Culling the Herd

Culling the Herd

by Sheila Samples

“Everything you can imagine is real”~~ Pablo Picasso

In 1974, a year after orchestrating a mass terror bombing of Cambodia — after being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize — Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and his National Security Council completed “National Security Study Memo 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.” This document, whose sharp edges are dulled by page after leaden page of how to reduce over-population in the Third World through birth control and “other” population-reduction programs, was classified until 1989, but was almost immediately accepted as US policy, and remains the US blueprint for ethnic cleansing today.

It is difficult to imagine the staggering number of innocent humans who have perished through war or famine as a direct result of Kissinger’s half-century obsession with, and lust for, genocide. It’s even more difficult to imagine the cruel indifference with which Kissinger, and those like him in positions of political and corporate power — the elite — continue to plan the elimination of millions, even billions. All under the guise of national security, or to spread freedom…democracy…

Kissinger targeted a number of “key countries” whose populations, he said, must be curtailed and controlled lest they gain economic, political and military strength, and thus threaten US strategic interests. “Depopulation should be the highest priority of foreign policy towards the third world,” Kissinger said, “because the US economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries.”

Then, as now, any nation refusing to surrender its natural resources was an ominous threat to our national security and was dealt with initially through birth control and other population-reduction programs such as food rationing. But that was too slow for Kissinger, for Brent Scowcroft who replaced Kissinger as national security adviser and was put in charge of thinning out the Third World population, and for his eager enabler, CIA Director George Bush who trotted like a love-starved puppy at Kissinger’s heels for decades.

At first, they used food as “an instrument of national power” to coerce the dumb masses to stop copulating and populating, and then as a deadly weapon because widespread famine not only dealt death quicker, but it was cost-effective. And it made more sense. Like Kissinger said, “To give food aid to a country just because they (sic) are starving is a pretty weak reason.”

If we could imagine the suffering endured by victims of such perverse inhumanity, we might feel a twinge of outrage or, as George Washington so succinctly put it — a “little spark of celestial fire called conscience.” Or not. Perhaps we are so far removed from reality because our minds cannot grasp the horror of that reality. Those who seek to destroy the denizens of this planet are totally without compassion or remorse. They are grotesque mutants who kill indiscriminately in their relentless drive for world conquest and domination.

It’s naive to think the carnage will stop once predators such as Kissinger, Alexander Haig, Robert McNamara, George H.W. Bush, and other One World advocates, many of whom are in their 80s or 90s, are no longer in our midst. With the release of thousands of tons of Depleted Uranium in both Bush Gulf Wars and Afghanistan, they have poisoned food, water and air, and turned the entire region into massive radioactive death camps. Without fear of accountability, they have ensured the slow, agonizing extermination of entire populations, to include the American military, whom Kissinger views as “dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy” — and their families — that will continue for many generations.

We’re like herds of cattle, grazing placidly, unable or unwilling to imagine that we might share the same fate as the millions throughout the Third World targeted by the elite as “bottom feeders,” contributing nothing — eating into their profit — gluttons who must be dispensed with. Any rancher or farmer will tell you that it’s good business to cull the herd for a variety of reasons, such as market outlook, cash flow, or just to maintain a healthier, more easily controlled mass of cattle. It makes no sense to keep problem cows, the elderly, the ill or non-productive around. There comes a time when you must cut your losses — and cull the herd.

There are those who, unlike Kissinger and his co-conspirators, are not interested in profit or power, but believe fervently that human population is destroying the planet. Perhaps the most outspoken is University of Texas evolutionary scientist Dr. Eric R. Pianka, who gave a speech in March 2006 advocating the elimination of 90 percent of Earth’s population.

According to Forrest M. Mims III, Chairman of the Environmental Science Section of the Texas Academy of Science, and the editor of The Citizen Scientist, Pianka shrugged aside war and famine — too slow — and said “the most efficient and fastest way to kill the billions that must soon die” is disease. Pianka advocates airborne Ebola because, he explained, “it is highly lethal, and it kills in days, instead of years.”

Pianka drew rounds of enthusiastic applause throughout his speech, and a standing ovation when he threw in the Bird Flu for good measure, and quipped gleefully, “We need to sterilize everybody on the Earth.” Five hours later, the University presented Pianka with a plaque, not for winning hands down as “Mad Scientist of the Year,” but in recognition of his being named 2006 Distinguished Texas Scientist.

It doesn’t take a wild imagination to know that genocide is real, and it’s underway in America. The most blatant example is the barbaric response to Hurricane Katrina victims — withholding food, blocking aid, ignoring those clinging to rooftops while crying out in vain for help, leaving corpses to float in the flooded streets or to rot in the Superdome.

If you start with the poor, minorities, elderly, the ill or non-productive, the culling becomes much easier the next time around. Those who wait become inured to the inhumanity and, rather than rise up against it, breathe sighs of relief that it’s others and not them who are rounded up and herded to the slaughterhouse.

Imagine what life would be like if the Food and Drug Administration did not ensure the safety of our food chain…if our creeks and rivers were polluted by sewage and industrial waste…if vaccines forced on our children caused mental deficiencies, even death…if mothers were afraid to breast-feed their babies because the environmental toxin perchlorate present in our food and water supply accumulates in mother’s milk…if our air was contaminated…if we had a government cold-hearted enough to withhold food and aid from the needy and health care from poor children…if we were spied upon and incarcerated, tortured, disappeared without charges…

Oh yeah. I forgot. That is what our life is like. All that, and more, is grinding relentlessly away at our safety, our health and our lives.

We have the power to remove these madmen. They are criminals under Articles II and III of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide, and they must pay for their crimes. One more year wherein millions more throughout the world are slaughtered is, as they say, not an option.

The culling must stop, even if we are forced to stampede. They must be impeached. Go here, here, and here and take action.

Secret Police Concentration Camps

an actual concentration camp

Secret Police
Concentration Camps

In a revealing admission in June, 1997, the Director of Resource Management for the U.S. Army confirmed the validity of a memorandum relating to the establishment of a civilian inmate labor program under development by the Department of the Army. The document states, “Enclosed for your review and comment is the draft Army regulation on civilian inmate labor utilization” and the procedure to “establish civilian prison camps on installations.”
Amid widespread rumors, Congressman Henry Gonzales clarified the question of the existence of civilian detention camps. In an interview, Gonzalez stated, “The truth is yes — you do have these stand by provisions, and the plans are here…whereby you could, in the name of stopping terrorism…evoke the military and arrest Americans and put them in detention camps.”

Rapture politics fundamentalism and World War IV

Rapture politics

fundamentalism and World War IV

I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn’t do my job.
— George W. Bush, Lancaster County, July 2004

God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East.
— George W. Bush

I believe today that I am acting in the sense of the Almighty Creator. By warding off the Jews I am fighting for the Lord’s work.
— Adolph Hitler, speech to the Reichstag, 1936

I believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator.
— Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampf, pg. 46

Fundamentalism isn’t about religion. It’s about power.
— Salman Rushdie

A cult is a religion with no political power
— Tom Wolfe

A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious. On the other hand, they do less easily move against him, believing that he has the gods on his side.
— Aristotle

If you’re “born again,” does that mean you have a second belly button?


Maurice Joly Plagiarized “Protocols of Zion”

Maurice Joly Plagiarized “Protocols of Zion”

(not vice-versa)

Henry Makow Ph.D. – Save the Males July 30, 2008

It is forbidden to mention the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” (1905) without the Disclaimer that, of course, they are a “forgery” of Maurice Joly’s “Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu” (1864.)

The assumption is that since Protocols appeared some 40 years after Dialogue, it plagiarized the earlier work. But I will suggest that Protocols actually predated Dialogue and Joly borrowed from it. In other words, far from being an anti-Semitic ruse, the “Protocols of Zion” are authentic.

I have already argued that the two documents are neither similar nor derivative, although they have some lines and words in common. “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion” is essentially a brilliant Master Plan for tyranny, i.e. the New World Order. It is the key to understanding our present predicament. (This is not a condemnation of all Jews, only the nucleus of bankers and high-level Masons directing this diabolical war against the human race.)

“Dialogue in Hell” was a veiled Masonic Jewish attack on Napoleon III, an example of how they championed liberalism to undermine the Old Order and usurp power, as described in the Protocols themselves. (The author of Protocols is contemptuous of liberalism and all egalitarian programs. They are just gimmicks to manipulate the masses.)

Reading Kerry Bolton’s monograph “The Protocols of Zion In Context” (Renaissance Press, 2003) it became obvious that Joly was plagiarizing from The Protocols and not vice-versa.

Joly, a Jew whose real name was Joseph Levy, was a lifelong Mason and member of the “Lodge of Mizraim.” He was the protege of Adolph Cremieux (Isaac Moise Cremieux 1796-1880) the head of the lodge and a Minister in the Jewish-backed government of Leon Gambetta.

The plot is described in the Protocols as “centuries-old.” It most likely predates “Dialogue.” Joly was well versed in the Protocols and borrowed from it to flesh out the unpopular authoritarian position of Machiavelli, which he ascribed to Napoleon III.

Joly, who committed suicide in 1879, was in the habit of “borrowing.” He is accused of plagiarizing a popular novel by Eugene Sue, namely “Les Mystères du Paris.” (1845) Also his work is predated by one by another of Cremieux’s proteges, Jacob Venedy, entitled, “Machiavelli, Montesquieu, Rousseau.” (1850)

In 1884 Mme. Justine Glinka, the daughter of a Russian General living in Paris, hired Joseph Schorst, a member of Joly’s Mizraim Lodge to obtain sensitive information. For the sum of 2500 francs, Schorst provided Glinka with “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.” He was subsequently tracked down and murdered in Egypt.

The Tsarist government, already heavily infiltrated, sat on the document. Glinka subsequently gave it to a friend who passed it on to Professor Sergius A. Nilus who published it for the first time in 1901.

After the Bolshevik Revolution, Nilus was arrested in Kiev in 1924 ,imprisoned and tortured. The President of the Court told him he had “done them incalculable harm in publishing the Protocols.” (“Waters Flowing Eastward” by Paquita de Shishmareff, 1999, pp.74-76.)


If your plan for World Domination leaked out, what would you do? Would you admit it? “You got me! My bad!”

No, you’d employ an army of ciphers to convince everyone the document is a hoax motivated by “prejudice” and “anti-Semitism.” They have executed this “damage control” perfectly, a measure of their power to deceive even in the presence of the truth.

This is the only Conspiracy that has prevailed in spite of the Blueprint being freely available. It demonstrates the credulity (or venality) of the intelligentsia and the masses.

They have colonized our minds first. We cannot name our oppressor for fear of being accused of “anti-Semitism.” It’s as though Black slaves working on cotton plantations were taught it was “racist” or “prejudiced” to mention the White slave driver. Since the majority of Jews are ignorant of this plot, and are manipulated like everyone else, racism is a ploy to divert attention from a very dire problem.

The Illuminati (top-rung Masonic Jews and their non-Jewish allies) have distributed some wealth and power to the masses (liberalism, socialism) as a way of securing ultimate power for themselves. According to the Protocols, they will eventually withdraw these benefits once their “invisible government” is invincible. The “war on terror” should be seen in this context.

In my view, “Protocols Deniers” are complicit in this Conspiracy, which is responsible for most human suffering and will lead to a great deal more. As a Jew, I don’t want this responsibility on my head, or on other innocent Jews or Masons.

Behaviourism, Psycho-Analysis and Physiological Manipulation in Education

Behaviourism, Psycho-Analysis and Physiological

Manipulation in Education

Brent Jessop

The Scientific Outlook Part 5 by Knowledge Driven

“Education in a scientific society may, I think, be best conceived after the analogy of the education provided by the Jesuits. The Jesuits provided one sort of education for the boys who were to become ordinary men of the world, and another for those who were to become members of the Society of Jesus. In like manner, the scientific rulers will provide one kind of education for ordinary men and women, and another for those who are to become holders of scientific power. Ordinary men and women will be expected to be docile, industrious, punctual, thoughtless, and contented. Of these qualities probably contentment will be considered the most important. In order to produce it, all the researches of psycho-analysis, behaviourism, and biochemistry will be brought into play.” – Bertrand Russell, 1931 (p243)

This article will examine the use of behaviourism, psycho-analysis and physiological manipulation as applied to education as discussed in Bertrand Russell’s 1931 book The Scientific Outlook [1].

Bertrand Arthur William Russell, 3rd Earl Russell (1872-1970) was a renowned British philosopher and mathematician who was an adamant internationalist and worked extensively on the education of young children. This included running an experimental school in the 1920’s with his second wife Dora Black. He was the founder of the Pugwash movement which used the spectre of Cold War nuclear annihilation to push for world government. Among many other prizes, Russell was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1950 and UNESCO’s (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization) Kalinga prize for the popularization of science in 1957.

Part 1 of this series examined science as power-thought and the use of scientific technique to increase the power of an elite scientific minority over the unscientific masses. Part 2 examined the composition of the society of experts who would use scientific technique to dominate the masses. At the forefront of this society of experts is the expert “manipulator”, whom Lenin is the archetype. This society would also aim to conceal its power and influence behind political veils like democracy. Part 3 explored the application of scientific technique to education with an emphasis on the distinction between education for the “governing class” and “working class”. Part 4 looked at the use of education, the Press, radio and Hollywood as forms of propaganda.

Behaviourism and Psycho-Analysis

From The Scientific Outlook [Italicised text is original emphasis and bolded text is added by author.]:

“As a technique for acquiring power, behaviourism is, I think, superior to psycho-analysis: it embodies the methods which have always been adopted by those who train animals or drill soldiers; it utilizes the force of habit, the strength of which has always been recognized; and, as we saw when we were considering Pavlov, it makes it possible both to cause and to cure neurasthenia and hysteria. The conflicts which appear in psycho-analysis as emotional re-appear in behaviourism as conflicts between habits, or between a habit and a reflex. If a child were severely beaten every time it sneezed, it is probable that a phantasy world would in time build itself up in his mind around the conception of sneezing; he would dream of Heaven as a place where the spirits of the blest sneeze unceasingly, or on the contrary he might think of Hell as a place of punishment for those who live in open sternutation. In this sort of way the problems brought to the fore by psycho-analysis can, I think, be dealt with on behaviourist lines. At the same time it should be admitted that these problems, whose importance is very great, would probably not have come to the fore but for the psycho-analytic approach. For the practical purposes of educational technique, I think it will be found that the educator should behave as a psycho-analyst when he is concerned with matters touching powerful instincts, but as a behaviourist in matters which a child views as emotionally unimportant. For example, affection for parents should be viewed in the psycho-analytic manner, but brushing teeth in the behaviourist manner.” – 182

“The most important applications of psycho-analytic theory are to education. These applications are as yet in an experimental stage, and owing to the hostility of the authorities they can only be made on a very small scale. It is, however, already evident that moral and emotional education has hitherto been conducted on wrong lines, and has produced maladjustments which have been sources of cruelty, timidity, stupidity, and other unfortunate mental characteristics. I think it possible that psycho-analytic theory may be absorbed into something more scientific, but I do not doubt that something of what psycho-analysis has to suggest in regard to education will be found permanently valid and of immense importance.” – 181

Physiological Manipulation

“So far, no experiments have been made to test the effect of X-rays on the human embryo. I imagine that such experiments would be illegal, in common with many others that might make valuable additions to our knowledge. Sooner or later, however, probably in Russia, such experiments will be made. If science continues to advance as fast as it has done recently, we may hope, before the end of the present century, to discover ways of beneficially influencing the human embryo, not only as regards those acquired characters which cannot be inherited because they do not affect the chromosomes, but also as regards the chromosomes themselves. It is likely that this result will only be achieved after a number of unsuccessful experiments leading to the birth of idiots and monstrosities. But would this be too high a price to pay for the discovery of a method by which, within one generation, the whole human race could be rendered intelligent? Perhaps by a suitable choice of chemicals to be injected into the uterus it may become possible to turn a child into a mathematician, a poet, a biologist, or even a politician, and to ensure that all his posterity shall do likewise unless prevented by counter-irritant chemicals.” – 172

“So far we have been considering those ways of influencing the mental life which proceed by mental means as in psycho-analysis, or by means of the conditioned reflex as in behaviourism. There are, however, other methods which may in time prove of immense importance. These are the methods which operate through physiological means, such as the administering of drugs. The curing of cretinism by means of iodine is so far the most remarkable of these methods. In Switzerland all salt for human consumption is obliged by law to be iodized, and this measure has been found adequate as a preventive of cretinism. The work of Cannon and others concerning the influence of the ductless glands upon the emotions has become widely known, and it is clear that by administering artificially the substances which the ductless glands provide, a profound effect can be produced upon temperament and character. The effects of alcohol, opium, and various other drugs have long been familiar, but these effects are on the balance harmful unless the drug is taken with unusual moderation. There is, however, no a priori reason why drugs should not be discovered which have a wholly beneficial effect. I have never myself observed any but good effects to flow from the drinking of tea, at any rate if it is China tea. It is possible also that psychological marvels may become possible through pre-natal treatment. One of the most eminent philosophers of our day regards his superiority to his brothers, perhaps humorously, as due to the fact that shortly before his birth his mother was in a carriage which rolled down the Simplon in an accident. I do not suggest that this method should be adopted in the hope of turning us all into philosophers, but perhaps in time we shall discover some more peaceable means of endowing the foetus with intelligence. Education used to begin at eight years old with the learning of the Latin declensions; now, under the influence of psycho-analysis, it begins at birth. It is to be expected that with the advance of experimental embryology the important part of education will be found to be pre-natal. This is already the case with fishes and newts, but in regard to them the scientist is not hampered by education authorities.

The power of psychological technique to mould the mentality of the individual is still in its infancy, and is not yet fully realized. There can, I think, be little doubt that it will increase enormously in the near future. Science has given us, in succession, power over inanimate nature, power over plants and animals, and finally power over human beings. Each power involves its own kinds of dangers, and perhaps the dangers involved in power over human beings are the greatest, but that is a matter that we will consider at a later stage.” – 183

“Whether men will be happy in the Paradise I do not know. Perhaps biochemistry will show us how to make any man happy, provided he has the necessaries of life; perhaps dangerous sports will be organized for those whom boredom would otherwise turn into anarchists; perhaps sport will take over the cruelty which will have been banished from politics; perhaps football will be replaced by play battles in the air in which death will be the penalty of defeat, they will not mind having to seek it in a trivial cause: to fall through the air before a million spectators may come to be thought a glorious death even if it may be that in some such way a safety valve can be provided for the anarchic and violent forces in human nature; or again, it may be that by wise education and suitable diet men may be cured of all their unruly impulses, and all life may become as quiet as a Sunday school.” 214

Bertrand Russell would later write in a similar book entitled The Impact of Science on Society (1952) [2] that:

“It is to be expected that advances in physiology and psychology will give governments much more control over individual mentality than they now have even in totalitarian countries. Fichte laid it down that education should aim at destroying free will, so that, after pupils have left school, they shall be incapable, throughout the rest of their lives, of thinking or acting otherwise than as their schoolmasters would have wished. But in his day this was an unattainable ideal: what he regarded as the best system in existence produced Karl Marx. In future such failures are not likely to occur where there is dictatorship. Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible. Even if all are miserable, all will believe themselves happy, because the government will tell them that they are so.” – 61


Part 6 will examine the application of scientific technique to the reproduction of human beings including the separate breeding techniques to be applied to the “governing class” compared with the “working class”. Changes to Freedom and equality in the scientific society will be examined in part 7. Part 8 will examine changes to free trade and labour in the scientific society. Finally, Part 9 will describe two examples of artificially designed societies, including the creation of a new religion specifically for that new planned society.

[1] Bertrand Russell, The Scientific Outlook (1931). First Edition.

[2] Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society (1952). ISBN0-415-10906-X.

¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤

© 2008 Brent Jessop


The Corporations -Killers Of Democracy

The Corporations –

Killers Of Democracy

By Siv O’Neall

It’s way too late at this moment to ask the question: Are we going to lose our democracy? We may not all have noticed it yet, but the Big Corporations stole our democracy a long time ago.

How did they manage? They bought up everything, from the heavy to the light industry, arms, oil, chemical, to the people in Congress who are supposed to protect us from abuse of power by applying the rules set down in the Constitution. But, above all, they bought up the media. There is no objective source for authentic news in the U.S. any more, other than the Internet.

Robert Murdoch and his equally power-hungry fellow media moguls have seen to it that we just get pre-cooked baby-formula infotainment. People are dumbed down by the non-stop stream of meaningless chatter and unceasing propaganda.

Two major disasters

Among all the outrageous and inhuman crimes that plague the world today, there are two all-consuming current disasters which tie into all the other dictatorial abuses of power, from the executive to the lobbies that have bought up the government in all its forms.

There is first of all world hunger and, on the same level of emergency, the phenomenon of global warming – both those enormous problems having to be seen as the disasters that must be dealt with in the most urgent way possible. And today, there is virtually no urgency displayed in the way those disasters are dealt with – or not dealt with.

And yet, those two huge problems have to be solved if the world is going to continue in a shape even vaguely like the world as we know it.

There is the planetary inequality which has caused the world hunger that finally seems to have attracted wide-spread attention. It is obviously not a recent phenomenon, but it has been enhanced by the rise in food prices, which have multiple causes – the use of food for biofuel, the rise in the price of oil for transport, the droughts in Australia and in Africa, the enormous sham of GMOs that were made out to be capable of saving the world from hunger, but instead are doing the opposite. And let’s not forget about the role the speculators and the hedge funds are playing in their roulette game with heavily loaded dice.

The second enormous disaster is climate change, which we don’t seem to be able to do anything much about. Or rather, governments are, at their own peril, disregarding the imminent danger of inaction in the face of global warming. It would be perfectly possible to roll back the disastrous situation where we find ourselves today. However, instead of dealing with the problem of over-consumption of oil in a rational way in order to save our lives and the life of the planet, governments are forging ahead in the same old way of splurging on oil consumption as if there was no tomorrow. Oil companies go on making bigger profits than ever before in human history, while the people are paying the price for their obscene profits at the gas pumps.

Why the lack of action?

So, why can’t we deal with the two foremost disasters, poverty and climate change? Because the corporations are more interested in making big bucks than saving the planet or saving people from starvation. Once again, it’s that short-term profit that outplays all true concern for realism and sound planning. Speculators drive up the prices of commodities without a second thought for the consequences of their short-sighted game of quick profit which produces nothing and benefits nobody.

So the real rulers of the world, the Big Corporations, are condemning us to a life of increased poverty and hunger in third-world countries, a general increase in insecurity and joblessness for middle class people in the western world and increased pollution in the emerging economies in Asia, where the standard of living is actually rising – for the rich. And of course, alongside all these disasters, we are seeing the lives of steadily increasing luxury for the people who are reaping the profits of the plunder. The Corporations see to it that the so-called governments, their obedient front men, cut back the taxes on the top levels of income, on capital gains and on inheritance.

Ethanol is NOT the solution

There is big talk and lots of activity for the production of ethanol, which is exactly the way we should NOT be going in the campaign to lower the rate of release of CO2 gas into the atmosphere. This use of corn, sugar cane and soybeans for biofuel makes for less food for the hungry in the third world and also in Brazil, which is now considered an emerging nation rather than a developing one, increasing food prices in the entire world. It does not make for less emission of CO2 gas since the production of ethanol gives off more CO2 than it saves as an alternative fuel. But corporations and industrial farms are taking advantage of people’s ignorance and gullibility and making huge profits. (See Addendum on ethanol*) Rain forests are being cut down to make room for millions of acres of culture for the production of ethanol and biodiesel. And those rain forests are exactly the best protection on the planet against too much CO2 in the atmosphere. [1]

The Corporations make money off ethanol production, so that’s the way we are going, even though it increases world hunger and does absolutely nothing to save the world from global warming.

Production of grazing land for cattle

Land is also being taken over for production of grazing land for cattle who are the heaviest consumers of grain and who, when converted to meat offer far less nourishment than they have consumed during their growing process.

One goal for corporations – maximum profit

In other words, the two problems of poverty and hunger and the problem of climate change are deeply intertwined. Both problems could be dealt with rationally, certainly to a somewhat satisfactory extent. But the corporations are not making money off a policy of improving the situation for the starving people in the world or on the urgent need to limit global warming and the disastrous consequences the planet will be undergoing in a near future. We have already begun to see the effects of climate change, but since the corporations own the governments, there is little chance that anything radical will get done very soon.

