Fighting Terrorism Stops At the Oil Pumps

The Flower of Our Youth Fights Terrorism
While Government PolicySupports It.


There is a kind of wrong-headed logic prevalent in Washington today that suggests it’s okay to send our young people to fight terrorism overseas but turns a blind eye to the fact that the money we pay in inflated oil prices supports the conduct of terrorism.

We cannot continue to claim to attack terrorism on one hand while on the other hand, we provide the financial framework for terrorists to continue their Jihad against the West.

This is the kind of connection that no one in power wants to make because it happens to point up the on-going hypocrisy of moving forward with a deliberately self serving policy that is supportive of narrow interests. On a macro scale, there is little motivation to change a policy that serves to maintain the status-quo.

In short, it is clear from the inaction inside the Beltway that there is no visible incentive to do anything about a strategy that serves cross-purposes and has the imprimatur of the US government.
]
Why is there no outcry for change? Because of oil related entanglements
that few want revealed that continue to produce fortunes for those in decision-making positions within the greatest profit producing business in this century.

In effect, our government suggests that it is okay to send out our young people to die to protect our Middle East interests, ie. read oil, but it is not okay for our leadership to sacrifice their collective interest in the biggest profit producer yet discovered. Something is wrong, illogical and dishonest about the current arrangement.

To these questions, the government suggests that it is supporting alternative solutions. How? Promoting the idea of a fuel cell at the expense of other, more realistic strategies that have not even been considered in the latest energy bill is a disingenuous at best attempt to scuttle debate. It is not a realistic solution over a realistic time frame. Moreover, the Energy Bill cynically perpetuates the status quo, providing money for rich oil companies to continue exploration and funding for the development of coal, a dangerous and unhealthy expedient and no long term solution to America’s energy needs. . . .

The fact is that is that the fuel cell is an attempt to throw a crumb to those who question the strategy of maintaining the status quo when we should be hard at work developing every other possible solution to problem of global warming. This has not happened because there is no incentive to make it happen. If this government were serious, it would have called on Detroit to improve engine performance and to focus their resources on developing better hybrid alternatives; it would also have called on the public to conserve and asked the people to give up their gas-guzzlers in the interest of supporting a consistent and coherent policy against both global warming and the support of terrorism.

The fact is that you can’t honestly send the flower of your nation to commit themselves to wiping out terrorism when at the same time, you ask nothing of the general population. You cannot expect our youth to give up their lives when our leadership cannot even extricate itself or its family members from trafficking in oil and oil technology. You cannot face dead and wounded among our youth if you continue to endorse policies that involve supplying the money that keeps terrorism alive and a threat to the US.

It does not take an advanced degree in ethics or logic to realize that something is radically wrong here and deserving of an investigation at the very highest level. It is the strongest indictment of our media that they have failed to serve the public good by shining a very strong spotlight on these problems that attack the essential nature of our democratic form of government. In the end, democracy depends on people of conscience coming together to address what has become a smokescreen of scandalous proportions designed to keep the American people in the dark about what is really going on in terms of government policy. .

Respectfully submitted,

Les Aaron