Matt's Journal

I AM ME · Post by **I AM ME** » 3/27/2003, 9:57 pm

the following is todays journal by Matt good, i appologise for teh length but they are interesting, if you liek it go for more at Nationofcool.com, tehn go to teh matt good section and then journal

Flipping through the Globe this morning I came across the continuing
debate concerning the comments made by US Ambassador Paul Cellucci the other day. Mr. Cellucci condemned Canada for not supporting the US war effort and said that he was disappointed that Canadian MP’s had made what he considered “anti-Amertican” comments in the house. Tensions have since been running high and there has been worry that the United States may end up doing less business with us. Americans are openly calling us things I’d rather not repeat and changing the names of food products to reflect their dislike for anyone not willing to see the world their way. In towns near the border Canadian cars are being spray painted and vandalized. Surprisingly our ambassador has yet to bring any of these things up.

And all because we don’t want to back the war.

According to sources Mr. Cellucci’s message comes straight from the top, so it should come as no surprise if Bush cancels his impending visit. There is also a web site out there that Canadians can log onto to voice their dislike for our nation’s current stance on all of this. Wesupporttheusa.ca is filled with such idiotic rhetoric as this:

“ The purpose of this website is to send a message to Prime Minister Chretien and his supporters that he is NOT speaking on behalf of the Canadian people whom he represents. We may not be able to support the U.S. militarily, but we should support the US efforts in principle. Failing to do so may seriously jeopardize the economic relationship between the U.S. and Canada. In kind, our own safety and freedom could be compromised without the security provided by the U.S.”

Strange. I was under the impression that the majority of Canadians were overwhelmingly against the war and that our government was reflecting that position. I must have not received the memo that detailed our change of heart. I realize that the majority of Albertans are for the war and why wouldn’t they be? It’s good for business and they’re all about that in Wild Rose Country. Hell, even Ontario Premier Ernie Eves has now sent a letter to Mr. Cellucci stating that the Ontario government supports the US despite the position of the federal government . So let’s tell it like it is.

We are the 51st state, are we not? We are simply here to go along and if we don’t then - “Failing to do so may seriously jeopardize the economic relationship between the U.S. and Canada. In kind, our own safety and freedom could be compromised without the security provided by the U.S”. Because let’s face it, we’re threatened by a great many more people than the United States. Hell, if anything, being their neighbour is not unlike being tied to an abortion doctor in Catholic Belfast. Their actions and secret undertakings have created this current situation, so crying foul that they are innocent in all of this is so laughable that I’m forgetting to. But we have to go along with it? I, for one, would like to say “go straight to hell”. Do not pass go, do not collect 200 dollars, none of it. You wanted your war, you got it. Have a ball.

As for the Canadian element in all of this. I am ashamed that Provincial governments would favour themselves so highly about the federal government that they would act in such a fashion. We are Canadians first and last, end of story. From Victoria to St. Johns, all of us stand together or we fall. If the governments of Alberta and Ontario are so worried about themselves that they need to distance themselves from the will of Canadians then we have a serious problem. Canada, as I know it, will not exist. Why should we fight to keep this country together if provincial governments want nothing more than autonomy to satisfy big business and the egos of politicians who are only looking to become bigger players? That’s not the country I was born in and it certainly is not the country that my grandfather and great uncles fought for. In a war, let us not forget, that the all mighty United States did not enter for a year while Canadians died at Dunkirk.

Do we need the Americans? I think the question we should be asking here is “do the Americans need us?” We give ourselves far too little credit and have no backbone to think that the United States could simply dispense with our dealings. And if they choose to, let them. I for one would rather be poor and nationally intact than rich and nothing more than a dog looking for scraps at an American table. Is that what we are? Is that how you see Canada? A nation of mutes that asks others what its own politicians can or can’t say in their own house of commons?

I realize that there are many Americans that are unhappy with the actions of their government. And to them I say stay the course of your convictions. I have many wonderful friends that are Americans, including my own sister in law, who are less than thrilled with the obvious disregard shown by the US government towards the international community and The United Nations. But at this time I must admit I’m finding it difficult to bring myself to want to pursue a career in the United States.