Renewable energy

There are several ways of producing renewable energy, but who cares? There is no money in it. There is, above all, solar and wind energy waiting to be developed, but no big-scale efforts have been made so far to save the planet using these fabulous non-polluting sources of energy. On a small scale, yes, enough to prove that it works. Even the tidal movements of ocean water can very efficiently be used to make energy. But it wouldn’t make any big bucks for the Corporations. And the Corporation is King. So what happens? We have opted for the destruction of the planet.

In short, the world has been taken over by the Big Corporations hand-in-hand with the Main Stream Media and they are all busy shredding our human rights and making our planet into a sterile desert. As long as wildfire capitalism is ruling the world, we are doomed.

*Addendum on Ethanol:

Ethanol And Biodiesel From Crops Not Worth The Energy
ScienceDaily (Jul. 6, 2005) – ITHACA, N.Y. – Turning plants such as corn, soybeans and sunflowers into fuel uses much more energy than the resulting ethanol or biodiesel generates, according to a new Cornell University and University of California-Berkeley study. “There is just no energy benefit to using plant biomass for liquid fuel,” says David Pimentel, professor of ecology and agriculture at Cornell. “These strategies are not sustainable.”

In terms of energy output compared with energy input for ethanol production, the study found that:
* corn requires 29 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced;
* switch grass requires 45 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced; and
* wood biomass requires 57 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced.
In terms of energy output compared with the energy input for biodiesel production, the study found that:
* soybean plants requires 27 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced, and
* sunflower plants requires 118 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced.


[1] “Recent research has shown that the Amazon rain forest is not a stable mature forest with growth and decay in balance but is in fact an expanding forest that is being fertilised by the excess atmospheric CO2. The trees are getting bigger and there is a net take up of 5000 kg of carbon per hectare per year ( 1 hectare = 100 x 100 metres ). The total area of forest is 400 million hectares so the whole forest could be absorbing 2 billion tons of carbon per year.”

“If the Amazon rainforest burns and releases billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere in a short period then this will be a further boost to global warming that will result in significantly higher end of century temperatures.”

© Copyright 2008 by

Mukasey to Congress: Defy the Rule of Law

Mukasey to Congress: Defy the Rule of Law

Along with other past and present administration officials, Attorney General Michael Mukasey supports lawlessness and police state justice. Weeks after the Supreme Court’s landmark (June 12) Boumediene ruling, he addressed the conservative, pro-war American Enterprise Institute (on July 21) and asked Congress to overrule the High Court – for the third time. His proposal:

— subvert constitutional and international law;

— authorize indefinite detentions of Guantanamo and other “war on terror” prisoners (including US citizens designated “enemy combatants”); and

— deny them habeas rights, due process, and any hope for judicial fairness.

Since June 2004, the (conservative) High Court made three landmark rulings. Twice Congress intervened, and Mukasey wants a third time. In Rasul v. Bush (June 2004), the Court granted Guantanamo detainees habeas rights to challenge their detentions in civil court. Congress responded with the Detainee Treatment Act (DTA) of 2005 subverting the ruling.

In June 2006, the Supreme Court reacted. In Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, it held that federal courts retain jurisdiction over habeas cases and that Guantanamo Bay military commissions lack “the power to proceed because (their) structures and procedures violate both the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the four Geneva Conventions (of) 1949.”

In October 2006, Congress responded a second time. It enacted the Military Commissions Act (MCA) – subverting the High Court ruling in more extreme form. In its menu of illegal provisions, it grants the administration extraordinary unconstitutional powers to detain, interrogate, torture and prosecute alleged terrorist suspects, enemy combatants, or anyone claimed to support them. It lets the President designate anyone anywhere in the world (including US citizens) an “unlawful enemy combatant” and empowers him to arrest and detain them indefinitely in military prisons. The law states: “no (civil) court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider any claim or cause for action whatsoever….relating to the prosecution, trial or judgment of….military commission(s)….including challenges to (their) lawfulness….”

On June 12, 2008, the High Court again disagreed. In Boumediene v. Bush, it held that Guantanamo detainees retain habeas rights. MCA unconstitutionally subverts them, and the administration has no legal authority to deny them due process in civil courts or act as accuser, trial judge and executioner with no right of appeal or chance for judicial fairness.

On July 21, Mukasey responded, and immediately the ACLU reacted in a same day press release headlined: “Attorney General Wants New Declaration of War Allowing Indefinite Detention and Concealment of Torture.” It called Mukasey’s speech “an enormous executive branch power grab….authoriz(ing) indefinite detention(s) through a new declaration of armed conflict.” He asked Congress to redefine habeas through legislation “that will hide the Bush administration’s past wrongdoing – an action that would undermine the constitutional guarantee of due process and conceal systematic (lawless) torture and abuse of detainees.”

Like his two predecessors, Mukasey mocks the rule of law and supports harsh police state justice. He wants Congress to “expand and extend the ‘war on terror’ forever” and let the president detain anyone indefinitely without charge or trial. ACLU’s Washington Legislative Director, Caroline Fredrickson, called this “the last gasp of an administration desperate to rationalize what is a failed legal scheme” – that the Supreme Court thunderously rejected three times.

Mukasey proposes lawlessness and cover-up, “but there is no reason to think that Congress will assist him.” It “won’t fall for this latest (scheme) to (suppress) its wrongdoing.” Besides, the House Judiciary Committee is now investigating whether high-level administration officials authorized torture and abuse. Mukasey wants to hide it and is asking Congress to “bury the evidence.”

The ACLU is righteously outraged by this latest attempted power grab. It rejects Mukasey’s lawlessness and states there is “no need to invent yet another set of legal rules to govern the detention and trial of prisoners held on national security grounds, and the rules that (Mukasey) is proposing are fundamentally inconsistent with” constitutional and international law.

The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) Responds

After Mukasey’s September 17, 2007 nomination for Attorney General, CCR issued the following November 1, 2007 statement:

“Michael Mukasey is not fit to be Attorney General because he supports torture, illegal spying on Americans, and limitless powers for the Executive Branch.” As the “country’s highest law enforcement official,” he’s obligated “to enforce the law” – not make excuses for the government when it’s in violation. CCR stands “firmly against Mukasey’s nomination….Our country cannot afford to make compromises to our laws, our morals, and our humanity any longer.” The Senate must reject Attorney General candidates who’ll “undermine American justice and shred the Constitution.”

CCR expressed equal outrage on July 21. Its Executive Director, Vincent Warren, denounced Mukasey’s proposal in the following excerpted statement:

“What Mukasey is doing is a shocking attempt to drag us into years of further legal challenges and delays. The Supreme Court has definitively spoken” in Boumediene v. Bush and its two prior rulings. “For six and a half years,” the administration and Congress “have done their best to (deny due process) and prevent the courts from reviewing the legality of the detention of the men in Guantanamo. Congress should be a part of the solution this time by letting the courts do their job.”

For the past six years, CCR litigated for Guantanamo detainee rights and continues to do it. It organized and coordinated over 500 pro bono lawyers for everyone held there illegally. Most recently, it represented plaintiffs in the landmark Boumediene v. Bush case – argued on December 5, 2007 and ruled on June 12, 2008.

The Wall Street Journal Reports and Editorializes

Its July 22 article states: “Mukasey Seeks Law on Detainees – Congress Is Urged to Limit Rights of Terror Suspects….in light of a rebuke by the Supreme Court.” It quotes Mukasey wanting:

— legislative “principles” for “practical” limits on the right of detainees to challenge their incarceration;

— Congress to give the administration freedom to detain combatants “for the duration of the (‘war on terror’) conflict;”

— a “reaffirmation of something that was enacted in legislation after September 11, 2001” (a menu of harsh repressive laws);

— no “enemy combatants” released in (or brought to) the US (even to appear in civil court);

— no intelligence (or harsh interrogation) methods revealed (so evidence of torture and abuse is suppressed), and

— military officers (and intelligence officials) to be excused from testifying (because what they know is damning).

On its editorial page, the Journal is supportive. It called Mukasey’s proposal “modest” on a “difficult” issue over which “different judges even on the same court will disagree.” Mukasey wants congressional “guidance” because there’s risk of “inconsistent rulings and considerable uncertainty.”

According to the Journal, Mukasey “was right in stepping forward to say that someone has to take responsibility for the consequences of the Supreme Court’s 5 – 4” Boumediene ruling. It wants “Congress (to) give one court jurisdiction over (all detainee) cases” and not let the process “bog down into a Babel of conflicting procedural and legal rulings.” Mukasey is “right” to ask Congress to settle the issue, (regardless of three landmark High Court rulings). In other words:

— constitutional and international laws don’t apply;

— judicial fairness is a dead letter;

— presidential power is supreme; and

— Congress must support the executive and overrule the highest court in the land….A “modest (police state) proposal” according to the Journal and one it clearly supports.

Political Parties, Corporations And The Truth

Political Parties, Corporations And The Truth

By Timothy V. GattoOther violations of civil liberties such as American citizens being subject to electronic surveillance and wiretapping without a warrant have also taken place. In violation of the law which established the FISA Court which requires the Federal Government to request a warrant at least 72 hours after the fact, were ignored. Presidential Directive 51 which establishes continuity of government in the event of a “national emergency” declared by the President has been written. This document, which basically gives dictatorial power to the President without authorization by Congress, has parts of it that are classified as “secret”. This directive is so secret, that members of the Senate and House Intelligence Committees that possess the highest security clearances have not been allowed to see it. What could possibly be so secret that members of Congressional Intelligence Committee members can’t see it? – Tim Gatto

In this article I am going to make one last attempt to clarify my views on this presidential race, U.S. foreign policy, the economy and what we are experiencing in this new era as far as our civil liberties, the constant threats (real and perceived) to our “security” and the increasing gap between the rich and the not so rich in this country. One could write a book about each of these subjects, putting everything in one article is a daunting task. I’m not an expert nor am I an economist, diplomat or a military genius. What I am attempting to do is separate fact from fiction as I see it. I’m sure that many will take exception to what I have to say and that’s understandable, we all can’t be mirror images of each other. I ask your indulgence beforehand.

Since the end of the Cold War, the United States has emerged as the leading superpower. This is not because we are better or smarter than other nations; it is because we have basically been on a war-footing since World War II and have outspent more on our military than the next 20 countries combined. When the Soviet Union fell, we had no reason to continue to fund our military at Cold War levels, but our economy was so dependent on our Military Industrial Complex. The United States could have shifted its focus from producing weapons and funding our huge military machine to projects like rebuilding our infrastructure and finding alternative energy sources to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. The problem with changing our focus from military spending to a peacetime economy was that the defense industry sector was a key player in our political structure. The influence of right wing conservatives that made up the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) that called for projecting American power throughout the world and installing friendly democracies in key strategic regions warranted continuing the high level of military spending.

During the Clinton and then the Bush administrations, the Federal Government basically took the hands-off approach as far as regulating business. Huge mergers, predatory lending practices, free-trade agreements and tax breaks to companies that were outsourcing their labor force to other nations led to decreased competition and contributed to rising unemployment. The practice of cutting benefits and pay cuts as cost saving measures while CEO’s and other top echelon executives were paid in the hundreds of millions, even though their companies were running in the red, faced little opposition from labor unions that had lost much of their clout while others worked hand in hand with management. The disparity between the rich and the poor increased so that now, the 10% of the wealthiest families in the U.S. hold 71% of this nation’s wealth, leaving 29% of wealth to be distributed by the remaining 90%.

Some sectors of the economy, Big Oil, the Pharmaceutical Industry, Banking and Investment, Insurance companies, the Defense industry and Lawyers made heavy contributions to politicians, gaining unprecedented clout in regard to influencing government policy. Huge contributions to political campaigns became essential if a politician wanted to keep his or her job. Campaigns became more expensive and many elected officials realized that corporate support was a necessity. The media was bought up by corporate entities and the large networks were bought up five or six corporate groups. The era of networks owned by networks ended. The large media groups were now owned by corporate entities, mostly owned by the defense industry, primarily GE and Westinghouse, two of the largest defense contractors in the country. This and “corporate-personhood” that guaranteed corporations first amendment rights, meant that much of the content in the mainstream media, was controlled by a few select industries. Self-censorship of network content in order not to incur the wrath of owners or advertisers became paramount to the network executives. The United States gradually entered a phase of corporate influence that some call the “Corporacracy”. The government eventually became not a “Government by the people and for the people”, becoming a “Government by the corporations and for the corporations”.

The attacks of September 11, 2001 ushered in The Global War on Terrorism. This became the replacement for the Cold War and justified the huge expenditures for the military, keeping the defense industries and the stock market thriving. Eisenhower’s warning to “Beware the Military-Industrial-Complex had become a reality. The largest slice of the nation’s discretionary budget is spent on the defense industry. The fall of the Soviet Union meant a larger NATO, and many more overseas military bases for the Armed Forces. We immediately invaded Afghanistan, holding Osama Bin Laden responsible for 9/11, even though, to this day, a criminal investigation has never been done. The ultimate result was the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, the largest agency created since the administration of President Franklin Roosevelt.

The GWOT ushered in many new laws to protect the security of the United States. New laws such as the Patriot Act have been passed, which allows the government to search a citizen’s home without their knowledge or presence, and with no obligation to even tell the person after the fact, if he or she happens to be unfortunate enough to be deemed a “terrorist suspect” or a “terrorist sympathizer”. There are many more provisions such as a “No-Fly List” that prevents a suspected terrorist, or a terrorist sympathizer, from flying on a commercial airliner. Passports are now required to enter or come in from Mexico and Canada as well as other nations that previously did not require a passport. The new passport now carries a chip that contains much of your personal information. The Military Commissions Act of 2006 allows the Federal Government to arrest anyone without a warrant, and to hold them indefinitely without counsel, and to try them in a military tribunal. Extraordinary Rendition is a practice of seizing individuals suspected of terrorism and flying them to nations that practice torture so as to extract information vital to “national security”.

The John Warner Defense Bill (the re-vamped Insurrection Act) allows the President to federalize State National Guards and use them as law enforcement in any US State or territory over the objections of the State Governor. This effectively repeals Posse Comitatus that was passed in 1867 that prohibits Federal troops from acting as law enforcement in order that the military could not be used to effectively promote a dictatorship. These laws that were designed to promote the security of the country against terrorists, but these laws have also drastically reduced the civil liberties of American Citizens. The writ of Habeas Corpus has effectively been eliminated; this is the right to be presented with the evidence of a crime, and the right to be tried by a jury of peers, and the right to have a swift speedy trial that was written into the cornerstone of English and American common-law, the Magna Charta in 1215.

Other violations of civil liberties such as American citizens being subject to electronic surveillance and wiretapping without a warrant have also taken place. In violation of the law which established the FISA Court which requires the Federal Government to request a warrant at least 72 hours after the fact, were ignored. Presidential Directive 51 which establishes continuity of government in the event of a “national emergency” declared by the President has been written. This document, which basically gives dictatorial power to the President without authorization by Congress, has parts of it that are classified as “secret”. This directive is so secret, that members of the Senate and House Intelligence Committees that possess the highest security clearances have not been allowed to see it. What could possibly be so secret that members of Congressional Intelligence Committee members can’t see it?

Many Americans disapprove of many of the decisions by the Executive Branch and Congress. The Bush Administration has been seen by many as an advocate of executive power and a danger to civil liberties. Allegations of torture and admissions of water-boarding, sleep depravation, sensatory deprivation, subjecting suspected terrorists to extreme heat and cold, slapping them around, being threatened by dogs and many other examples have surfaced. International Law on the treatment of prisoners has been broken. Many people around the world, and some people in America, expect the International Court to eventually file charges against members of the U.S. Government, to include President Bush and Vice-President Cheney. Impeachment articles against President and Vice-President have been introduced in Congress.

Everything written in this article has been illustrated to underscore the issues that we currently face as a nation. We are coming up on a Presidential election that will determine who will succeed this President. We are faced with a world that believes the allegations of torture by our government. We invaded Iraq on the premise that Saddam had WMD’s which proved to be false, killing over a million Iraqi’s and displacing another two million. We have almost destroyed their infrastructure. We have used over two hundred fifty tons of depleted uranium in our ordinance that is still on the ground emitting radiation that has caused the level of childhood leukemia to rise by 600%. Deformed children and the increase in all kinds of cancer have been reported. American soldiers have been exposed to radiation from DU and this affects their DNA and is responsible for many babies born in the US that fail to thrive and many children that have suffered their hearts exploding at 4 to 8 month of age ( The economy is crippled by rampant capitalism and deregulation. American citizens are losing their homes to foreclosures due to predatory banking practices and the government is bailing out the banks and ignoring the homeowners. People are losing health benefits due to unemployment, firms that hire on a part-time 35 hour work week, and cost-cutting measures. 42% of Americans have either no health insurance or are under-insured. Unemployment has reached a 25 year high.

The Republicans are offering up Senator John McCain for the presidency. By all that has been said so far, he earnestly expects to “win” in Iraq without even proposing what the definition of “winning” is. He has said that he will follow the economic policies of George W. Bush. That means more “hands-off” behavior when it comes to regulating certain business practices that are hurting the economy. With a McCain presidency we can expect more Federal bailouts for banks and other industries, and no relief for the middle-class. We can expect to see more tax breaks for the wealthy, so that the divide between the Middle-Class and the wealthy, is even greater. We can expect more free trade agreements that could lead to more out-sourcing. We can look forward to more of our civil liberties lost to “protecting national security”. We can look forward to a continuation of the Global War on Terror and continued defense spending at the current rate as our economy becomes even more crippled and we stay dependent on fossil fuels that are heading the causes of global warming.

The Democrats are offering up Senator Barack Obama. This is a junior Senator with no executive experience. The Democratic presumptive nominee has already committed another two Army Divisions to the war in Afghanistan while leaving a “residual force” in Iraq, thus continuing this premise of the GWOT. He has not committed to lowering the defense budget. He has reneged on his opposition to strike immunity from prosecution for illegal electronic eavesdropping on American citizens by the telecoms. He has not come forward in opposition to the Patriot Act and the other draconian acts committed by the Bush Administration. He has pandered to AIPAC by threatening Iran with attack and supporting Jerusalem as the Israeli Capitol under Israeli control. He has threatened to invade Pakistan to fight the Taliban thereby increasing the scope of the war. The corporate control of the media and the body politic has not been addressed. The liberal wing of the Democratic Party has been virtually ignored. Senator Obama snubbed his nose at Netroots Nation, the so-called “Progressive” bloggers of Democrats and liberals. Senator Obama claims that he receives most of his financial support from small donations of middle income supporters. This is a not exactly the truth. Investment bankers and hedge fund managers are among his largest donors. “Bundled” contributions are the bread and butter of the Obama campaign.

The world see’s the United States as the biggest supporter of Israel’s right-wing government. Israel continues to build settlements on the West Bank and keeps the inhabitants of Gaza in a virtual “lockdown”. Bulldozers still raze homes in Gaza and unarmed young men are shot on a regular basis by the Israeli Defense Force. The J Street Coalition of liberal Jews claims to represent 60% of Jews in America. AIPAC, which J Street claims only represents 30% of Jewish Americans is the target of Senator Obama’s affection. Why? What is it about AIPAC that draws politicians in like moths to a light? The answer I come up with is money. Money and the fact that Republicans that lean hard right support AIPAC along with religious zealots like Rev. Hagee who seems to believe that once Jerusalem is entirely in Israeli hands, God can then fulfill the Bible’s prophesy and start the “rapture” and Hagee and his followers can enter the kingdom of heaven. I wonder if they’ll meet the Muslim suicide bombers and their 72 virgins hanging out at St. Peter’s gate.

The two corporate political parties have their two corporate candidates. I see Cynthia McKinney as the favored candidate of the true left in America. She has ballot access and she isn’t afraid to condemn the loss of civil liberties in America, nor does she hesitate to criticize the pandering of both corporate politicians to the military industrial complex. She is highly critical of Israel and also speaks out on the corporate controlled media. The Greens, which in my mind are born-again feudalists’, are extremely lucky to have her. She just might qualify for matching campaign funds for the Green Party. Brian Moore of the Socialist Party is, in my opinion, the best candidate… but only intellectually. The lack of ballot access for the Socialists, and the hangover from the Cold War, leaves many Americans afraid of the name Socialist. I believe that if the same corporate control of the two political parties, that are essentially not too different from one another continues, those Americans that find the divide between the rich and middle class (if we still have a middle class), will find the message of the Socialists more attractive than at any time in the past. Their support of strong unions and a return to a peacetime economy will become much more attractive. While Senator Obama gets the Democrats misty-eyed with his talk of change and tearing down walls, in reality, change will be the last thing we’ll see in an Obama presidency, and the walls of distrust between the corporatists, the wealthy and the rest of us, will be higher than ever. Until real limits are legislated on campaign financing, the corporate money will continue to rule the two major political parties, along with the corporate media that will promote them.

Unless Americans start to look past the hype that the mainstream media provides to their myopic vision of this so-called two-party system, the future seems bleak indeed for the average middle-class citizens. To get a clear understanding of modern politics today, one needs only to follow the money in the political arena to see who will emerge as the victor in this particular election. It seems to me the cruelest joke that is being played today is on all of the young people in this country that see a champion in Barack Obama and his mantra of “change”. I believe that the disillusionment that they will feel when the changes they are hoping for fail to materialize, it will bring a backlash of epic proportions. Maybe then the Socialists will start looking pretty good in a world separated by those that have and those that don’t.

Court Confirms President’s Dictatorial Powers

Court Confirms President’s Dictatorial Powers

in Case of US “Enemy Combatant” Ali al-Marri

By Andy Worthington

On July 15, the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled by 5 votes to 4 in the case of Al-Marri v. Pucciarelli (PDF) that the president can arrest US citizens and legal residents inside the United States and imprison them indefinitely, without charge or trial, based solely on his assertion that they are “enemy combatants.” Have a little think about it, and you’ll see that the Fourth Circuit judges have just endorsed dictatorial powers.

In the words of Judge William B. Traxler, whose swing vote confirmed the court’s otherwise divided ruling, “the Constitution generally affords all persons detained by the government the right to be charged and tried in a criminal proceeding for suspected wrongdoing, and it prohibits the government from subjecting individuals arrested inside the United States to military detention unless they fall within certain narrow exceptions … The detention of enemy combatants during military hostilities, however, is such an exception. If properly designated an enemy combatant pursuant to legal authority of the President, such persons may be detained without charge or criminal proceedings for the duration of the relevant hostilities.”

As was pointed out by Judge Diana Gribbon Motz, who was steadfastly opposed to the majority verdict (and whose opinion was endorsed by Judges M. Blane Michael, Robert B. King and Roger L. Gregory), “the duration of the relevant hostilities” is a disturbingly open-ended prospect. After citing the 2007 State of the Union Address, in which the President claimed that ‘[t]he war on terror we fight today is a generational struggle that will continue long after you and I have turned our duties over to others,'” Judge Motz noted, “Unlike detention for the duration of a traditional armed conflict between nations, detention for the length of a ‘war on terror’ has no bounds.”

The Court of Appeals made its extraordinary ruling in relation to a habeas corpus claim in the case of Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri, whose story I reported at length here. To recap briefly, al-Marri, a Qatari national who had studied in Peoria, Illinois in 1991, returned to the United States in September 2001, with his US residency in order, to pursue post-graduate studies, bringing his family — his wife and five children — with him. Three months later he was arrested and charged with fraud and making false statements to the FBI, but in June 2003, a month before he was due to stand trial for these charges in a federal court, the prosecution dropped the charges and informed the court that he was to be held as an “enemy combatant” instead.

He was then moved to a naval brig in Charleston, South Carolina, where he has now been held for five years and one month in complete isolation in a blacked-out cell in an otherwise unoccupied cell block. For the first 14 months of this imprisonment, he was subjected to sleep deprivation and extreme temperature manipulation, frequently deprived of food and water, and interrogated repeatedly.

In August 2003, representatives of the International Red Cross were finally allowed to visit al-Marri, and two months later he was permitted to meet with a lawyer, when he finally had the opportunity to explain that his interrogators had “threatened to send [him] to Egypt or to Saudi Arabia where, they told him, he would be tortured and sodomized and where his wife would be raped in front of him.”

