The Only Monopoly that Matters
The crack-up of Empire will provide its all-too-brief episodes of amusement, for which we subjects must be duly grateful. ("You will be grateful, you pathetic pissants!" scream Our Masters in D.C.)
Here is Harry Reid on closing Guantanamo, releasing terrorists (alleged terrorists, to be accurate -- "NO!" loudly proclaim Our Masters. "They are terrorists, because we say so! Why would they be in prison if they weren't terrorists? Hah! Didn't think of that, did you, you piece of scum!" "Oh, thank you, sir," sez I. "Sorry, sorry, sorry. I forgot. Thank you, sir! Harder, sir! I deserve it!" grovel grovel grovel), and -- o, wondrous mysteries of life! -- the endlessly baffling epistemological and linguistic complexities raised by transferring a "terrorist" ("Oh, thank you, sir. That was a good one!") from one prison to another:
This is like the hardest essay ever in an advanced philosophy seminar. That Harry Reid is someastoundingly stupid doofus impressive guy. ("Fixed it, sir! Sorry, sorry, very sorry!")
I detect another dynamic here. When we consider that the United States government slowly, inexorably transforms itself into institutionalized terrorism both abroad and at home (or not slowly at all, depending on where you are in relation to the bombs, bullets and numerous other instrumentalities of murder and control), we realize that Our Masters, with less than a handful of exceptions, are terrorists themselves.
So when Reid purports to speak for his fellow rulers as well as himself on this question, he inadvertently reveals their real concern.
They don't want the competition.
Here is Harry Reid on closing Guantanamo, releasing terrorists (alleged terrorists, to be accurate -- "NO!" loudly proclaim Our Masters. "They are terrorists, because we say so! Why would they be in prison if they weren't terrorists? Hah! Didn't think of that, did you, you piece of scum!" "Oh, thank you, sir," sez I. "Sorry, sorry, sorry. I forgot. Thank you, sir! Harder, sir! I deserve it!" grovel grovel grovel), and -- o, wondrous mysteries of life! -- the endlessly baffling epistemological and linguistic complexities raised by transferring a "terrorist" ("Oh, thank you, sir. That was a good one!") from one prison to another:
REID: I’m saying that the United States Senate, Democrats and Republicans, do not want terrorists to be released in the United States. That’s very clear."Can't put them in prison unless you release them." Discuss.
QUESTION: No one’s talking about releasing them. We’re talking about putting them in prison somewhere in the United States.
REID: Can’t put them in prison unless you release them.
QUESTION: Sir, are you going to clarify that a little bit? I mean (OFF-MIKE).
REID: I can’t make it any more clear than the statement I have given to you. We will never allow terrorists to be released in the United States.
This is like the hardest essay ever in an advanced philosophy seminar. That Harry Reid is some
I detect another dynamic here. When we consider that the United States government slowly, inexorably transforms itself into institutionalized terrorism both abroad and at home (or not slowly at all, depending on where you are in relation to the bombs, bullets and numerous other instrumentalities of murder and control), we realize that Our Masters, with less than a handful of exceptions, are terrorists themselves.
So when Reid purports to speak for his fellow rulers as well as himself on this question, he inadvertently reveals their real concern.
They don't want the competition.
<< Home