global terrorism and scapegoats

Corinne, married with no kids, once made a mistake at work and since then she's been blamed for everything that goes wrong, whether it's in her department or not, so she knows what it's like to be made a scapegoat and she understands the ultererior motives of the globalists -- all of whom, according to her, are little better than terrorists.

"If that sort of thing can happen to a little thing like me," laughs Corinne, "then I can understand why someone like Saddam Hussein gets blamed for 9/11 and every terrorist activity anywhere in the world. Sure, he's an evil monster and deserves to be hanged, but invading Iraq was an evil, monstrous thing to do, too."

"As soon as Bush announced the axis of evil." says Corinne, "I knew that Iraq rather than Iran or North Korea was going to get targeted, and I knew that Saddam was going to bear the brunt for Bush's failure to capture Osama. Someone had to be made a scapegoat, and Saddam was it."

"Theoretically, any country has the potential to produce chemicals of mass destruction," adds Corinne, "so it is the potential and capacity to use such weapons that needs to be examined, along with the motive for doing so."

"Why would Iraq, Iran or North Korea want to use weapons of mass destruction against the USA, and do they have the geographic and military capacity to do so?"

"Iran's military presence was decimated following the US supported war on Iran conducted by Saddam many years ago," explains Corinne. "Iran is unfriendly towards the USA because of its support of Iraq in that war, but it has no known program of chemical weaponry or use and it definitely does not have the geographic or military capacity to launch any sort of attack on the USA."

"Similarly, Iraq's military presence was decimated following the UN supported Gulf War of 1991," says Corinne. "The Gulf War was legitimate as it was a consequence of Iraq's invasion of Kuwait - a protectorate set up by Great Britain to safeguard oil supply -and Iraq is definitely unfriendly towards the USA because of its participation in that war. But despite its past program of chemical weaponry and the use of same on its own dissidents Iraq has willingly accepted UN inspectors to confirm it has no ongoing program."

"Iraq was a hardly a threat to the US in terms of weapons of mass destruction," explains Corinne, "and it also did not have the geographic or military capacity to launch any sort of attack on the USA."

"Also," adds Corinne, "it may have had the geographic capacity to attack British protected Kuwait and US protected Israel but it did not have the the military capacity to do so. It was no real threat."

"Unlike Iraq and Iran, North Korea has nuclear capacity," says Corinne. "It has a formidable military presence and has been locked in a stand-off with America over the US protected South Korea for nearly half a century - a situation that is getting worse rather than better over the years."

"If the potential to produce and use weapons of mass destruction against the USA were truly the main concern of Bush," explains Corinne, "then North Korea would have been the logical target, not Iraq, because its regime is secretive - nobody knows what is going on there."

"Geographically, North Korea does not have the capacity to launch any sort of attack on the USA, but it most definitely does have the geographic capacity as well as the military capacity to attack Japan and US protected South Korea."

"North Korea, not Iran and Iraq, is thus a far more potential enemy for the USA," says Corinne, "but to impose any sort of action on North Korea in terms of the War of Terror cannot be justified without a terrible price being paid."

"North Korea is isolationist and pays no attention to UN dictates. To achieve security from any sort of attack by North Korea, America would need to use massive military force."

"Support for a war on North Korea would not be gained at home," says Corinne," nor in the UN. There is nothing to tie North Korea with 9/11 or any terrorist activity."

"Furthermore, victory would be not assured against such a formidable military force as North Korea, and basically there would be nothing tangible to be gained by going to war with North Korea - expect, of course, for the reunification of the country."

"Similarly, although targeting Iran would be easier in terms of a fundamentalist Islam connection - possibly an al-Qaeda link," says Corinne, "there is nothing tangible to be gained by such action."

"So, we're left with Iraq," sighs Corinne. "There's everything to gain in terms of the world's richest oil fields, and nothing much to lose besides a bit of human collateral. It was expected to be a pushover and initially it was."

"After the quick and relative painless Afghanistan pushover, the military machine was fired and ready for more," explains Corinne. "Bush couldn't get Osama and the al-Qaeda, so he needed another target to wreak revenge on for the 9/11 tragedy."