Based on advice given to Donald Rumsfeld by Defense Department lawyers regarding the use of isolation at Guantánamo, when the lawyers warned that it was “not known to have been generally used for interrogation purposes for longer than 30 days,” al-Marri has now been held in solitary confinement for 67 times longer than the amount of time recommended by the Pentagon’s own lawyers (this figure includes the six months that he spent in isolation in Peoria County Jail and the Metropolitan Correction Center in New York, before being transferred to Charleston).

It is, therefore, unsurprising that his lawyer, Jonathan Hafetz of the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law, has explained that he is suffering from “severe damage to his mental and emotional well-being, including hypersensitivity to external stimuli, manic behavior, difficulty concentrating and thinking, obsessional thinking, difficulties with impulse control, difficulty sleeping, difficulty keeping track of time, and agitation.”

So what is Ali al-Marri supposed to have done to justify being held in solitary confinement for almost as long as the duration of the Second World War? The presidential order declaring him an “enemy combatant” stated simply that he was closely associated with al-Qaeda and presented “a continuing, present, and grave danger to the national security of the United States.” Elaborating, in subsequent statements, the government has claimed that he was part of an al-Qaeda sleeper cell, who had been instructed to carry out further terrorist attacks in the United States, targeting reservoirs, the New York Stock Exchange and military academies.

What’s particularly worrying about these charges is that, by the government’s own admission, the primary sources for its supposed evidence against al-Marri are confessions made by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM), the alleged architect of the 9/11 attacks, during the three months following his capture in March 2003, when, as even the CIA has admitted, he was subjected to waterboarding, a form of controlled drowning, which the torturers of the Spanish Inquisition at least had the honesty to call “tortura del aqua.”

As I discussed at length in an article last summer, KSM stated during his tribunal at Guantánamo in March 2007 that he had given false information about other people while being tortured, and, although he was not allowed to elaborate, I traced several possible victims of these false confessions, including Majid Khan, one of 13 supposedly “high-value” detainees transferred with KSM to Guantánamo from secret CIA prisons in September 2006, Saifullah Paracha, a Pakistani businessman and philanthropist held in Guantánamo, and his son Uzair, who was convicted in the United States on dubious charges in November 2005, and sentenced to 30 years in prison.

As I also stated last November, “It’s possible, therefore, that al-Marri is another victim of KSM’s tangled web of tortured confessions, but whether or not this is true, the correct venue for such discussions is in a court of law, and not in leaks and proclamations from an administration that appears to be intent on holding him without charge or trial for the rest of his life.”

When I wrote these words, it seemed possible that the Fourth Circuit judges would act to prevent al-Marri from having the dubious distinction of being the last “enemy combatant” on the US mainland, and would put pressure on the government to transfer him to a federal prison to face a trial in a US court, as happened with Jose Padilla, a US citizen and one of two other “enemy combatants” imprisoned without charge or trial — the other being Yaser Hamdi, a US-born Saudi, who was held in Guantánamo until it was ascertained that he held US citizenship. In Hamdi’s case, however, a brief stay at the Charleston brig was followed by a deal that allowed him to return to Saudi Arabia.

In June 2007, a panel of three Fourth Circuit judges dealt a blow to the administration’s claims by ruling that “the Constitution does not allow the President to order the military to seize civilians residing within the United States and then detain them indefinitely without criminal process, and this is so even if he calls them ‘enemy combatants.'” Last week’s decision followed a successful appeal by the government, but when the Fourth Circuit court met en banc to reconsider al-Marri’s case in October, it seemed possible that they would uphold the panel’s June verdict. When Judge Michael asked the government’s representative, Gregory J. Barre, “How long can you keep this man in custody?” and Garre replied that it could “go on for a long time,” depending on the duration of the “war” with al-Qaeda, Judge Michael stated, “It looks like a lifetime.”

I now realize, of course, that it was always highly improbable that the Fourth Circuit court — widely regarded as the most right-wing court in the country — would end Ali al-Marri’s legal limbo, although it was somewhat ironic that, in a separate ruling, the swing-voting Judge Traxler ruled in al-Marri’s favor when it came to a decision to grant him some as yet unspecified ability to challenge the basis of his definition as an “enemy combatant.”

This, at least, earned him the gratitude of Judge Motz, who stated that “the evidentiary proceedings envisaged by Judge Traxler will at least place the burden on the Government to make an initial showing that ‘the normal due process protections available to all within this country’ are impractical or unduly burdensome in al-Marri’s case and that the hearsay declaration that constitutes the Government’s only evidence against al-Marri is ‘the most reliable available evidence’ supporting the Government’s allegations.”

In other respects, however, the court only added to its reputation as a defender of the indefensible. Not content with endorsing the President’s dictatorial right to imprison “enemy combatants” without charge or trial on the US mainland, the judges responsible for the majority verdict ruled that the President did not even have to allege, as he did with Yaser Hamdi and Jose Padilla, that an “enemy combatant” had either been in Afghanistan or had ever raised arms against US forces.

The injustice of this was pointed out in the opinion of Judge Motz, who stated that, “unlike Hamdi and Padilla, al-Marri is not alleged to have been part of a Taliban unit, not alleged to have stood alongside the Taliban or the armed forces of any other enemy nation, not alleged to have been on the battlefield during the war in Afghanistan, not alleged to have even been in Afghanistan during the armed conflict, and not alleged to have engaged in combat with United States forces anywhere in the world.”

Judge Motz added, however, “With regret, we recognize that this view does not command a majority of the court. Our colleagues hold that the President can order the military to seize from his home and indefinitely detain anyone — including an American citizen — even though he has never affiliated with an enemy nation, fought alongside any nation’s armed forces, or borne arms against the United States anywhere in the world. We cannot agree that in a broad and general statute, Congress silently authorized a detention power that so vastly exceeds all traditional bounds. No existing law permits this extraordinary exercise of executive power.”

Disturbingly, as Judge Motz mentioned above, the court also indicated its presumption that its ruling applies not just to legal residents like Ali al-Marri, but to US citizens as well. Judge Traxler noted, “it is likely that the constitutional rights our court determines exist, or do not exist, for al-Marri will apply equally to our own citizens under like circumstances,” and Judge Motz explained that the lack of distinction between citizens and residents had become apparent at oral argument, when the government “finally acknowledged that an alien legally resident in the United States, like al-Marri, has the same Fifth Amendment due process rights as an American citizen. For this reason, the Government had to concede that if al-Marri can be detained as an enemy combatant, then the Government can also detain any American citizen on the same showing and through the same process.”

We have, to be honest, been here before. In September 2005, a three-member panel upheld, in Padilla’s case, the President’s power to hold US citizens indefinitely without charge or trial (PDF). This verdict was never tested, as the government took Padilla out of the brig and into the court system (where he was convicted in January) before the Supreme Court could rule on his case, but as Glenn Greenwald noted in an article in Salon, the upshot is that the 2005 Padilla verdict still stands. To that extent, all that has changed now is that the Fourth Circuit court has reinforced its former ruling en banc.

Al-Marri’s lawyers will doubtless appeal, and, if justice still counts for anything, his case will go all the way to the Supreme Court. However, it remains incomprehensible to me that the whole sorry saga has lasted for so long already. As Jonathan Hafetz and his colleagues explained last November when they presented their arguments to the Fourth Circuit judges (and as Judge Motz noted last week), the President “lacks the legal authority to designate and detain al-Marri as an ‘enemy combatant’ for two principal reasons”: firstly, because the Constitution “prohibits the military imprisonment of civilians arrested in the United States and outside an active battlefield,” and secondly, because, although a district court previously held that the President was authorized to detain al-Marri under the Authorization for Use of Military Force (the September 2001 law authorizing the President to use “all necessary and appropriate force” against those involved in any way with the 9/11 attacks), Congress explicitly prohibited “the indefinite detention without charge of suspected alien terrorists in the United States” in the Patriot Act, which followed five weeks later.

That seems pretty clear to me. In the “War on Terror,” however, as I learned during my research for The Guantánamo Files, all forms of logical thought — sometimes in the courts, most of the time in military custody, and as a permanent fixture in the war rooms where torture was endorsed — have been engulfed in a fog of fear and barbarism.

I leave the final words to Judge Motz, and her clear-eyed awareness of the injustice of the al-Marri verdict. “To sanction such presidential authority to order the military to seize and indefinitely detain civilians, even if the President call them ‘enemy combatants,’ would have disastrous consequences for the Constitution — and the country,” Judge Motz wrote. “For a court to uphold a claim to such extraordinary power would do more than render lifeless the Suspension Clause, the Due Process Clause, and the rights to criminal process in the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments; it would effectively undermine all of the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. It is that power — were a court to recognize it — that could lead all our laws ‘to go unexecuted, and the government itself to go to pieces.’ We refuse to recognize a claim to power that would so alter the constitutional foundations of our Republic.”

Unless Ali al-Marri is allowed a meaningful review of his status as an “enemy combatant,” Judge Motz’s fears have already come true.

America’s Democratic Collapse

America’s Democratic Collapse

By Chris Hedges

n a dramatic speech, Chris Hedges warns that the nation is on the verge of becoming a full-blown corporate state.

Note: Chris Hedges gave this keynote address on Wednesday, May 28, in Furman University’s Younts Conference Center. The address was part of protests by faculty and students over the South Carolina college’s decision to invite George W. Bush to give the May 31 commencement address.

When it was announced in May that Bush would deliver the commencement address, 222 students and faculty signed and posted on the school’s Web site a statement titled “We Object.” The statement cites the war in Iraq and the administration’s “obstructing progress on reducing greenhouse gases while favoring billions in tax breaks and subsidies to oil companies that are earning record profits.”

“We are ashamed of the actions of this administration. The war in Iraq has cost the lives of over 4,000 brave and honorable U.S. military personnel,” the statement read. “Because we love this country and the ideals it stands for, we accept our civic responsibility to speak out against these actions that violate American values.”

I used to live in a country called America. It was not a perfect country, God knows, especially if you were African American or Native American or of Japanese descent in World War II, or poor or gay or a woman or an immigrant, but it was a country I loved and honored. This country gave me hope that it could be better. It paid its workers wages that were envied around the world. It made sure these workers, thanks to labor unions and champions of the working class in the Democratic Party and the press, had health benefits and pensions. It offered good public education. It honored basic democratic values and held in regard the rule of law, including international law and respect for human rights. It had social programs from Head Start to welfare to Social Security to take care of the weakest among us, the mentally ill, the elderly and the destitute. It had a system of government that, however flawed, was dedicated to protecting the interests of its citizens. It offered the possibility of democratic change. It had a media that was diverse and endowed with the integrity to give a voice to all segments of society, including those beyond our borders, to impart to us unpleasant truths, to challenge the powerful, to explain ourselves to ourselves.

I am not blind to the imperfections of this America, or the failures to always meet these ideals at home and abroad. I spent 20 years of my life in Latin America, Africa, the Middle East and the Balkans as a foreign correspondent reporting in countries where crimes and injustices were committed in our name, whether during the Contra war in Nicaragua or the brutalization of the Palestinians by Israeli occupation forces. But there was much that was good and decent and honorable in our country. And there was hope.

The country I live in today uses the same words to describe itself, the same patriotic symbols and iconography, the same national myths, but only the shell remains. America, the country of my birth, the country that formed and shaped me, the country of my father, my father’s father and his father’s father, stretching back to the generations of my family that were here for the country’s founding, is so diminished as to be nearly unrecognizable. I do not know if this America will return, even as I pray and work and strive for its return. The “consent of the governed” has become an empty phrase. Our textbooks on political science are obsolete. Our state, our nation, has been hijacked by oligarchs, corporations and a narrow, selfish political elite, a small and privileged group which governs on behalf of moneyed interests. We are undergoing, as John Ralston Saul wrote, “a coup d’etat in slow motion.” We are being impoverished — legally, economically, spiritually and politically. And unless we soon reverse this tide, unless we wrest the state away from corporate hands, we will be sucked into the dark and turbulent world of globalization where there are only masters and serfs, where the American dream will be no more than that — a dream, where those who work hard for a living can no longer earn a decent wage to sustain themselves or their families, whether in sweatshops in China or the decaying rust belt of Ohio, where democratic dissent is condemned as treason and ruthlessly silenced.

I single out no party. The Democratic Party has been as guilty as the Republicans. It was Bill Clinton who led the Democratic Party to the corporate watering trough. Clinton argued that the party had to ditch labor unions, no longer a source of votes or power, as a political ally. Workers, he insisted, would vote Democratic anyway. They had no choice. It was better, he argued, to take corporate money. By the 1990s, the Democratic Party, under Clinton’s leadership, had virtual fundraising parity with the Republicans. Today the Democrats get more. In political terms, it was a success. In moral terms, it was a betrayal.

The North American Free Trade Agreement was sold to the country by the Clinton White House as an opportunity to raise the incomes and prosperity of the citizens of the United States, Canada and Mexico. NAFTA would also, we were told, staunch Mexican immigration into the United States.

“There will be less illegal immigration because more Mexicans will be able to support their children by staying home,” President Clinton said in the spring of 1993 as he was lobbying for the bill.

But NAFTA, which took effect in 1994, had the curious effect of reversing every one of Clinton’s rosy predictions. Once the Mexican government lifted price supports on corn and beans for Mexican farmers, they had to compete against the huge agribusinesses in the United States. The Mexican farmers were swiftly bankrupted. At least 2 million Mexican farmers have been driven off their land since 1994. And guess where many of them went? This desperate flight of poor Mexicans into the United States is now being exacerbated by large-scale factory closures along the border as manufacturers pack up and leave Mexico for the cut-rate embrace of China’s totalitarian capitalism. But we were assured that goods would be cheaper. Workers would be wealthier. Everyone would be happier. I am not sure how these contradictory things were supposed to happen, but in a sound-bite society, reality no longer matters. NAFTA was great if you were a corporation. It was a disaster if you were a worker.

Clinton’s welfare reform bill, which was signed on Aug. 22, 1996, obliterated the nation’s social safety net. It threw 6 million people, many of them single mothers, off the welfare rolls within three years. It dumped them onto the streets without child care, rent subsidies and continued Medicaid coverage. Families were plunged into crisis, struggling to survive on multiple jobs that paid $6 or $7 an hour, or less than $15,000 a year. But these were the lucky ones. In some states, half of those dropped from the welfare rolls could not find work. Clinton slashed Medicare by $115 billion over a five-year period and cut $25 billion in Medicaid funding. The booming and overcrowded prison system handled the influx of the poor, as well as our abandoned mentally ill. And today we stand in shame with 2.3 million of our citizens behind bars, most for nonviolent drug offenses. More than 1 in 100 adults in the United States is incarcerated, and 1 in 9 black men ages 20 to 34 is behind bars. The United States, with less than 5 percent of the global population, has almost 25 percent of the world’s prisoners.

The growing desperation across the United States is unleashing not simply a recession — we have been in a recession for some time now — but the possibility of a depression unlike anything we have seen since the 1930s. This desperation has provided a pool of broken people willing to work for low wages and without unions or benefits. This is good news if you are a corporation. It is very bad news if you work for a living. For the bottom 90 percent of Americans, annual income has been on a slow, steady decline for three decades. The majority’s income peaked at $33,000 in 1973. By 2005, according to New York Times reporter David Cay Johnston in his book “Free Lunch,” it had fallen to a bit more than $29,000, this despite three decades of economic expansion. And where did that money go? Ask ExxonMobil, the biggest U.S. oil and gas company, which made a $10.9 billion profit in the first quarter of this year, leaving us to pay close to $4 a gallon to fill up our cars. Or better yet, ask Exxon Mobil Corp. Chief Executive Rex Tillerson, whose compensation rose nearly 18 percent to $21.7 million in 2007, when the oil company pulled in the largest profit ever for a U.S. company. His take-home pay package included $1.75 million in salary, a $3.36 million bonus and $16.1 million of stock and option awards, according to a company filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. He also received nearly $430,000 of other compensation, including $229,331 for personal security and $41,122 for use of the company aircraft. In addition to his pay package, Tillerson, 56, received more than $7.6 million from exercising options and stock awards during the year. Exxon Mobil earned $40.61 billion in 2007, up 3 percent from the previous year. But Tillerson’s 2007 pay was not even the highest mark for the U.S. oil and gas industry. Occidental Petroleum Corp. CEO Ray Irani made $33.6 million, and Anadarko Petroleum Corp. chief James Hackett took in $26.7 million over the same period.

For each dollar earned in 2005, the top 10 percent got 48.5 cents. That was the top tenth’s greatest share of the income pie, Johnston writes, since 1929, just before the Roaring ’20s collapsed in the Great Depression. And within the top 10 percent, those who made more than $100,000, nearly all the gains went to the top tenth of 1 percent, people like Tillerson or Irani or Hackett, who made at least $1.7 million that year. And until we have real election reform, until we make it possible to run for national office without candidates kissing the rings of Tillersons, Iranis and Hacketts to get hundreds of millions of dollars, this rape of America will continue.

While the Democrats have been very bad, George W. Bush has been even worse. Let’s set aside Iraq, the worst foreign policy blunder in American history. George Bush has also done more to dismantle our Constitution, ignore or revoke our statutes and reverse regulations that protected American citizens from corporate abuse than any other president in recent American history. The president, as the Boston Globe reported, has claimed the authority, through “signing statements,” to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution. Among the laws Bush said he can ignore are military rules and regulations, affirmative action provisions, requirements that Congress be told about immigration services problems, whistle-blower protections for nuclear regulatory officials, and safeguards against political interference in federally funded research. The Constitution is clear in assigning to Congress the power to write the laws and to the president a duty ”to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” George Bush, however, has repeatedly declared that he does not need to ”execute” a law he believes is unconstitutional. The Bush administration has gutted environmental, food and product safety, and workplace safety standards along with their enforcement. And this is why coal mines collapse, the housing bubble has blown up in our face, and we are sold lead-contaminated toys imported from China. Bush has done more than any president to hand our government directly over to corporations, which now get 40 percent of federal discretionary spending.

Over 800,000 jobs once handled by government employees have been outsourced to corporations, a move that has not only further empowered our shadow corporate government but helped destroy federal workforce unions. Everything from federal prisons, the management of regulatory and scientific reviews, the processing or denial of Freedom of Information requests, interrogating prisoners and running the world’s largest mercenary army in Iraq has become corporate. And these corporations, in a perverse arrangement, make their money off the American citizen. Halliburton in 2003 was given a no-bid and non-compete $7 billion contract to repair Iraq’s oil fields, as well as the power to oversee and control Iraq’s entire oil production. This has now become $130 billion in contract awards to Halliburton. And flush with taxpayer dollars, what has Haliburton done? It has made sure only 36 of its 143 subsidiaries are incorporated in the United States and 107 subsidiaries (or 75 percent) are incorporated in 30 different countries. Halliburton is able through this arrangement to lower its tax liability on foreign income by establishing a “controlled foreign corporation” and subsidiaries inside low-tax, or no-tax, countries known as a “tax havens.” They take our money. They squander it. And our corporate government not only funds them but protects them. Halliburton — and Halliburton is just one example — is the engine of our new, rogue corporate state, serviced by people like George Bush and Dick Cheney, once the company’s CEO.

The disparity between our oligarchy and the working class has created a new global serfdom. Credit Suisse analysts estimates that the number of subprime foreclosures in the United States over the next two years will total 1,390,000 and that by the end of 2012, 12.7 percent of all residential borrowers in the United States will be forced out of their homes. The corporate state, which as an idea is an abstraction to many Americans, is very real when the pieces are carefully put together and linked to a system of corporate power that has made this poverty, the denial of our constitutional rights, and a state of permanent war inevitable. The assault on the American working class — an assault that has devastated members of my own family — is nearly complete. The U.S. economy has 3.2 million fewer jobs today than it did when George Bush took office, including 2.5 million fewer manufacturing jobs. In the past three years, nearly 1 in 5 U.S. workers was laid off. Among workers laid off from full-time work, roughly one-fourth were earning less than $40,000 annually. A total of 15 million U.S. workers are unemployed, underemployed, or too discouraged to job hunt, according to the Labor Department. There are whole sections of the United States which now resemble the developing world. There has been a Weimarization of the American working class. And the assault on the middle class is now under way. Anything that can be put on software — from finance to architecture to engineering — can and is being outsourced to workers in countries such as India or China who accept a fraction of the pay and work without benefits. And both the Republican and Democratic parties, beholden to corporations for money and power, allow this to happen.

Take a look at our government departments. Who runs the Defense Department? The Department of Interior? The Department of Agriculture? The Food and Drug Administration? Who runs the Department of Labor? Corporations. And in an election year where we are numbed by absurdities, we hear nothing about this subordinating of the American people to corporate power. The political debates, which have become popularity contests, are ridiculous and empty. They do not confront the real and advanced destruction of our democracy. They do not confront the takeover of our electoral processes.

We have watched over the past few decades the rise of a powerful web of interlocking corporate entities, a network of arrangements within subsectors, industries, or other partial jurisdictions to diminish and often abolish outside control and oversight. These corporations have neutralized national, state and judicial authority. They dominate, for example, a bloated and wasteful defense industry, which has become sacrosanct and beyond the reach of politicians, most of whom are left defending military projects in their districts, no matter how redundant, because they provide jobs. This has permitted a military-industrial complex, which contributes lavishly to political campaigns, to spread across the country with virtual impunity.

Defense-related spending for fiscal 2008 will exceed $1 trillion for the first time in history. The U.S. has become the largest single seller of arms and munitions on the planet. The defense budget for fiscal 2008 is the largest since the Second World War even as we have more than $400 billion in annual deficits. More than half of federal discretionary spending goes to defense. This will not end when Bush leaves office. And so we build Cold War relics like $3.4 billion submarines and stealth fighters to evade radar systems the Soviets never built and spend $ 8.9 billion on ICBM missile defense that will be useless in stopping a shipping container concealing a dirty bomb. The defense industry is able to monopolize the best scientific and research talent and squander the nation’s resources and investment capital. These defense industries produce nothing that is useful for society or the national trade account. (Seymour) Melman, like President Eisenhower, saw the defense industry as viral, something that, as it grew, destroyed a healthy economy. And so we produce sophisticated fighter jets while Boeing is unable to finish its new commercial plane on schedule, and our automotive industry tanks. We sink money into research and development of weapons systems and starve technologies to fight against global warming and renewable energy. Universities are awash in defense-related cash and grants, and struggle to find money for environmental studies. This massive military spending, aided by this $3 trillion war, is hollowing us out from the inside. Our bridges and levees collapse, our schools decay, and our safety net is taken away.

The corporate state, begun under Ronald Reagan and pushed forward by every president since, has destroyed the public and private institutions that protected workers and safeguarded citizens. Only 7.8 percent of workers in the private sector are unionized. This is about the same percentage as in the early 1900s. There are 50 million Americans in real poverty and tens of millions of Americans in a category called “near poverty.” Our health care system is broken. Eighteen thousand people die in this country, according to the Institute of Medicine, every year because they can’t afford health care. That is six times the number of people who died in the 9/11 attacks, and these unnecessary deaths continue year after year. But we do not hear these stories of pain and dislocation. We are diverted by bread and circus. News reports do little more than report on trivia and celebrity gossip. The FCC, in an example of how far our standards have fallen, defines shows like Fox’s celebrity gossip program “TMZ” and the Christian Broadcast Network’s “700 Club” as “bona fide newscasts.” The economist Charlotte Twight calls this vast corporate system of spectacle and democratic collapse “participatory fascism.”

How did we get here? How did this happen? In a word, deregulation — the systematic dismantling of the managed capitalism that was the hallmark of the American democratic state. Our political decline came about because of deregulation, the repeal of antitrust laws, and the radical transformation from a manufacturing economy to a capital economy. This understanding led Franklin Delano Roosevelt on April 29, 1938, to send a message to Congress titled “Recommendations to the Congress to Curb Monopolies and the Concentration of Economic Power.” In it, he wrote:

The first truth is that the liberty of democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of power to a point where it becomes stronger than the democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism — ownership of Government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. The second truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if its business system does not provide employment and produce and distribute goods in such a way to sustain an acceptable standard of living.

The rise of the corporate state has grave political consequences, as we saw in Italy and Germany in the early part of the 20th century. Antitrust laws not only regulate and control the marketplace, they serve as bulwarks to protect democracy. And now that they are gone, now that we have a state that is run by and on behalf of corporations, we must expect inevitable and perhaps terrifying political consequences.

