Roger Goes to the Circus (aka Politics and All) or Momentary Lapses of Reason
  • StrayDogStrayDog December 2012
    Hello to everyone. And let me go straight to business - some politics and beyond.  

    Is Roger Waters a good man? I do not know. But he surely strikes me as an adequate man. And one of the very few today who are not just capable but also willing to see the truth. On the other hand, given the current state of affairs in the world in economic, political and social terms, which as far as any sentient being is concerned can only be regarded as critical, the voice of eminent ones becomes particularly important. While raising their voice for those in such a position becomes both a duty and responsibility.

    That’s why I’d like to hope that Roger’s apologias for Obama - specifically those delivered in the course of his conversation with Eric Ripert - were a result of some peculiar brain effect induced by probably not so fresh langoustines. Which is not to say that his assessment of the Republican candidate was in any way incorrect. But Roger’s fascination with the exact mirror image of Romney and yet another corporate fascism agenda promoter and hand-picked puppet for this bipartisan complicity and plutocratic duopoly circus Obama is a piece of mystery. And I should say that it would certainly be great if people like Roger, that is ones whose opinions might have some effect on those of quite a number of other people, could take it a bit more seriously - especially in respect of such important issues and on such pivotal occasions.

    This forum is hardly a proper place to go into economic specifics. Besides it would not simply make much sense because the picture seems to be crystal clear. It’s quite evident for anybody who is ready to choose the red pill (that is the truth, however harsh it might be, but also sanity and ultimately hope) instead of the blue one (comfortable illusions but ultimately a catastrophe) that both the Democons and Republicrats pursue economic policies that are economic weapons of mass destruction leading the country and the whole world into a disaster. The same goes to their foreign policies. As Ron Paul, the only prominent American politician who could have made real difference, justly stated in one of his 32 questions being part of his farewell speech to Congress: “Why does changing the party in power never change policy? Could it be that the views of both parties are essentially the same?”

    So I will just take the liberty of refreshing the memory of those pathologically myopic people who are inclined to present Obomber as some kind of true alternative to Robmney, Democrips to Rebloodicans, and thus seem to be sleepwalking into an abyss in respect of these two facts:

    Bush: The Patriot Act / indefinite detention for enemy combatants.

    Obama: Reauthorizing the Patriot Act (while the promise to “revisit” it was part of his first term presidential campaign) / supplemented by - indefinite detention for American citizens (the National Defence Authorization Act) / and the ultimate touch - the self-assumed ‘right’ to execute citizens of any country as well as American people only suspected of terrorist activity without arrest or trial (in plain English - to kill anybody at his sole discretion).

    So Obama did not reverse the overt assault on the Constitution, which Roger seems to consider so scary a thing, started by the Bush administration, in the least. On the contrary, he evidently brought the process to the next level. If one places those two documents mentioned  alongside Orwell’s “1984” it will be hard to detect any difference as to the approaches implemented. So much for the most liberal president. So much for the main world democracy. And here is another entry from that list of Congressman Paul’s questions: “Why is there so little concern for the Executive Order that gives the President authority to establish a “kill list”, including American citizens, of those targeted for assassination?”

    That's a good question. Indeed, as Arthur Silber puts it: "It’s not every day that the president claims the right to dispense death arbitrarily. It’s not every day that the State announces that its central mission is the elimination of human life, wherever, whenever and to whatever extent it wishes." But Ron Paul has always been way too diplomatic. So let's give Mr. Silber a chance to continue in his more direct way: “It is a fact that Obama and Romney both claim the President possesses absolute power, the power over life itself - and this with regard to every human being alive. It is a fact that a vote for Obama or Romney means that you support their claim. Say that, and those who refuse to surrender their souls will know where you stand.”

    “If you vote for Obama or Romney - it is certainly your right. Although you will forever forfeit the right to speak of "rights" at all. Because if a human being can be murdered for any reason, or for no reason at all, merely on the arbitrary order of someone who claims the power to issue such orders, she has no rights at all. You thus sanction the destruction of all rights, yours included. If you support this particular evil, that is murdering by arbitrary edict anyone, anywhere, anytime -  and if you vote for Obama or Romney you support it - then you will support anything. Because there is no evil beyond that. So anyone who says they vote for Obama or Romney should declare: "I vote proudly. I am proud to be a knowing accomplice to their murders, including the murders of innocents."

    I do not think that I can really add anything here. I do not fancy this modest post to become a trigger for Roger to terminate his hopefully occasional departure from good sense which he normally seems to manifest either. But I do hope that something will become such a trigger and soon enough. Because “What do you get for pretending the danger's not real / Meek and obedient you follow the leader / Down well trodden corridors into the valley of steel” never rang so true and frightening as it does today. This voice is needed if we do not want to transfer ourselves from “Fahrenheit 451” we are living now right into “1984”.

    And in the wake of another act of the obscene farce that came to its conclusion on November 6 here is a brief piece of political satire, which was in part inspired by one of “South Park” brilliant episodes, Jesse Ventura’s recent remarks, and Pink Floyd‘s classic lines, but mostly by that pantomime’s sheer depravity.    

    Welcome To The Circus

    Hey, folks everywhere,
    Do you see flashing spotlights?
    Bread and circuses are all you need,
    Is that right? Forget all your reason,
    Join the show’s new season. Don’t dawdle -
    It will be sold-out tonight

    The house is all gaudy
    Tightly packed with the herd
    Docile, if not happy, not giving the bird
    But pensively choosing between
    The two options - between
    A giant douche and a sandwich with turd

    The lights here are brightest
    But it’s hard to distinguish
    Those two little puppets jerking on stage
    Both lie as they breathe in the deadliest contest
    To seize for a fortnight
    The lead role in a cage

    Their attires fit them nicely
    The crowd gets dizzy  
    No one seems to regard the question of springs
    But for both the clowns NASCAR suits
    Would be better - so that it could be seen
    Who are pulling the strings


  • StrayDogStrayDog April 2013
    My apologies for this way too dramatic pause but I had a couple of things to take care of. And now, taking the risk of boring all genuine music lovers to death, I still want to say one or two words about these Roger’s recent initiatives concerning Israel, which look to me a bit like another failure to communicate with his reason (the previous total malfunction being his support of Obama).

    I would like to start with saying that I certainly don’t consider myself an expert on this subject. There are many people who could provide incomparably more comprehensive and in-depth analysis as far as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict’s history and present situation are concerned. So, I guess, I will just say this. I think that not that many good things have been happening in the Middle East and this specific region of it for quite some time. I think that lots of bad things indeed have. And I’m not sure if the only, or the most critical, reason for this state of affairs are the actions of Israel. I’m not sure that things were that rosy there before this state even came into existence. And I’m not sure that they would be if it disappeared altogether or never occurred. So I’m not strictly pro-Palestinian in this case.

    At the same time, if we are talking about Israeli Zionist elite, which neither constitutes nor represents the whole of the country, then we are most definitely not talking about something one should put up with. This elite and its policies are certainly to be opposed by all possible means.

    I also think that I can understand why Roger has chosen this particular issue among all other ones to act upon. However indirectly, he’s been involved in this situation for quite a while. This is also some activity he can actually contribute into being a prominent musician.

    And, as I said earlier, I have a great respect for any member of our drowning in its own anaemia and rapidly declining Western society who can still act at all.

    However, here are my doubts very briefly.

    First of all, is Israel really in a position to develop any policies and hold to them independently? Would she be able to stick to her belligerent stance if not supported by some other much more powerful state? And should we deal with any of lieutenants when Al Capone himself is standing in plain view? To me the answer is clearly “no”. As Ron Paul correctly points out in his comment made in November 2012 on the temporary ceasefire in Gaza: “We must realize that without changes in US foreign policy it’s only a matter of time before the killing begins again.” Then he cites journalist Glenn Greenwald: “For years now, US financial, military and diplomatic support of Israel has been the central enabling force driving this endless conflict. The bombs Israel drops on Gazans, and the planes they use to drop them, and the weapons they use to occupy the West Bank and protect settlements are paid for, in substantial part, by the US taxpayer…”. “It’s our money and our weapons. Nothing has changed under the Obama administration. He says that the US supports the Israeli side because “No country on Earth would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens from outside its borders.” Considering that this president rains down missiles on Yemen, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and numerous other countries on a daily basis, the statement is so hypocritical that it doesn’t pass the laugh test. But it isn’t funny”, Dr. Paul concludes.