"Iraq was the perfect target and Saddam was the perfect scapegoat."

"Iraq is a Islam nation so it was not be too hard to foment fear at home that it is harboring some terrorists," explains Corinne. "It was a pushover in the 1991 Gulf War and was weakened by 12 years of sanctions against it and would be another easy victory."

"Also, Iraq is unfinished business," explains Corinne. "Bush's father had wanted to get rid of Saddam but the UN didn't sanction a regime change. Despite the UN not supporting a war, Section 1433 gave the USA a loophole to go in and invade the country on its own if necessary."

"Bush maintains that the potential to produce and use weapons of mass destruction against the USA was a valid reason to focus attention on Iraq," says Corinne, "and in failing to allow the UN weapons inspectors the time they need to do their job and prove Iraq's claim that it had no such weapons, Bush showed that he wants war and revenge for 9/11 and that weapons of mass destruction had nothing to do with it."

"Because Bush knew that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction," says Corinne, "he needed a big excuse to go to war and win the support of allies."

"This excuse came in the final weeks before invading Iraq when rumors were spread that Osama and Saddam were in cahoots," says Corinne. "This was a lie because Osama hates Saddam and his liberal Islamic beliefs more than the Americans do, and vice versa!"

"And then finally Saddam's human rights record was trotted out."

"Very few people had cared about Saddam and his human rights abominations before this," explains Corinne. "All of a sudden, the world's attention became focused on shredding machines allegedly used for human extermination."

"All other despots and their human rights abominations were conveniently ignored."

"I watched in disbelief as the world was whipped by the US propaganda machine into wanting to get rid of the Saddam regime," sighs Corinne.

"A war ostensibly against weapons of mass destruction had become one against Saddam and his regime."

"Saddam had supplanted Osama."

"As nasty as Saddam is," says Corinne, "he had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11 and to use him as a scapegoat for Osama's abominations is an abomination in itself."

"The whole nasty operation was so similar to the sort of office politics that go on where my husband and I work that I despair of any imperfect human goverment being capable of governing us honorably and rationally," says Corinne. "We'd be better off with computers doing the job."

This story first appeared as saddam the scapegoat

smoking invasions

Like most smokers, Moya, 48, is under considerable pressure at work to quit her enjoyable habit even though smoking is something she indulges in at home -- not at work -- and she is fuming that her civil liberties are being violated and invaded in this manner. She sees the whole quit smoking campaign as being as criminal, shortsighted and venal as the Iraq invasion, and believes that it's pushed by the same type of opportunistic people, for the same reasons.

"Although it's not a life-threatening violation of my civil rights -- as the criminal invasion of Iraq was, and still is, to Iraqi citizens," says Moya, "the quit smoking war is still very much a criminal act -- it's creating discriminatory attitudes in my place of work that are violating my civil liberties to enjoy a legal product in the sanctity of my own home."

"What I do at home is absolutely no business of my employer and it's deplorable that a comment I made to a coworker about smoking ended up being reported on my employment file," says Moya. "This is Big Brother gone crazy and next thing they'll be wanting to know what we eat for breakfast and what we do in bed."

"As I see it, the quit smoking campaign came about as a result of someone getting lung cancer and successfully litigating against the tobacco companies," says Moya. "That person may very well have developed lung cancer from a bacterial infection whether he or she smoked or not, but once the precedent had been set -- and the dollar signs started flashing -- that was the end of freedom for smokers."

"From then on, smokers became the enemy and the lies started coming thick and fast -- such as smokers are killing themselves and others (some of us may very well be doing that, but so are drinkers, drivers, meat eaters, gun owners, etc); we are bankrupting the health services with our smoking-related diseases (and paying for them ten times over with tobacco tax); and we crave liberation from the thralls of addiction (yeah, sure, we embrace the efforts of the nicotine-Nazis with love and gratitude.)"