I spent two years traveling the country to write a book on the Christian right called “American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America.” In depressed former manufacturing towns from Ohio to Kentucky it was the same. There are tens of millions of Americans for whom the end of the world is no longer an abstraction. They have lost hope. Fear and instability has plunged the working class into personal and economic despair, and not surprisingly into the arms of the demagogues and charlatans of the radical Christian right who offer a belief in magic, miracles and the fiction of a utopian Christian nation. And unless we re-enfranchise these Americans back into the economy, unless we give them hope, our democracy is doomed.

As the pressure mounts, as this despair and desperation reaches into larger and larger segments of the American populace, the mechanisms of corporate and government control are being bolstered to prevent civil unrest and instability. It is not accidental that with the rise of the corporate state comes the rise of the security state. This is why the Bush White House has pushed through the Patriot Act (and its renewal), the suspension of habeas corpus, the practice of “extraordinary rendition,” the warrantless wiretapping on American citizens and the refusal to ensure free and fair elections with verifiable ballot-counting. It is part of a package. It comes together. It is not about terrorism or national security. It is about control. It is about their control of us.

Sen. Frank Church, as chairman of the Select Committee on Intelligence in 1975, investigated the government’s massive and highly secretive National Security Agency. He wrote:

“That capability at any time could be turned around on the American people and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything. Telephone conversations, telegrams, it doesn’t matter. There would be no place to hide. If this government ever became a tyranny, if a dictator ever took charge in this country, the technological capacity that the intelligence community has given the government could enable it to impose total tyranny, and there would be no way to fight back, because the most careful effort to combine together in resistance to the government, no matter how privately it was done, is within the reach of the government to know. Such is the capability of this technology. I don’t want to see this country ever go across the bridge. I know the capability that is there to make tyranny total in America, and we must see to it that this agency and all agencies that possess this technology operate within the law and under proper supervision, so that we never cross over that abyss. That is the abyss from which there is no return.”

When Sen. Church made this statement, the NSA was not authorized to spy on American citizens. Today it is.

… We are fed lie after lie to mask the destruction the corporate state has wrought in our lives. The consumer price index, for example, used by the government to measure inflation, has become meaningless. To keep the official inflation figures low, the government has been substituting basic products they once measured to check for inflation with ones that do not rise very much in price. This trick has kept the cost-of-living increases tied to the CPI artificially low. The disconnect between what we are told and what is actually true is worthy of the old East German state. The New York Times’ consumer reporter, W.P. Dunleavy, wrote that her groceries now cost $587 a month, up from $400 a year earlier. This is a 40 percent increase. California economist John Williams, who runs an organization called Shadow Statistics, contends that if Washington still used the CPI measurements applied back in the 1970s, inflation would be in the 10 percent range. The advantage to the corporations is huge. A false inflation rate, one far lower than the real rate, keeps equitable interest payments on bank accounts and certificates of deposit down. It masks the deterioration of the American economy. The Potemkin statistics allow corporations and the corporate state to walk away from obligations tied to real adjustments for inflation. These statistics mean that less is paid out in Social Security and pensions. It has reduced the interest on the multitrillion-dollar debt. Corporations never have to pay real cost-of-living increases to their employees. The term “unemployment” has also been steadily redefined. This has rendered official data on employment worthless. In real terms, about 10 percent of the working population is unemployed, a figure that is, over the long run, unsustainable. The economy, despite the official statistics, is not growing. It is shrinking. And as the nation crumbles, we are awash with the terrible simplicity of false statistics. We confuse our emotional responses, carefully manipulated by advertisers, pundits, spin doctors, television hosts, political consultants and focus groups, with knowledge. It is how we elect presidents and those we send to Congress, how we make decisions, even decisions to go to war. It is how we view the world. Four media giants — AOL-Time Warner, Viacom, Disney, and Rupert Murdoch’s NewsGroup — control nearly everything we read, see and hear. This growing disconnect with reality is the hallmark of a totalitarian state.

“Before they seize power and establish a world according to their doctrines,” Hannah Arendt wrote, “totalitarian movements conjure up a lying world of consistency which is more adequate to the needs of the human mind than reality itself; in which, through sheer imagination, uprooted masses can feel at home and are spared the never-ending shocks which real life and real experiences deal to human beings and their expectations. The force possessed by totalitarian propaganda — before the movements have the power to drop iron curtains to prevent anyone’s disturbing, by the slightest reality, the gruesome quiet of an entirely imaginary world — lies in its ability to shut the masses off from the real world.”

So what do we do? Voting is not enough. If voting was that effective, to quote the activist Philip Berrigan, it would be illegal. And voting in an age when elections are stolen by rigged ballot machines and a stacked Supreme Court willing to overturn all legal precedent to make George Bush president, will not work. I am not saying do not vote. We should all vote. But that has to be the starting point if we want to reclaim America. We must lobby, organize and advocate for the dissolution of the World Trade Organization and NAFTA. The WTO and NAFTA have handcuffed workers and consumers and stymied our efforts to create clean environments. These agreements are beyond the control of our courts and have crippled our weakened regulatory agencies. The WTO forces our working class to compete with brutalized child and prison labor overseas, to be reduced to this level of slave labor or to go without meaningful work. We need to repeal the anti-worker Taft-Hartley law of 1947. The act obstructs the organization of unions. We need to transfer control of pension funds from management to workers. If these pension funds, worth trillions of dollars, were in the hands of workers, the working class would own a third of the New York Stock Exchange.

The working class has every right to be, to steal a line from Obama, bitter with liberal elites. I am bitter. I have seen what the loss of manufacturing jobs and the death of the labor movement did to my relatives in the former mill towns in Maine. Their story is the story of tens of millions of Americans who can no longer find a job that supports a family and provides basic benefits. Human beings are not commodities. They are not goods. They grieve and suffer and feel despair. They raise children and struggle to maintain communities. The growing class divide is not understood, despite the glibness of many in the media, by complicated sets of statistics or the absurd, utopian faith in unregulated globalization and complicated trade deals. It is understood in the eyes of a man or woman who is no longer making enough money to live with dignity and hope.

George Bush, who will be here on Saturday, has done more to shred, violate or absent the government from its obligations under domestic and international law. He has refused to sign the Kyoto Protocol, backed out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, tried to kill the International Criminal Court, walked out on negotiations on chemical and biological weapons, and defied the Geneva Convention and human rights law. He has set up offshore penal colonies where we deny detainees basic rights and openly engage in torture. He launched an illegal war in Iraq based on fabricated evidence we now know had been discredited even before it was made public. And if we as citizens do not hold him accountable for these crimes, if we allow the Democratic majority in Congress to get away with its refusal to begin the process of impeachment, which appears likely, we will be complicit in the codification of a new world order, one that will have terrifying consequences. For a world without treaties, statutes and laws is a world where any nation, from a rogue nuclear state to a great imperial power, will be able to invoke its domestic laws to annul its obligations to others. This new order will undo five decades of international cooperation — largely put in place by the United States — destroy our own constitutional rights and thrust us into a Hobbesian nightmare. We are one, maybe two, terrorist attacks away from a police state. Time is running out.

We must not allow international laws and treaties — ones that set minimum standards of behavior and provide a framework for competing social, political, economic and religious groups and interests to resolve differences — to be discarded. The exercise of power without law is tyranny. And the consequences of George Bush’s violation of the law, his creation of legal black holes that can swallow American citizens along with those outside our borders, run in a direct line from the White House to Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and military brigs in cities such as Charleston. George Bush — we now know from the leaked Downing Street memo — fabricated a legal pretext for war. He decided to charge Saddam Hussein with the material breach of the resolution passed in the wake of the 1991 Gulf War. He had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was in breach of this resolution. And so he and his advisers manufactured reports of weapons of mass destruction and disseminated them to a frightened and manipulated press and public. In short, he lied. He lied to us and to the rest of the world. There are tens of thousands, perhaps a few hundred thousand people, who have been killed and maimed in a war that has no legal justification, a war waged in violation of international law, a war that under the post-Nuremberg laws is defined as “a criminal war of aggression.”

We have blundered into nations we know little about. We are caught between bitter rivalries and competing ethnic groups and leaders we do not understand. We are trying to transplant a modern system of politics invented in Europe characterized, among other things, by the division of earth into independent secular states based on national citizenship in a land where the belief in a secular civil government is an alien creed. Iraq was a cesspool for the British when they occupied it in 1917. It will be a cesspool for us as well. We can either begin an orderly withdrawal or watch the mission collapse.

A rule-based world matters. The creation of international bodies and laws, the sanctity of our constitutional rights, have allowed us to stand pre-eminent as a nation — one that seeks at its best to respect and defend the rule of law. If we demolish the fragile and delicate domestic and international order, if we permit George Bush to create a world where diplomacy, broad cooperation, democracy and law are worthless, if we allow these international and domestic legal safeguards to unravel, our moral and political authority will plummet. We will erode the possibility of cooperation between nation-states, including our closest allies. We will lose our country. And we will, in the end, see visited upon us the evils we visit on others. Read Antigone, when the king imposes his will without listening to those he rules or Thucydides’ history. Read how Athens’ expanding empire saw it become a tyrant abroad and then a tyrant at home. How the tyranny the Athenian leadership imposed on others it finally imposed on itself. This, Thucydides wrote, is what doomed Athenian democracy; Athens destroyed itself. For the primary instrument of tyranny and empire is war and war is a poison, a poison which at times we must ingest just as a cancer patient must ingest a poison to survive. But if we do not understand the poison of war — if we do not understand how deadly that poison is — it can kill us just as surely as the disease.

Hope, St. Augustine wrote, has two beautiful daughters. They are anger and courage. Anger at the way things are and the courage to see they do not remain the way they are. We stand at the verge of a massive economic dislocation, one forcing millions of families from their homes and into severe financial distress, one that threatens to rend the fabric of our society. We are waging a war that devours lives and capital, and that cannot ultimately be won. We are told we need to give up our rights to be safe, to be protected. In short, we are made afraid. We are told to hand over all that is best about our nation to those like George Bush and Dick Cheney, who seek to destroy our nation.

A state of fear only engenders cruelty — cruelty, fear, insanity, and then paralysis. In the center of Dante’s circle, the damned remained motionless. If we do not become angry, if we do not muster within us the courage, indeed the militancy, to challenge those in the Democratic and Republican parties who herd us toward the corporate state, we will have squandered our courage and our integrity when we need it most.

We, the Salt of the Earth, Take Precedence

We, the Salt of the Earth, Take Precedence

by Paul Craig Roberts The hypocrisy of the Nuremberg trials is that the victors were also guilty of crimes for which the vanquished were punished. The purpose of the trials was to demonize the defeated in order to divert attention from the allies’ own war crimes. The trials had little to do with justice. In Freedom Next Time, Pilger shows the complete self-absorption of American, British and Israeli governments whose policies are unimpeded by any moral principle. Pilger documents the demise of the inhabitants of Diego Garcia. The Americans wanted Diego Garcia for an air base, so the British packed up the 2,000 residents, people with British passports under British protection, and deported them to Mauritius, one thousand miles away. – Paul Craig Roberts

Which country is the rogue nation? Iraq? Iran? Or the United States? Syndicated columnist Charley Reese asks this question in a recently published article.
Reese notes that it is the US that routinely commits “acts of aggression around the globe.”

The US government has no qualms about dropping bombs on civilians whether they be in Serbia, the Middle East, or Africa. It is all in a good cause – our cause.

This slaughtering of foreigners doesn’t seem to bother the American public. Americans take it for granted that Americans are superior and that American purposes, whatever they be, take precedence over the rights of other people to life and to a political existence independent of American hegemony.

The Bush regime has come up with a preemption doctrine that justifies attacking a country in order to prevent the country from possibly becoming a future threat to the US. “Threat” is broadly defined. It appears to mean the ability to withstand the imposition of US hegemony. This insane doctrine justifies attacking China and Russia, a direction in which the Republican presidential candidate John McCain seems to lean.
The callousness of Americans toward the lives of other peoples is stunning. How many Christian churches ask God’s forgiveness for having been rushed into an error that has killed, maimed, and displaced a quarter of the Iraqi population?

How many Christian churches ask God to give better guidance to our government so that it does not repeat the error and crime by attacking Iran?

The indifference of Americans to others flows from “American exceptionalism,” the belief that Americans are graced with a special mission to impose their virtue on the rest of the world. Like the French revolutionaries, Americans don’t seem to care how many people they kill in the process of spreading their exceptionalism.

American exceptionalism has swelled Americans’ heads, filling them with hubris and self-righteousness and making Americans believe that they are the salt of the earth.
Three recent books are good antidotes for this unjustified self-esteem. One is Patrick J. Buchanan’s Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War. Another is After the Reich: The Brutal History of the Allied Occupation by Giles MacDonogh, and a third is John Pilger’s Freedom Next Time.

Buchanan’s latest book is by far his best. It is spell-binding from his opening sentence: “All about us we can see clearly now that the West is passing away.” As the pages turn, the comfortable myths, produced by history written by the victors, are swept aside. The veil is lifted to reveal the true faces of British and American exceptionalism: stupidity and deceit.

Buchanan’s strength is that he lets the story be told by Britain’s greatest 20th century historians and the memoirs of the participants in the events that destroyed the West’s dominance and moral character. Buchanan’s contribution is to assemble the collective judgment of a hundred historians.

As I read the tale, it is a story of hubris destroying judgment and substituting in its place blunder and miscalculation. Both world wars began when England, for no sound or sensible reason, declared war on Germany. Winston Churchill was a prime instigator of both wars. He seems to have been a person who needed a war stage in order to be a “great man.”

The American President Woodrow Wilson shares responsibility with Britain and France for the Versailles Treaty, which dismembered Germany, stripping her of territory and putting millions of Germans under foreign rule, and imposed reparations that Britain’s greatest economist, John Maynard Keynes, correctly predicted to be unrealistic. All of this was done in violation of assurances given to Germany that there would be no reparations or boundary changes. Once Germany surrendered, the assurances were withdrawn, and a starvation blockade forced German submission to the new harsh terms.

Hitler’s program was to put Germany back together. He was succeeding without war until Churchill provoked Chamberlain into an insane act. Danzig was 95 percent German. It had been given to Poland by the Versailles Treaty. Hitler was negotiating its return and offered in exchange a guarantee of Poland’s frontiers. The Polish colonels, assessing the relative strengths of Poland and Germany, understood that a deal was better than a war. But suddenly, the British Prime Minister issued Poland a guarantee of its existing territory, including Danzig, whose inhabitants wished to return to Germany.

Buchanan produces one historian after another to testify that British miscalculations and blunders, culminating in Chamberlain’s worthless and provocative “guarantee” to Poland, brought the West into a war that Hitler did not want, a war that destroyed the British Empire and left Britain a dependency of America, a war that delivered Poland, a chunk of Germany, all of Eastern Europe, and the Baltic states to Joseph Stalin, a war that left the Western allies with a 45-year cold war against the nuclear-armed Soviet Union.

People resist the shattering of their illusions, and many are angry with Buchanan for assembling the facts of the case that distinguished historians have provided.

Churchill admirers are outraged that their hero is revealed as the first war criminal of World War II. It was Churchill who initiated the policy of terror bombing civilians in non-combatant areas. Buchanan quotes B.H. Liddell Hart: “When Mr. Churchill came into power, one of the first decisions of his government was to extend bombing to the non-combatant area.”

In holding Churchill to account, Buchanan makes no apologies for Hitler, but the ease with which Churchill set aside moral considerations is discomforting.

Buchanan documents that Churchill’s plan was to destroy 50% of German homes. Churchill also had plans for using chemical and biological warfare against German civilians. In 2001 the Glasgow Sunday Herald reported Churchill’s plan to drop five million anthrax cakes onto German pastures in order to poison the cattle and through them the people. Churchill instructed the RAF to consider drenching “the cities of the Ruhr and many other cities in Germany” with poison gas “in such a way that most of the population would be requiring constant medical attention.”

“It is absurd to consider morality on this topic,” the great man declared.

Paul Johnson, a favorite historian of conservatives, notes that Churchill’s policy of terror bombing civilians was “approved in cabinet, endorsed by parliament and, so far as can be judged, enthusiastically backed by the bulk of the British people.” Thus, the terror bombing of civilians, which “marked a critical stage in the moral declension of humanity in our times,” fulfilled “all the conditions of the process of consent in a democracy under law.”

British historian F.J.P. Veale concluded that Churchill’s policy of indiscriminate bombing of civilians caused an unprecedented “reversion to primary and total warfare” associated with “Sennacherib, Genghis Khan, and Tamerlane.”

The Americans were quick to follow Churchill’s lead. General Curtis LeMay boasted of his raid on Tokyo: “We scorched and boiled and baked to death more people in Tokyo that night of March 9-10 than went up in vapor in Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.”
MacDonogh’s book, After the Reich, dispels the comfortable myth of generous allied treatment of defeated Germany. Having discarded all moral scruples, the allies fell upon the vanquished country with brutal occupation. Hundreds of thousands of women raped; hundreds of thousands of Germans died in deportations; a million German prisoners of war died in captivity.

MacDonogh calculates that 2.5 million Germans died between the liberation of Vienna and the Berlin airlift.

Nigel Jones writes in the conservative London Sunday Telegraph: “MacDonogh has told a very inconvenient truth,” a story long “cloaked in silence since telling it suited no one.”

The hypocrisy of the Nuremberg trials is that the victors were also guilty of crimes for which the vanquished were punished. The purpose of the trials was to demonize the defeated in order to divert attention from the allies’ own war crimes. The trials had little to do with justice.

In Freedom Next Time, Pilger shows the complete self-absorption of American, British and Israeli governments whose policies are unimpeded by any moral principle.
Pilger documents the demise of the inhabitants of Diego Garcia. The Americans wanted Diego Garcia for an air base, so the British packed up the 2,000 residents, people with British passports under British protection, and deported them to Mauritius, one thousand miles away.

To cover up its crime against humanity, the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office created the fiction that the inhabitants, which had been living in the archipelago for two or three centuries, were “a floating population.” This fiction, wrote a legal adviser, bolsters “our arguments that the territory has no indigenous or settled population.”

Prime Minister Harold Wilson and Foreign Secretary Michael Stewart conspired to mislead the UN about the deported islanders by, in Stewart’s words, ” presenting any move as a change of employment for contract workers – rather than as a population resettlement.”

Pilger interviewed some of the displaced persons, but emotional blocs will shield patriotic Americans and British from the uncomfortable facts. Rational skeptics can find a second documented account of the Anglo-American rape of Diego Garcia online. An entire people were swept away.

Two thousand people were in the way of an American purpose – an air base – so we had our British dependency deport them.

Several million Palestinians are in Israel’s way. Pilger’s documented account of Israel’s crushing of the Palestinians shows that our “democratic ally” in the Middle East is capable of any evil and has no remorse or mercy. Israel is an apt student of the British and American empires’ attitudes toward lesser beings. They simply don’t count.

Those who are the salt of the earth take precedence over everything.

A Work Force Betrayed

By Paul Craig Roberts
09/07/08 “ICH” — – The collapse of world socialism, the rise of the high speed Internet, a bought-and-paid-for US government, and a million dollar cap on executive pay that is not performance related are permitting greedy and disloyal corporate executives, Wall Street, and large retailers to dismantle the ladders of upward mobility that made America an “opportunity society.” In the 21st century the US economy has been able to create net new jobs only in nontradable domestic services, such as waitresses, bartenders, government workers, hospital orderlies, and retail clerks. (Nontradable services are “hands on” services that cannot be sold as exports, such as haircuts, waiting a table, fixing a drink.)
Corporations can boost their bottom lines, shareholder returns, and executive performance bonuses by arbitraging labor across national boundaries. High value- added jobs in manufacturing and in tradable services can be relocated from developed countries to developing countries where wages and salaries are much lower. In the United States, the high value-added jobs that remain are increasingly filled by lower paid foreigners brought in on work visas.
When manufacturing jobs began leaving the US, no-think economists gave their assurances that this was a good thing. Grimy jobs that required little education would be replaced with new high tech service jobs requiring university degrees. The American work force would be elevated. The US would do the innovating, design, engineering, financing and marketing, and poor countries such as China would manufacture the goods that Americans invented. High-tech services were touted as the new source of value-added that would keep the American economy preeminent in the world.
The assurances that economists gave made no sense. If it pays corporations to ship out high value-added manufacturing jobs, it pays them to ship out high value-added service jobs. And that is exactly what US corporations have done.
Automobile magazine (August 2008) reports that last March Chrysler closed its Pacifica Advance Product Design Center in Southern California. Pacifica’s demise followed closings and downsizings of Southern California design studios by Italdesign, ASC, Porsche, Nissan, and Volvo. Only three of GM’s eleven design studios remain in the US.
According to Eric Noble, president of The Car Lab, an automotive consultancy, “Advanced studios want to be where the new frontier is. So in China, studios are popping up like rabbits.”
The idea is nonsensical that the US can remain the font of research, innovation, design, and engineering while the country ceases to make things. Research and product development invariably follow manufacturing. Now even business schools that were cheerleaders for offshoring of US jobs are beginning to wise up. In a recent report, “Next Generation Offshoring: The Globalization of Innovation,” Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business finds that product development is moving to China to support the manufacturing operations that have located there.
The study, reported in Manufacturing & Technology News, acknowledges that “labor arbitrage strategies continue to be key drivers of offshoring,” a conclusion that I reached a number of years ago. Moreover, the study concludes, jobs offshoring is no longer mainly associated with locating IT services and call centers in low wage countries. Jobs offshoring has reached maturity, “and now the growth is centered around product and process innovation.”
According to the Fuqua School of Business report, in just one year, from 2005 to 2006, offshoring of product development jobs increased from an already significant base by 40 to 50 percent. Over the next one and one-half to three years, “growth in offshoring of product development projects is forecast to increase by 65 percent for R&D and by more than 80 percent for engineering services and product design-projects.”
More than half of US companies are now engaged in jobs offshoring, and the practice is no longer confined to large corporations. Small companies have discovered that “offshoring of innovation projects can significantly leverage limited investment dollars.”
It turns out that product development, which was to be America’s replacement for manufacturing jobs, is the second largest business function that is offshored.
According to the report, the offshoring of finance, accounting, and human resource jobs is increasing at a 35 percent annual rate. The study observes that “the high growth rates for the offshoring of core functions of value creation is a remarkable development.”
In brief, the United States is losing its economy. However, a business school cannot go so far as to admit that, because its financing is dependent on outside sources that engage in offshoring. Instead, the study claims, absurdly, that the massive movement of jobs abroad that the study reports are causing no job loss in the US: “Contrary to various claims, fears about loss of high-skill jobs in engineering and science are unfounded.” The study then contradicts this claim by reporting that as more scientists and engineers are hired abroad, “fewer jobs are being eliminated onshore.” Since 2005, the study reports, there has been a 48 percent drop in the onshore jobs losses caused by offshore projects.
One wonders at the competence of the Fuqua School of Business. If a 40-50 percent increase in offshored product development jobs, a 65 percent increase in offshored R&D jobs, and a more than 80 percent increase in offshored engineering services and product design-projects jobs do not constitute US job loss, what does?
Academia’s lack of independent financing means that its researchers can only tell the facts by denying them.
The study adds more cover for corporate America’s rear end by repeating the false assertion that US firms are moving jobs offshore because of a shortage of scientists and engineers in America. A correct statement would be that the offshoring of science, engineering and professional service jobs is causing fewer American students to pursue these occupations, which formerly comprised broad ladders of upward mobility. The Bureau of Labor Statistics’ nonfarm payroll jobs statistics show no sign of job growth in these careers. The best that can be surmised is that there are replacement jobs as people retire.
The offshoring of the US economy is destroying the dollar’s role as reserve currency, a role that is the source of American power and influence. The US trade deficit resulting from offshored US goods and services is too massive to be sustainable. Already the once all-mighty dollar has lost enormous purchasing power against oil, gold, and other currencies. In the 21st century, the American people have been placed on a path that can only end in a substantial reduction in US living standards for every American except the corporate elite, who earn tens of millions of dollars in bonuses by excluding Americans from the production of the goods and services that they consume.
What can be done? The US economy has been seriously undermined by offshoring. The damage might not be reparable. Possibly, the American market and living standards could be rescued by tariffs that offset the lower labor and compliance costs abroad.
Another alternative, suggested by Ralph Gomory, would be to tax US corporations on the basis of the percentage of their value added that occurs in the US. The greater the value added to a company’s product in America, the lower the tax rate on the profits.
These sensible suggestions will be demonized by ideological “free market” economists and opposed by the offshoring corporations, whose swollen profits allow them to hire “free market” economists as shills and to elect representatives to serve their interests.
The current recession with its layoffs will mask the continuing deterioration in employment and career outlooks for American university graduates. The highly skilled US work force is being gradually transformed into the domestic service workforce characteristic of third world economies.