I AM ME · Post by **I AM ME** » 3/27/2003, 10:02 pm

this was written a few days before war

Ambiguities are worth their weight in gold. Mr. Hussein is not responding to diplomatic advances but will respond to force (according to Mr. Powell). We don’t want to go to war, it’s a last resort, but are considering acting without the full support of the United Nations (an outcome that could just render that institution defunct). At some point you have to admit you’re grasping at straws and simply do what it is that you’re going to no matter the light it casts. If The Romans wanted Germany they went and took it. Why bother beating around the bush trying to justify it to yourself? Obviously in the public mind of the US Government this is about the prevention of further terrorist acts and some greater sense of revenge for September 11th. The fact that conventional warfare is a thing of the past doesn’t seem to matter much. Will an invasion of Iraq diminish terrorist activities or amplify them? Do the American people really believe there is a “terrorist council” out there that gets together and decides these things and that if they are destroyed that terrorism will end? Is it safe to assume that terrorism will continue to exist as long as there is one person out there that is willing to hurt other people to get a point across? Does it really matter if they’re of Arab ethnicity and fly planes into buildings or are white men that drive vans filled with explosives up to the fronts of buildings and then detonate them? Is the biblical adage “an eye for an eye” wisdom or warning?

When attempting to have all eyes forward it’s important to make sure that no one’s looking back. Cause and effect play into events more than most ever bother to consider and this situation is no different. If you play with fire you are bound to get burned sooner or later. And no amount of distraction after the fact will ever detract from the simple truth that you got burned because you were careless. There are many forms of carelessness. Arrogance, for example, is one. The effects of a perceived ideological necessity is another. The decision that we face is whether we act like children after we get burned or adults. Do we run the burn under cold water and take a deep breath? Or do we run around the room screaming our heads off? And if it’s the latter, how effective is that tactic in distracting others from the stupidity of our initial carelessness? The onus shifts from the stupidity of our initial actions to lessening our immediate anguish by whatever means are available.

Secret meetings on islands are pointless. If it’s work that’s to be gotten to then get to it and quit fucking about. Warm up the weapons, gas up the vehicles, scrape the barnacles off the boats.

Then go and stick your hand on the stove and run around the room screaming your head off kid.

areusad831 · Post by **areusad831** » 3/27/2003, 10:38 pm

i love that man...

only 8 days until i see him live :nod:

superrgirll · Post by **superrgirll** » 3/27/2003, 10:42 pm

15 days, i think, till i see him live.

areusad831 · Post by **areusad831** » 3/27/2003, 10:47 pm

i am seeing him first and driving 10 hours to do so

superrgirll · Post by **superrgirll** » 3/27/2003, 10:49 pm

i only have to drive 20 minutes. but then i have to take a 30 minute subway ride, and a 10 minute bus ride.

areusad831 · Post by **areusad831** » 3/27/2003, 10:50 pm

come to montreal show instead :nod:

superrgirll · Post by **superrgirll** » 3/27/2003, 10:55 pm

are you going to come pick me up?

xoNoDoubt69 · Post by **xoNoDoubt69** » 3/27/2003, 10:59 pm

I think Rob likes long drives...

I AM ME · Post by **I AM ME** » 3/27/2003, 11:07 pm

i've decided to post each new journal in here for the cm readng pleasure, and no you don't need to liek matt or his music to enjoy reading his journals

starvingeyes · Post by **starvingeyes** » 3/28/2003, 8:02 am

i saw him last night and he was fucking incredible.

the verse to 21st century living was changed to a monologue of news clippings about the war. it was cool.

I AM ME · Post by **I AM ME** » 3/28/2003, 6:08 pm

yeah he could easily change that songs verses into any sort of rant that was current

lora · Post by **lora** » 3/28/2003, 7:51 pm

i'm really hoping he comes to the east coast. desperately hoping.

dream in japanese · Post by **dream in japanese** » 3/28/2003, 8:25 pm

14 more days till i see him live. YAY!

i really can't wait

areusad831 · Post by **areusad831** » 3/28/2003, 9:37 pm

come back home wrote:i saw him last night and he was fucking incredible.

the verse to 21st century living was changed to a monologue of news clippings about the war. it was cool.

any more of a review then that? :mrgreen:

robcore · Post by **robcore** » 3/29/2003, 12:06 am

I'm too young to see him :cry:

He was in my city tonight and last night and i could have bootlegged the show

I AM ME · Post by **I AM ME** » 3/31/2003, 6:48 pm

sorry ppl i missed a few...

Winnipeg, March 30th. Night off. Waiting for a doctor to come by and take a look at me. My sinuses aren’t so good. Slept for 12 hours, so hopefully some more rest will help better the situation.