"The illegal invasion of Iraq -- against UN decisions -- came about as a result of Mr Bush and the warmongers being frustrated at failing to nab Osama and going after Saddam instead," says Moya. "One criminal excuse after another was given in order to justify the illegal invasion -- Saddam was a monster (he may have been, but so are lots of other rulers and even Hillary Clinton is seen as being one by a fellow Democrat! ); he had stockpiles of WMD (Hans Blix found none); and the Iraqis crave liberation (yeah, sure, they embrace our gun-toting troops with love and gratitude)."

"The quit smoking campaign and the decision to invade Iraq are also alike in that they were based on shortsighted premises by people who have no understanding of consequences and no way to back off without losing face -- making them dangerous people."

"Their jobs -- their wealth and their pension funds -- depend upon successfully completing their mission and maintaining control over the outcome," says Moya. "They refuse to admit that they were wrong in invading Iraq -- that Saddam was the right person to rule a divided nation -- and they also refuse to admit that they were wrong in making such deceitful claims against smokers."

"The Iraqi people they claimed to be 'liberating' are now living in fear, anger and helplessness, wishing Saddam were back in power," says Moya. "And that's the way many ex-smokers feel. The rewards of being a non-smoker are not what they were cracked up to be -- all of the hidden reasons why people become smokers in the first place come back with a vengeance when they give it up."

"I have personally seen several acquiantances at work sink into deep depression when they quit cigarettes," says Moya. "Now they are on prescribed medication and spending just as much on their meds as they did on cigarettes. Big deal!"

"And there has been no massive decrease in the so-called smoking-related diseases either," says Moya. "Rather that admitting that other factors cause these diseases, the health authorities now claim that people who once smoked have already done the damage. Hmm, more reason to keep on smoking, then?"

"Finally, by far the closest likeness between the quit smoking campaign and the invasion of Iraq is, you guessed it, money!" sighs Moya. "They want a bigger cut of the Iraqi oil fields and they want a bigger cut of our money -- if not in tobacco tax then in quit programs and products."

"They've already pushed the Iraqis too far by overstaying their welcome -- and they're pushing smokers to the end of their tether, too," says Moya, "and I have no idea whether they doing what they're doing out of grotesque money-grubbing greed, arrogant self-righteous hubris or just plain dumb stupidity."

"The only way the warmongers can win decisively in Iraq is the same way the anti-smokers can win decisively in the smoking war -- imprison or shoot all the dissidents."

"I don't think there are enough prisons and bullets to achieve this end and while fellow citizens may not be too concerned about this sort of thing happening in Iraq they may start squirming when the dissendent smokers at home start getting rounded up -- or will they?"

"Judging from what's happening at work -- and what's happening in society at large --I honestly fear that our national identity as a feircely proud and free nation has been so watered down with foreign immigrants from totalitarian nations that the concept of civil liberties is fast disappearing from our national psyche."

"That so many so-called democratic freedom lovers still see the Iraq invasion as justifiable -- as justifiable as smoking and other bans -- is really scary," says Moya. "I feel so sorry for the next generation raised on Big Brother television and Big Brother government -- as well as control freaks at school and work -- because they will never know what freedom is."

"And most of all I feel sorry for the Iraqis -- especially the ones who smoke, and that's an awful lot of them -- because if western style democracy takes off in that country, they're going to be hit with an invasion of their smoking rights next."

globalized murder

Like most Christians, if not most people of any faith, Adrienne -- a working wife and mom -- was raised to negotiate her way through conflict, to turn the other cheek if necessary and to focus her charity at home. She is totally against war of any kind and believes globalization -- other than spreading Christianity -- is evil.

"Life's too short to make enemies," says Adrienne, "but the conduct of this war against terror has overturned everything I was raised to believe."

"Either I have been lied to all of my life -- in which case I have been a victim of pacifist propaganda," says Adrienne, "or our government is run by evil people and in not protesting this war and stopping it we are all accessories to a terrible crime."

"As I see it, the weapons inspectors were doing their job in Iraq, the regime was complying with UN requirements and no 'smoking gun' was found that indicated Iraq was producing weapons of mass destruction."

"By refusing to allow the weapons inspectors the time they needed to complete their task and prove to all concerned that Iraq was, indeed, no threat to anyone," explains Adrienne, "Bush proved that he wanted a violent conflict and had no intention of allowing peaceful negotiations to work."