    So, do these initiatives which concern some far away entity with a strong domestic lobby and are promoted by a relatively insignificant number of people have any chance to influence American foreign policy evidently being the cornerstone of this situation? It’s extremely unlikely. What about the last presidential election in the US? It could have proved to be of some help had we had different outcomes. But that chance was blown amidst wine and langoustines.

    There can also be some objections connected with the overall context of the present situation. But to take them into account it would be helpful to have a clear notion of this situation - for instance, to realize what has been actually happening or rather helped to happen in the course of the Arab Spring. It really makes sense to go at least a couple of inches deeper into material before “jumping to conclusions” - especially when those conclusions are meant to become foundations for further action. And at even more general level there seem to be another dangerous delusion on the part of Roger - that “the forces that are trying to get information out are strengthening”. In fact, “information is” not “becoming more available to us”. “It’s the fact that” it’s been totally made so - that is unbelievably available - some time ago already. But it didn’t change a thing. Why? My another thread

    http://www.roger-waters.com/forum/index.php?p=/discussion/1366/the-wall-and-beyond-former-is-it-time-to-reconsider-the-message-of-the-walls-#Item_117

    is almost entirely dedicated to answering the question. Anyone who would like to have a look at the situation and the prospects of our society from a bit more adequate angle can also start with reading this brief article written by a former high US Treasury official and editor of the Wall Street Journal:

    http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2013/03/18/iraq-after-ten-years-paul-craig-roberts/.

    There is one more - somewhat philosophical - aspect of this problem. Do we really need to begin with blaming somebody else again? The Zionist elite and Israel lobby are most definitely not good things. But was it any of those entities who elected Bush and Cheney twice? And then their faithful follower Obama twice? Was it them who let those murderous demagogues start war after war after war after war at will in pursuit of their interests without offering the slightest opposition? And thus became accomplices to murder of hundreds of thousands innocent people? Do we need to begin now with addressing some important but relatively peripheral issue and treat it as if it’s some narrow glitch in our otherwise functional system? Or do we need to admit at last that this whole system is rotten to the core, and no one else is responsible for its coming into existence in the first place but all of us? So should we begin with boycotting someone somewhere? Or should we rather take a very good look in the mirror at ourselves?



  • yaacovk April 2013
    Hi.
    you don't know how i'm so sorry why i didn't learn very well English.
    (I would be happy to teach you about Israeli / Palestinian in Hebrew)
    because i have so much to tell and explain about the Israeli / Palestinian conflict.
    in shortly i can say that Mr. waters know about the middle east conflict like i know to make music (and i'm not a musician).
    he connect to another artists and agitate agents Israel (like Stevie Wonder and peal jam(
    another point of view is, did you know that Jesus was a Jew? (and he did't leaved alone in Israel...) 

    regards.
    ʏaacov.
     
  • churchmileschurchmiles April 2013
    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
  • waveprojectwaveproject April 2013
    i aplogize my late reply- too many things at the time to care for.
    generally, i agree with roger´s action of boycotting. as far as i can understand, it is an attempt to clear up the situation and to get attention to to consternation of the palestinian people in this conflict which does not appear, softly said, in a correct way in the official press.

    but as stray dog correctly declares above, i don´t feel that roger´s  operation really is something like" telling both sides of the story" because the root of the game in the middle east can´t be found without "digging in the dirt" .this "Or should we rather take a very good look in the mirror at ourselves?"for me expresses the question for other actions of boycotting.

    roger´s dissapointment about obama´s foreign politics in the interview shows that he obviously had some expectations of a change.....i remember well of the reactions in some circles in my country when it was clear that it´s going on in the same way again and this was just half a year after his FIRST selection.

    so in my view this call for boycott of a foreign state won´t have any real attention to what is going on.this" war after war after war after war after war...."is the game of one gang. and this gang was chosen by ourselves.

    there were many artists in the rock scene who suppportet obama´s first election. even crosby stills nash &young were touring through the states. where are they now? why don´t they take their guitars, compose something like" don´t vote them" and position themselves in front of the white house and " keep on rocking in the free world"?

    wouldn´t this be something really effective in oppostion to just signing any amnesty declaration like it was at the arresting of pussy riot?
  • StrayDogStrayDog April 2013
    This “his first selection” thing happens to be another spot-on parapraxis in print. That’s precisely how those puppets get into power - through being selected, not elected. With a little help from us serving as a stage backdrop during the election circus.

    And it’s an actually very good question - where are all those musicians, performers and other prominent people? Why are they silent? Now - when the cat is totally out of the bag (if it ever really was inside of it at all)? They have time, all sorts of opportunities, easy access to any information. They are financially independent and can afford themselves to speak absolutely freely without jeopardizing their families’ welfare and all. But instead Bob Dylan (sic) receives some award from the hands of this criminal and thanks him. Which redefines the term “disgrace”.  

    On the other hand, Roger himself with all his declared philosophic and political views was promoting this corporate fascist’s re-election just several months ago - on the grounds that the choice was restricted and Obomber was the lesser of two evils. Really? Well, before that Roger had spent quite some time actually living in the US. Hasn’t he ever heard of Ron Paul? Is he acquainted with Dr. Paul’s views and plan of action? How is such a folly possible at all?

    And now he asks: “Why, oh why the US doesn’t do what it easily could do in order to help to solve this situation with Palestine?”. For Christ sakes, is it really, really THAT mysterious, Roger?


  • waveprojectwaveproject April 2013
    as to your" Why are they silent?" question: certainly answers like " they are tired, they´ve grown old" and so on i would respect, if there was not the fact that most of them keep on touring and touring again and are not shy to present themselves as "rock and roll will never die"dinosaurs.and even if you add their respectable activities within their human projects like bono or peter gabriel for example- as musicians , composers and performers they should be able to bring some of their political views into a song and try to awaken their paying audiences!

    what i really think is that the fact of success and its coming out emotions like pride and self security are walls to divide them from what some of them they tell in their lyrics. you could also say it viciously:

    rock musicicians have become more or less clowns in the circus. you can´t take them for really serios.
  • StrayDogStrayDog April 2013
    Well, actually it was a bit of a rhetorical question. The answer is surely simple - they are people as everybody else. And it’s been said quite enough on this species in the other thread. By the way, this thing Bono has chosen to turn himself into, having just nothing to do with the person he was in the early 80s, that looks now like a hypocrite, talks like a hypocrite, acts like a hypocrite and even walks like one is the best - or the worst - example of it.

    But Roger does seem to be different. It appears that he is sincere in his attempts. And strategically he seems to be looking in the right direction. But his tactics and choice of concrete actions are embarrassing. It could be explained simply by the lack of intelligence, but he does not really look like an idiot either. So, in fact, as of today I fail to offer any rationalization.

    I also think that if we’re talking about all these famous ones - musicians specifically, for instance - it’s time now to do something outside their music, not within their professional activities - as you suggest. Because when people attend a gig, they are there not to get awoken. They are not there even to be bothered with any such things. As it has been properly explained on numerous occasions on this Forum alone, they are there for MUSIC. To put it “viciously” - to consume their experience, just like they are generally consuming their existence. There is no way - no matter how profound and accurate the message of a performance or an album can actually be - they are going to the barricades after that. They will go to a social network to “share their experience”, preferably with as many nice snapshots as possible.

    So, in fact, what Roger is trying to do is certainly the way to go. I just don’t understand why he chooses not to think before he acts.



  • churchmileschurchmiles April 2013
    Yeh Bono sure has changed since the 1980s when he was ramming Sunday Bloody Sunday down our ears and making his stand against the terrorist in Ireland and trying to educate people of the troubles that surrounded the incident in Enniskillen in Northern ireland. All he has done since that terrible attack is help suffering people all over the globe. And champions so many causes you couldnt mention. I thought you was a paddy straycat. So why are ya dissing the good guy. I was afraid to even go here with you for fear that you will baffle the bollox off me with your trigonometry.

