Category: Pseudo-Event of the Week

Lupe Fiasco and Bill O’Reilly Square Off On Terrorism

The latest pseudo-controversy ruffling the feathers of empire apologists across the political spectrum is hip-hop artist Lupe Fiasco’s assertion that “the biggest terrorist is Obama in the United States of America”, a statement he made on a Shira Lazar’s ‘What’s Trending?’ on CBS.

This blew up the smoke-hole of self-described “traditionalist” Bill O’Reilly on Fox News, who has also anointed himself as something of a “culture warrior”, mainly for defending the status quo. In this exchange, O’Reilly is playing the role of empire defender, something he does as calmly and eloquently as a man would describe his new charcoal smoker barbecue. Lupe Fiasco, however, being an anti-establishment youth more seemingly aware of the empire’s existence than O’Reilly, counters the punches and explains the “terrorism” of the American government.

As usual, the interview is heavily edited, showing once again O’Reilly’s fear of live, unformatted confrontations which may question his “elite” persona. I commend Fiasco for challenging the most-watched warmonger on television.

As I so stated on the last Liberty In Exile, I agree wholeheartedly with Fiasco. I believe he articulated his points rather well, especially considering the fact that he is a musical artist squaring up against one of highest-paid political televangelists.

See what you think:

PSEUDO-EVENT OF THE WEEK: Tony Blair and Peace Medals

The Pseudo-Event for this week is the recent announcement that The National Constitution Centre in the United Kingdom will be presenting Tony Blair with its Liberty Medal.

Blair to receive US peace medal

(BBC)- Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair is to receive a prestigious US medal and $100,000 (£67,000) prize for his work in conflict resolution.

The National Constitution Centre is awarding him its Liberty Medal for “steadfast” efforts to broker peace in Northern Ireland and the Middle East.

Previous winners include Nelson Mandela and former US presidents Bill Clinton and George Bush senior.

Mr Blair said he was driven by values of “freedom, liberty and justice”.

Mr Clinton, the centre’s chairman, will present the medal in Philadelphia on 13 September.

He said: “It was a privilege to work with my friend Tony Blair to help end 30 years of sectarian violence and broker a lasting peace in Northern Ireland, to stop the killing in and mass exodus from Kosovo, and to develop policies that would improve living conditions for people in both our countries.

In response, Mr Blair, who currently works as a peace envoy to the Middle East, said: “Freedom, liberty and justice are the values by which this medal is struck.

As we see here, the self-anointed tyrants of our time are presenting themselves with medals and prizes to celebrate their élite nature and stature.

Noticeably absent from Blair’s credentials was his commitment to join George W. Bush in convincing his public to invade the sovereign nation of Iraq.

Justifying UK involvement because of the “danger” of Saddam and his “potential” weapons of mass destruction, the policies of Mr. Blair have shattered the state that was Iraq and left over 100,000 Iraqis dead and thousands upon thousands more wounded and forever scarred.

As has been admitted, the elites that governed the UK and the U.S.A. would have attempted to persuade their populations for war anyway, even if no evidence for WMDs were ever found:

By presenting Blair with peace medals and commending his efforts and actions as a human being, the National Constitution Centre is doing its part in manipulating and warping reality to fit an agreeable narrative that will be carried through history, not the story of the unjust invasion of Iraq.

To free-thinking individuals, this event only serves as a reminder that the struggle for human liberty and freedom is continuously being fought, and that reality, as we know it, is in danger of being crafted and manipulated to justify further aggression.

PSEUDO EVENT OF THE WEEK: President Obama Meets with BP

The Pseudo-Event for this week took place earlier today between President Barack Obama, his advisors and various executives of British Petroleum:

White House meeting with BP goes into overtime

June 16 (Reuters) – A White House meeting between Obama administration officials and executives at BP Plc (BP.L) (BP.N) went longer than expected on Wednesday as the two sides wrangled the company’s response to the oil spill.

Earlier BP and the White House reached a preliminary agreement for the London-based company to put some $20 billion into an escrow account to cover damage claims from the massive Gulf of Mexico spill.

According to a White House schedule, President Barack Obama was slated to attend the meeting for roughly 20 minutes starting at 10:15 a.m. The meeting was still going — though the president had long left — several hours later.

As is to be realized, this entire meeting was formally called to falsely reassure the American public that “something is getting done”. In reality, very powerful people met in a room to take a few pictures and make smug looks at each other from across the table. Obama’s presence, 20 minutes, just goes to show that theatrics play well in Washington and in the evening newscasts.

For those that aim to deconstruct the media and powerful PR firms that are our governments and big businesses, the BP oil spill has provided much material that is almost too rich t0 hoard to oneself.

To frame the arguments correctly, a look must be afforded at all sides that are dominating the airwaves:

OBAMA ADMIN AND DEMOCRATS–> The Obama administration has come out forcefully against BP, as any White House administration would do. They are calling for BP to cover all costs and “legitimate claims” and seek to use the political capital from this tragic event to pass energy reforms in Congress, which are actually structured as national energy taxes. Always seeking to disenfranchise the opposition, Government apologists are making hits against the “Tea Party Mentality”. They say that Tea Party types would have allowed an ever bigger oil spill to forgo government intervention, and that government intervention is now forever justified because of this oil spill.

EXTREME PROGRESSIVES–> Extreme progressives, in this case referring to Robert Reich, Chris Matthews and the folks at ThinkProgress, are convinced that the only solution is to nationalize BP and allow the government to take over. They seek to destroy BP and to eradicate all oil drilling in favor of “clean energy” that no one has seem to have invented yet. They believe that with government at the helm of such industries, more good than bad would result and more people would benefit across the board.

REPUBLICANS AND PARTISAN FOXNEWS CONSERVATIVES–> Taking the contrarian view as is politically, though not logically, easy to do, republicans and conservatives have been lighting up the airwaves and newspaper columns saying that Obama was “too slow” to react and could have “acted faster. These points are only being put forth because the President is on Team A instead of Team B, and no doubt is present that, if the tables were switched, the exact opposite arguments would be used by the opposite sides. Resisting to save face is always a political game.

For those that see through the illogical arguments and reactions by media and party elites, this is an issue based on property rights and tort law. If business or land is affected by the spill, it should be legally adjudicated and the claim will be answered by BP under penalty of law. Note, however, that this doesn’t include talk of nationalization, reaction time or energy reforms. It focuses, instead, on the need to answer all claims and wrongs committed by the oil spill in a peaceful, legitimate manner that respects the rule of law and does not bend to hawkish populist impulses that threaten both property and liberty.