VIDEO: Death, Destruction Mean Freedom to America

VIDEO: Death, Destruction Mean Freedom to America
An Iraqi oil engineer showed a film in which US soldiers throw detainees off from buildings and compete in who can shoot the injured first.


The price of the ‘liberation’ of Iraq has been paid with the lives of dozens of thousands Iraqis [1], of thousands of American soldiers, of thousands of American mercenaries, an cost over 700 billion dollars.

Oil Engineer Ali Kadhim spoke about all these events, and then showed a very shocking film on American crimes, revealing the special role of Iran in the occupation of his country.

– Iran has helped the Americans to enter Iraq, in order to take revenge for the war we led against them at the time of Saddam Hussein. When the Americans had already occupied Iraq, the Iranians personally decapitated our scientists, professors and intellectuals in general. We are talking about almost 10 thousand people, whose names I have written in documents which are available on the internet – said Ali Kadhim, adding that everything Iran and the USA are bring up now is only a play in front of the world. What is really happening takes place under the table

As oil expert, he confirmed the well known story according to which the USA made up everything about weapons of mass destruction in order to seize Iraqi oil.

Vanja Deželić-.–.– We are a land rich in oil and America, as the greatest consumer, had to encroach what we had. Now, after they have occupied us, they said that now we are in dept with them for freedom, and that we will have to pay them back a dept of 700 billion dollars in oil – Mr Khadim stated, adding that Iraq gets only six dollars a barrel.

Aspects of the Iraqi occupation are visible

However, regardless of the fact that the Iraqis presently live with one hour of electricity and water a day and that death comes with every step, Ali Kadhim revealed that the opposition movement against the aggressor is growing and that victory is close.

– It is worst than Vietnam to them, today we have the internet, we have cameras, mobile phones, the world sees everything they do. The sun of freedom will soon shine in the sky of Iraq – Ali said, and he presented the film on five years of occupation of Iraq.

The film is really shocking. It starts showing the beautiful treasures of Iraq before chaos and death overtook everything. Then it immediately shows scenes of Iraq today. Fires, dead bodies, bombs are everyday life.

As if it were not shocking enough, the scenes that follow awake an even greater rage. Mainly because you are conscious of your impotence in front of what you see. The crimes of the American soldiers. Shooting the injured and competitions to see who can kill them first, throwing detainees off from buildings and the shocking behaviour towards children.

However, the end, just like the beginning, features a proud theme. Scenes of the Iraqi opposition movement inform everyone that Iraq is not on its knees. The film ends with the message that the Iraqi resistance lives forever. The whole story really recalls the events of the Second World War, especially because the Iraqis, and not only them, compare Bush with Hitler.

[1] Uruknet’s note: actually more than one million Iraqis have died because of the war in Iraq since the US-led invasion of the country in 2003.

Eager to Tap Iraq’s Oil, Industry Execs Suggested Military Intervention

Eager to Tap Iraq’s Oil, Industry Execs Suggested Military Intervention

Jason Leopold, The Public Record

July 2, 2008

Two years before the invasion of Iraq, oil executives and foreign policy advisers told the Bush administration that the United States would remain “a prisoner of its energy dilemma” as long as Saddam Hussein was in power.

That April 2001 report, “Strategic Policy Challenges for the 21st Century,” was prepared by the James A. Baker Institute for Public Policy and the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations at the request of Vice President Dick Cheney.

In retrospect, it appears that the report helped focus administration thinking on why it made geopolitical sense to oust Hussein, whose country sat on the world’s second largest oil reserves.

“Iraq remains a de-stabilizing influence to the flow of oil to international markets from the Middle East,” the report said.

“Saddam Hussein has also demonstrated a willingness to threaten to use the oil weapon and to use his own export program to manipulate oil markets. Therefore the U.S. should conduct an immediate policy review toward Iraq including military, energy, economic and political/diplomatic assessments.”

The advisory committee that helped prepare the report included Luis Giusti, a Shell Corp. non-executive director; John Manzoni, regional president of British Petroleum; and David O’Reilly, chief executive of ChevronTexaco.

Those companies now stand to earn tens of billions of dollars in no-bid contracts in a U.S.-brokered deal that was recently announced to drill Iraq’s untapped oil fields.

James Baker, the namesake for the public policy institute, was a prominent oil industry lawyer who also served as Secretary of State under President George H.W. Bush and was counsel to the Bush/Cheney campaign during the Florida recount in 2000.

Ken Lay, then chairman of the energy-trading Enron Corp., also made recommendations that were included in the Baker report.

At the time of the report, Cheney was leading an energy task force made up of powerful industry executives who assisted him in drafting a comprehensive “National Energy Policy” for President George W. Bush.

A Focus on Oil

It was believed then that Cheney’s secretive task force was focusing on ways to reduce environmental regulations and fend off the Kyoto protocol on global warming.

But Bush’s first Treasury Secretary, Paul O’Neill, later described a White House interest in invading Iraq and controlling its vast oil reserves, dating back to the first days of the Bush presidency.

In Ron Suskind’s 2004 book, The Price of Loyalty, O’Neill said an invasion of Iraq was on the agenda at the first National Security Council. There was even a map for a post-war occupation, marking out how Iraq’s oil fields would be carved up.

O’Neill said even at that early date, the message from Bush was “find a way to do this,” according to O’Neill, a critic of the Iraq invasion who was forced out of his job in December 2002.

The New Yorker ’s Jane Mayer later made another discovery: a secret NSC document dated Feb. 3, 2001 – only two weeks after Bush took office – instructing NSC officials to cooperate with Cheney’s task force, which was “melding” two previously unrelated areas of policy: “the review of operational policies towards rogue states” and “actions regarding the capture of new and existing oil and gas fields.” [The New Yorker, Feb. 16, 2004]

By March 2001, Cheney’s task force had prepared a set of documents with a map of Iraqi oilfields, pipelines, refineries and terminals, as well as two charts detailing Iraqi oil and gas projects, and a list titled “Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts,” according to information released in July 2003 under a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by the conservative watchdog group, Judicial Watch.

A Commerce Department spokesman issued a brief statement when those documents were released stating that Cheney’s energy task force “evaluated regions of the world that are vital to global energy supply.”

There has long been speculation that a key reason why Cheney fought so hard to keep his task force documents secret was that they may have included information about the administration’s plans toward Iraq.

‘Conspiracy Theory’

However, both before and after the invasion, much of the U.S. political press treated the notion that oil was a motive for invading Iraq in March 2003 as a laughable conspiracy theory.

Generally, business news outlets were much more frank about the real-politick importance of Iraq’s oil fields.

For instance, Ray Rodon, a former executive at Halliburton, the oil-service giant that Cheney once headed, said he was dispatched to Iraq in October 2002 to assess the country’s oil infrastructure and map out plans for operating Iraq’s oil industry, according to an April 14, 2003 story in Fortune magazine.

“From behind the obsidian mirrors of his wraparound sunglasses, Ray Rodon surveys the vast desert landscape of southern Iraq’s Rumailah oilfield,” Fortune’s story said. “A project manager with Halliburton’s engineering and construction division, Kellogg Brown & Root, Rodon has spent months preparing for the daunting task of repairing Iraq’s oil industry.”

“Working first at headquarters in Houston and then out of a hotel room in Kuwait City, he has studied the intricacies of the Iraqi national oil company, even reviewing the firm’s organizational charts so that Halliburton and the Army can ascertain which Iraqis are reliable technocrats and which are Saddam loyalists.”

At about the same time as Rodon’s trip to Iraq – October 2002 – Oil and Gas International, an industry publication, reported that the State Department and the Pentagon had put together pre-war planning groups that focused heavily on protecting Iraq’s oil infrastructure.

The next month, November 2002, the Department of Defense recommended that the Army Corps of Engineers award a contract to Kellogg, Brown & Root to extinguish Iraqi oil well fires.

The contract also called for “assessing the condition of oil-related infrastructure; cleaning up oil spills or other environmental damage at oil facilities; engineering design and repair or reconstruction of damaged infrastructure; assisting in making facilities operational; distribution of petroleum products; and assisting the Iraqis in resuming Iraqi oil company operations.”

In January 2003, as President Bush was presenting the looming war with Iraq as necessary to protect Americans, the Wall Street Journal reported that oil industry executives met with Cheney’s staff to plan the post-war revival of Iraq’s oil industry.

“Facing a possible war with Iraq, U.S. oil companies are starting to prepare for the day when they may get a chance to work in one of the world’s most oil-rich countries,” the Journal reported on Jan. 16, 2003.

“Executives of U.S. oil companies are conferring with officials from the White House, the Department of Defense and the State Department to figure out how best to jump-start Iraq’s oil industry following a war, industry officials say.

“The Bush administration is eager to secure Iraq’s oil fields and rehabilitate them, industry officials say. They say Mr. Cheney’s staff hosted an informational meeting with industry executives in October [2002], with Exxon Mobil Corp., ChevronTexaco Corp., ConocoPhillips and Halliburton among the companies represented.

“Both the Bush administration and the companies say such a meeting never took place. Since then, industry officials say, the Bush administration has sought input, formally and informally, from executives and industry experts on how best to overhaul Iraq’s oil sector.”

Guarding the Oil Ministry

Despite the Bush administration’s denials about oil as a motivation for war, the Bush administration’s focus on Iraqi oil was firmly set.

On April 5, 2003, Reuters reported that the State Department’s “Future of Iraq” project headed by Thomas Warrick, special adviser to the Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, held its fourth meeting of the oil and energy-working group.

Documents obtained by Reuters showed that “a clear consensus among expert opinion favoring production-sharing agreements to attract the major oil companies.”

“That is likely to thrill oil companies harboring hopes of lucrative contracts to develop Iraqi oil reserves,” the news agency reported. “Short-term rehabilitation of southern Iraqi oil fields already is under way, with oil well fires being extinguished by U.S. contractor Kellogg Brown and Root …

“Long-term contracts are expected to see U.S. companies ExxonMobil, ChevronTexaco and ConocoPhillips compete with Anglo-Dutch Shell, Britain’s BP, TotalFinaElf of France, Russia’s LUKOIL and Chinese state companies.”

After U.S. troops captured Baghdad in April 2003, they were ordered to protect the Oil Ministry even as looters ransacked priceless antiquities from Iraq’s national museums and stole explosives from unguarded military arsenals.

Now, the long-held dreams of U.S. dominance over the Iraqi oil spigot now seem close to fulfillment.

Last weekend, The New York Times reported that State and Commerce department officials have been secretly working with Iraq’s Oil Ministry in drawing up contracts between the Iraqi government and Western oil companies to develop Iraq’s oil fields.

Unacceptable Options

This outcome for U.S. and other Western oil companies now appears to have been foretold by the Baker Institute report more than seven years ago.

In April 2001, the report laid out a series of unacceptable options, including helping Iraq under Saddam Hussein extract more oil by easing embargoes that were meant to hem Hussein in.

“The U.S. could consider reducing restrictions on oil investment inside Iraq,” the report said. But if Hussein’s “access to oil revenues was to be increased by adjustments in oil sanctions, Saddam Hussein could be a greater security threat to U.S. allies in the region if weapons of mass destruction, sanctions, weapons regimes and the coalition against him are not strengthened.”

Iraq is a “key swing producer turning its taps on and off when it has felt such action was in its strategic interest,” the report said, adding that there even was a ”possibility that Saddam Hussein may remove Iraqi oil from the market for an extended period of time” in order to drive up prices.

“Under this scenario, the United States remains a prisoner of its energy dilemma, suffering on a recurring basis from the negative consequences of sporadic energy shortages,” the report said. “These consequences can include recession, social dislocation of the poorest Americans, and at the extremes, a need for military intervention.”

The report recommended Cheney move swiftly to integrate energy and national security policy as a means to stop ”manipulations of markets by any state” and suggested that his task force include “representation from the Department of Defense.”

“Unless the United States assumes a leadership role in the formation of new rules of the game,” the report said, ”U.S. firms, U.S. consumers and the U.S. government [will be left] in a weaker position.”

Two years after the Baker report, the United States – along with Great Britain and other allies – invaded Iraq. Now, more than five years after that, with Hussein dead and a U.S. expeditionary force still occupying Iraq, the U.S. oil industry finally appears to be in a strong position relative to Iraq’s oil riches.

However, the price that has been paid by American troops, Iraqi civilians and the U.S. taxpayers has been enormous.

The biggest enemy of the American people is the government of the United States.

