And for the record, yes I'm a bit ashamed it took a TV show to get this post out of me

Caught Boston Legal tonight. The sister of a slain National Guardsman sues the US Army for fraud liability in the course of his recruitment. He'd signed on for a one year tour as a medic, and as a result of circumstances in Iraq his responsibility was extended 26 years and duty as an MP, for which he was untrained, and during the course of which he died.

I do not know if the situation described in the show was realistic. It sounds in line with Bush administration military policy, but I have neither done the research nor come across such knowledge in news media (I'll get to that)

If such is true, then the conservative axiom that to support the continuation of the war effort in Iraq is to honor our troops is a blatant falsehood, and if one were to look at both sides of the issue, easily the better case for treason, which is as we all know the charge levelled at whomever speaks out against the war.

It is true. We are at war. Things arise. But the means with which we pursue war, both at home in the hearts and minds of our citizens and abroad on the battlefeild, is what separates us from our enemies. Or is what should separate us. Instead of honoring our soldiers by protecting the sanctity of their deaths, we should honor them by not allowing them to be put in harms way unless it is absolutely necessary. When a soldier enlists, he pledges his life and his sacred honor to the protection of the United States. We as a nation have proven ourselves unworthy of such sacrifice by allowing our men and women in uniform to be sent to that hell that is the Iraq war under a false pretense and poor management, and furthermore by choosing to ignore their suffering. The outcry has not been there, and that is perhaps the greatest failing.

But it has become hard to be well-informed about this war. To put it bluntly, few others than those already against it are coming across the sorts of facts like the story mentioned above (assuming for the point of arguement that it's true). Mass media has experienced a chill effect from the flag wavers who do not want to be wrong, and will employ slander to defend themselves if pushed. In short, the truth has in many cases been decried as a liberal conspiracy.

I have little patience for the politics of truth. Those who would distort it for personal or political gain are below my mention, and those who will speak it proudly despite the potential consequence are heroes.


  1. The truth has always been distorted for politcial gain and always will it has just gottenout of hand.
    I missed that show due to some group studying but i love that show. I have to have it tevoed for me most of the time.

    We can not support the war and still support the troops IMO anyway. There has been some discussion and disagreement on this at another site I read.

    Live sucks bbut if it takes a telvision show to get this out of you then good for Boston Legal.

  2. i hardly watch the telly but i caught a few shows off boston legal a while back. truth has always been a tool for the one telling it and needless to say, the government is in the stone age.

  3. It's worse than the stone age. It's cavemen with power.

  4. oh, and because the relevant post is almost buried now, I was confused because I'd forgotten that I'd referenced Julius Caesar in it. So yes, you have won my favor

  5. Alice: I've heard the arguement against it, and essentially it comes down to whether or not you can support someone without agreeing with them. This "with us or against us" mentality is nothing but unnecessary polarization

  6. oh, yes. i went back to that post several times. thank goodness i won your favor. caesar is not one to trifle with.