    But you are correct in what people want is to just get their ticket and go see the show . Without all this Roger said that Roger says this. Personally i dont care what he says and if he has offended people then leave it them to voice their opinions. Freedom of speech is what its called i believe. Worst thing ever aloud. To many people talking to much crap about to many subjects that they know to little about. Entre Mr Waters
  • StrayDogStrayDog April 2013
    The final sentence in my previous post was meant to sound a bit provocatively, so some accuracy has probably been sacrificed as a result. However, not to any considerable extent.

    It’s simply inconceivable how someone like Roger, who, as far as I’m concerned, honestly tries to pursue the truth and also seems to implement quite a deliberate approach while doing so, can be missing such crucial parts of the big picture. Actions of the US Congress, Presidents who have secured themselves in the course of the last decade almost Caesarean power, as well as any other entities like the Council on Foreign Relations or corporate mainstream media are not accidental. They are not done by mistake. Neither they are produced by erratic reaction to some unexpected external circumstances. All that is part of the system and done consciously and consistently. The same refers to the UK. The natural inevitable results of those policies - which, I repeat, are carried out SYSTEMICALLY - are ruining domestic economies and killing innocent people all around the world in the War on Terror, “humanitarian missions” and other Orwellian undertakings. These crimes are committed by a handful of greedy psychopaths (aka the Elites) with, however, full support of all of us with rarest exceptions (aka the Masses).

    That’s the sad truth of the moment. Until it’s realized and admitted in its entirety, and each one of us takes their part of responsibility for what’s going on nothing will change. And no local problem like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, for instance, will be solved because it can't be with any permanent effect if being addressed as a separate issue in our globalized world by definition. Unfortunately, such initiatives do not constitute the first step in the right direction. They are leading us away from it.

    So, while I respect Roger’s integrity, doesn’t he see all the obvious intrinsic inconsistency of his position? And would he mind considering this question: why should we - each one of us, including himself, being personally responsible for electing all those “bushes”, “obamas”, “blairs” and “camerons”, for putting these criminals into power and enabling them to kill innocent civilians in many thousands and maintain the system that is a direct way into disaster - focus on boycotting Israel? Do we really have nothing to do somewhat closer to home?

             

  • waveprojectwaveproject April 2013
    I agree to all your implementation adding the question:"..to do somewhat closer..." if you were on roger´s postion , just meant existencially, would you make a call for boycotting the next elections?
  • churchmileschurchmiles April 2013
    He neither has the following or the clout to boycott the next election. In fact i would say he is our version of americas Arnold swartzer. But with obvious exclusion of him having no position in politics whatsoever
  • StrayDogStrayDog April 2013
    As I’ve already been mentioning in my rebuttal to Mr. Molyneux’s stuff, I do not think that elections should be boycotted. On the contrary, I think that they should be actively participated in. However, implementing a bit more serious approach in the process than “I’m so voting Obama because all my favourite celebrities do”. Sadly, but approximately the same level of understanding of the situation has been manifested by Roger himself during the last presidential election in the US.

    I can’t be quite sure about the next election yet simply because we don‘t know what’s going to happen tomorrow. The financial/economic collapse can strike any minute. The social consequences are hardly predictable in detail, but in general we can assume that this democracy show will be over. Probably for good. So let me say a couple of words about the last election first. Which might prove to be the last chance that we actually had.

    Let’s do some dreaming. Let’s imagine what might have happened in a separate, and somewhat more sensible, universe.

    2011 (or any time earlier). Starring: Roger.

    He wakes up one day, takes a break from consuming wine and langoustines while expressing a deep concern about troubles of the poor, and through some magical means of communication that is available in that universe - let’s call it television - discovers that there is actually an alternative to all those corporate puppets of corrupt politicians. And, surprisingly enough, it’s not a paragon of being “bought and paid for” and ready to break all possible legal and moral laws in order to serve in return Obama. The alternative is called Ron Paul. After that our hero uses another miraculous tool existing in his world - let’s call this one the Internet - to study Ron Paul’s platform, views, articles, plan of action, as well as his activities for many terms of being a member of the US House of Representatives (naturally not through reading the stupid Wikipedia article, but by means of doing an actually serious research on the subject). That helps our protagonist to complete the mission of withdrawing one’s head out of one’s ass. Upon which he undertakes some action.

    He starts to do approximately the same thing as he is doing now. He’s addressing his fellow musicians and other well off people possessing the same level of various opportunities, financial included. And, hopefully, joins forces with them. However, not in a quite irrational attempt to culturally boycott some far away state while the home one is best described by one of Orwell’s best known pieces (which our hero is well aware of) and clearly heading in the direction of the other, but in a quite rational one of supporting the only prominent politician in the Western world who is opposing that rotten to the core system with its corrupt officials and standing up for liberty and truth. The only man among marionettes. Who’s happened to be a candidate in the presidential election in the most influential of Western powers.

    So, what’s happened in reality instead? It’s been quite precisely formulated: “Ron Paul was a huge threat to the government, the media, and the elite group that turned the US into a corporation many years ago. For the most part they control the wars, economy, media and everything in between. Ron Paul is a genuine hero, not a puppet like those currently in power. That’s why the establishment did everything in their power to illegally censor, discredit, cheat, and eliminate him from the 2012 election. If we had not been lied to on such a huge scale, there is a good chance that Ron Paul would be the current President of the United States.”

    And that’s not dreaming. Just a couple of examples. Polls conducted in January, 2012 showed that Ron Paul had 46% of support (the second result after Obama with 48%). But the problem is that the game is rigged. The outcome is not just influenced, but totally pre-determined by the amount of money invested. So if one hasn’t got some independent source of financing, then - to have any chance at all - they have to participate as a candidate from one of two major parties. But they are not two major parties. They are one and the same gang. With precisely the same powers behind each one of them that essentially own both these entities. So the Republican party was never going to let Ron Paul get nominated. Here is another example. These are the Favourability Ratings for Republicans (as a result of another poll conducted in  February 2012):

    Gingrich     63% (unfavourable)     25% (favourable)
    Romney     54% (unfavourable)     34% (favourable)
    Santorum   38% (unfavourable)     32% (favourable)

    That’s all that has ever been reported in the mainstream media. Not a single mainstream media outlet, not a single channel didn’t mention the following fact even once:

    Ron Paul     42% (FAVOURABLE)       36% (unfavourable)

    They have simply “forgotten” to announce the indisputable winner of the poll. So much for the freedom of speech. So much for the free press. So much for fair and transparent elections. So much for the main world democracy.

    And it didn’t happen just once or twice. This well-planned (and well-paid for) campaign aimed at making Ron Paul “the 13th floor in a hotel” was going on for weeks, for months. They knew that to get him nominated would equal suicide for them. And they got what they wanted.

    Indeed, for Ron Paul to run for President under such conditions was the same thing as for a Jewish person to run for Reichskanzler. But what if our above dreaming came true? And what if - out of consideration for the seriousness of the current situation (which is, in fact, critical) - Roger and his friends (well, considering the FECA, his friends actually) were ready to put on the line something a bit more substantive than words? Their financial resources, for instance? What if Ron Paul had that independent source of financing? Comparable with what his opponents had? Which could allow him to break through this blockade arranged by the Establishment and controlled media? Well, just as it’s said above - there is a good chance that Ron Paul would be the President of the United States (anyone who finds this unrealistic can be advised to take a serious look at Ross Perot’s first presidential campaign).

    If it had happened we all would have acquired a tiny bit of chance. Or let me put it in this way - if it happened we all would acquire it. So, maybe instead of imitating political activities through getting engaged in some fairly irrational undertakings many miles away from home,  Roger would consider an attempt at commencing some real ones where he actually lives? Maybe it would make sense to start with doing some reading? And then, when Roger is prepared enough for a serious conversation, he could just meet the man? Not to talk is not an option. To talk is a very good one. Let them talk. And then we’ll see. Should Roger need any kind of assistance in carrying out these two tasks, I’m here to help.