"Just imagine how this scenario plays out in our private lives," says Adrienne. "If we had a dispute with a neighbor, for instance, and we took the matter to court and were told to give the neighbors six months to remove whatever offensive material they had on their property, do we have a right to ignore what the court says -- claiming six months is too long to wait -- and go in there and murder them all?"

"Don't tell me that we have one law for individuals, and another for governments," says Adrienne.

"Civilization is built upon civility or it isn't, and if it isn't then I need to reassess everything I was brought up to believe."

"No matter how much I may despise my neighbors because they are brutal people, had a religion that differed from mine and stored material offensive to me on their property," says Adrienne, "I have no desire to invade their property and murder them. I trust in legal negotiations to work the problem out, and if it doesn't pan out to my satisfaction then I would be prepared to move rather than kill them."

"Does this mindset make me a fool?" asks Adrienne.

"Apparently so," she answers, "because my government wasn't even prepared to let legal negotiations run their course!"

"Instead, my government got fed up waiting for the weapons inspectors to do their work and took the law into its own hands."

"I don't believe Iraq ever had any weapons of mass destruction, and if it did then it certainly wasn't planning on using them on us in a country half a world away with more weapons of mass destruction than the rest of the world put together."

"All of which means," sighs Adrienne, "that my government invaded Iraq because it didn't like Saddam and his regime and wants to overthrow the regime and set up a puppet government it can manipulate."

"If my government can do this," reasons Adrienne, "then my neighbor can invade my property because it doesn't like me and my family, and it can murder us, too, for the same reasons."

"And if my government can do this," adds Adrienne, "then other governments can do this, too. North Korea can march into South Korea, China can invade countries to the south and west and all of the Arab nations can do the same."

"My government has set a precedent and because so few nations and individuals protested there is going to be no end to war and the sanitized murder that invading nations commit."

"I was brought up to believe that murder is murder when you know what you are doing, when you're aware of the consequences of your actions," says Adrienne, "and my government planned this war and whatever it says about collateral damage and other sanitized terms it's still murder to me."

"I can't be the only person perplexed by what my government has done," sighs Adrienne. "I can't be only person feeling ashamed to be part of a nation that is seen by most of the rest of the world as a nation of bullies and evil monsters."

"And yet I am aware that to think the way I do I am essentially expressing traitorous thoughts," muses Adrienne, "and this perplexes me even more because I love my country."

"Of course I am as concerned about the death of our troops in this war as I am about the Iraqi civilians that get killed," adds Adrienne, "and of course now that the war has gone on for long I want it to end as quickly as possible in our favor so that we don't end up being called losers as well as murderers, yet I will always regret that we didn't take the peaceful course set down by the United Nations."

"The weapons inspectors should have been given all the time they needed to find the weapons of mass destruction that Bush claimed Iraq was producing and stockpiling," says Adrienne. "And if such weapons were found then the war needed to be a UN mission, not a unilateral strike by the USA."

"What is a few months or even a few years when we are talking about human lives -- not just those of innocent civilians but also military personnel?" asks Adrienne.

"My kids are asking questions and I feel useless at explaining what is happening," sighs Adrienne. "This war goes against everything my husband and I have taught them."

"I'd like to know what sort of Christianity Mr Bush follows because it sure as hell isn't the same one we use to guide our lives," says Adrienne. "All that old testament stuff -- eye for an eye, stoning to death and other acts of brutality in the name of God -- isn't in our good book."

Adrienne's story first appeared as war is sanitized murder! and is reprinted with permission.

the global war for oil

Mercedes is an 19 year old student living at home and all she wants to talk about is the war on terror and the conflict in Iraq which, to her parents' dismay, is not helping her get good grades and get ahead in life.

The first question Mercedes asked everyone after 9/11 was 'why?' and although it was not given directly to her the answer ultimately came from Osama bin Laden himself.

"He once said that all terrorist acts would stop once America pulled out of the middle east and minded its own business," explains Mercedes.

