<nettime> a couple of observations

["Ivo Skoric" <ivo {AT} reporters.net>]

1) Bush and Bushites with the American flag pins pinned on their 
dark suits standing in rows - don't they remind you of late Soviet 
leaders: they always wore some pins on their suits (Lenin/Marx 
pins, red star pins, military medals, hammer and siecle pins...), the 
second row guys usually wore a couple of them - and by the way - 
did you notice, yesterday when W. was receiving his predecessor's 
wife's approval for his post 9-11 socialist policies (true: most of 
New York city residents, including me, now have Medicaid), how 
some of the second row guys behind Bush, also had a couple of 
pins pinned to their suits. Are republicans picking up on the late 
Soviet dress-code?

2) What's up with that largest US war efforts in Afghanistan? Isn't 
the war officially over? How is that the war efforts became even 
larger once the war was over? Or is this the expected scenario - 
after all, for Soviets the war in Afghanistan literally just started once 
they occupied Kabul and "won" the war. But if it was expected, 
why would the US act so surprised? It is also interesting how this 
re-appearance of war after the war was over coincides with the 
forming (and, later, unceremonious dis-forming) of the proverbial 
Ministry of Truth by Pentagon. Could that be just a mere 
coincidence?

3) DoD unraveled a new weapon: thermobaric bomb. The bomb is 
supposed to deliver a heat blast deep into confined space. Kind of 
like a Boeing 767 minus passengers. So, it is not a terrorist 
weapon, but a democratic bomb. Still, since it is essentially based 
on Bin Laden's infamous idea, is he going to sue Pentagon over the 
copyright infringement? 

4) Did anybody else noticed how effective was the hunger strike of 
Al Qaeda captives in Guantanamo Bay? They got what they 
wanted. The superpower bowed to their demands quickly. They got 
to wear their head-scarves again. And the strike lasted less than a 
week. I don't see that as a sign of US weaknes, though. I see this 
as a sign of US relentless pragmatism: a prolonged hunger-strike 
at Guantanamo Bay would cost US much more in p.r. terms, than 
the required increase in security checks if the detainees are 
allowed to wear their turbans. On the other hand, letting them win 
the turban game may make them less defensive and more open for 
co-operation in more important matters.

ivo

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net