  • @stray dog

    as far as i understand you are talking about a very serious thing here. both your implementations about the us election in connection with ron paul and the candidate himself who in my research seems in fact to be someone willing to change things and who is dangerous for the game of the gang, make comprehensible your serious and clear appeal to roger. moreover, it´s a good reference to bring roger´s action into some direction more senseful.

    after all, you seem to be rather convinced about what you are saying, at least because of your offer to help. so wouldn´t it be more effective to contact roger directly than throwing the important thing into this field of uninterestet fans?
  • StrayDogStrayDog May 2013
    Frankly, this thing strikes me as moderately important too. And this simple plan doesn’t seem to be overtly futile either. As far as I’m concerned, it looks like something that deserves at least to be given a serious thought. And a try.  

    Unfortunately, we are not drinking buddies with Roger (well, bad example - that ancient reference to Chianti was a joke of sorts, and - however outrageous it may sound from an Irish - to tell the truth, I do not drink at all). So let’s say we’re not tennis partners. And I’m afraid posting on this Forum is the most direct way to offer Roger any ideas that I have.

    By the way, regarding this kind of activity, I think, it was my fault in a way - I should have thought about it and started to do it long before I actually did. But I could never imagine that Roger might need someone like me to show him the light, you know. And I was simply stunned when I’d discovered that he was promoting Obama. I still fail to conceive how it's possible, while effectively living in the States, to have “overlooked” Ron Paul - if Roger genuinely believes in what he says and is actually serious about his intentions.

    I can also understand your quiet indignation about the general anemia of this Forum’s participants. If it was not just two of us, but like two hundred, or even some funny couple of dozen we might have higher chances to convey the message and wake up Roger from his slumber of reason - provided he‘s not just one of those clowns in the circus after all, of course. But, sadly, it’s another proof of my ramblings in the other thread probably being not that far from the truth. 

    Anyway, as the things are now he is still just one click away from all this stuff. The stuff is actually serious. It actually makes sense. Taking into account that it would be pretty hard to attribute the same quality to Roger’s recent actions, to make this click might be the thing to do.       

                
  • @stray dog

    i know what you mean. serious thoughts and tries are the tools of " someone like us" in that postition and in fact we are no neighbours of that guy to say " hello, habe you seen the scratch at the back of your car...?" and go on with something serious. i was aware my question was a  rhetoric one. and yes, to be just one click away  in that case SHOULD be enough. but nevertheless i can´t see any reason not to choose the second option. the only thing you can loose is time and work which both you were not shy to invest here up to now.  just do it and nobody including yourself will ever say that you wouldn´t have tried it at least.
  • StrayDogStrayDog May 2013
    Would you mind to describe the "second option" in more precise a way?
  • as i mentioned before: to contact roger directly.
  • StrayDogStrayDog May 2013
    That much I grasped. But through what channels? Do you happen to have any of Roger’s direct contacts? Because I seem to have lost his cell phone number somewhere …   

  • ok, i withdraw my "directly"which was a thoughtless choice of word for the alternative of sending an e-mail- the only second option you have and which in my view is neither less nor more " a direct way to offer Roger any ideas". just a second option(...if there only was not always that sloppiness with those cell phone numbers...)
  • StrayDogStrayDog May 2013
    I’m afraid that Roger’s direct email address was on the same slip as his
    phone number. So the only second option that we have is some kind of
    fan mail or anything like that. That is your letter will hit a moderator
    who has to deal with hundreds (or thousands) of messages on a daily
    basis - most of which are either totally vacuous or plainly insane
    bullshit. I do seriously doubt that this option is any more “direct”
    than posting here. Strictly speaking, I’m not sure if it can be
    qualified as such at all.

    Besides, there is another aspect. I
    don’t want to produce any illusions. Even if through just being
    economical with the truth - as Orwell said “Omission is the greatest
    form of lie.” You’ve read both my threads. You know what I think about
    the current state of things as well as our “prospects”. You know that I
    do not think that Ron Paul or the Libertarian idea in general are highly
    likely to save us from ourselves. On the other hand, you’re also aware
    of all those reasons why - paradoxically enough as it might seem, on the
    surface at least - I still think that some steps within the confines of
    social environment can and should be undertaken.

    If we
    temporarily restrict ourselves to the area of politics only, the
    situation is like this. Dr. Paul has retired from Congress. It’s not
    clear if he’s even going to consider running for President in 2016 -
    especially if it is just another run with “purely educational” purposes,
    that is without any actual chances to win like his three previous
    campaigns (as far as I can see, the goal of education will be pursued
    now through the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, which has
    been recently established and could, by the way, constitute another
    direction for co-operation). And, to be quite frank, I do not see Rand
    Paul as a worthy substitute.

    But everything could change if any
    real chances to win emerged on the horizon. And, as I understand, Roger
    could actually contribute into this happening. But I do not want to
    encourage anybody to act, especially if we are talking about some
    actually serious action, without clear understanding of the overall
    situation (not only its political components) in its entirety - as far
    as my perception and analysis of this situation go, at any rate.

    That’s
    why I’ve spent some time and effort to get this stuff formulated here
    in a compact but, at the same time, more or less comprehensive way. I
    find it essential for anybody who is considering any serious political
    action to clearly realize everything which is briefly outlined in my
    main thread (or to be familiar with this stance and give it a good
    thought at least). For this reason I’m not sure if emailing Roger (even
    if I could use his direct address) without any preliminary
    recommendations would be the right means to communicate. Imagine that
    you, being a person with as tight a schedule as Roger obviously has, are
    suddenly receiving an email from someone you do not know and never
    heard of as lengthy as my Parts 1-3 combined plus a portion of
    indispensable stuff from this thread. To expect the contents of any such
    memorandum to be properly attended to wouldn’t be highly realistic.
    This Forum, on the other hand, seems to be a very appropriate place to
    come up with something like that. As well as to get oneself acquainted
    with this kind of material presented in the relevant context.

    Thus
    it’s up to Roger now to decide. He can choose to proceed with getting
    engaged in slightly strange at best and deeply wrong at worst
    activities. While continuing to disregard quite reasonable things
    appearing on his own site. Being, as I’ve already mentioned, literally
    just one click away from them. Which would manifest a very unwholesome
    mixture of ignorance with arrogance. The thing one is obviously going
    nowhere with. Or he can choose otherwise. And embark upon some real
    action. If that is really what he wants.

    So, the ball is in Roger’s court. I guess we should just wait a bit and see. And keep leaving little hints for him here. 


  • to say the truth, as far as i thought to know you i finally expected such background of your reasons of choosing only this forum at least, especially because of the fact of that mail problem, which i was aware of- but i was not quite shure. now i think it was good to unfold the objective reality of chances to get a message of big importance to a person of big popularity. and after such clear analysis from your site, for me the question accurs ( which again brings the other thread into the game):

    what kind of court we are in here if  even a ball like this one is not picked up by its inhabitant??

    ...which is a rhethoric question.
  • StrayDogStrayDog May 2013
    I think that we should give Roger or anyone who could direct his attention to this stuff that is meant to provide some help in attaining somewhat more adequate perception of the situation, which could result in more sensible practical activities a bit more time. But it looks like Roger does need to make a few steps down this road. Because his political opinions and actions indicate that he either is totally missing a good number of quite elementary but, at the same time, thoroughly fundamental things, which seriously, even if involuntarily, undermines the consistency of his views and integrity of his position or, sadly, can be considered nothing more than just another “clown in the circus”. I still hope that we are dealing with the first option and this purely “technical” problem will be solved soon enough.

  • StrayDogStrayDog May 2013
    In the course of the last years or even decades Roger has posed some serious questions in his artistic works as well as in more recent interviews and talks. Since, in some fairly incomprehensible to me way, he, at the same time, seems to have failed to hit upon answers to them or lack determination to admit the truth in its undoubtedly frightening entirety, several quite evident ones will be offered here. All of them will be based on or comprised of excerpts and quotations taken from various works of experts, people actually trying to do something about the current state of affairs, or simply prominent thinkers.