The World’s Foremost Terrorist –

The US Government

By Karl Schwarz

This article will explain to you why the Totally Screwed-Up US Strategic Plan for the Caspian Basin has backfired and created a “megatrend” against America that may well be the doom of our nation.
Any country willing to spend 30 years lying, conniving and scheming – and blow over $3 trillion (reported) on nothing – is pretty damned stupid or desperate. In the case of American policy, I submit, both apply…and we can, with no effort, add in DELUSIONAL.
There is nothing that George W Bush, McCain or Obama can do to change the tide now…for it has turned into a tsunami against America. The Grand Chessboard game is over, finished, and the US has lost in a rout. Our nation has blown through trillions of dollars (of new debt) with little to nothing accomplished to pursue a bogus, contrived war that was designed to take over in excess of $15 trillion in Caspian Basin oil and natural gas. The sheer cost of the failed ‘war’ and scheme to take over the Caspian Basin has ruined the value of the dollar, buried the US in debt and a myriad of ancillary problems, skyrocketed the cost of oil, utilities, food, and shredded the reputation of the United States around the world. By any measure, it is a catastrophe.
They say greed makes people do stupid things. I guess we can all conclude that ‘really stupid greedy people’ do REALLY stupid things. This screw-up is colossal. Only an MBA president like the Great Decider, who bankrupted every company he ever ran, could do such a thorough job of wrecking the world’s largest economy and that of much of the rest of the world, too.
If Americans would learn math and factor these monumentally needless expenditures back into ‘the real US cost for a gallon of gasoline’, Americans would wig out completely. Every time you cringe while gassing up at the pump, multiple that by at least 25 and you are in the ball park of the real ‘net price’ for each gallon of gasoline today. That, of course, does not include the cost of blood, both foreign and American, which made it possible for you to pay these absurd prices for gasoline.
The checkmate went to Russia and the World directly due to the massive strategic blunders by the United States over the past 20 years. Yes, folks, the past 20 years, not just the Bush Administration. The administrations of George H W Bush, Clinton and the current Village Idiot in the Oval Office have predictably managed to put about 1,000 torpedoes into the USS Titanic and their moronic Grand Chessboard scheme.
The ship is going down and Americans need to focus their blame and anger on the idiotic, traitorous, terrorist warmongers in Washington, DC. Theses vampire goons have needed no help whatsoever from any outside ‘enemy’ to utterly destroy America. This was their idea and marketing plan, so let them all burn.
That is one of the basics of Sun Tzu’s classic ‘The Art of War’. Give the delusionally arrogant enough rope and they hang themselves without any outside help…every time. There is no need to wage war on arrogant morons; nobody can trounce them quite as thoroughly as they trounce themselves.
Past civilizations had the right idea in having the names of derelicts and traitors stricken from every book, every temple, building and palace. However, we shall not be that fortunate because the names of these creeps will be plastered to libraries, freeways, aircraft carriers, and university and federal buildings as a permanent reminder of monumental self-destruction and treason. San Francisco had the right idea, name a sewage treatment plant ‘The George W Bush Wastewater Treatment Center.’ Garbage in is garbage out.
When I wrote “One-Way Ticket To Crawford Texas, A Conservative Republican Speaks Out” many things were uncovered during the research, investigations and interviews I conducted as deep background for the book. Much of that data could not be put into the book because of publishing deadlines or to protect the identities of certain sources.
The book had 837 pages and over 950 footnotes. Many enjoyed reading the footnotes as much as the book because they start to show the true ‘Ugly American’ face of the US government. It may wind up a minor ‘classic’ for it predicted what we are all seeing right now.
Many chapters of the book are about the same lunatic policies of our government and how insane ideas become idiotic national policies and even dumber ‘strategic plans.’ It explains how a brain-retarded ‘strategic vision’ evolves into a ‘shitforbrains national strategic plan’ based on a lust for money and power that came from the ‘geostrategic imperative’ of the Grand Chessboard by Zbigniew Brzezinski.
When the DNC heard the title of the book, their Vice Chairman got in touch with me thinking that an “off the ranch Republican” would be their ‘best buddy’ for the 2004 elections. However, they were horrified when they saw the book and how it exposed this lunatic scheme all the way back to Carter and moved forward through George H W Bush and Clinton, and then showed why Bush, Jr is the complete imbecile he has proven himself to be.
I could write a six volume set the equivalent of Carl Sandberg’s “Lincoln” just from the information that was put into my hands about what a total fraud Bush, Congress and the Global War on Terror are. I, and others, have known from day-one that the problems rest on both sides of the aisle in DC.
We do not have a ‘Dream Team’ in Washington, DC representing America, now, or will we have one in the foreseeable future. All of this euphoria about McCain or Obama (as if he is the Messiah) is a total waste of time and energy. Much ado about absolutely nothing.
What we have is an unmitigated nightmare leading America into the abyss while these lying thugs line their pockets at our expense. It is a deadly cancer and it is time for major surgery.
We have a ‘terrorist organization’ running America.
I have no fear of ‘Al Qaeda’ which is a Jimmy Carter-CIA fabrication used to control the American Sheeple and keep them dead in their tracks, like deer in the headlights. The biggest enemy of the American people is the government of the United States.
As explained below, ‘the world’s foremost terrorist organization’ is the United States government. Read on, and I will provide you some proof.
Barky Obama Black Bush does not have a plan and apparently John McBush does not have a damned clue. I would be more entertained if Daffy Duck Obama were running against Mr. John MaGoo…but we are stuck with the lousy theater DNC and RNC have scheduled for 2008. There will be no meaningful ‘change’…none whatsoever.
I totally agree with Mike Gravel. Bush does not deserve impeachment; he deserves war criminal referral to the ICC at The Hague. However, the true list would be much longer than just Bush and would include Big Names from both sides of the aisle.
Somewhere between ‘point A’ and ‘point B’ we, as a nation, got lost. We trusted our government. We trusted that it would always do the right thing, the honorable thing, the just thing. We trusted its members to be better, and on a higher moral ground than any possible enemy. We trusted them to not become a tyranny… or worse, terrorists. We trusted that they would always speak the Truth…but the only thing that flows from their mouths are endless lies.
That should be the first clue to every American that something is amiss.
We were wrong to have ever trusted them. What and who we trusted are the true enemy of every man, woman and child in America.
In the early years they did the right thing, but ultimately, they sold us out. Shit happens…and it is now way past time to fix it.
Most people I know in America have a deep sense of right versus wrong. Most people I know will follow that which God and Jesus Christ desire rather than blindly accept orders from evil beings…such as the liar war criminal George W Bush and his co-conspirators in the US House and US Senate.
As I was doing the research for “One-Way Ticket to Crawford Texas” I was contacted one day by a former US Special Forces soldier. He wanted to meet for coffee in a public place and tell me something that Americans needed to know. I drove for hours to get to that meeting.
A full eight weeks before Iraq invaded Kuwait in August 1990, this US soldier was part of a special forces black ops team that was ordered to attack both Iranian and Iraqi positions to stir up tensions in that part of the Middle East. That was weeks before Iraq invaded Kuwait to set the stage for ‘Desert Shield’ and then ‘Desert Storm 1991’ and another completely fabricated war by the Bush Family. This former Special Forces soldier had the dates, operation names, targets, etc. Through other sources I was able to verify it all.
It was just another third-rate, based-on-lies ‘Bush Show’ and if Americans are not tired yet of the ‘Bush Show’ they are a pretty sad lot…to the extent of being dead from the neck up.
Many Americans have heard the babbling fool George H W Bush mumble “if Americans only knew what we have done they would run us out of town.”
Well, we Americans cannot “only knew” when we have blatant liars as leaders and a gutless mainstream media that puts career promotions or ‘talking head status’ as being more important than the truth. Bill O’Reilly gets over $50 million a year to lie to and mislead America. The stakes are high for this criminal cabal.
Before Iraq invaded Kuwait there had been a dispute going on in the background. Reportedly, US oil contractors operating in Kuwait had used ‘directional drilling’ and ‘aided and abetted’ a major theft of Iraqi oil. They were stealing oil from Iraq’s southernmost oil fields…which just happen to be very close to the Kuwait border. It took serious planning and premeditation to pull off such a burglary….which went on for years.
Iraq was claiming that about $7 Billion of its oil had been stolen (at 1990 oil prices) and Iraq was demanding payment or Saddam would invade Kuwait and take payment. Of course, this was all heating up as US Special Forces were attacking and making Saddam think some of his neighbors were stirring up the mess. Just for spite and good measure, George H W Bush had Special Forces playing ‘shits and giggles’ with Iran at the same time they were trying to goad Saddam Hussein into invadingKuwait. George H W Bush created the mess so he could be a “war president” and appear to be something other than the babbling elitist fool he is. Remember well, Daddy Bush wrecked the US economy, too.
There was a 1990 conference call involving Washington, DC and the US ambassador in Iraq, April Glaspie, and Saddam Hussein. To this day she is under a ‘gag order’ so she cannot tell the world about what really happened on that conference call and what a liar George H W Bush is. The US told Saddam, unequivocally, that it did not care if he invaded Kuwait to collect what had been stolen from his country. Saddam was told the US had no interest whatsoever in the dispute. If the Kuwaitis owed Iraq money, sort it out with the Kuwaitis.
Remember what I wrote just above ­ a full 8 weeks before Iraq invaded Kuwait the US Special Forces, under order of President George H W Bush, started attacking to stir up a hornet’s nest. I will let you figure this out ­ they were not posing as “US soldiers”.
The US wanted Saddam to think the Kuwaitis were flaunting in his face that they were US allies, not Iraq, and could steal all the oil they wished because the Kuwaitis had a Big Bully as an ally. Now, carry that one-step forward as to how the controllers crafted and presented 9-11 to Americans.
They were trying to intentionally start a war – just like they did with Afghanistan, just like they have now done twice with Iraq, and just like they are trying to do with Iran.
Since I could not get confirmation from the ‘gagged’ former ambassador April Glaspie, I had to wait to see if I would get confirmation from other directions. Suddenly, such confirmation did show up from a retired US employee.
There were many on that conference call since it was planned to set off a Middle East shit storm, so the US could take the Iraqi oil and get rid of Saddam Hussein with “Desert Storm.’ They expected the hornet’s nest could quickly spread to the entire Middle East so they included the embassies all over that area of the world in their planning. Their goal was to sucker Saddam Hussein into invading Kuwait to collect what the Iraqi people were legitimately due.
A former US Foreign Service person contacted me and confirmed several things. Yes, he was on the conference call. Yes, the US already had Special Forces attacking to stir things up, and yes, they told Saddam that they had no interest in his dispute with Kuwait. The US also informed Saddam that they were not going to intervene on behalf of Iraq and help recover funds from Kuwait for the stolen oil.
So, Saddam invaded because Iraq had been robbed of billions by BushCo and their buddies. Then the GHWB forces swung into action to ‘save the world’ with 1990 Desert Shield and then 1991 Desert Storm. I remember his arrogant pontificating like it was yesterday, “Saddam, get out of Kuwait!” What a vile performance. What an utter betrayal of America and its people.
On January 12, 1991, Congress voted to declare war on Iraq. I have always wondered how many of these dolts knew GHWB had Special Forces over there in the summer of 1990 trying to get a war started and provoke Iraq to invade Kuwait. My bet is many of them.
They are liars, folks. Our leaders are blatant, outrageous, psychopathic, unrepentant liars.
The Zionist Jew Neocon Edward Luttwak was asked in 1991 what the US was going to do to Iraq.
“Saddam is not like the Saudi Princes who spend the bulk of their lives outside of their country, and who fritter away the Kingdom’s oil profits on prostitutes and bottles of champagne in Paris. No, Saddam is building railways! Creating electrical networks! Highways and other important elements of a serious State infrastructure! After eights years of war against the Iranian regime of Khomeini, he desperately needs to demobilize his Republican Guard, which incorporates so many of this technical elite, in order to rebuild his war-devastated country. These people are his technicians, his engineers. If they are put to work in the way Saddam wishes, they will rapidly make Iraq the most advanced power in the region, and we cannot allow this to happen.”
Yeah, I can understand why George H W Bush would not want Americans to know that he started that Desert Storm war and intended to do just that. I can see where that fact does not ‘jive’ with the Presidential Legacy they keep trying to mold for him. Sort of like trying to create a ‘great monumental sculpture’ from countless tons amounts of bullshit rather than marble or clay.
Do you recall the Bush speech after Desert Storm? “Now, we can see a new world coming into view. A world in which there is the very real prospect of a new world order.” Right. One based on endless lies.
That is why everything has to be such a ‘big damned secret’; why they lie and they intend to keep on doing just that. That is part of selling their stupid strategic plan to control and dominate all things.
I do not know who can be credited with the quote “Like father, like son” but I think they probably knew the Bush Family pretty well.
The research continued and the more I did the more confirmation I received that we are led by evil agenda players, not to mention one of the sleaziest, murderous families in the history of the nation, if not the planet.
At dinner one night, I was meeting with a US Army major who was having a very deep battle of the conscience. Even someone trained to kill as a profession has a conscience and usually weighs the issues of right versus wrong, legal versus criminal, just versus evil, etc.
That is most often the case until one meets the mercenary types employed by firms like Blackwater USA, which put money far above human life. Many of the Blackwater killers are on laced up on drugs to dull their senses for rampant, indiscriminate killing. I have met some of the former Blackwater USA employees. Chronic, serious use of drugs, severe drinking problems and clinical psychosis are common issue among their employees. I could explain to them why they have a ‘bruised spirit’ but they would have to want that help for it to do any good.
America, at its core, is essentially still a nation of good people for the most part. Unfortunately, we are being riddled by the malignant affliction of being ruled, governed and societally-programmed by idiots, liars and arguably the most evil people on Earth.
At this particular dinner meeting, I was stunned to hear some of the details that were being conveyed to me across the table. And I am not an easy person to shock. This person was stationed at Landstuhl, Germany at the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center. That is where our troops are mainly sent when they are injured in battle or require evacuation for medical attention. That is also where the ‘Official Morgue’ is located.
I was shocked to learn that many US troops have been delivered to Landstuhl on life-support due to a ‘mystery’ pneumonia. Many of them died at Landstuhl or were dead when they arrived (DOA)…still plugged into life support. They were not part of the official KIA stats in Iraq…by order of Bush and Rumsfeld.
I was shocked to learn that many US troops also have chronic problems with DVT, or deep vein thrombosis, after they were given ‘vaccines’ for CBW that they will not even encounter on the field of battle or in their Iraq or Afghanistan missions. Those injections are given, yet again, just to line the pockets of some of the DoD and BushCo insiders. Firms such as…BioPort and DynPort Vaccines, LLC, that hybrid of a biotech and a mercenary company that the FBI keeps overlooking as a suspect in the anthrax attacks in the US.
DVT causes huge blood clots if not treated. The NBC reporter David Bloom and MANY US troops have died or suffered major health setbacks due to heart attacks, strokes or pulmonary embolisms due to blood clots caused by DVT…resulting directly from the Anthrax ‘vaccine’ they are injecting into our young men and women. Our nanotechnology researchers have been on that matter for 4 years now, working on ways to block it or reverse it.
I was further shocked to learn that many of our troops are diagnosed at Landstuhl as having a rare disorder (only 1 per 500,000 in a normal population) that is abundantly common in our US troops after they have had the usual course of vaccine injections. It will take time to nail it down, but it currently appears that possibly as many as 25% of US soldiers have this rare disorder. That huge spike, as compared to a normal population, is too high not to be noticed as being tied to what the DoD and their pet contractors are injecting into our US troops. If that affliction rate holds up, it means from 250,000 to 500,000 US soldiers could now have it.
It’s called ‘amyloidosis’ and while it can be deadly, it is almost always debilitating. The doctors and nurses at Landstuhl were under orders to ‘diagnose’ this new disorder as sprains, fatigue, wear and tear due to physical exercise, carrying heavy army packs on their backs, and hard soldiering work in the desert heat, etc. I was told that some of the soldiers were in so much pain they could not even sit in a chair…but were still expected to serve and perhaps die for Emperor Bush in Iraq and Afghanistan.
It was little wonder to me that when I met some of the US soldiers with this nightmare, I found that they call themselves “the Walking Dead” because of how awful they feel and how ruined their lives are. Amyloidosis is most likely a direct result of the ruthless barrage of dangerous, sometimes deadly, and ultimately useless ‘vaccines’ they are forced to take. I have, by now, met several thousand soldiers…and about TWENTY-FIVE percent of them are said to be afflicted.
Amyloidosis causes the human body to produce amyloid proteins which the body cannot handle properly. These proteins destroy joints and vital organs, and over time result in permanent disability and sometimes death. This is the same crap Bush wanted to inject into all American citizens under his lunatic Project BioShield.
The biggest shock of all was learning that vast numbers of our troops are now confirmed as having been exposed to Depleted Uranium (DU) with often extremely heavy concentrations of it found in their blood and body organs. However, once again, the doctors and nurses were under direct orders to not disclose DU poisoning to the soldier, not to make any note of it in their medical records which would create a ‘criminal chain of evidence.’ They are, instead, instructed to take blood samples only, freeze them, and that the DoD will ‘check back on the soldiers’ in a few years to see how they’re doing. Many, of course, will be dead or dying, or to have produced deformed children, or to have contaminated their spouses and families with it.
You have probably already guessed…the DoD never bothers to check back on the soldiers at all.
DU weapons were banned by the UN as a “weapon of indiscriminate harm” because after it kills, it just keeps right on killing civilians living in the area such weapons were used…like Bosnia, Palestine, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon and Afghanistan. That list does not include the many US military bases where they have been shooting DU weapons for years and polluting America, too. In fact, DU contaminated sand was recently shipped from Kuwait to IDAHO…since the Kuwaities are our good buddies because they helped get rid of that evil Saddam after he caught them stealing billions of dollars of Iraq’s oil.
Two of the reasons I have had to fight the Bush Administration professionally (nanotechnology) are because we are trying to do something about the DVT/Anthrax vaccine problems and the DU. They do not want a chain of evidence to nail their asses to the wall, and we are building such a chain to do just that. ‘Indiscriminate harm’ and ‘genocide’ are accurate ways to sum up the entire Bush Administration, and those of Clinton and Daddy Bush.
If the United States government will not help our soldiers, I am, as a United States citizen, trying to find a way to help them.
Many are dying of other conditions and are experiencing major health problems. Of course, all ignored by DoD under the ‘Feres Doctrine’ that grants immunity to our DoD and defense contractors for such criminal negligence. Since DoD is immune, who is George Bush to really care about the well-being of our US troops?
Under Bush orders (and idiotic policies), millions of our soldiers now have ruined health and ruined lives. It is time for accountability for ‘knowingly harmful actions’ and to Hell with the Feres Doctrine.
I was also shocked to learn that those troops delivered to Landstuhl Germany on life-support (regardless of reason) are not declared dead until they reach Germany and are therefore not part of the KIA (killed in action) from Iraq or Afghanistan. Some of those people were dead when flown out of Iraq or Afghanistan but the ‘diagnosis’ was delayed until they reached Germany so they did not show up in the Official DoD Certified KIA for Iraq or Afghanistan.
Such “strategies” are to keep American citizens from knowing the true toll of carnage the US has suffered in Iraq and Afghanistan under the beyond stupid Bush Plan.
But, what really stunned me and broke my heart the most was something else this US Army major disclosed to me. By the time our dinner meeting was over, we went to the couple’s home to talk in private. I was fuming by that time, as you may well imagine.
Landstuhl, as the MSM told us, was receiving injured from the Iraq and Afghanistan “theater of operations” where the US was claiming so many successes. However, it was ALSO receiving wounded from places like Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and Tajikistan where our evil government was trying to carry out Special Forces Ops to target and kill those who were standing in the way of the BushCo regime and its Grand Chessboard, Fake Global ‘War on Terror’ scheme.
Standing in the way of their precious pipeline across Turkmenistan and Afghanistan! Standing in the way of their taking over huge amounts of oil and natural gas in theCaspian Basin! Standing in the way by siding with pipelines that were headed north into Russia or east to China! Standing in the way by signing up with non-US oil companies!
I asked “Are these medical need cases from the military bases Bush has put in the Caspian Basin area or combat related injuries?”
Response: “They are both…need for general medical treatment and combat related. Vehicle accidents, non-combat injuries, major illness, combat injuries, etc.”
I asked “Interesting, I do not seem to recall reading in ‘the news’ that the US is involved in combat operations in those nations. Are we talking about black ops?”
Response: “Yes, it is almost all black ops in those nations.”
I asked. “How did you know that these troops had been injured in those nations and not say in Afghanistan?”
Response: “Because they were angry at what they had been sent to do and they wanted someone to talk to about it. As their care providers, safe in the hospital late at night, they cried, they talked, they confessed to us what they had been sent to do. We are all under orders to shut up, not tell the truth, but soldier-to-soldier we talked a lot. I heard more than I was prepared to hear. Due to the horrid extent of the injuries, I saw more than I was prepared to see.”
[This major showed me a DVD of photos from the triage, operating rooms and ICU. I have never in my life seen such horrible photos and I do not have a weak stomach.]
I asked. “Why would a tough special ops soldier be crying? Loss of a fellow soldier, loss of a leg or limb, or God-forbid his genitals, or face unrecognizable anymore?”
Response: “Because of what they were sent to do, once they figured out what the real mission was.”
I asked “Like what? What was enough to make the toughest US soldiers cry? Protecting the high and mighty Americans from the “terrorists”?
Response: “No, they were sent to be the terrorists and it is why they were sent that had them crying. Some of them were afraid that God would never forgive them, and, I think they might be right at times. There were some attacks on the US soldiers by people who do not want us there and some ‘pay back’ attacks after US forces had attacked them, but for the most part what I was being told about was the US conducting intimidation and terrorism operations against civilians. to get their oil and gas.”
I asked “Really? US? The honorable, truth-telling US of A being “terrorists” in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan.. and Tajikistan? Please explain.”
Response: “Many of the people in those areas do not like America, do not trust America. Many are competing to get control of areas of land that have, or are thought to have, vast amounts of oil or natural gas. Some of it is oil and gas leases, some of it pipeline right-of-way to get it to a port and ship it all over the world.”
I asked “I know, the Caspian Basin mother lode, the idiotic Grand Chessboard. That is why I have been reporting on and researching the Caspian Basin and the real reasons we attacked Afghanistan to steal a pipeline deal from an Argentina company. Have these soldiers been sent in to strong arm, threaten, terrorize, etc with these Big Oil thugs and things got too hot, shooting started?”
Response: “Some times yes, but that is not what had many of them upset unless they did lose a fellow soldier or yes, they lost a future because of their injuries. What had them upset was they were sent to kill entire families under the pretense of “hitting a terrorist base” and they found out later that it was not a terrorist base. It was the home of a father, mother, children, grandparents who would not roll over for Bush and his thugs and sign over their property or the oil and gas rights. They were uh, in the way of the “Big Mission”. These were people who refused to sign over their land and energy rights to US Big Oil. It was a ‘tract of land’ Big Oil wanted and these people were refusing.”
I asked. “So, it is true. Anyone daring to stand in the way of those trillions in oil and natural gas is classified as a “terrorist” and eliminated?
Response: “Exactly, and that is exactly why I contacted you. Japan, China, Russia, and others are over there to sign up the oil and gas leases, but the US is the only one I know of that is going in there and terrorizing or killing people to get its way. They are using US soldiers to try to force people to sign a contract or kill them and take it from them anyway. The truth has to get out about what Bush has done and used 9-11 as the excuse to do it. These black ops started way before 9-11. They had to get oil and gas leases signed, then they had to get the pipeline under control.”
“Many of our soldiers have already figured out that 9-11 was just to get the pipeline they need across Afghanistan. Many of these soldiers know they were ‘used’ to get the oil and gas leases nailed down so there would be something to put through that pipeline.”
“The US Army or Marines cannot tell you the truth, lest they want to face court martial and spend the rest of their life in Leavenworth. As for me, I am no longer concerned about making grade to colonel or general. I am resigning my commission and getting out of this web of lies and evil. I can no longer serve this nation and what it really stands for and what is does and will not tell America. I’m finished.”
I asked “Were you able to determine from any of these special ops soldiers how long such covert operations had been going on prior to 9-11?”
Response: “Yes, according to some of them these operations had been going on for up to a year before 9-11 and possibly even longer. They had to nail down those oil and gas leases, pipeline right-of-ways because many other nations were after the same oil and gas deals.”
I continued. “The thought just occurred to me, how do they explain these injuries or KIA of these soldiers who are waging black ops against civilians in nations we supposedly have no ongoing military operations? Afghanistan?
Response: “Afghanistan some times if after October 7, 2001, or they list them as ‘victims of terrorists’ without explaining that they were killed or injured conducting acts of terrorism against civilians and a fire fight broke out. Innocent humans except they were sitting on land with oil and gas under it. There were some attacks on US troops as ‘pay back”, but most of the attacks were terrorism by the US against those who were not cooperating with the US objectives in the region. If they cannot come up with an excuse, since the ops are black, they just ignore it ever happened.”
I cannot say what you are feeling right now as you just read through that, but I was sickened to my stomach that night and have been ever since that night. That meeting with the US Army Major was the day I stopped being a proud American.
The reason I was offended and angered is that those are all illegal orders. These were orders originated by a US war criminal at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
If such happened even once…it happened one time too many. This US Army Major confirmed that many discussions were held with many wounded US soldiers over a period spanning months. There were many such black ops targeted at many people who were judged to be ‘in the way.’ This happened far more times than George Bush or Bill Clinton want anyone to know about.
What the Major was seeing in the hospital at Landstuhl was for the most part US soldiers who were injured by someone who was defending their rights and their property. This man had many heart-to-heart talks with these wounded soldiers. Few of them were angry at a Turkmen, or an Uzbek, or a Kazakh. They were angry at who sent them and why they were sent.
It did not take long for many of them to figure out that they had been sent under illegal orders to commit murder, not take out a terrorist. Some of the missions were literally to kidnap persons who had been labeled ‘terrorist’ but were really just resisters defending their property rights.
Most of our US soldiers have very strong sense of duty, but they also have very strong senses of right versus wrong and they have good instincts to see wrong for what it is. In their hands are matters of life and death, and they do not take that as lightly as the arrogant bastards in Washington, DC who don’t have the courage to stand on that front line…cowards that they are.
I asked “Did any of these soldiers admit to you how they figured out that someone had ordered them on an illegal mission, an illegal order, to go process a death warrant on civilians who would not sign a contract?”
Response: “Yes, because I had the same question. There was a targeted site, an alleged “terrorist camp”. and the team leader sent snipers as advance recon to get into position and closely watch a house. A smart soldier will always size up what he is about to lead his men into. While they were watching a vehicle pulls up, three men get out and there is a huge argument regarding a stack of papers the men were trying to get them to either take or sign. It was a US oil company truck and they were ordered off the property at gun point. They then went to another house about half-mile away that could be also be seen by the snipers, where a second group ordered them off the property at gun point, would not accept or sign the papers. That night they were ordered to ‘take out’ everyone at both houses. They had already been briefed on the ‘intel regarding the alleged terrorist camp’ and knew that both houses could not fit what the mission description was. That was when they realized that the orders were to remove “resisters” not ‘terrorists’. Most were women and children. The reason more than one of that team were at Landstuhl was the locals were more than prepared and repelled the attack that night. As one soldier of that team said, ‘those folks know how to deal with burglars. I am lucky to be alive’.
I am not naïve enough to think that all such attacks were repelled.”
What was being described to me pre-dated 9-11 in the Clinton and Bush Administrations and continued on as they launched their bogus, fraudulent Global War on Terror. As this US Army Major talked, I was remembering Operation Gladio where US, UK and NATO were conducting terrorist operations against innocent people in Europe to get their way.
As I was driving back home, I thought about the Special Forces soldier who was involved prior to Desert Shield / Desert Storm and about what I was just told that predated 9-11 in the Caspian Basin nations. I had to resist the urge several times to pull over on the side of the road and throw up…over their description of what America had become.
I know exactly what these arrogant murderous bastards are after, and have been since they planned 9-11 so they could launch this hideous, murderous scheme…this ‘lunatic strategic plan.’ I did not know until that night that even before 9-11 they were attacking and taking out families in the Caspian Basin area who did not want to sign over their property or their oil and gas rights to the US thugs.
That was when I truly understood the level of evil that has taken control of our nation and our government. These are not legitimate “missions” in defense of America; they are death warrants to kill people who do not wish to roll over to US demands.
Anyone who would prefer to do business with others, were labeled “terrorists” and murdered or extorted into complying with US demands, or ‘disappeared’. If they would not sign the contracts with Big Oil, the ‘T” designation was hung on them, and elimination was next. Sign the contract or die.
I can well imagine that some were ‘tortured’ into signing the contracts. They may still be torturing some into signing the contracts. Think on that one.
Folks, these are the acts of desperate people who are wickedly sick in mind and heart.
Resisting is not ‘terrorism’ by a property owner. It is, by legal definition, self-defense of family and property and what was rightfully theirs and not rightfully the property of Big Oil or BushCo. People have a legitimate right to get the best price for what they own…but not when they happen to be standing in the way of US hegemony and pipedreams of trillions and trillions and trillions of oil and natural gas. If they refuse to sign with BushCo, they are ‘terrorists’.
The GITMO fiasco has already proven many in our government are psychopathic liars and conducting illegal actions and violations of human rights against many people.
When some of the military started objecting to such orders, they were ‘relieved of duty’. The tasks were handed over to the mercenary firms, since they will do anything for money.
In my travels in the EU and elsewhere, I have noticed and met many people from Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, etc. I started asking questions as to why they were no longer living in their homeland. They are afraid to live in their homeland. They are afraid of the US and their black ops killers who come in the night like the thugs, thieves and murderers they are.and the terrorists they are.
Countless people were targeted by George W Bush for execution as terrorists because they wanted to take a better business offer from others. Merely designate them as ‘terrorists’ and target them for elimination, entire families. It was that night that I had a totally clear picture of what some in the US will do for oil and natural gas and domination of anyone who gets in their way.
They were also targeted by Clinton as muscle for Big Oil, so I rest my case. Both sides of the aisle are corrupt and criminal.
I laugh when I think now of what a total failure their scheme has turned out to be. These people are past nuts, they are completely insane.
The Bush Family is all about “family values”? Do not believe that bullshit lie for even a nano-second. If you believe a word that comes out of the mouth of any Bush family member, you are a complete fool. They are family killers. And don’t forget it.
That, folks, is the mark of a war criminal and a terrorist.
I have no way to confirm this. but I am willing to bet that many of those persons being held by our government ­ reportedly up to 26,000 people ­ are not terrorists at all. My bet is many of them are “property owners” in the Caspian Basin who would not cooperate with the Grand Chessboard lunacy. My bet is they are being tortured (or punished) for not rolling over and handing their oil and gas over to the Thugs of BushCo.
I think often about the ‘Big Picture’ implications of how incredibly stupid this “Bush Strategery” has proven to be. No wonder the former Russian states are welcoming Russia back in. They want protection from BushCo.
I do have confirmation from two governments (and citizens of those nations) in that area, that they figured out what the US was up to and ordered them to ‘cease and desist’ or. get out of the Caspian Basin, period.
So, this is who we have sitting in the Oval Office: a world terrorist, a liar, a murderer, and war criminal as our president. To the shame of America, Clinton did this same kind of evil, too, and so did Daddy Bush. Sadly, Bush Lite (McCain) and Bush Dark (Obama) would keep the same status quo in place like the unthinking, compromised, sock-puppet morons they are.
Great, one of them is going to be our next ‘Terrorist in Chief.’
They are ‘All American Terrorists.’ They are all liars and they are all war criminals and murderers and traitors to the very spirit of America. They are leaders of nothing but a pack of murderous thugs.
What has been interesting and infinitely predictable, is that most of the Caspian Basin is standing its ground and signing contracts with ANYONE BUT THE UNITED STATES or UNITED KINGDOM. They are not about to let the US have its way after what they have done.
It will take years to know the full damage of such policies, such senseless acts of US sponsored terrorism. Some day, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, etc, will publish who has the natural gas and oil leases and how much is being sold to what nations. When that happens, America will truly see how little of the oil and natural gas the US was able to control through commercially abusive business practices, threats and acts of terrorism. When those facts are known, the sheer lunacy of the Obama/Brzezinski continuing push for the Afghanistan pipeline will be known, too.
Then we shall truly know how stupid this entire Grand Chessboard scheme has been from its inception. Folks, this has been the most colossal failure of thinking in the history of the United States. Their ‘strategic vision’ that they could do anything they wanted because the US was the only Superpower was a brain spasm of the magnitude of Krakatoa blowing up.
Their ‘strategic plan’ that they could be terrorists and get the oil and gas and the money, and get away with it because they were shouting ‘terror’ and ‘terrorists’ more than anyone else, was incredibly stupid.
The main mission was to prevent the locals from signing with others and to force them to sign with the US oil companies under commercially abusive, unacceptable terms and conditions. Sign the contracts under duress, at gun point, at threat of death if they did not sign, or ‘kill those terrorists’ and take it any way.
I know some of the terms that Russia, China and Bridas have put forth and they are much more equitable than what BushCo thought it could cram down the throats of the Caspian Basin citizens who have oil and natural gas under their lands.
Remember the recent piece ‘What to do? What to do?”
<start insert>
“”He admitted to the pipeline ‘mission’ in Afghanistan and Rumsfeld quickly corrected him, the entire DC ‘spin cycle’ had to scramble to cover its tracks because this was PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 11, 2001.
As they say, oops!
“In April 2001, Tommy Franks, the commander of US forces in the Persian Gulf/South Asia area, testifies to Congress in April that his command’s key mission is “access to [the region’s] energy resources.” The next month US Central Command begins planning for war with Afghanistan, plans that are later used in the real war May 2001 (F)). Sydney Morning Herald, 12/26/02] Other little noticed but influential documents reflect similar thinking September 2000 and April 2001 (D)).” “
<end insert>
The black ops, the acts of intimidation and US terrorism and slaughter started well before 9-11. Here the commanding General Tommy Franks was admitting to Congress what the ‘key mission’ was of his command. The ‘region’ includes Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Tajikistan as well as Afghanistan for the pipeline.
There were some soldiers there trying to build good-will and do the right thing. There were others sent there to do the unspeakable. Some times they even got their asses kicked by people defending their property, their family, their rights. Since they were ‘black ops’, not a word about their missions came from BushCo. They just didn’t exist.
This is the sort of evil your taxpayer dollars are being used for, America. Wake the Hell up, especially you idiots over in the Christian community. You idiot Far Right Christian folks are aiding and abetting murder, terrorism, genocide and war crimes and the wiping out of entire families of innocent people by US acts of terrorism…who just happened to have oil and gas under their property.
Just so America could have gas for those Soccer Mom SUVs, and shopping, Christian retreats, and $20 million jets for Kenneth Copeland, and.
“One Nation under God?” Do not believe that lie for a nano-second. We are a nation led by a terrorist organization. That is why they lie so much and cannot utter a single word of truth.
I think Americans need to start demanding ‘full disclosure’ on four matters:
1. The name and country of origin, country of “extraordinary rendition” of each and every person ‘nabbed’ by the US government as an alleged terrorist, including total number of persons held, where held and why; and
2. The name of every person who owned property on any “oil and gas lease” tract in any Caspian basin nation, or pipeline right-of-way, and that oil and gas lease is signed with a US Oil company and the identity of that US Oil company; and
3. The identity of every oil and gas lease in the Caspian Basin held by any US oil company and the date they entered into that oil and gas lease, and the identity of the US and non-US parties on the contract for that oil and gas lease; and
4. The whereabouts of each and every such person who signed with the US on any tract of land, wherever in the Caspian Basin.
I would be willing to bet that some of those “oil and gas deals” are fake signatures on the non-US side of the contract. I also think many of those owners are among the 26,000 our government is holding as ‘alleged terrorists’ and still refusing to roll over for BushCo.
There is a simple moral to this entire US created fiasco: If one wants to take over an area of Oil and Natural Gas controlled by Islamic nations, the dumbest thing one can do is declare a Global War on Islam and really piss off the people that have what you want.
Their “Second Really Dumb Move” was to be the exact terrorists that they claim they are defending the world from.
Checkmate, the Grand Chessboard game is over.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,


IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The 56 signatures on the Declaration appear in the positions indicated:

Column 1
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton

Column 2
North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton

Column 3
John Hancock
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton

Column 4
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean

Column 5
New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark

Column 6
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott
New Hampshire:
Matthew Thornton

An Open Letter To Cindy Sheehan

An Open Letter To Cindy Sheehan

By Emily Spence

01 June, 2007

Dear Cindy,

Others and I can certainly understand your reluctance to continue in fostering the peace movement. It is easy to want to walk or run away.