Things continue to get out of hand. My hotmail inbox has become a hostile place these past few weeks. It never ceases to amaze me how people can convince themselves of anything simply because mainstream media says so. There are adds in major news papers for television news coverage of the war. Basically advertisements informing you that it’s a-okay to indulge in the most vile form of voyeurism going. Watch our coverage of death, it’s more in-depth than the competition’s.

Questions rarely get asked at times such as these that do anything but seek the banal details of troop movements and military analysis of the situation. It confuses you, leading you away from asking more important questions, questions that have frightening answers than might make you think twice about sitting back with your nice television dinner and listening to some retired general try and guess at what might be happening in some theatre of death thousands of miles away. You spoon feed yourself the desert, stretch out, and do anything but look for answers that would disturb such a serene moment.

Since 1947 how many foreign governments has the United States influenced or helped come to power only to reverse their opinion of them years later? Of those nations, how many did they either sell armaments to or fund without it being widely known by the American people?

Who is the largest arms manufacturer in the world?

Who leads the way in chemical and biological weapons research?

Who has the largest nuclear arsenal?

How many nations have agencies with mandates to observe of the internal workings of other countries and, because of their external power, are not allowed by law to conduct operations within the boundaries of their own country?

Between 1947 and 1995 which nations have produced and sold the most armaments?

Currently in Afghanistan the national infrastructure is basically no better than it was when the Taliban was in power. Women are still persecuted and warlords continue to use fear to influence the populace. Where is the freedom that the United States promised these people? Or will it be just like their failure to aid them following their war with the Soviet Union? If it’s their country and therefore their problem, then why isn’t Saddam Hussein the problem of the Iraqi people? Evidence of chemical weapons testing was discovered in Afghanistan. Why didn’t the United States invade it prior to 911 on the basis that it could use such weapons against the US or other nations in the region?

If Iraq’s military capabilities were stronger five year ago and they were in possession of chemical and biological weapons, why didn’t they use them to engage Israel or, for that matter, help support a terrorist attack using them in the years since the end of the Gulf War?

Had 911 not happened would there have been an invasion of Iraq? Would Saddam Hussein be left in power or would steps be taken to remove him?

Had the United States discovered that Italians had planned 911 would the United States have invaded Italy? Would Italian Americans be detained at airports and border crossings?

Does a proper and defined hierarchy exist within what is termed as “Al Qaeda” or is that is that “organization” something that has just been overly simplified so that it can been easily digested by a populace in need of a well defined enemy?

Which nation has the largest untapped oil reserves in the world?

Who sold Iraq its chemical and biological weapons and/or trained their personal that might have created them?

What was the military budget last year in the US?

Of the 75 billion dollars asked for by Bush, how much will be spent on the people of Iraq when all is said and done? Will it be the amount promised? Will the majority of people spend the time to learn if the amount promised was used to help rebuild Iraq?

Of that 75 billion dollars, how much of it will go towards education and the general welfare of the American people?

More often than not questions tend to simply lead to more questions in situations such as these. And it’s then that you know you’re on the right track. So ask questions, even if you think they’re dumb, and come to your own conclusions. Exercise your right to be heard and to speak out against those things that you believe to be unjust or about questions that go unanswered. There are those that believe that such pursuits are a waste of time and that people can do nothing to influence change. That isn’t the point. The point is that you took the time to free yourself from the belief that nothing can be done. And that in itself is a revolution.

I AM ME · Post by **I AM ME** » 3/31/2003, 6:49 pm

As I said in my last entry, I receive a lot of heated e-mail because of my views. Though not really that heated, I thought I would provide and example and take the time to publicly respond with more than a single line. First, here is the e-mail.

“Matt,

I take your opinions very seriously because I know you don't bullshit, I know you usually think before you speak, and you know your shit. However, answer me this one question: Do you want the people of Iraq to be free? That's more than a yes or no question.

Here me out for a minute:

I'm not for war, but sometimes good things come out of it. If you ask me, as of right now, more good things could come out of this war than bad things. A better, less plastic, more intelligent, more educated American society being one of those things (a better Canada too?). Plus (some of these are optimistic but possible): No Sadam, a free Iraq, a real democracy in the Middle East - which could lead to a better preception of Americans by Muslims, which could go a long way in not only winning the war against terrorism, but also in achieving peace in the Middle East and global unity. Unless this thing spirals out of control (certainly possible), the thousands that will die in Iraq will be dying for a cause.

