Friday, May 22, 2009

No Change


I haven't been able to post much over the past few months, but every once in a while I've had a laugh or two at the ridiculousness of some of the FPM marketing spins spewed onto the nation's billboards and airwaves (say what you will about Hizballah, but at least they're pretty up front about how little they care for the political/social/civil/geographical integrity of the country ... if you know how to read/listen to their speeches, that is).

Perhaps the most hilarious of these media stints has been the abduction of the Obama US presidential campaign's "Change" motto.

Putting aside the sheer ridiculousness of the motto's new found home, made painfully apparent by the everyday (and more severe, not-so-everyday) events that have transpired in the country over the past four years - and which seem to be occurring on an increasingly frequent basis as we approach June 7th - lets take a look at what could possibly be meant and understood by this "creative" (are you kidding me?) campaign spin by a group most accurately characterized as being a political carcass of a group formerly known as the FPM.

Change ... Could it be that the "change" being alluded has something to do with the upcoming elections, and changing the manner in which the country has been ruled in the past?

Perhaps, but then how much sense would such a claim make coming from a party, or a General, who beyond a shadow of a doubt has been shown to have cut deals, both political and financial, with the Syrian regime which occupied and lorded over the country for fifteen years? Not only cut deals, but also swore to kill the only successful drive at sovereignty to come about in the country against that Syrian regime's occupation? The end-result of such a deal can therefore be construed as a return to that occupation and mutilation of any hope for the "change" that could have been.

Perhaps then, as some of the blogosphere's dimmer lights have sought to project over the past several months, the "change" being referred to is a foreign one, a bet by the General and his lemmings on an external "change" in policy - say coming from the US and directed at Syria - which the General (who, if you recall, sided with Saddam Hussein against the world) hopes will allow him to capitalize on (through his newly-refreshed ties with that country's autocratic regime) to lay claim over a country he apparently feels owes him so much ... the end-result being the same as that above.

And so the ridiculousness, the idiocy, and the distortion continues. Change. As the elections approach, the country will decide if it is willing to put up for the only real change to come our way in over 15 years of occupation, or shut up.

I'll see you when the results are out.

4 comments:

  1. "I'll see you when the results are out."

    And not before?

    ReplyDelete
  2. ... hehehe, what can I say, I'll try but judging by the last few months ... :S

    ReplyDelete
  3. davidp9:50 AM

    "foreswore to kill the only successful drive at sovereignty to come about in the country against that Syrian regime's occupation?"

    I do not really understand this phrase. What you mean by "foreswore" is unclear to me.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks for the comment davidp, it was an ms auto-correct typo, its swore.

    ReplyDelete

Powered by Blogger.