BB Part Two

Maybe the US should take a lesson from the greatest of the Enlightenmentalists, the German philosopher, Immanuel Kant, whose ideas did result in the League of Nations and later the United Nations

While Kant did believe in the concept of Republicanism, he did give warning:

"The idea of international law presupposes the separate existence of many independent but neighbouring states. Although this condition does itself include a possibility for war, this is rationally preferable to the amalgamation of states under one superior single entity." (Apparently as with George W Bush in today's United States).

As Kant concludes his passage:

Under one universal personage laws will often lose in vigor compared to what a federal union gains in extent. What remains henceforth, can be a soulless despotism stifling the seeds of the Good...."

As most social scientists have learnt, Kant's plan for a League of' or a United Nations, was what he termed a Federation of Nations.

One wonders therefore, whether he would have regarded even the United Nations as being soulless because it lacks a multiple executive

My guess is Howard is attacking the first available soft target in the
US in a reaction to the Thick Sheik calling him "Mr Me
too" because "he waits for any news from America to
say 'me too'", and Anthony Mundine calling him a "a
puppet to the bigger brothers, who are England and
America".

The bizarre aspect is that comments by idiots are actually
effecting the prime minister.

I am fascinated to note that when the previous Leader of the Opposition (I think he was called Latham) called President Bush "the most dangerous and incompetent President in history" there was little comment in the media, but when John Howard makes a reasoned and sensible remark that Al-Quada would have every reason to pray for a Democrat victory, he is portrayed as endangering the US alliance.

This is obviously another display of the total impartiality of our media.

For the fun of all I am venturing my arm in forecasting the name of the next President of the USA. The name is Jeb Bush.

There are some other points that other posters may care to comment on. These are:

1. The UN will NEVER come to our rescue. Hopefully, the US may.

2. When you are short of resources, you don't ration them out, you have a little war to see who gets the lot, and who gets nothing.

3. Human nature has not progressed to any noticeable extent in the last 50,000 years.

4. The main world problem, from which all others emanate, is overpopulation.

Strategically, it makes sense for John Howard to bring Australia back into the Terrorist spotlight, tempting them with ernest to explode something here before the next election.

He has something in common with the the two shieks that have outraged us all by isolating and vilifying Australia to the rest of the world. They both want trouble for their own seperate agendas with the same outcome. More conflict and war.

I mean, how many wanted to say "shut up and stay out of the gunfire"?

There is a theory that it will provoke a response either Easter or Mardi Gras, where lots of people with a body count will drive the populace to a frenzy of fear. Mardi Gras would be a brilliant target. Howard couldn't care less about the individuals in the body count, and those close will be so scared to death, they'll vote him back to power.

The terrorists don't want a Democrat US President or the ALP in Australian Government either. They like to have a clear enemy to demonise and keep them in business. The last thing they want is negotiation and peace.

It sure worked for Mayor Julianni of NY just after 9 / 11. His opinion polls were a record low before this tactic put the Grand Old Party back on top, and the people back down in fear and confusion.

If this happens in Australia in the next few months, then you will know that that Howard's comments provoked them. Howard is cunning. It is the ultimate strategy. Brilliant.

How evil is his hunger for power? In the next few months, if you see things exploding, you know that John Howard is reading the Hairy Goat somewhere before he celebrates.

He will say something else shocking to provoke the terrorists in the next few weeks, you can bet your bottom dollar. He will stop at nothing to have his own people exploded for the sake of fear, to rule to the bitter end.

Think about it

Howard is falling apart. He's grabbing for his old tactic, fear and name calling. To resort to name calling re Obama really has revealed him for what he is. The rodent, teeth bared, whiskers trembling. Note no response re Obama's calling Howard's bluff. How Hard never really committed many troops. Just enough for political gain but not enough to actually help anyone. That's what Obama was pointing at.

Rudd's no genius by the way and I doubt he could lead a horse to water (to coin a phrase) but it's looking like a drover's dog election to me.

An old man who is now frothing at the mouth in Question Time, spitting accidentally, using hearing aids but still claiming he can't hear over a rowdy Opposition (actually there was NO noise at all)during THAT question.

He's put loudmouths Abbott and Costelloe on the front line to call names. Expect Bibl quotes and calling on God for support. Prey or pray or pay.

He's still got the warchest but what's he going to spend it on? Everything he will name has been an area where he has meanly deprived people of services. He'll just look a fool, at last.

We may or may not like the Prime Minister (actually he is a brilliant politician) but what/who is the alternative?