Say what you want about Bush, but give him credit for having balls. At first I wasn't too sure of his intentions, but now I'm convinced that they're sincere. He rolled the dice - lets hope it works out. He picked Iraq for many reason, some selfish I'm sure. But he knew a post-Sadam Iraq could rebuild relatively quickly because of their oil.

Save the Bush bashing for when it fails - if it does, until then, we should pray that somehow he knew what he was doing (in which case Bush will be the most popular President ever).

Sincerely,

Alberto”

In my opinion an imposed freedom is not freedom. It’s a placebo state that has the appearance of freedom. The real problem that is faced by Iraqis after they are delivered such “freedom” is the survival of their cultural identity. It may have taken some time but I believe that the Iraqi people would have struggled for this change on their own. To impose change on them is dangerous because when it occurs it will breed resentment, diminishing the effectiveness of any new government. People will view it as “Americanized” and question it. Such an occurrence could lead to further unrest and because of the method used to attain the initial “freedom”, The United States and others would be forced to involve themselves. So basically what is going to happen is the creation of a state that is entirely influenced by those that have supposedly delivered it its freedom and not one really governed by its people.

Now I ask you, is that freedom? Would you rather live in a country that struggled for its own identity or one that was handed it by someone else? Sure, it may seem safe and stable for a while but it’s simply a band-aid. Peace in the Middle East is a funny saying. Because is it really peace if it is forcefully brought about by those that aren’t even native to the region? There was social unrest during the 1960’s in the American South. Would it have been our place to involve ourselves because we considered certain Americans racist and oppressive? Of course not. But a double standard has been applied to that region of the world because it has something that we don’t have in abundance…

Oil.

And the more backwards and antiquated we can keep them and they remain, the better for us. After all, we are superior in our own eyes. Make no mistake that is how we see ourselves. And though it’s not spoken or admitted openly, on this side of the ocean we consider ourselves morally superior. Which of course is laughable. Saddam Hussein gassed the Kurds, a crime that he should be tried for in an international court of law. But you have to ask yourself how morally superior we are when in our own past we slaughtered the people native to this continent. Or how morally superior our forefathers were when they kidnapped half of West Africa and brought slaves to the “new world” to do their bidding. Not enough time has passed for us to be forgiven those evils and declared morally beyond reproach.

A free Iraq by American standards means investment potential that will pay off a hundred fold compared to what they put into it. The Iraqi people aren’t going to be applying for positions at “The Iraqi Oil Company”, they’ll be working for American and British oil companies who might simply pay leases to the new government. Will life for the average Iraqi seem better right away? Probably. But that will pass and the reality of a free market economy will set in. Go ask the Russians what that’s like. Iraq will be opened like a can of tuna and everyone will be invited in to make sandwiches. So instead of Iraqi business flourishing they’ll all end up working at McDonalds and think it fantastic. Our impression of them will not change whatsoever. They will remain those poor, backward people we helped. And then we will forever say that they own us their freedom.

How is that being free?

Give Bush credit for having balls? The balls to do what exactly? Invade a nation that he so outguns than the stiffest resistance will come from pockets of civilians and ill-equipped soldiers that are only fighting because if they don’t they’ll be shot or suffer in some other way? What happens if the common people of Iraq suddenly come to the conclusion that they want to wage a guerilla war? What if they spend months or even years popping up and hitting coalition forces? I’m sure if you said as much about the Vietnamese in 1966 that most people would have laughed and said they didn’t stand a chance. Industrial and monetary superiority doesn’t always mean that you’ll win. Vietnam proved that in spades, so I fail to see what balls has to do with it. This entire adventure is far more complicated a matter than that. And if George Bush had to pick up a riffle and do it himself I would be willing to bet his bravado would take a sudden vacation.

As far as the Bush bashing is concerned and waiting to see if he “fails” I have only this to say. If people are dying, failure is a certainty.

I AM ME · Post by **I AM ME** » 3/31/2003, 6:50 pm

Winnipeg. Monday morning. Not feeling the greatest. Fearing whatever’s in my head may have found its way into my chest during the night. I apologize in advance to those attending the sound check parties if I don’t seem as chipper as expected. And please don’t be offended if I don’t shake anyone’s hand. I spend large portions of each day shaking hands and all the hand sanitizer in the world can’t stop you from catching something. I’m starting to sound like Howard Hughes. How delightful. Spruce Goose anyone?

It’s a morning of doom. Turn on the television and you’re assaulted by either the war in Iraq or SARS. There’s nothing like a global mystery illness to go along with a war in the cradle of civilization.