    So, the question of the day comes directly from "Mother" lyrics and is like this:

    “Should I trust the government?”

    This one is simple to answer - no, Roger, you shouldn’t. Neither the “bought and paid for” political class, which doesn’t care about the good of others and reduces its functions to pursuing special interests of the elitist groups, nor corporate controlled media, which similarly reduces its functions to mere propaganda, will tell you the truth. Forget about it. They are not going to tell us what is coming. It’s time to switch on our own brains. They’re not going to protect us from what is coming. We will have to take care of it ourselves. We are heading for a disaster, and it’s up to US, not up to THEM, to stop and make an about-turn. If we fail to do that the disaster will strike. And then all those crooks in power - the so-called Elite comprised of corrupt politicians controlled by the banksters, who are dragging the world along this road to an abyss now amid the passive acquiescence of the wilfully ignorant masses, will bring their lethal games to the next level. They will simply have no other choice. Because they are certainly not going to loose their power and control over the situation due to the mathematically unavoidable global financial collapse, upcoming economic catastrophe and inevitable massive social unrest. After that even the remains of liberty will be lost. And we all will have to face a full-scaled social nightmare. So it’s time to wake up. In fact, it mightily looks like the last opportunity to get awake. And start to act.  

    “A system of capitalism presumes sound money, not fiat money manipulated by a central bank. Capitalism cherishes voluntary contracts and interest rates that are determined by savings, not credit creation by a central bank. It is no coincidence that the century of total war coincided with the century of central banking.”

    “Liberty is lost through complacency and a subservient mindset. When we accept or even welcome automobile checkpoints, random searches, mandatory identification cards, and paramilitary police in our streets, we have lost a vital part of our American heritage. America was born of protest, revolution, and mistrust of government. Subservient societies neither maintain nor deserve freedom for long.”

                                                                                                                                 - Ron Paul

    “In our age there is no such thing as ‘keeping out of politics.’ All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia. The very concept of objective truth is fading out of the world. Lies will pass into history.”

    “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

                                                                                                                                  - George Orwell

    But before we start to blame the government, Elites, Wall Street guys, or Israel we need to remember that it’s OUR responsibility. As James Quinn quite correctly puts it in one of his recent articles: “The people of this country must regain a sense of responsibility for their lives and the lives of future generations. Enough people need to perceive they are being manipulated, controlled and used by the thought leaders and awaken from their narcissistic materialistic debt financed lives. Our culture has failed. The masses are trapped in the Republican/Democrat false dogma. More people need to question and challenge the authorities. We must cast aside our wilful ignorance of facts and accept the consequences of decades of bad decisions and delusions of grandeur. More government is not the answer. We must break free of the conditioning and mind control used to make us love our servitude and trust those in power”.

    I would just add that the Americans are not the only people to whom it can be applied. It’s time to stop. It’s time to leave the show. Now we have to put OURSELVES on trial and realize that we HAVE BEEN GUILTY all this time.



  • StrayDogStrayDog May 2013
    During Obama’s first term and later Roger has been repeatedly expressing, let’s put it mildly, some concern about his foreign policy. “I’m very, very disappointed by it. His foreign policy obviously goes against everything that I believe” is only one among his utterances on the subject. This particular one was delivered in December, 2011, when Barack “The Nobel Peace Prize” Obama had already managed to officially turn himself into a war criminal through Libya, not to mention any other cases. And that was a very adequate utterance. However, Roger had something to add on that occasion. “But it seems that the alternative to re-electing Obama would be such a heinous disaster for this country if you look at the candidates on the other side”, he said. Well, first of all I should say that being “trapped in the Republican/Democrat false dogma” (see also my first post in this thread) is such a childish mistake that I’m surprised that Roger even mentions that. But let’s go on: “I find it hard to find any value in any of them. They are lackeys for the grossest machine … to a man and to a woman”. It’s here where the adequateness fails completely.

    Really, Roger? In case you didn’t notice, here is Ron Paul’s famous “What If” speech delivered on the House Floor as early as in February, 2009. It has something to do with US foreign policy. Sometimes this “Better late than never” thing actually makes sense …



    Ron Paul:

    “Madam Speaker, I have a few questions for my colleagues.

    What if our foreign policy of the past century is deeply flawed and has not served our national security interest?

    What if we wake up one day and realize that the terrorist threat is the predictable consequence of our meddling in the affairs of others, and has nothing to do with us being free and prosperous?

    What if propping up repressive regimes in the Middle East endangers both the United States and Israel?

    What if occupying countries like Iraq and Afghanistan and bombing Pakistan is directly related to the hatred directed toward us?

    What if someday it dawns on us that losing over 5,000 American military personnel in the Middle East since 9/11 is not a fair tradeoff with the loss of nearly 3,000 American citizens no matter how many Iraqi, Pakistanian, Afghan people are killed or displaced?

    What if we finally decide that torture, even if called “enhanced interrogation technique”, is self-destructive and produces no useful information and that contracting it out to a third world nation is just as evil?

    What if it is finally realized that war and military spending is always destructive to the economy?

    What if all war-time spending is paid for through the deceitful and evil process of inflating and borrowing?

    What if we finally see that war-time conditions always undermine personal liberty?

    What if Conservatives who preach small government wake up and realize that our interventionist foreign policy provides the greatest incentive to expand the government?

    What if Conservatives understood once again that their only logical position is to reject military intervention and managing an empire throughout the world?

    What if the American people woke up and understood that the official reasons for going to war are almost always based on lies and promoted by war propaganda in order to serve special interests?

    What if we as a nation came to realize that the quest for empire eventually destroys all great nations?

    What if Obama has no intention of leaving Iraq?

    What if a military draft is being planned for for the wars that would spread if our foreign policy is not changed?

    What if the American people learned the truth, that our foreign policy has nothing to do with national security, that it never changes from one administration to the next?

    What if war in preparation for war is a racket serving the special interests?

    What if President Obama is completely wrong about Afghanistan and it turns out worse than Iraq and Vietnam put together?

    What if Christianity actually teaches peace and not preventive wars of aggression?

    What if diplomacy is found to be superior to bombs and bribes in protecting America?

    What happens if my concerns are completely unfounded?

    Nothing.

    But what happens if my concerns are justified and ignored?

    Nothing good.

    And I yield back the balance of my time.”



    Does it really sound as words of another “lackey of the grossest machine”? Do actions of this man for his many terms in Congress really strike as ones of such a lackey? And in case Roger failed to notice again, due to the way in which this duopoly circus is arranged, Dr. Paul had to seek the Republican nomination in the last presidential election - talking about “to a man and to a woman”. While Roger, 3 years after this speech and after 23 years of the impeccably consistent standing of Representative Paul on the House Floor virtually alone, was still promoting the verified corporate puppet Obama and supporting his re-election. Was he aware of all this stuff then? Is he familiar with it at least now? Because Roger’s action is irrational.

    So, I think, unlike the restless Ron Paul who had many very justified questions for his colleagues, I have only one for Roger - considering the gravity of the current situation, isn’t it time to cease to look up to Homer Simpson and approach it somewhat more seriously?