"Clearly, by pushing into parts of the world where they are not wanted," adds Mercedes, "American business interests, and the military might that supports them, are inciting more hatred and exposing more and more innocent people to acts of terror."

"When neighbors get together to protest against an industrial development in their area," explains Mercedes, "they are often successful in thwarting the development, or having a say in modifying how the development takes place."

"If they are unsuccessful, they have the option to sell up and move on."

"What say do people in poor countries have when wealthy American business interests move into their area?"

"None, I'd imagine," says Mercedes, "and that's why these people have to resort to terrorist attacks. They don't have the option to sell up and move on like we do."

"It's like the situation in Northern Ireland and Israel, isn't it?" muses Mercedes.

"Faced with the might of the British armed forces the Irish wanting a united Ireland have no option but to resort to terror to get the Brits out of Northern Ireland."

"And having lost most of their country when Israel was created as a homeland for displaced Jews following WWII the Palestinians are in a similar situation," explains Mercedes.

"It seems to me that terrorist attacks are nothing more than acts of desperation made by people who are denied justice." says Mercedes, "and old style wars where one country openly fought another over a disputed territory or belief are just that -- old style."

"Terrorism seems to be the new style of warfare these days," remarks Mercedes, "and it's no longer nation against nation but little people fighting huge nations or corporations."

"I guess we've got far too many business interests in other parts of the world to pull out and become, once again, an isolationist nation, minding our own business," says Mercedes, "but I truly believe that ultimately we are going to be forced by unrelenting terrorist attacks to face the fact that we are responsible for what happens to us."

"I don't believe that terrorist acts committed by desperate people who rightly or wrongly believe that their rights have been trodden on by a big nation or corporate interests can be stamped out."

"Just think about it -- we use more oil than the rest of the world put together," sighs Mercedes. "The only reason we're interfering in the middle east and fighting in god-forsaken deserts is because that's where the oil is."

"If there were no oil in Iraq," says Mercedes, "we wouldn't be there."

"And if gazillions could not be made from reconstructing a country we have bombed to pieces we wouldn't have done it."

"I am deeply concerned that at soon as we invaded Iraq we headed straight for the oil fields and as soon as the bombing of cities started the tenders went out for rebuilding them," sighs Mercedes. "Doesn't that indicate quite clearly what the war is all about?"

"The war in Afghanistan was a just war for just reasons," adds Mercedes. "There was no money to be made from it and I suppose that's why we didn't go after Osama and the al-Qaeda network when we had routed them."

"There was no money to be made from pursuing Osama and the al-Qaeda, right?"

"But there's plenty of money to be made from invading Iraq, isn't there?"

"I've come to the conclusion that the axis of evil rhetoric was just a smokescreen for the real target, which was always going to be Iraq," says Mercedes.

"We stood to gain nothing but trouble by invading Iran or North Korea," adds Mercedes. "Both of these countries might be construed as enemies of the USA and potential threats to our security, but they have no great commercial value to us."

"I was thinking of doing some travel after finishing my studies," sighs Mercedes, "but now I wouldn't dream of getting on a plane or traveling through countries that hate us."

"I don't particularly feel safe at home, either," adds Mercedes. "You never know who is plotting against us -- more particularly American business interests, and the military might that supports them."

"If this is the price we must pay for being a rich and powerful nation then is it worth it?" asks Mercedes. "What am I studying for if we are going to be hit at home with more terrible acts of terror against our illegal involvement in the affairs of other nations?"

"Why can't we be like Sweden or Switzerland and mind our own business?"

(Mercedes' story first appeared as it's all about oil and money and is reprinted with permission.)

anti-smoking blindness

Cora lives in a small community which got along okay before the anti-smoking propaganda came along. Now, it's not only divided over the issue but it's also blinded by it as to the real causes of death and disability in the community, if not the world.

"Since the so-called war on terror, one young man in our community has died fighting for the freedom of other people in other lands -- and two have come back wounded," says Cora. "All of these boys were smokers or came from smoking families, and I would imagine this scenario fits a lot of our fighting men and women."

