprove your theory of sexy chicks brutally biting it in the end.
These were the Top 10:
1. Rear Window (1954)
2. Cidade de Deus (2002)
3. The Usual Suspects (1995)
4. North by Northwest (1959)
5. Memento (2000)
6. Psycho (1960)
7. The Silence of the Lambs (1991)
8. The Third Man (1949)
9. Vertigo (1958)
10. M (1931)
Watch them again, if you've watched them at all. "Sexual women" didn't get it in the end in most of these films. Sometimes chaste virgins got it. Sometimes kids got it. Sometimes guys got it. Sometimes nobody got. Am I upset that these things are being made? No. It's FICTION. They're stories, not potshots taken on a life bent on good, based on a historical event that saddened the world.
I liken this to having a videogame called The Twin Towers: The Return of the King, if we're all about stealing the titles of other films. In it, the player controls the planes flying into the World Trade Center. The first player who flys the planes at the exact angle and kills exactly the same amount of people as the real event WINS $100,000. Special mentions go to those who can nail groundlevel passersby with office furniture!
Money... forever the great motivator and justification in whatever heinous and morality-free decisions we make - because, hell, as long as we're making money... it's the right of every American. Who cares how it's done?
posted by Comrade Chicken at
5:26 a.m.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home