  • so this
    time, you really brought that "roger-obama thing "even more precicely
    and understandable into this forum and again i must say that i agree to all
    points. so if there was anything unclear before you posted the last two longer
    parts it must be easy for everybody to realize what is going wrong with roger´s
    action and, most important , what should be done if he wants to turn his action
    into a rational one.

    i am also rather impressed of this " what if " speech. doesn´t it unambigiously unmask the extend of irresponsibility and the unavoidable danger of consequences of the us foreign policy?


    as i had read roger´s statement in the aricle mentioned my doupts were getting into the same dirrection like yours , although i also was not aware of any alternative" cadidates on the other side".

    but let me go into roger´s action as an artist by one example. i am aware that people only come to see the show ( or prefere to eat popcorn in the cinema and won´t be "awakened by the ratio of water in their bodies and get out new born...")

    but in spite of that, let me express why i think that if an artist puts that fundamental question" Mother ,Should I trust the government?” ( at minute 25 on the cliphttp://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=OKxt-fOCB1s) into his project and IF he has some intention to "awake" people in some way, and IF it´s not just one brick of a circus whichs arena is that meaningful seeming grafity wall, WHY is his answer nothing else than " No....more fucking war" ?

    roger, if you want to put some question mark in the heads of the audience about the right to exist of war in general then this superficial answer is enough. who the hell wants war really?? but if you want bring some fundamental doupts into the mind of your fans about the current state of war in the world, it is not enough at all! then you have to

    TELL THE NAMES, TO SHOW THE PLACES WHERE WAR HAPPENS; TO SHOW THE FACES OF THE MURDERES, SHOW THE MASSES OF THEIR VICTIMS; TO TELL THE NUMBERS OF THE KILLED WOMEN; CHILDREN AND SOLDIERS AND POSITION THEM ONTO YOUR WALL! etc. etc.....

    BRING SOME DEMONSTRATIONS OF CONNECTIONS!  BRING SOME UNCOMFORTABLENESS AND UNPREDICTABILITY INTO THE GAME!

    IF YOU WANT TO A REBEL LIKE THE MAN YOU QUOTED ON YOUR WEBSITE you should TAKE SOME RISK OF BEING UNPOPULAR IN THE CROWD

    WHICH YOU HAD PROOVED TO BE IN YOUR LYRICS OF ANIMALS; THE WALL AND AMUSED TO DEATH

    you know that popularity is not based on truth!






  • StrayDogStrayDog May 2013
    I truly like this idea of showing concrete victims and exposing their murderers on Roger’s Wall. Definite crimes, definite perpetrators. It’s chaste, effective, and very workable from a technical standpoint.

    The only problem is that it would be the same thing as to place the mirror in front of the crowd. Because 98% of people it’s comprised of are essentially accomplices to those murders. But they won’t admit that. Ever. They are prepared to chant void anti-war declarations, but not to accept actual responsibility. And, yes, to remind them of that is the shortest way to “unpopularity”. Because they do not like to be reminded of that at all. They prefer to jerk off publicly over their sorry asses attending some gig or snatching another collectable item (for some unknown reasons this pathetic wanking is subtly termed “talking about music”). And they will continue to amuse themselves until the shit hits the fan right in their own backyard.

    But even then they won’t take any responsibility. They will assume the look of indignant innocence and ask: “How could it happen in our America (England, Canada and so on)? Everything was so fine … We were buying things and all … There must be someone to blame for that … that is someone else … we need this someone to be brought to justice … and we want our cosy little lives back … any volunteers to accomplish that?”. Such volunteers will instantly emerge. Strictly speaking, they are already out there. They will find some guilty ones pretty quickly and propose another Patriot Act to deal with them and the overall situation. Then they will ask for a couple more.

    In fact, there will be no need to even ask. Or to impose anything by force. It doesn’t take an Einstein to figure out what will happen to all these wusses - the “civilized masses” of the “Free Western world” - spoiled by decades of Liberal Dogma and welfare states, who are constantly babbling something about love, peace, tolerance and everything while not giving the slightest shit about women and children, being killed in droves, so that they could continue to buy their toys and distract themselves with them, hoping to keep dodging the reality forever, after just a tiny little doze of “real life”. Like, for instance, after two months into a global hyperinflation event. They will be crawling on their fucking knees begging for any sort of dictatorship just to terminate this certainly completely undeserved disaster. Their wish will be willingly granted. It rings a bell, doesn't it? “Waiting for the Worms”. Or Germany, the early 30s … But, I guess, you know everything about the latter case.

    Nonetheless, I think that something still can be done - at least all those nice things do not have to irrevocably strike as soon as tomorrow. As for Roger … I do believe that he could actually contribute into this something - if he embarks upon real, honest, sensible, precise and consistent action. To implement that idea of yours might be a good start. Let’s see what Roger thinks about it.


  • barjohn May 2013
    Armchair politics... zzzz....
  • StrayDogStrayDog May 2013
    To provide Roger with some more clues which might help him to switch to more sensible actions, let’s take a closer look at Ron Paul’s farewell address to Congress. What if - before we all get engaged in this big noble crusade against Israel - we still discover a couple of things which might pretty urgently require our attention at home?

    First of all, here is a series of quotes from that speech which contribute into the description of the current state of things and its origins:

    “If liberty is the principle that protects all personal, social and economic decisions necessary for maximum prosperity and the best chance for peace - it should be an easy sell. Yet, history has shown that the masses have been quite receptive to the promises of authoritarians which are rarely if ever fulfilled.

    Why the people of a country like ours, once the freest and most prosperous, allowed the conditions to deteriorate to the degree that they have?

    It is good when material abundance is a result of liberty but if materialism is all that we care about, problems are guaranteed. The material benefits became more important than the understanding and promoting the principles of liberty and a free market.

    The wealth that we enjoyed and seemed to be endless, allowed concern for the principle of a free society to be neglected. As long as most people believed the material abundance would last forever, worrying about protecting a competitive productive economy and individual liberty seemed unnecessary.

    But the damage to the market economy, and the currency, has been insidious and steady. It took a long time to consume our wealth, destroy the currency and undermine productivity and get our financial obligations to a point of no return. Confidence sometimes lasts longer than deserved. Most of our wealth today depends on debt.

    The crisis arrived because the illusion that wealth and prosperity would last forever has ended. Since it was based on debt and a pretense that debt can be papered over by an out-of-control fiat monetary system, it was doomed to fail. We have ended up with a system that doesn’t produce enough even to finance the debt and no fundamental understanding of why a free society is crucial to reversing these trends.

    Without an intellectual awakening, the turning point will be driven by economic law. A dollar crisis will bring the current out-of-control system to its knees.

    If it’s not accepted that big government, fiat money, ignoring liberty, central economic planning, welfarism, and warfarism caused our crisis we can expect a continuous and dangerous march toward corporatism and even fascism with even more loss of our liberties.  

    The answer available is based on the Constitution, individual liberty and prohibiting the use of government force to provide privileges and benefits to all special interests.”


  • crusader May 2013
    Hi from Russia!
    I feel myself just as RW.
    He's Indepen'd and adequat'd.
    Bless im!
    Live to live hb fuc'd politics!


  • StrayDogStrayDog May 2013
    Ron Paul continues to describe the “dangerous period in which we now live”. And which we are supposed to do something about - right here, Roger, not somewhere.

    “Today we face a dependency on government largesse for almost every need. Our liberties are restricted and government operates outside the rule of law, protecting and rewarding those who buy or coerce government into satisfying their demands. Here are a few examples:

        Undeclared wars are commonplace.

        Welfare for the rich and poor is considered an entitlement.

        The economy is overregulated, overtaxed and grossly distorted by a deeply flawed monetary system.

        Debt is growing exponentially.

        The Patriot Act and FISA legislation passed without much debate have resulted in a steady erosion of our 4th Amendment rights.

        Tragically our government engages in preemptive war, otherwise known as aggression, with no complaints from the American people (emphasis is added).

        The drone warfare we are pursuing worldwide is destined to end badly for us as the hatred builds for innocent lives lost and the international laws flaunted. Once we are financially weakened and militarily challenged, there will be a lot resentment thrown our way.

        It’s now the law of the land that the military can arrest American citizens, hold them indefinitely, without charges or a trial.

        Rampant hostility toward free trade is supported by a large number in Washington.

        Supporters of sanctions, currency manipulation and WTO trade retaliation, call the true free traders “isolationists.”

        Sanctions are used to punish countries that don’t follow our orders.

        Bailouts and guarantees for all kinds of misbehavior are routine.

        Central economic planning through monetary policy, regulations and legislative mandates has been an acceptable policy.”


  • again, i agree to your continous try to provide roger with these quotes. if i have understood everything right, this time we can find some points adressing more to the reponsibilty of the american people themselves and which are the reason for the current state as well if even more:

    Why the people of a country like ours, once the freest and most
    prosperous, allowed the conditions to deteriorate to the degree that
    they have?