"Tell me, why it is okay to waste young lives fighting for the freedoms of Iraqis and Afghans while at the same time they're taking away OUR freedoms," sighs Cora. "And, to add more fire to this argument, don't they know that more Iraqis and Afghans smoke than don't smoke?"

"Why would the Iraqis and Afghans want freedom and western democracy if it means that they, too, will one day be forced to quit smoking in order to join the New World Order?"

"If our soldiers didn't die for freedom -- yeah, even the freedom to smoke -- then what did they die for?" asks Cora. "Big Oil, Halliburton or the Bush family's prestige?"

"None of the anti-smokers I've spoken to seem to understand the irony of this situation and they are totally blinded by their prejudices," sighs Cora. "All that matters to them is that THEY don't get to smell our smoke any more, and THEIR lives aren't shortened any more by our smoke. Freedom is a word that's missing from their vocabularies."

"Well, let me tell you, not one person -- smoker or otherwise -- has died of lung cancer or any smoking-related disease in this community for as long as I can remember," says Cora. "All those smoking death statistics that the health department is coming out with must apply to the big cities where carcinogens other than cigarette smoke play a part."

"I'll tell you what people are dying from around here," confides Cora. "They're dying of alcoholism, road traffic accidents, heat exhaustion in the summer, pneumonia in the winter and just general old age."

"And now we have the death of a healthy young man to add to our community death statistics," sighs Cora. "And it's a death from a totally preventable cause -- war."

"Why are people so blinded as to the real causes of death?" asks Cora. "Why are they believing all those anti-smoking lies about smokers causing their own premature deaths as well as those of others?"

"The deaths of the 3,000 people who were killed by 9/11 were an absolute tragedy -- an unavoidable one, as far as we know," says Cora, ''but can we say the same for the equal (and growing) number of our young people who've died in the subsequent war of revenge?"

"And what about the incredible number of innocent civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan who've died in this war -- the so called 'collateral damage'?" asks Cora. "Don't they matter?"

"If the anti-smokers want to bring up the mythical number of 'preventable' deaths from smoking," says Cora, "then they should be forced to focus their eyes on the very REAL number of preventable deaths from war, alcohol, motor vehicles and everything else."

"Could it be that they're too busy raking in the profits from war, alcohol, motor vehicles and everything else to care?"

"All I know is that the anti-smokers around here are just smug-happy to have won their right to a non-smoking environment over our right to smoke and couldn't give a fig about the war or anything else," says Cora. "We are banned from smoking everywhere except in our homes, and even that right is now being threatened."

"Before the bans, we had smoking and non-smoking areas and everyone was happy," says Cora. "Why did the government have to step in and change all that with its anti-smoking propaganda based on questionable health hazards?"

"Frankly, I feel bad talking about my pathetic right to smoke when thousands of people around the world are dying terrible deaths from war, diseases and starvation," sighs Cora, "and yet if the whole thrust of the anti-smoking movement is to eradicate preventable deaths and disabilities then why are they focusing on smokers and turning a blind eye to the MAJOR causes of preventable deaths and disabilities -- wars, alcohol, motor vehicles, bacteria, viruses, poverty and overpopulation?"

"In fact, why did our government start a war that would kill more people than smoking has ever caused?"

"If you can't stand the smell of cigarette smoke, guys, then put a peg on your noses or hassle the tobacco companies to produce perfumed cigarettes," says Cora. "Just don't insult my intelligence -- and blind those with less intelligence -- with your exaggerations about smoking hazards and how much you care about human lives."

silent majorities and protection rackets

According to Melody, the trouble with democracy is that it works on the principle of majority rule but majorities are always silent and sheep-like and the only people who gain from the system are rich minority groups with politicians in their pockets.

"In all governments -- democratic or not -- the deal is this," explains Melody. "We'll take care of you, we'll handle all the tough stuff, trust us. Give us your money and all you have to do is go about your daily life and abide by the laws we make for your good."

"It sounds like a reasonable deal -- a neat social contract -- doesn't it?" laughs Melody. "But it's nothing more than a massive protection racket."

"Very few of the laws governments pass are for our good," says Melody, "and very few of the baddies they are protecting us from are out to get us."