I see that Peter Arnett’s been canned by both NBC and National Geographic. Things to remember when on assignment in a country not yet liberated and indoctrinated by the west: that whole freedom of speech thing isn’t in effect. True, he was there working for National Geographic and I guess they have ever right to let him go because his opinion does not represent theirs. But it’s a little thin on the part of NBC. After all we are talking a man that spend years in the field in Vietnam and who has spent more time in Iraq than most journalists But there I go again thinking that journalism is supposed to be about objectivity. Could he have been influenced by the Iraqis to make the statements that he did? I guess he could of. Then again, people seem to forget that Donald Rumsfeld, who now calls Saddam Hussein evil, spent some time exchanging pleasantries with Mr. Hussein in the 80’s in Iraq, back when he wasn’t considered “evil”. Yet Mr. Rumsfeld won’t be losing his job any time soon. Personally, it seems to me that various members of the United States government are a little suspect on this one. I believe they’re referred to as Hawks. They have some interesting views on how The United States should conduct itself internationally. And as luck would have it, they’re currently giving you a demonstration.

Today’s queries:

What happens if the majority of the Iraqi civilian population views the coalition forces as invaders and takes up arms against them?

What will happen if this business isn’t over in a month, but rather three years?

What if the invasion of Iraq by a foreign power creates more anti-American sentiment in the Middle East, swelling the ranks of those who are planning terrorist attacks?

How will public opinion change if, once Iraq is conquered, The United States attacks Syria?

I AM ME · Post by **I AM ME** » 4/1/2003, 8:50 pm

VERY GOOD ONE!

I wanted to take the time to address something that’s mentioned numerous times of late. I have been accused by some of bashing Americans. I have also been accused of being insensitive to their feelings being that their country is at war. I would like to take this opportunity to put all of this to rest so there isn’t any confusion in the future.

Do I dislike Americans? The answer would be no. If that were the case I would have to dislike members of my own family. There is a line that must be draw between a people and their government. At some point you have to come to terms with the fact that you cannot generalize an entire society because of the actions of its government. Likewise, the actions of a handful of citizens cannot represent the will of a government. That said, at some point the people of a democratic nation have to be held somewhat responsible for the actions of their elected representative(s). If such a government is acting inappropriately, or counter to the principles of that society, then the populace is obliged to use whatever civil and peaceful means necessary to influence those responsible to cease their inappropriate behavior. I realize that not all Americans agree with the actions of their government. But I also do not believe that just because US troops have been sent into combat that your conscience disappears and you support them because it is the thing to do. And by that I do not mean that they should be treated with any disrespect. But that morals should not be abandoned once the decision is made to enter into a war such as this.

When I make mention of the United States in my journal I am speaking about the government of that nation and its policies. I am immensely against this current action. In my opinion it is nothing more than the first of many steps in the restructuring of US foreign policy. A new foreign policy that is to be more aggressive and more militarily proactive because of the world power shift. Such a strategy has been outlined by the Hawks and has been their top priority for more than a decade. 911 simply gave them the reason that they needed. I believe that President Bush is simply a pawn in their game, an empty vessel if you will, being used unawares to bring such things about. I believe that President Johnson was very similar in that respect.

The reality to waging a war on terrorism is that it will never succeed. Terrorism isn’t meant to cause widespread destruction. Its goal is to psychologically affect millions of people through an action that harms a lesser number. And the only way to combat that is to rise above that psychological tactic. Using force to try and find several needles in a stack of needles is useless. It will only inspire others to act against you using terrorist methods or, because you are forced to involve yourself in foreign countries that you believe are harboring terrorists, your disregard for them will cause new individuals to think about the possibility of using terrorist acts to deter you. In my opinion wars are no longer fought on proper battlefields with proper military tactics. To wage a conventional war you need the capital to do it and the world is far too economically skewed for that to happen. It is far better to use psychological warfare in the form of terrorism to make a point. Therein lies the danger of stomping all over the world trying to root out terrorism. Because you create enemies that you cannot see and that can strike at you without warning. And because of that you will be forced to live in a perpetual state of readiness and fear. And such a state of being is not something that the American people would do well with. They are unaccustomed to that sort of fear. Theirs is a benign, media driven fear that comes with condiments.

Obviously there is much more to all of this. What I have said here is merely the tip of a very large iceberg. And the tricky thing with icebergs is that the majority of their mass is to be found below the waterline, out of sight.