    The crisis arrived because the illusion that wealth and prosperity would last forever has ended

    Without an intellectual awakening, the turning point will be driven by economic law.

    If it’s not accepted that big government, fiat money, ignoring liberty,
    central economic planning, welfarism, and warfarism caused our crisis we
    can expect a continuous and dangerous march toward corporatism and even
    fascism with even more loss of our liberties.

    as far as i can see, ron paul seems to be someone who doesn´t shy away from "accusing"  people  whom we wants to vote him. and if i am not wrong, this is a rather interesting fact. i am not that good in poliltical thinking but if you look at it just human, he does not give the guilt to his opponents as its usual in election campaigns but to us all together which is fact of course.

    concerning roger´s stage work of the wall i would really have some ideas which could provide his intention mentioned in the statement on his web site to put the message of the wall into broader concerns. besides, there still remains the question of his public relations work which means his precence in the european media when he goes on tour there in sumer like tv or radio for instance. i don´t mean any bla bla talk shows but critical cultural/ political broadcasts which do exist( in my country on ARTE or 3 sat) where he could declare some of his points of view instead of always only answering the same boring questions like what is his favourate song of the wall or other senseless stuff.

    mildly said , there STILL ARE ways to do something, roger and YOU HAVE more opportunities than YOU USE AT THE MOMENT.
  • StrayDogStrayDog May 2013
    You got it right. Ron Paul would be the only one out there who does not try to use the political arena to throw another show of smoke and mirrors, but simply speaks the truth. Whatever it is. It’s indeed something rare among our human species, especially today. And among politicians it’s something unique. Not only does Dr. Paul understand that to find the way out of the current mess we should start with giving an honest description of the present sate of affairs and its origins, and taking our share of responsibility, but he also acts accordingly. And he does it with a perfect consistency. Because “when political action is taken for the right reasons, not for personal aggrandizement, money or power, it’s easy to understand why compromise should be avoided. It also becomes clear why progress is best achieved by working with coalitions, which bring people together, without anyone sacrificing his principles”, as Dr. Paul puts it himself. I will get back to this point in my concluding part dedicated to his farewell address to Congress.

    And you are certainly right that joining forces is the key. That’s precisely my point. If it’s done it could bring the effectiveness of endeavours in question and substance of their outcomes to another level. Both your suggestions, for instance - concerning some meaningful alterations to stage performances as well as promotional activities - are very reasonable if one is to pursue the cause, not to sell oneself. There ARE things to be done. There ARE people to team up with. Let’s try to help to make it real.
     

  • roger,

    in the case that you intend to express the background of your statement of your website( why the wall now) to an audience not only interested in rock star stories or the show effects of your wall project, here are some programms of which i really think that they work rather seriously and try to figure out critical points about political, social and cultural issues being non- mainstream as far as it´s possible.

    http://www.3sat.de/kulturzeit/index.html

    http://www.daserste.de/information/wissen-kultur/ttt/index.html

    http://aspekte.zdf.de/

    and the following one is a radio station

    http://www.dradio.de/dlf/wir/

    and a newspaper

    http://www.taz.de/!p3305/

    ".....but I have a sense that just beneath the surface understanding is
    gaining ground. We just have to keep blogging, keep twittering, keep
    communicating, keep sharing ideas. "

    i totally agree with what you say. but blogging about what? twittering about what? communicating about what? sharing what ideas? to bring some change?

    did you ever expect what´s going on on your forums here?


  • StrayDogStrayDog May 2013
    My previous comments on Ron Paul’s farewell speech to Congress, which summarizes his take on the present state of things, were dedicated to describing this current situation. But what does he have to offer? Is he going to place the responsibility on someone else? Is he going to blame politicians for everything, but, irrationally enough, expect them, at the same time, to change this everything for the better? He is not. That’s what, quite unexpectedly, the author of "The Trial" seems to be pretty good at. But Dr. Paul’s views here are just as consistent as anywhere else. That’s what he has to say:

    “If the people are unhappy with the government performance it must be recognized that government is merely a reflection of an immoral society that rejected a moral government of constitutional limitations of power and love of freedom.

    If this is the problem all the tinkering with thousands of pages of new laws and regulations will do nothing to solve the problem.

    I never believed that the world or our country could be made more free by politicians, if the people had no desire for freedom.

    Under the current circumstances the most we can hope to achieve in the political process is to use it as a podium to reach the people to alert them of the nature of the crisis and the importance of their need to ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEMSELVES, if it is liberty that they truly seek.  Without this, a constitutionally protected free society is impossible.

    The ultimate solution is not in the hands of the government.

    The solution falls on each and every individual.
    With guidance from family, friends and community.

    The #1 responsibility for each of us is to change ourselves with hope that others will follow.”

    (emphasis is added)

    So, Roger, in two words - it is not about Obama “growing cojones” and, all of a sudden, starting to rule over us in the way you would like him to. This wish is so ridiculous that it hardly deserves a comment, let alone the fact that it’ll never be granted. It’s about you growing a set and realizing one simple truth: the only one who can bring real change is yourself. But that would take two things: adequate perception, supplemented with willingness to admit the whole truth whatever it is (not part of it which is convenient to you) and honest action, supplemented with willingness to go all the way. Judging by your occasional forays into the area of social activism you seem to be lacking in both.



  • Bump
  • Bump
  • bump
  • StrayDogStrayDog June 2013
    Roger has recently delivered another interview. In this one he expressed his profound satisfaction with the fact that Tony Blair was considered one of the most despicable characters in the UK. That’s because Roger holds him responsible for the UK joining the US in the 2003 invasion of “fucking” Iraq (if my translator - the stuff was in German - did the job right), while most of British people were against it.

    That military aggression was another hideous imperialist crime. Here I agree. But what I do not quite understand are the reasons which enable Mr. Waters to hold himself innocent - since I do not remember Mr. Blair being imposed on poor Roger by powerful evil aliens. And those folks were against the war? Really? They were probably asked: “Do you want our country to go to war with Iraq?”. War costs money, sometimes lives - so they said “No, we do not” (over 60% of them that is, if I’m not mistaken).

    But if they’d been asked: “How about the US goes to war with Iraq and liberates it - do you  think our country should participate in managing its oil resources?”, despite the fact that in plain English it could be read “How about the US invades the country - should we participate in looting?”, 95% of them would have most definitely said “Sure, by all means” - again, simply pursuing their interests. But that would be essentially the SAME question. And in case you have forgotten, Roger - you’re one of those folks.

    It’s people in America in the late 60s - hundreds of thousands of them - who were protesting against the war in Vietnam while putting their future, jobs, welfare, and often lives on the line, were against the war. Clowns who put on their “Fuck War” T-shirts and go to a gig to chill out a little are not. Neither is someone who is amusing them on stage.   

    And, sadly enough, Roger, but you start to sound exactly like this Mr. Albert “Pig In A Cage On Antibiotics” Miles here: “Governments are doing what they are doing - I have nothing to do with it. I’m generally not responsible for my words. Nor actions. Nor any outcomes. It’s them …”. But it’s not the mentality of Sheep. It’s not the mentality of Pigs. It’s the mentality of Sheepigs.

    So, bravo, Roger! It’s certainly the way to go. So keep it up. And let us all boycott Israel. Or the dark side of the fucking Moon.


  • would you please post the link of the interview? i couldn´t find neither on fb nor here on this site.
  • thanks for the service- i was too lazy for googling and it´s a rainy sunday you know.
    so in the second interview again we´got some significant points which , sadly, seem to confirm our fears. it will take some time but i´ll go into it soon.

    firstly i need a walk at fresh air to blow away the bitterness about the fact that there IS someone in a position with the best conditions to tell the WHOLE truth- but he doesn´t!
  • SMALL TALK MIDST OF THE CROSS FIRE

    the first point of the second interview i want to figure out is roger´s comparison of the national stadium of santiago and the olympic stadium of berlin which both in their architecture remind of the german nazi regime.