"On the contrary, most of the laws governments pass are for the good of vested interests, not us" says Melody, "and most of the baddies they are protecting us from are out to get these vested interests, not us."

"You only have to look at the situation in Iraq to see the truth of this," says Melody. "Saddam Hussein's regime may have been brutal in comparison to ours, but he kept law and order in a country that doesn't have a silent majority of sheep like ours does."

"The invasion of Iraq was nothing more than a bully boy tactic -- one gang leader moving in on the lucrative turf of another gang leader," says Melody. "On the pretext of weapons of mass destruction -- and then the democratic rights of Iraqi people -- our government fooled our silent majority sheep that Iraq was a danger to us."

"The vested interests like Halliburton and Big Oil have made a killing out of the Iraq invasion," sighs Melody, "and the silent majority sheep still send their children to be slaughtered in a war which never was, and never will be, for our good."

"Our government, led by whatever party and whatever vested interest, has a bloody history of using the silent majority sheep to line the pockets of the rich and powerful," says Melody. "Even the American Revolution was started by the rich tea merchants of Boston. It was easy to whip up hatred for the king and the Westminster parliament among the rag-taggle refugees from mother England, but essentially they just changed one political master for another."

"In 1915, during WWI, a terrible influenza epidemic -- Spanish Flu -- swept around the world and millions dropped dead like flies and yet the war went on regardless," says Melody. "The real enemy -- the real focus of our government -- should have been this bug, but it wasn't. Why? Because governments have always been more concerned about the economic interests of a vested minorities than the health interests of the majority sheep."

"It's tragic that the only system of government -- communism -- that held out any hope for a people rather than a money focused economy was also usurped by the racketeers," sighs Melody. "In it's pure form, a communist community would be living in heaven, not the hell their greedy leaders dumped them in."

"What's happening right now in China, for instance, is scary," says Melody. "In their efforts to catch up with the West, the new economic masters are turning China into a polluted and disease-prone wasteland."

"With globalization, more of our food is coming from parts of the world that have no health regulations," says Melody, "and more of our immigrants are coming -- and going -- from these places, too."

"I'm concerned about our government cutting back on health measures in order to fund its vested interest wars and vested interest causes," says Melody. "I believe another pandemic is coming and our government -- paid by the silent majority to protect it -- is deliberately playing down this threat while stocking up the bunkers that are going to save them, not us."

"I look at all the anti-terror laws the government is passing and wonder whether their real purpose is to erode our freedoms and make us incapable of acting to save ourselves when the crunch comes," says Melody. "Are the security cameras, phone taps, strip searches, background checks and incredible delays in getting anything done or going anywhere really to protect us from terrorists?"

"Terrorists, or freedom-fighters, have been with us since our freedoms were first threatened," says Melody. "No great cause -- be it Christianity, democracy, slavery or whatever -- was achieved without terrorism and bloodshed."

"I don't want to focus my argument entirely on Iraq," says Melody, "because the whole war over there is being used as a smokescreen to hide what's happening here."

"One by one our freedoms are being demolished and the silent sheep like majority are not only being fleeced but led over a precipice," warns Melody. "Right now, apart from the big vested interests, certain minority vested interests are also driving the government. Some things once unacceptable are now acceptable -- such as homosexuality -- and some things once acceptable are now unacceptable -- such as smoking."

"The silent majority go along with whatever the government does because that's the deal, that's the social contract," says Melody. "They hug the homosexuals they once despised, and despise the smokers they once hugged."

"With a change in government, who knows what minority vested interests will next drive the country?" asks Melody. "Will we be hugging Arabs and despising Jews? Kissing paedophiles and spitting at SUV owners or gun owners?"

"The point to be made is that we are being socially engineered -- even genetically modified like Monsanto's food," says Melody, "and if we must be subject to a government run protection racket then why should we remain silent about what we want to be protected from?"

"I believe we have more chance of being killed by a simple flu virus than by trans fat, SUV pollution, global warning, cigarette smoke, a terrorist's bomb or a crazed gun owner," says Melody, "and we should all demand that our taxpayer dollars go into measures designed to stop these bugs getting into our country."