Ironically, the first day that I joined the peace moment was the same one that I most desperately wanted to run away. I, literally, wanted to flee with every part of my being, but somehow managed to sit still instead.

At the time, I was five years old. I was sitting on a bench at a Quaker Meeting. I remember the drop dead silence surrounding the deeply inward-dwelling people all around me. I remember the contrast that the occasional trilling bird in the shrubbery outside the window made and the merry splash of intermittent sunshine on the floor opposed to the overall dimness of the room. Then I heard the room’s door open followed by a muted shuffle of feet.

Curious, I glanced upward and saw a struggling parade of frail outlines shaped like humans — faltering spectral forms wrapped in gauze from head to toe like mummies in a B-grade horror flick. Meanwhile each person in the group slowly and torturously drew ahead on unsteady feet — a movement forward so difficult to execute that one could palpably feel the duress and had to resist the impulse to grab hold of the ones with the worst gait so as to steady and help. Indeed, it appeared as if a tremendous and excruciating effort was required for each footfall to follow the next one.

One, also, had to resist a contrary impulse. That one was simply to avoid the alarming sight altogether. As such, I, simultaneously, felt like jumping to my feet to assist the bunch and moving past them right out the door. Their struggle was that stark and striking to behold.

Instead of either choice, I simply gripped my father’s hand and began to wonder about whatever these people could have done to deserve such a horrific fate. What could any person ever have done so terribly wrong to receive such utter damage done unto them in return?

(I’d been told in advance of attending Meeting that a group of women, ones called Hiroshima Maidens from a far away land, would be joining us as Friendly families were hosting them while they received medical aid at a local hospital for grave damages caused by a bomb released during a war. Yet, what did I know of bombs and wars at age five? All I knew was that these women looked plainly dreadful — far more dreadful than any fanciful nightmare that my young mind could dreg up during sleep. I, likewise, knew that they didn’t seem as if they, or anyone else for that matter, could ever have done anything so awful so as to to deserve the ravage that they, so pitifully, expressed. In short, they were heart wrenching in the extreme.)

Although my childhood was fairly normal in most respects, I never did get over the searing image that these drastically broken women created in mind. At the same time, I’d fairly quickly figured out that, if something such as happened to them (seemingly innocent people) could occur once, then it could hypothetically take place again and to everyone who I loved, including myself. This afterthought did greatly alarm.

So, you can imagine my pronounced glee when my third grade class had its first mock air raid drill. Oh, it was such a thoroughly happy moment when I crouched under my desk in a ball while covering the back of my neck and lower head with my hands. How exciting! (What pathos underlies the thrill.)

That day, I could hardly wait for the school bus to bring me home. I flew from its steps and down the street. I raced into the house while breathlessly yelling for my mother to come watch me. Then I got under the dining table while commanding something like, “See? See? This is all we need to do. Do it like this. Now we can all be safe. Tell everyone who you know.You must RIGHT AWAY!” Then I explained about the manner in which this hiding under tables in a specific pose could save us all from bombs, the type of bombs that hurt those poor mangled Maidens!

In response, my mother gently drew me up into her lap and asked me whether I truly thought that a flimsy wooden cover could sufficiently protect anyone from the severe type of breakage that bombs can render. With such a revelatory question, all my hopes were dashed in an instant.

Shocked, I, quietly, asked about what could work instead to which my mother replied that one action and one action only could help. And this is to work for peace, and to spread the word about its value while resisting, at all costs, any activities that promote contrary aims. We, then, discussed the various ways that people can bring about this outcome.

Of course, her comments were delivered many wars ago. Since then, I have watched many people come back from their peace efforts renewed, refreshed and enlivened. These have included our family dentist, who periodically would close his practice to Freedom Ride; family members and friends who proudly strolled in the first protest march against the Vietnam war; US citizens, who hid pacifist Cambodian students during the Vietnam War so that their mandatory inscription for which execution was the alternative could be avoided, and many others, who acted with unrelenting courage of conviction.

Simultaneously, I have watched grave harm occur to people deliberately choosing to buck the status quo. My being spit on by racists while collecting Green Stamps to paste into books that I donated to a group that could exchange them for cheap bus rides from the Northeast to Selma during the Civil Rights contention is nothing compared to War Tax resisters being jailed and losing their homes… is nothing compared to being under permanent house arrest as is Aung San Suu Kyi… is nothing compared to being brutally beaten and shot at during protests… is nothing compared to being muzzled after spending years in solitary confinement (Vanunu)… is nothing compared to losing your life in sadistic torture (captured resistance operatives in WW ll, slain Civil Rights workers and countless others going as far back as human history).

Yet conscience and ethos often compel one forward such that no other course of action than the one taken is possible regardless of outcome. Of course, you, more than most people, know this is so. There is a gritty surety in one’s direction no matter the degree that the task ahead is daunting, risky and seemingly impossible. Regardless of anticipated results, the choice is totally clear and the sides are definitively drawn!

You, also, know that wars are very difficult to dismantle. As Scott Schaeffer-Duffy, a Catholic Worker, once explained to me — the violence is like pressurized magma just waiting to erupt. Once you tamp it down in one place on the planet, it will rise up on another. There seems no end to it.

Yes, there seems no end to it. If it’s not happening in Iraq, it is in Afghanistan and Darfur. If it is not in these hot spots, it is in Haiti, Burma, and countless other locations where the seething threat is barely below the surface. Then, too, there are all the less visible, although equally brutal, wars that are taking place along side of these more graphically pronounced ones.

For example, there are the wars against the poverty stricken and other maligned, marginalized masses — wars in which they are used for cheap expendable labor by the managers of transnational companies whose parasitic owners and stock holders are reaping billions upon billions of dollars while not paying living wages to their employees (~ eleven cents an hour to Caribbean laborers who make Disney products, ~ $1.50 a day as a WalMart garment worker’s salary in Nicaragua, ~ eight cents a pound for Starbucks coffee growers, etc.).

At the same time, the ignorance of people, who see oppressive clashing forces as a simple case of us (the good guys) against them (desperate migrants or stereotyped sub-human terrorists) is certainly myopic. In short, they fail to see that many of the migrants want to patriotically support new countries in whatever ways that they can while some of the terrorists deeply revere 1700’s American Revolutionaries, a ragtag motley collection of individuals just as grimly determined to protect their lands from overseas invaders as are they, themselves.

Meanwhile, many of the gung-ho flag waving patriots, whose troops aggress, ponder on the reason that it takes so long to quell and render subservient those who resist their countries being plundered. That is, they do if they bother to think about anything else much beyond the upcoming shopping spree at the nearest mega-mall, the choices in upcoming sitcoms, the relative merits of various anti-wrinkle creams, the lineup for professional sports teams, one’s own latest golf score, etc.

When considering the sheer magnitude of it all, one easily can get discouraged. As such, I imagine that most of the others with the same goals as yours do and sometimes when I, personally, do — I recall this ensuing account. (It helps me regain my strength of purpose when everything starts looking too bleak for me to carry on.)

It is one shared with me by my parents, who knew the featured, young American during the 1940’s. As an aside, he was nineteen years old at the time of his return to the US…

After having lived at Gandhi’s ashram and shortly before his departure back to the US, a young man requested an exit interview with Gandhi (who brought his Hindi interpreter along). Upon meeting for this final time, the eager young man asked, “How can I ensure that your message of peace and universal brotherhood can be made a successful realization in America? What can I do to make certain that this WILL happen?”

In response, Gandhi shakily rose to leave and answered the query in Hindi (despite that he could speak in perfect King’s Standard English as he had been trained as a lawyer in Great Britain). Meanwhile, the interpreter translated into English, “Interview is ended.”

The young man pleaded, “But why? What is wrong? I do not understand.”

Gandhi, turning back from leaving the room, replied, “It is because we are not speaking the same language. You see, you speak of success and think of failure. Your vision and your words are wrong… Instead, you must think of yourself and all of us as birth attendants upon the world. We will and must try to do our utmost to bring about a good delivery as it is our responsibility. However, we, absolutely, cannot think in terms of success and failure. We simply must do all we can in the best way that we know to help the world irrespective of any presumed outcome. Our effort, in and by itself, must be our whole focus.”

In a similar vein, we know where personally isolating ourselves from personal and global difficulties, while doing nothing to try to address them, leads. We, also, know where indulging in various forms of self-advancement, at the exclusion of others, does. What we do not know, though, is how intentional changes in some life choices can make a difference. Nonetheless, we have to try out these alternatives. After all, it is the only viable way to proceed toward our world’s future!

Sometimes, I wonder what Gandhi might think if he were to see the world as it is today. Would he be gloomy?

At times, it staggers the imagination to consider the depths of depravity into which people, individually and collectively, can sink in a self-serving, greedy desires to control, destroy and/or own all. At the same time, it greatly amazes that this orientation can exist along side of unrestrained expressions of extreme self-sacrifice, unbreakable compassion even in the most dire circumstances and extraordinary outpourings of tenderly rendered care. How contradictory the two directions are!

In the end, it is up to each and every one of us to decide the type of world we want to help create. What version of the future do we want?

I do know yours and need the hopeful vision that it creates. It helps makes life worthwhile and serves to propels me onward.

So, thank you for it and for the time you dedicated to improving our collective condition. Both have brought us a world of goodness. In the end, this goodness can never be destroyed.

In gratitude,


Emily Spence lives in MA and deeply cares about the future of the world.

Documents prove FBI has national eavesdropping program that tracks IMs, emails and cell phones

Documents prove FBI has national

eavesdropping program that tracks IMs,

emails and cell phones

John Byrne

FBI also spies on home soil for military, documents show; Much information acquired without court order

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has been routinely monitoring the e-mails, instant messages and cell phone calls of suspects across the United States — and has done so, in many cases, without the approval of a court.

Documents released under the Freedom of Information Act and given to the Washington Post — which stuck the story on page three — show that the FBI’s massive dragnet, connected to the backends of telecommunications carriers, “allows authorized FBI agents and analysts, with point-and-click ease, to receive e-mails, instant messages, cellphone calls and other communications that tell them not only what a suspect is saying, but where he is and where he has been, depending on the wording of a court order or a government directive,” the Post says.

But agents don’t need a court order to track to track the senders and recipients names, or how long calls or email exchanges lasted. These can be obtained simply by showing it’s “relevant” to a probe.

RAW STORY has placed a request to the Electronic Frontier Foundation for the new documents, and will post them upon receipt.

Some transactional data is obtained using National Security Letters. The Justice Department says use of these letters has risen from 8,500 in 2000 to 47,000 in 2005, according to the Post.

Last week, the American Civil Liberties Union released letters showing that the Pentagon is using the FBI to skirt legal restrictions on domestic surveillance.

Documents show the FBI has obtained the private records of Americans’ Internet service providers, financial institutions and telephone companies, for the military, according to more than 1,000 Pentagon documents reviewed by the ACLU — also using National Security Letters, without a court order.

The new revelations show definitively that telecommunications companies can transfer “with the click of a mouse, instantly transfer key data along a computer circuit to an FBI technology office in Quantico” upon request.

A telecom whistleblower, in an affidavit, has said he help maintain a high-speed DS-3 digital line referred to in house as the “Quantico circuit,” which allowed an outside organization “unfettered” access to the the carrier’s wireless network.

The network he’s speaking of? Verizon.

Verizon denies the allegations vaguely, saying “no government agency has open access to the company’s networks through electronic circuits.”

The Justice Department downplayed the new documents.

A spokesman told the Post that the US is asking only for “information at the beginning and end of a communication, and for information “reasonably available” by the network.

The FBI’s budget for says the collection system increased from $30 million in 2007 to $40 million in 2008, the paper said.



Dick Neavel
Oh, Hell. Forget about it. All I’ve done every week for two-plus years is
raise these specters, and I know half of you don’t even read it ““ you don’t
want to think about the shit that’s going on. Well, neither do I anymore. I don’t
have a single clue about how to deal with the political, economic, and
moral travesties driving this country deeper into ruin. I’m frustrated and
ashamed. I can’t even, in good conscience, recommend voting Democrat’s into
office. As I’ve pointed out many times, the Dems in power are also part of the
problem (see Nancy Pelosi‘s latest in the “Ethics”� item further down).
I’ve decided that I can’t continue to read and write about what’s going on
and maintain my sanity.
Good luck! And may that great, never-seen, evidence-less, yet
devoutly-worshiped, supranatural spirit-guy who dwelleth somewhere in the blue sky bless
you and yours. We’re all going to need it. While the economy, the Constitution,
and the climate continue to crater, the greatest political question being
raised seems to be: “What really is Obama’s religious faith?”� OH, FUDGE! (or
some similar expletive)
“You will know us by the company we keep. The burners of witches and the
medieval masters of thumbscrews and Iron Maidens, the interrogators of the
Spanish Inquisition, the North Vietnamese soldiers who beat John McCain and his
fellow American prisoners of war into false confessions. We have joined their
ranks. In the almost seven years since 9/11, we have countered terror not only
with killing and war, but with fear, imprisonment without due process and
yes, torture. Torture is no more about learning the truth than rape is about
sex. Both are about the violent abuse of power.”� (Michael Winship, Thruthout
Friday night, I watched Bill Moyers interview Jane Mayer, author of The Dark
Side: The Inside Story of How the War on Terror Turned into A War on
American Ideals (an expose of US torture policy). From what she reported and what I’
ve read many times, the green light for torture came from THE TOP. But then,
you all knew that, didn’t you?
Abusing human beings is NEVER justified. NEVER! NEVER! NEVER! NEVER! Those
who countenance it are criminals. (Dick Neavel 7/27)
Pertinent to this, I also just read the following by Glen Greenwald in Salon
“The idea that the Rule of Law is only for common people, but not for our
political leaders and Washington elite, is pervasive among the political and
pundit class, in both parties”¦what we are now hearing from the likes of Harold
Ford [Chair of the Democratic Leadership Council], N.Y. Sen. Chuck Schumer,
Cass Sunstein [Obama advisor], pundits _David Broder_
( , _Tim Rutten_
(,0,1766225.column) *, and _on and on
and on_
( — criminal prosecutions for government lawbreakers are far too
disruptive and politically untenable and unfair.
“QUESTION: ‘Why hasn’t anyone been held accountable, either through firings
or demotions, for what some people see as mistakes or misjudgments?’
THE PRESIDENT: ‘Well, we had an accountability moment, and that’s called the
2004 election.’
“Why would we expect political officials to do anything other than break the
law if we continuously tell them – as we’ve been doing – that they are
exempt from consequences? Some members of the conservative legal community in
Washington said in interviews that they hoped Mr. Bush would issue pre-emptive
pardons to officials involved in controversial counterterrorism programs –
whether or not anyone made a specific request for one. Said Victoria Toensing,
former Reagan Justice Department official, “˜If we don’t protect these people
who are proceeding in good faith, no one will ever take chances.'”�
[Greenwald had much more to say, but you get the message ““ I hope.]
* Tim Rotten ““ oh, sorry, Rutten, wrote in the LA Times 6/18: “It’s true
that there are a handful of European rights activists and people on the lacy
left fringe of American politics who would dearly like to see such trials, but
actually pursuing them would be A PROFOUND – EVEN TRAGIC – MISTAKE. OUR
however egregious, and seeks redress for its societal wounds, however deep,
at the ballot box and not in the prisoner’s dock.”� [DN: Get that???
Torture, lies, ignoring the Constitution, and other officially sanctioned
lawbreakings are all just a “DIFFERENCE IN POLICY”� or “POLICY MISTAKES”� for which
no one should be held responsible. Damn these people !!]
“WHAT, ME WORRY?! MY LAWYER SAID IT’S OK.”� For months now, Atty. Gen.
Michael Mukasey has refused to investigate whether Bush administration officials
committed war crimes by authorizing the torture of suspected terrorists. His
reasoning? Any actions were authorized by the administration’s lawyers, and so
cannot constitute a crime. (Wash. Independent, 7/23)
But, there’s more.
On 7/18, Bill Moyers interviewed The Nation’s correspondent, William Greider
about the economic free-fall. Here’s an excerpt:
Moyers: “Both parties have been complicit in tipping the balance of power to
capital, right?”�
Greider: “I’m afraid so. I mean, if you go back over the last 20 – 25 years,
it was always portrayed as a cause of conservative Republicans, even
right-wing Republicans. And that was, of course, true. But I think a majority of the
Democrats were in collusion virtually every step of the way, and sometimes
they led the way . . . We have an opening in this crisis for a deep
transformation in American politics. But it requires people – this is the hard part –
to get out of their sort of passive resignation . . . and engage among
themselves in a much more serious role as citizens. I think in the next year, two
years, five years, you’re going to see both political parties floundering.
insider”� blog had the following to say on 7/23: “Democrats are marching
through their legislative agenda as they near the fall election season, scoring
several key victories and forcing President Bush to abandon his veto threats.
The latest triumph [DN: ???] came Wednesday when Bush dropped his opposition
to a massive housing-rescue bill and the House subsequently passed the
measure, 272-152.”� [The Senate passed it Saturday.]
[*DN Answer to who benefits: Greedy financial manipulators, especially
overpaid Wall Street execs. The bill will make it possible for 400,000 families to
keep paying interest to the mortgage companies, even as the value of their
homes falls below the principal owed. And, our “representatives”� are going to
use federal debt (which now moves into 14 figures – $10+ TRILLION) to bail
out the stockholders of investor-owned, mortgage behemoths “Freddie Mac”� and ”
Fannie Mae.”� (Mark well – these companies are NOT government institutions.)
Their managers, like those of mortgage banks and equity companies, were
complicit in granting mortgages to unqualified borrowers and then bundling them as
investment vehicles for investors – who were misled by bond rating agencies
to believe that the investments were safe. See below for another snapshot of
these two organizations.]
year, the Chair of Freddie Mac took home a cool $18,289,575. Fannie Mae CEO
Daniel Mudd reaped a 7 percent rise in pay to $13.4 million in 2007 while the
company lost $2.1 billion and its shares fell 33 percent. Now we taxpayers are
bailing them out. Call it Wall Street socialism. Their losses are socialized;
their profits are pocketed. (Huffington Post 7/15)
giant oil companies like ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips report another round
of eye-popping quarterly profits, just where is all that money going? The
five biggest international oil companies plowed about 55 percent of the profit
they made into stock buybacks and dividends last year, up from 30 percent in
2000 and just 1 percent in 1993. The percentage they spend to find new
deposits of fossil fuels has remained flat for years, in the mid-single digits. (AP
heard stories about how much waste and inefficiency there is in our military
spending [how many times have I highlighted it], this is always portrayed as
either “˜corruption’ or simple “˜inefficiency,’ and not what it really is – a
profound expression of our national priorities, a means of taking money from
ordinary, struggling people and redistributing it upward, to connected insiders,
who convert your tax money into their profit. . .We are in the midst of a
political movement to concentrate private wealth into fewer and fewer hands
while at the same time placing more and more of the burden for public
expenditures on working people.”� (Matt Taibbi on Smirking Chimp 7/19)
HERE’S A PRIME EXAMPLE OF THE CLASS WAR. Billionaire Peter Peterson just
established a new foundation with a $1 BILLION endowment, the main purpose of
which is to get the government to cut spending on Social Security, Medicare and
Medicaid. “Peterson does not feel the need to be bound by the truths of
logic and arithmetic,” and he’s proud that he doesn’t need SS. He’s an
investment banker who makes money by manipulating money – and he gets a break on his
income tax rate (15%) on his MASSIVE investment returns. (Truthout 7/21)
SOME SCARY WORDS FROM A REPORTER OF 25 YEARS. The decline of newspapers is
about the rise of the CORPORATE STATE, the loss of civic and public
responsibility on the part of much of our entrepreneurial class and the intellectual
poverty of our post-literate world. Corporations are not in the business of
news. They hate news, real news. Real news is not convenient to their rape of
the nation [Think: Class war] . . . Bloggers and Internet addicts are largely
parasites who cling to traditional news outlets. They rarely pick up the
phone, much less go out and find a story. [Mea culpa ““ DN] Reporting, which is
time-consuming and often expensive, begins from the premise that there are
things we need to know and understand, even if these things make us uncomfortable.
If we lose this ethic we are left with pandering, packaging and
partisanship. When the traditional news organizations go belly up we will lose a vast
well of expertise and information. Our democracy will suffer a body blow. A
democracy survives when its citizens have access to trustworthy and impartial
sources of information, when it can discern lies from truth. Take this away and
a democracy dies. (Chris Hedges, Truthdig 7/21)
“ETHICS,”� n, A DIRTY WORD IN CONGRESS. This week, House leaders announced
appointments to the new independent panel empowered to review ethics
complaints against House members. They surprised even Republicans by appointing
controversial Porter Goss as co-chair. Goss is a former Republican congressman, and
then the CIA head under Bush. In the House, he co-sponsored the horribly
misnamed Patriot Act, and, as the Chair of the House Intelligence Committee,
refused to investigate the leaking of CIA agent Valerie Plame’s identity. (The
Progress Report 7/25) [DN: He also has a highly partisan and ethically stinky
past – Google him as Porter GRoss (so you get beyond Wikipedia). A blogger on
Firedoglake wrote: “It is a cynical, horrid choice. But in hindsight
entirely predictable.”� Dem. majority Leader Nancy Pelosi joined Repub. minority
leader Matt Boehner to appoint him. Think “CLASS WAR”� and “WHAT, ME WORRY ABOUT
IS THERE NO LIMIT TO WHAT “THEY”� WILL DO? Political appointees at the
Department of Labor are moving with unusual speed to push through in the final
months of the Bush administration a rule making it tougher to regulate on-the-job
exposure to chemicals and toxins. Virtually overnight, changing the
risk-assessment process became the agency’s top priority for workplace regulations.
The department’s speed in trying to make the regulatory change contrasts with
its reluctance to alter workplace safety rules over the past 7-1/2 years. In
that time, the department adopted only one major health rule for a chemical
in the workplace, and it did so under a court order. (Wash Post 7/23) LATER
BREAKING NEWS. Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Education
and Labor Committee, said he will introduce legislation to stop what he
described as a Bush administration effort to block the next president from trying
to reduce worker deaths and illness caused by workplace toxins. (Wash Post
EPA official Jason Burnett said the Bush administration’s OMB officials
looked for ways to define carbon dioxide (CO2) from power plants as different
from CO2 from automobiles, in order to shield industrial power plants from
regulation under the landmark Supreme Court decision Massachusetts v. EPA. “So
there’s an interest to determine whether we could define CO2 from automobiles as
somehow different than CO2 from power plants,”� Burnett said. (ThinkProgress
7/22) [DN: No can do – of course. Carbon dioxide is the same chemical
compound regardless of what source emits it. But surely, politicIans can change
natural laws, too ““ can’t they?]
T-t-t-h-a-a-t’s all, Folks. Say goodbye to Looney Toons.

‘Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews’—

‘Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews’—

an Interview With Alan Hart

Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews. Volume 2. By Alan Hart. 452 pages. World Focus Publishing. £14.99.

When Alan Hart started his journalism career in Africa at the age of 18, joining ITN television, his editor summed up what his job ought to be: “Keep democracy alive.” Hart made it his life’s mission.

The profession took him around the world as a foreign correspondent, with a stop in Vietnam where he learned that “you cannot defeat an idea with bullets and bombs.”

The Middle East was another destination for him, and one that had even more impact on his life.

The British reporter was probably the only correspondent to have enjoyed on the professional level access to, and on the human level friendship with, the top leaders of both the sides of the Arab-Israeli conflict, including Yasser Arafat and Golda Meir. It was not without reason that, in 1980, he was chosen by United Nations senior leaders to lead a secret peace initiative between Shimon Peres and Arafat, an initiative that, a decade later, became the Oslo process.

But behind the scenes, Hart discovered a bitter truth: that the two-state settlement was “long dead.”