    "....at the time of the pinochet regime it was a prison. we were making the show at the same place where the junta prisoned , examined and tortured people whom they declared as their enemies.this was FRIGHTENING.....(before the show) i have met activists and politicians as camila valejo, the leader of the left student movement and the chile president sebastian pinera. he is a liar and a dity swine if you´d ask me....the sphere of the show was politically uploaded and so was i. so I AM EXITED HOW IT WILL BE IN BERLIN."

    here again,roger , you accuse a foreign politcian as something you can, no, should accuse ALL of them! but what really makes ME frightened is that the actual thing of the conversation in this political seeming part of the interview is nothing else than something you could have said more simply:" how does it feel to play MY wall in an athmosphere of such tragic and drama of real cruelty? this is good ground for a good show, isn´t it?...." using the fact of dictature regimes whichs perception up to the present expresses itself in the CIRCUS ARENA -chosen by YOU- provides in fact a perfection of publicity which is in deed very special!

    SO AFTER ALL IT MUST BE REALLY EXITING FOR YOU.

    the second point, your implementations about the bomb attacks in gemany by the allies whichs final operation you corecctly describe as follows:

    "....these kinds of bomb attacks...where an early way of terrorism....this had nothing to do with war stragedy.... here it was about affecting and terrorising the civil and to wear them down psychologicly. this was deeply reprehensible and detestable of all compatants. but luckily, this all is history FOR A LONG TIME NOW. THANK GOD.

     this all his history FOR A LONG TIME NOW?? someone like you who offers such a respectable option called " the fallen loved ones" HAS to complete the sentence with the REALITY OF NOW  which is exactly the same  f.....  thing like it was in ww2 with the difference that you and i are just ( and yes,luckily, still) living at the edge of the boiling pot, DON´T YOU THINK?

    the third and last point:

    THE LIE OF A UNITED EUROPE

    "i hope we will find a solution for greece.."
    WE? WHOM DO YOU MEAN?THE EU PARLAMENTß THE ECONOMIC LOBBY? GOLMAN/ SACHS?

    roger,
    do you watch tv? ever heard about ARTE TV? ever heard that your dream
    of"breaking of barriers" between the people of europe was NOT the
    reason, why old german cancler kohl and his french dude made that
    misleading packaging of united europe? it was pure vanity of writing
    history just like it was in the german reunion. and the start of the
    cheating was in?... greece! bilances were faked in such  irresponsible
    ways and critical voices were not only ignored but attacked personally
    and so on and so on.

    the results of over a decade of lies and
    suppression of truth we have now in greece, spain, italy, ireland and it
    will get all over the continent. "we need a new model of teamwork"

    WOULD YOU TELL THIS TO THE ENRAGED PEOPLE IN the STREETS OF ATHEN or MADRID?
    a new model of teamwork between the MEMBERS OF THE MAFIA?

    BUT THIS IS THE BEST! CONGRATS!:
    "Ja gut, ihr seid halt ein bisschen Big-Brother-artig in der Vermittlung
    eurer Spar-Vorschläge. Aber das geht schon in Ordnung, es ist ja
    schließlich euer Geld, das ihr da reinsteckt"

    incredible to read this from you.
    "yes
    ok, your (german people) propositions of saving money are kind of big
    brother like but that´s ok, finally it´s your money you put in there."

    every word i wrote here i wrote after thinking about its effect to the readers. aware of consequences.

    can say this about yourself?

  • @stray dog

    i forgot to declare my total agreement to all points of your last implementations. and what you say about the risk of protesting and military service refusing people in the peace movement of the 60íes is just what i think so often when i see what is happening now- and meanwhile,there is more war than it was in that time!
  • StrayDogStrayDog June 2013
    I’d say yes, the other interview does have a couple of strong things to offer too. I will touch briefly upon just one of them …

    First of all, I agree with Roger that the devastating bombings of Dresden at the end of WW2, for example, which he mentions in this interview, had indeed “nothing to do with strategic warfare" and essentially were “the early form of terrorism”. I would just add - the early form of state terrorism (just like the heinous crime of Hiroshima and Nagasaki that turned in a way, as Camus quite justly puts it, the Nuremberg trials with the US posing as judges into a farce).    

    But, Roger, may I remind you that a military aggression against the sovereign state of Libya, undertaken by Western powers (including your glorious democracy, which actions are your responsibility as a voting citizen exactly to the same extent as anybody else’s in your country) under a fake humanitarian cover just a couple of years ago, consisted, among other things, of 15 000 of strike sorties (according to NATO’s official releases, not to Thierry Meyssan). 6 months, 15 000 strike sorties - that is bombings, Roger. 500 bombings each week, 80 each day. Those “humanitarian” strikes targeted densely populated residential areas, objects of crucial civilian infrastructure, educational institutions, hospitals. They targeted unarmed people, women and children. It was not then. It was today. In our shiny politically correct world, Roger. Populated with such nice tolerant folks. The one you give your concerts in.

    Another illegal military aggression against another sovereign state - you are subtly referring to it as the “war with fucking Iraq” - initiated in 2003 by the same perpetrators, was another outright crime and caused more than 1 500 000 civilian “fucking” deaths - that is people like you, Roger. Or your children, for instance. May I also remind you that UK casualties in WW2 were 450 000.  

    Now, I wouldn’t even venture to start to think in order to begin to imagine what ways one's mental process should be going to lead one from this premise to concluding that such things are “history” and something that “we have left behind us - thank God”. Roger, are you deaf, blind, living on Mars? Not only haven’t any of them become history but they are gaining momentum and, with the help of such idiotically irresponsible statements as yours, dragging us all in the direction of that “valley of steel”. State terrorism is going to the next level under the disguise of “humanitarian missions”, “spreading democracy” and “protecting citizens”, while the docile self-serving masses - that is ourselves - are swallowing this totally insane and lethally dangerous hypocrisy easily.

    So, what’s the matter with you, Roger? And what’s the matter with us all? To what level should one degenerate as an existential unit to unhesitatingly prefer to indulge in reporting on how many times they chose to urinate this morning to at least a feeble attempt to avoid our certainly brilliant as of today future?




  • It is A WALL of FEAR and GREED

    There is enough of everything in THE WORLD for us all to have
    enough to eat, to be warm and dry and to have a colour TV and a car. WE
    are taught to FEAR that if WE share what WE have with THEM, WE won’t
    have anything left for US.

    WE also FEAR that THEY may try to take what WE have away from US,
    so WE spend WAY more than THEY would need to feed, house, clothe, and
    EDUCATE THEMSELVES, on weapons to prevent THEM from taking what WE have
    away from US.


    There is another WALL between US and the reality of OUR lives.

    This WALL is called THE MEDIA. This WALL is a tool that is used to divert US from inconvenient truths.

    Perhaps I should stop now, before I alienate anybody.
  • there has something gone wrong with my last post. tried to cancel it but it didn´t work
  • StrayDogStrayDog June 2013
    @waveproject

    Yeah, it's not too good.

    Because, frankly, I was under the impression that Iraq, for example, wasn’t exactly about protecting what is OURS from THEM - even in a pre-emptive mode. But rather about stealing what was THEIRS. Just like it was nicely termed in “Avatar”: “This is how it’s done. When people are sitting on shit that you want, you make them your enemy. Then you’re justified in taking it.”

    And as to the mainstream media - we have already been talking about that more than once. Those guys are certainly jerks (to say the least), but they do not put a loaded gun at our head. It’s US who choose to swallow their crap. And we are fully responsible for this choice.

    So do not copy/paste stuff. You don’t need it. Despite your continuing edgy experiments with English grammar (understandable) and spelling (not quite), you are doing much better when you speak yourself.    



  • mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-ansi-language:EN-GB;mso-fareast-language:
    DE;mso-bidi-language:AR-SA" lang="EN-GB">

    mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-ansi-language:EN-GB;mso-fareast-language:
    DE;mso-bidi-language:AR-SA" lang="EN-GB">

    mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-ansi-language:EN-GB;mso-fareast-language:
    DE;mso-bidi-language:AR-SA" lang="EN-GB">

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Apply for Membership

Welcome to the message board. Please be courteous to all your fellow forum users.

Contact forum@rogerwaters.com with any issues.