In the afternoon, the time for showing-off had faded out, and all eyes had turned upward, to the tower where there was found a digital display: 900 ... 901 ... 902 .... All at the field had become silent, in a motionless stare on that slowly-changing number, which represented the payout, in millions, for finding and incapacitating the target—Osama bin Laden. (Read more...)
Discuss this Article(12 messages)
James, I had anticipated such a criticism/innuendo.
Soros, to be sure, is nothing but a man who speaks of sacrifice -- and expects to be drawing your blood later. He is a living example of Elsworth Toohey -- only a rich and powerful version. I suspect the same can be said for Streisand.
Your insinuating criticism here attacks Bell's vision, not mine. This is why I penned the aphorism: Bell's Answer to Despotism--Involving Democratically Elected Assassination (BAD--IDEA).
This vision of mine involves the very same intelligence data -- and the very same categorization schemes for identifying terrorists -- as those currently in use (ie. it is law-based, not mob-based).
I came to this article just having read the lyrics to Dylan's "My Back Pages"; so I had a corrupted mental set.
I think I've identified a possible flaw in your lottery. I couldn't find an opportunity for a political leader to grab any credit. I wonder if it would be possible to get a permit to sell tickets, before anyone found out what was going on?
You could always sell it as an animated film script. What a talent.
Thanks Sharon, your words are kind and validating -- and they make me feel acknowledged.
This story, if adapted to screenplay (as you suggest), seems to me to be more of the TV special type of material, rather than feature film type. That said, I can definitely see it as an animation -- due to the need to do justice to the now-only-imaginable advancements that free market mechanics would almost immediately thrust upon Western society. But this would occur only if this vision was to be adopted by a galvanized US population, fed up with the terrorists' superior exploitation of current engagement dynamics.
Alert! Alert! Incoming idea ... ----------------- The TRUE-ANSWER mascot, would be a tiger. The Free Market Tiger: "Tommy the Tiger" (ala Thomas Jefferson). The continous subtle -- while showing on screen a free-market produced tank which, like the cameleon, reflects its own surroundings (in this promotion: tiger stripes) -- would be: Put a Tiger in your Tank! -----------------
I liked writing it. It's a jagged pill to swallow though, due to the mental gymnastics required to simultaneously acknowledge its superiority over the status quo -- while remaining patriotic under the status quo. Some folks may say this can't be done (implicitly arguing that uncritical support of current leaders is what it is that makes great countries great) -- though I would question their mental fortitude.
When is it a good time to turn down a more productive way of doing things? There are 2 such times that come to my mind: when one wants credit (as Sharon alludes to above); and when one has vested interests, interests which require control of a country, rather than incapacitation of a tyrannical threat (ie. an individual criminal).
There may be more reasons to turn down a more productive way of doing things, but I haven't yet become aware of any good arguments for such.
My primary purpose with this essay is not to put any status quo supporters on trial, my primary purpose is to offer a means by which the US can make progress (overandabove that which the status quo policy could ever achieve).