American Septic Tanks

South Asian countries call Americans "sepis" for a good reason -- it is short for septic tank.

Take a look at the non-sense form America:

They want to have two standards on information -- it can only be used if the Americans say "OK," but must be ignored if the Americans say "We don't want to face reality."

American torture: US changes the subject . . . again

EU wants to inspect the detention centers; but the arrogant Americans are changing the subject.

Just like they did with the CIA revelations.

Said the Senate, "Hay we don't want to look into the detention centers, we want to go after the CIA officials who talked about the crimes."

* * *

The Americans absurdly argue, "You can't start investigations based on media reports."

Well, that's not the way the US Attorney and FBI work. If there are credible news reports by credible media outlets, the FBI does investigate investigations into matters of voting fraud.

* * *

How do the Sepis explain within their own US Attorney Manual, permission for the FBI to obtain media phone records as evidence?

Or are we saying the arrogant goons in the DoJ are asking for information that is "not reliable"?

No, the problem, as always, is the White House does not like it when the DoJ Prosecutor like Fitzgerald dares to use media reports as the basis to charge FBI agents with the responsibility to examine, under oath and penalty of perjury, White House staffers.

They might get indicted.

The reason the media is subpoenaed is that they are considered reliable sources of information to prosecute.

* * *

But let's consider the argument: Who is the US to suggest, "Someone can't use the media as the basis for action."

Surely the US must be joking.

For it was the "media propaganda" from the NYT's Judith Miller-Libby spin machine that was the basis for the US unlawful action in Iraq.

* * *

Why does America have:

A. one standard for using the media when it comes to FBI investigations; then

B. a second standard when it comes to using the media to mobilize for an unlawful war; but

C. a third standard when it comes to other nations using the media to review matters?

No answer from the Sepis!

* * *

Lawful investigations are based on credible media reports.

If America wants to deny others the "right to review based on the media," then America has shown it is the enemy of a free flow of information.

* * *

American only likes information if it is . . .

used for our goals, not the rule of law;

from our propagandists, not from leakers about war crimes;

from contractors we've paid to write the stories, not from contractors paid to collect evidence of war crimes;

used as the basis for us to invade countries, not if it is used to hold us accountable for war crimes or crimes against humanity;

used to deny others the right to exercise their rights, and can be twisted to cover-up our doctored videos and testilying by arrogant law enforcement officers; and

used to justify denying people the right to assert their self-dignity, and abuse them for daring to stand up to what is degrading, inhumane, and unlawful treatment.

* * *

America cannot claim it has a "superior position" when it comes to statements about the "appropriate" use of the media.

Why is it "OK" for America to make decisions about unlawful war based on "media reports," but the world cannot use the same media to hold America accountable for the conduct during that war?

The Sepis have no answer, just more excuses.

* * *

America wants the world to embrace:

"Information is slavery."

"Information is ignorance."

"Information is misinformation."

"Information is not information."

"Information cannot be used to make informed decisions."

"Information is not information."

QED.

* * *

The Sepis argue, "[I]t was inappropriate and illegitimate for her to question US conduct on the basis of media reports. "Ref

The world has another view.

Stupid Americans.

Sepi!