Ghoul’s Glossary: From Atrocity (Syria) to CEO (Romney)

Atrocity: What a mass murder is called when the world is too blind or timid or divided to prosecute it as a war crime. Synonym (mainly Syr.): Treimseh.

CEO sabbatical: The practice of chief executive officers of a company to absent themselves for several years from actually making decisions, even while they are the only CEO. Related term: Absentee sole owner. Some CEOs buy Chinese companies to which they send American jobs, though only during their sabbaticals, in which case they are not really the ones who buy the Chinese company or send the jobs there, what with being on sabbatical and all.

Grozny: Russian for “peace plan.” The Grozny form of peace plan is often urged by Russian leaders on other countries, such as Syria. Antonym: Peace plan. Related Terms: Treimseh (see above).

Swipe fees: Fees paid by retailers to Mastercard and Visa so that the credit card companies and banks can swipe your money. It is apparently illegal for them to conspire to overcharge the merchants, but it is all right if they conspire to charge individual consumers usurious rates (i.e., rates that are often illegal in the state where the consumer resides). Related terms: usury. (Note that readers in Delaware and South Dakota may encounter a 404 ‘not found’ error if they click on the term ‘usury.’)

Unicorn: 1. Mythical animal with one horn. 2. Black psy-ops operation in which it is alleged to the public that a nuclear power might give its nuclear warheads to small, crazed terrorist groups so as to convince the public that therefore the alleged budding nuclear power must be nuked, so as to make sure that nuclear weapons are never used. Antonym: Sanity.

Posted in Syria | 3 Responses | Print |

3 Responses

  1. The link under the unicorn myth is worth noting for the subtlety of the propaganda, at a level beneath the threat of how an uncivilized country like Iran would, for some reason, “gift” one of a few astronomically expensive and complex devices to a terror group.

    The better argument they struggle to make, chiefly through REPETITIVELY JUST SAYING IT LOUD, is how Iran might/would use a nuclear capability as a shield to embolden non-nuclear acts of terror. It is true how more power provides confidence, but it’s funny how confidence only emboldens and becomes a threat when it comes from currently weak country. It is far more true, when a state has unquestioned hegemony it provides them the freedom of action and option to avoid development of more peaceful relationships: just ask Israel.

    Now, imagine there were some power to offset Israel’s, preferably without a common border, so their conflicts would be limited to political influence rather than substantive issues of ownership. Such a balance would serve to keep each other’s actions in check. An increasingly modern and capable KSA would also be good for the neighborhood.

    Progress ultimately cannot be successfully fought and its course needs to be embraced and channeled. After all, who really wants to take the alternative argument to its natural conclusion, that its in anyone’s enlightened self-interest to keep everyone else poor, hungry and resentful?

    The more we think of an nuclear capable Iran, the worse it bodes for current Israeli policies and the better it portends for a fair accommodation with the Palestinians, and a just and lasting regional peace.

  2. okay,if what the Western media report actually happened, Treimseh wasn’t a mere “atrocity” but a mass murder. (Bashir Assad’s regime seems bent that way, so it’s likely that the Western media aren’t lying.) But can we say that “the world is too blind or timid or divided to prosecute it as a war crime?” Could it be that there’s no way to “prosecute” such a war crime? Could it be that a US- or NATO- or Saudi Arabian-led invasion of Syria would lead to even worse results? Could it be that sanctions would also lead to worse results? (And is the current system for prosecuting war crimes legitimate when the US is exempt?)

Comments are closed.