Because the gentile Hart believes that, generally speaking, “the Jews are the intellectual elite of the Western civilization, and the Palestinians the intellectual elite of the Arab world,” his commitment is to find an alternative in order for the two people to work in partnership.

In Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, the 65-year-old Hart reveals his fascinating, at times shocking, experiences and conversations with top leaders in the most volatile region of the world. He puts these in their historical context, and, through a logical demonstration, offers an alternative to the conventional peace process, perhaps a more realistic one.


Throughout your career, you seem to have lost hope in the “two-state settlement.” “It is there in theory; in fact it is long dead,” you say. What makes you so confidently say so?

Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews. Volume 1. By Alan Hart. 596 pages. World Focus Publishing. £19.99.

In 1980 I found myself engaged in a secret exploratory dialogue between Yasser Arafat and Shimon Peres. The background situation was the following: Towards the end of 1979, Arafat sent a secret letter to the [United Nations] Security Council saying he was prepared to accept resolution 242, that is, to do peace with Israel beyond the 1967 border.

Andy Young [United States ambassador to the United Nations] thought the letter was the biggest breakthrough since 1948, and [President] Carter agreed with him on the necessity to seize the opportunity. But while he tried to bring the Palestine Liberation Organization (P.L.O.) into the peace process, Israel’s then [Prime Minister] Menachim Begin got the Zionist lobby in America to move against Carter, who was punished by having to fire Andy Young.

It was then suggested to me by very senior people of the U.N., who were not unconnected from Carter, that I should try my hand at some unofficial diplomacy because it was generally known in the world that I had good access to both Arab and Israeli leaders as a reporter for the BBC’s Panorama program, and that on the human level I enjoyed friendship with them.

In 1980, Israel was 19 months from its elections, which the whole world (including Carter), hoped Menachim Begin would lose. The game plan was: if I can persuade first Peres and then Arafat to let me be the middleman between them, we would use these months to try and create a position so that when Peres became prime minister, we could go public.

I went to Tel Aviv, met with Shimon Peres behind closed doors, and said to him: “If Arafat is willing, would you agree to let me lead the dialogue?”

Peres agreed, and then he made this statement: “It’s already too late.” He meant too late for peace on any terms Arafat could accept. When I asked for the reason, the following was his reply:

“Every day that passes sees new bricks on new settlements. Begin knows exactly what he’s doing. He’s creating the conditions for a Jewish civil war. He knows that no Israeli leader is going down in history as the one who gave the order to the Jewish army to shoot Jews out of the West Bank … I’m not.”

My point is: if it was too late in 1980—when there were only 70,000 illegal settlers in the occupied territories—how much more too late is it today when they count half a million? And that number is growing. There is absolutely no way that any Israeli P.M. ever goes to confront the settlers.

Some commentators say all the Israeli government has to do is pull out their troops from the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and the settlers would simply follow.

Probably half the settlers could be bought out to have a life in Tel Aviv or somewhere else, but probably half is still a hell of a lot who would fight. I think the two-state solution has long been killed by Israel’s ongoing colonization.

What do you think is the responsibility of the international community on this issue?

I think the real evil in this story is not even Zionism, but rather the governments of the major powers—in particular the U.S., the U.K., and France. The moment they could have put a stop on the trip to disaster was after the 1967 war. They could and should have said: “According to Resolution 242, not only must Israel go out, but furthermore we would not allow it to build any settlements to colonize this newly-occupied land (which Israel does in defiance of international law)—and if Israel does we should sanction it.”

So what do you believe are the options now?

In my view there are only two:

1. The one-state solution in which Zionism loses. It would be a secular state in which Palestinians and Jews who live there now become equal citizens. It would be end of Zionism, but it would mean peace with real security for Jews.

2. The doomsday for the Palestinians. Israel’s policy is currently to create conditions which make life hell for the Palestinians on the West Bank and Gaza in the hope that they would just surrender. I think Israeli leaders still believe they can do that, but they are wrong.

What happens if the Zionist leaders come to the conclusion that they cannot break the will of the Palestinians?

I think then Zionists will create the pretext for a final round of ethnic cleansing to drive the Palestinians out of the West Bank and Gaza. If that happens, there will be a Zionist holocaust. The West Bank will run in blood and it will be mostly Palestinian blood. That, I personally believe, is the road we are on.

Do you believe the countdown to the doomsday can be stopped?

The only power on earth that can confront Zionism is America. The problem is that requiring from Zionism to make peace on terms Palestinians could accept, would mean standing up to Israel and threatening with the use of sanction.

No American president is ever going to do that unless he knows that the majority of America’s Jews would support it, i.e., unless pushed to do so by an informed public opinion.

The problem is that the public opinion is too uninformed to do so. There is only one name of the game to make democracy work: information and education.

Most citizens throughout the Judeo-Christian world are totally ignorant about the truth of history. I’m a classic example. I came out of my mother’s womb conditioned by Zionism’s version of history. It took me 12 to 15 years of being an ITN TV reporter to actually get to the other side of the story. I can understand how people who didn’t have my exposure to it don’t challenge.

There is talk of the “new anti-Semitism” defined as criticism of Israel’s policy that, whether intentionally or unintentionally, has the effect of promoting prejudice against all Jews. What do you suggest to escape that dilemma?

If not told with context and sensitivity, the truth about Israel might provoke anti-Semitism. That’s why I say the key is to explain the difference between Judaism and Zionism. A large part of Zionists’ success to date is that it has managed to conflate the two.

In fact, they are total opposites. Like Christianity and Islam, Judaism has at its core a set of moral values and ethical principles. To the extent that they look to Jerusalem as the centre of their religion, all religious Jews could (and most do) regard themselves as spiritual Zionists.

But political Zionism (and that’s what I refer to in the title of my book) is something else. It is a sectarian, colonialist ideology which created a state for some Jews in the Arab heartland mainly by terrorism and ethnic cleansing. By so doing, it made a mockery of Judaism’s moral values and ethical principles.

Knowing this difference makes two things possible: One is why it is perfectly possible to be passionately anti-Zionist (opposed to Zionism’s colonial enterprise) without being anti-Semitic. The other is why it is wrong to blame all Jews for the crimes of the relative few—hardest core political Zionists in Israel, which is a Zionist, not a Jewish state.

Clearing nations to this difference is my fight, and I gave five years of my life to research and write this book, drawing off my experiences and conversations with leaders.

But it’s not only the gentile Alan who says Zionism is a threat to Judaism. One of my dear Jewish friends is Hajo Meyer, a Holocaust survivor, whose latest book is entitled “The End of Judaism.”

The former bishop of Jerusalem, Riah el-Assal, whom I recently interviewed, made this point: Despite everything Zionism has done to the Palestinians, it’s actually been more disastrous for Judaism, because it isn’t actually land that has enabled Jews to survive, but rather their moral principles.

It seems Jews are overwhelmingly silent about Israel’s policy toward the Palestinians. Do mainstream Jews actually support Zionism?

The silence of the Jews is another obstacle. Throughout history, they have generally been liberal, except on this issue. My best friend in the world after my wife is my Jewish accountant. I’ve known him for 40 years, and I even once took him to Israel to meet Golda Meir as a way of saying “thank you” to him. He doesn’t like what Israel has done, but he won’t … read … my … book. [Hart paused after each word to convey despair.] He doesn’t want to know the truth of history.

I once said to him: “Like 99 percent of all Jews in the world, you believe that when Israel went to war in 1967, it was either because the Arabs attacked first or because they were going to attack. If I can convince you, using only Israeli sources, that this is a complete fabrication, do you believe me?” He paused and said: “If what I believe about that war is not true, then everything collapses.”

Ilan Pappe (an Israeli revisionist historian) makes this point: Israel is not entirely Zionist. There are a lot of Jews in Israel who would make peace on almost any terms Palestinians would accept. The sad thing is that Israelis have been as much conditioned by Zionist propaganda as the rest of the world.

There is another reason why people like my Jewish accountant are frightened to speak out about Zionism: deep down among every Jew there is a fear of Holocaust II. That’s understandable.

In my book I call for a new Covenant—not between Jews and their God, but between Jews and the Gentiles. In it, Gentiles would commit once and for all to slaying the monster of anti-Semitism. The Jews would commit to dealing with the monster of Zionism.

ADL Releases Free Filtering Software Designed to “Keep Hate Out Of Homes”

ADL Releases Free Filtering Software

Designed to “Keep Hate Out Of Homes”

New York, NY, March 21, 2002 … In its continued effort to fight hate on the Internet, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today announced the release of ADL HateFilter Filter® 2.0, a completely redesigned version of the League’s unique software that blocks access to hundreds of hate sites on the Web. Powered by the Internet Content Rating Association (ICRA), the free program is available at the League’s Web site at

“The explosion of growth in Internet use over the last few years has brought with it an increasing number of anti-Semitic and racist Web sites operated by hate groups,” said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director. “Since the release of the original HateFilter in 1998, the number of sites we routinely monitor has grown exponentially along with the number of Americans going online. While the Internet continues to be a boon for information and education, unfortunately there is a dark side of the Web that remains only a click away.

“ADL HateFilter Filter® 2.0 is a free software tool that can be used by parents to ensure that their children do not stumble into a hate zone,” Mr. Foxman added. “We are giving parents and caregivers the option to keep hate out of their homes.”

ADL monitors hate on the Internet and provides information to law enforcement, the media and the public. In 1998, building on more than eight decades of experience in tracking hate groups, ADL made available its original filtering software, enabling computer users to block access to racist and bigoted sites. ADL HateFilter Filter® 2.0 employs the same, carefully compiled list of hate sites used by the original HateFilter and blocks access to the dozens of bigoted sites that have appeared since.

Installation and configuration of the program is both quick and easy. ADL’s Internet Monitoring Unit will provide regular updates of the software, which will be available free of charge on the League’s Web site. To update the program, users can simply download a small file that installs itself in the filter.

ADL HateFilter Filter® 2.0 uses the technology of ICRAfilter, a powerful filtering program that can block access to pornographic, violent and other online content that parents may find unsuitable for children. Though ADL is responsible only for its list of hate sites – which includes those run by neo-Nazis, white supremacists and Holocaust deniers – users of ADL Hate Filter® 2.0 may use the program to block access to other sites. Parents may choose to activate rules that block or allow sites on the basis of the way those sites describe themselves, or use lists developed by other, trusted groups similar to ADL.

The filter was created as part of an international initiative to develop standards for responsible Internet use. ADL has an ongoing relationship with IRCA, a public-private international partnership that includes such Internet industry leaders as AOL, IBM and Microsoft.

ADL Training US Police Departments across the country.. For What Purpose?

ADL Training US Police Departments

across the country.. For What Purpose?

Are Abe Foxman and the Zionist ADL training US Police to be their private armies?

When your door gets kicked down at 3 am in the morning, you’d better have on your yarmulke, have a menorah visible and a Star of David Flag draped over one wall… or else!

Here’s a few samples on what the Zionists are teaching American cops to do:

ADL Participates in First Annual Urban Shield Training Exercise in California

Posted: November 14, 2007

An Anti-Defamation League expert participated in the first annual Urban Shield training exercise in Oakland, California.

Urban Shield is a large-scale training exercise and competition sponsored by the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office. It involves over 20 SWAT (Special Weapons and Tactics) teams from throughout the country, and is designed to test each team’s tactical ability to cope with a variety of real-life emergency scenarios.

The exercise took place continuously over a 24-hour period, beginning and ending at 5:00 am. It included different scenarios conducted at 22 training venues (or checkpoints) throughout Alameda County.

Two-Day Law Enforcement Training Held in Utah

Posted: January 14, 2008

Federal, state, and local law enforcement from across Utah gathered for a presentation from an Anti-Defamation League expert on right-wing extremism in West Valley City, Utah.

The training took place over two days and was held at the West Lake City Police Department Headquarters, just outside of Salt Lake City, Utah.

Approximately 150 officers assembled for the ADL expert’s informative presentation on the ideologies, symbols, and criminal activities associated with right-wing extremists in the area. The expert also discussed the proliferation of white supremacists in the anti-immigration movement, emphasizing recent trends and tactics used by extremists to exploit anti-immigration sentiment in the region and across the United States.

U.S. Military Investigators Trained

Posted: December 11, 2007

An Anti-Defamation League expert conducted a law enforcement training at the Fort Leonard Wood United States Army Basic Combat Training Post in the Missouri Ozarks in December.

Nearly 70 attendees, representing several military units, participated including the Anti-Terrorism Branch, Non-Commissioned Officer Academy, Equal Employment Office, Military Police Investigation, Basic Military Police Training, 14th Military Police Brigade, Marine Detachment, and the 1st Engineering Brigade.

Training the US Army’s Military Police? To do what, torture Iraqi’s, using the brutal tactics of the Israeli Shin Bet?

Other training sessions and the infected departments:

ADL Presents for New Mexico Law Enforcement
Briefing on domestic extremism for the Albuquerque FBI.

ADL Trains Law Enforcement in Wisconsin
Training at a Terrorism Conference sponsored by the Wisconsin Department of Justice.

ADL Provides Series of Trainings to NYPD
First two sessions held in four-part series on domestic extremism for the NYPD in Brooklyn.

ADL Trains Law Enforcement in Idaho
Law enforcement from across the Pacific Northwest received training on extremism.

ADL Provides Training to Wyoming DOC
Two day training sponsored by the Wyoming DOC.

ADL Trains Law Enforcement in Arizona
Gang squad recruits in Tucson received a presentation on domestic extremism.

ADL Trains Las Vegas Law Enforcement
Presentation at the third Annual Gang Conference sponsored by the LVMPD.

ADL Presents to the U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement Command Staff
Presentation for the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) command staff at the 2008 ICE Leadership Conference

ADL Trains Missouri Law Enforcement
Training sponsored by the Missouri Police Chief’s Charitable Foundation and the Missouri School Resource Officers Association.

ADL Trains Police Departments on Cape Cod
The Provincetown and Truro, Massachusetts, Police Departments participated in a hate crime training session.

ADL Presents Counterterrorism Course in San Diego

Training Held for San Diego District Attorney’s Office
Training on the California white supremacist subculture held in San Diego.

Training Held for U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington, DC
Members of the DC Bias Crimes Task Force gathered for a presentation on right-wing extremism and hate activity.

Two-Day Law Enforcement Training Held in Utah
Federal, state, and local law enforcement from across Utah gathered for a presentation on right-wing extremism in West Valley City, Utah.

U.S. Military Investigators Trained
Military units participated in a training at the U.S. Army Basic Combat Training Post in the Missouri Ozarks.

Senior Law Enforcement Personnel Attend Anti-Terrorism Course in DC
The twelfth session of ADL’s course on extremist and terrorist threats was held on December 2-4, 2007.

Training Held at FBI National Academy
Information on extremist use of the Internet was presented at the FBI National Academy.

Law Enforcement Training in Illinois
Federal, state, and local law enforcement officials met in Springfield, Illinois, for a presentation on extremism.

California Law Enforcement Attend Training
Law enforcement officers in Ventura, California, attended a training on domestic extremism in November 2007.

Senior Law Enforcement Travel to Israel for Counterterrorism Training
Senior law enforcement executives traveled to Israel to learn counterterrorism tactics and strategies.

ADL Participates in First Annual Urban Shield Training Exercise in California
ADL participated in the fist annual Urban Shield training exercise held in Oakland, California.

Training Held for Traffic Court Judges in Seattle
A presentation on anti-government extremism was held for the American Bar Association’s Judicial Division in Seattle.

Law Enforcement Trainings Held in Massachusetts
Two extremism trainings were held for Massachusetts law enforcement.

California Law Enforcement Attend Training
Information was presented on terrorists’ and extremists’ use of the Internet to law enforcement in the California.

Training Held for Members of the Association for Uniform Crime Reporting Programs in Michigan
Members of the Association for Uniform Crime Reporting Programs received information on extremism in Michigan.

Training Held for Dallas Police Department
Law enforcement officers from the Dallas Police Department received information on extremists’ use of the Internet.

Pennsylvania Law Enforcement Attend Training
Pennsylvania law enforcement met for a training on extremism and hate crime legislation in Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.

Domestic Terrorism Training Held in Western New York
Information on domestic terrorism was presented to law enforcement in Western New York.

Extremism Training Held in Missouri
Officers from across Missouri gathered for an extremism training in Jefferson City, Missouri.

Michigan Law Enforcement Attend Training
Law enforcement from across Michigan gathered in Livonia for a presentation on right-wing extremism.

Training Provided to District Court Magistrates in Michigan
A training on anti-government extremism was held for the Michigan Association of District Court Magistrates.

Training Provided to New Mexico Law Enforcement
Law enforcement officers from across New Mexico received a presentation on right-wing extremism and domestic terrorism.

Domestic Terrorism Training Held for Pennsylvania State Troopers

State troopers from across Pennsylvania received information on right-wing extremism and domestic terrorism.

Jewish groups get most Homeland Security funding

Jewish groups get most

Homeland Security funding


Jewish institutions will receive the majority of U.S. federal funds designated this year to help secure nonprofit organizations.

Of $24 million in grants nationwide, Jewish groups have been awarded $19.6 million.

In Phoenix, the only money that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has awarded through the Urban Areas Security Initiative Non-Profit Security Grant Program – $96,305 – will go to improve security at four free-standing Jewish day schools: The King David School, Pardes Jewish Day School, Phoenix Hebrew Academy and Jess Schwartz Jewish Community High School.

“In some of the schools, we’re making sure that they have better video equipment; in some, it’s higher fencing,” said Jane Wabnik, who wrote the successful grant proposal, explaining some of the ways the money will be used to improve security.

Wabnik, who works for the Community Relations Committee of the Jewish Federation of Greater Phoenix, said the grant was initiated with “the imprimatur of Fred Zeidman and Adam Schwartz,” who are respectively the federation’s director of planning and CEO.

The idea was to let the federation, as an umbrella group, do the heavy lifting of writing security grant proposals for constituent agencies, which the schools are, Wabnik said. She stressed that the schools will receive the money, though, not the federation.

“I’m very pleased because they only gave 308 grants around the country,” she added, pointing out that the terrorist threat level in Phoenix is not considered to be as high as in port cities, such as Long Beach, Calif., where 24 of the grants were funded.

The only other grant in Arizona was $97,475 to the Jewish Community Services Center in Tucson. The maximum amount that could be awarded in any single grant was $100,000.

There were a number of criteria used to justify the grant, which supports “target hardening” against terrorist threats, she said, including a threat assessment by local law-enforcement officials, the symbolic value of the sites and how the sites might be used by the community at large in efforts to recover from an attack.

Wabnik pointed out that schools generally have been used as gathering places and temporary shelters for people displaced by disasters.

An as-yet-unscheduled meeting among Homeland Security, federation and school officials will hammer out details of the grant’s implementation, she added.

Of the 308 grants awarded through the program nationwide, 251 are being allocated to Jewish groups. Non-Jewish groups that have received funding include a variety of hospitals across the country, schools such as Northwestern University in Illinois and faith-based relief agencies such as American Muslims for Emergency and Relief in Florida.

The $24 million in total grants announced by the Department of Homeland Security last week vary in amount. The funds are used to provide everything from roadblocks to security cameras to blast-proof doors and windows at locations that could be terrorist targets.

The grants were announced a few days after representatives of the Department of Homeland Security’s Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives toured the Jewish community’s national security alert organization in Manhattan.

A presidential order created the center in March 2006 in response to the lack of coordination between the Federal Emergency Planning Agency and faith- and community-based groups that volunteered on the Gulf Coast in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

Center director John Kim Cook, who took over six weeks ago, is meeting with community organizations across the country to understand how his agency can best help them take care of their own.

“Our objective is to get right in the middle of (Department of Homeland Security) policy to really work with the programs of DHS to make sure there’s not discrimination, and secondly to provide outreach to faith-based community organizations,” Cook told JTA. “We want to foster an environment that welcomes participation of these organizations. With our preparedness programs, if we touch congregations throughout the land, we would touch the majority of the people in the U.S.”

Cook’s deputy, Greg DiNapoli, joined him Sept. 25 in touring the Secure Community Network facility. Representatives from the DHS bomb-prevention squad and members of the New York Police Department were on hand as well to meet with the SCN advisory board, which comprises representatives from the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, the Anti-Defamation League, United Jewish Communities, the New York Board of Rabbis and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs.

Secure Community Network director Paul Goldenberg said he believes the potential for future attacks against Jews in America cannot be underrated.

“Anywhere where Jews gather is a potential target,” he told JTA. “I think synagogues are particularly susceptible because they’re considered soft targets, but my concern is the lone wolf, the most difficult to investigate. The only real mitigation we have is to make the community aware of these types of individuals and train them about what to look out for.”

The research bears out Goldenberg’s concerns.

“DHS conducted a two-phase assessment based on investment justifications and state, local and national law enforcement review,” United Jewish Communities, the umbrella body for Jewish federations, said in a news release. “The result underscores a troubling fact: The Jewish community is at risk in a way and at a level not shared by other groups.”

After one woman was killed and five were wounded in an attack on the Jewish federation building in Seattle last year, UJC stepped up its involvement this year to ensure that the SCN program was funded and that Jewish organizations were informed how to apply for grants.

Many of the grants were awarded to organizations in the New York area. Another large concentration was in Maryland, where $900,000 will go to 19 Jewish organizations, including individual congregations and institutions such as the Jewish Museum of Maryland and the Maimonides Academy of Baltimore.

Goldenberg said that despite the high level of security concerns at Jewish institutions, it is important not to “get to the point where we’re building walls around our synagogues and around our federations.”

“We have to do everything that we can to harden our locations and to make them much less appealing to people who want to do harm to our communities,” he said, “but Secure Community Network is not out there to say the sky is falling.”

Cook said he was impressed by the communication and coordination within the community that makes SCN an effective organization, and he pledged to work with SCN to offer disaster response training to the Jewish community.

“It is comprehensive training that teaches citizens how to respond to an act of terrorism, first aid, how to stay alive during a catastrophic event and help others,” Goldenberg said. “We’re formally and officially working at the highest levels to promote that training. It can save lives.”

ADL Submits Policy Priorities to Democratic and Republican Platform Committees

ADL Submits Policy Priorities to Democratic

and Republican Platform Committees

New York, NY, July 21, 2008 … The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has submitted to the platform committees of both the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Republican National Committee (RNC) a statement of policy priorities on a range of international and domestic issues. The platform statement describes ADL’s positions on the issues and outlines recommendations on policy direction that the League hopes the parties will adopt.

Platform committees meet every four years in advance of the national conventions. The League has a longstanding practice of submitting its policy agenda to both parties prior to the nominating conventions.

The following are highlights from ADL’s submission:

International Extremism and Global Anti-Semitism

The League believes the U.S. must take a leadership role in mobilizing government efforts to confront anti-Semitism, racism, xenophobia, homophobia and all forms of hatred and bigotry. Anti-Semitic propaganda continues to thrive in the Muslim and Arab world and is disseminated throughout the world via satellite television and the Internet. (more).

U.S. Support for Israel and the Peace Process

ADL believes that the United States must continue its historic support for the State of Israel and its fundamental right to protect its citizens from terrorism, violence and harm, while promoting a peaceful resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict. The U.S. must stand with Israel to promote security and to minimize strategic dangers (more).

Stopping the Iranian Threat

The greatest threat to the U.S., the West, Israel and our other allies in the Middle East is posed by Iran’s development of a nuclear weapons capability. The U.S. and our international allies must work to convince Iran to abandon its development of a nuclear weapons capability through incentives for cooperation and sanctions for non-cooperation (more).


Comprehensive immigration reform is necessary in order to effectively decrease the flow of undocumented workers while treating our fellow human beings with dignity. ADL opposes the coordinated roundups of undocumented workers, takes a strong stand against the increasing use of intolerant rhetoric to describe immigrants, and calls on all parties to the discussion to debate immigration policy civilly and respectfully (more).

Protecting Church-State Separation

ADL urges the committees to reaffirm a commitment to the separation of church and state:

* Faith-Based Initiatives: The Faith-Based Initiative raises serious questions of both law and policy and has distorted the appropriate role of government in the provision of social services. Every component of the initiative should maintain essential constitutional safeguards for protecting religious organizations, beneficiaries and the government (more).

* School Vouchers: Vouchers pose a serious threat to the values that are vital to the health of American democracy. These programs subvert the constitutional principle of separation of church and state and threaten to undermine our system of public education (more).

* Creationism and “Intelligent Design:” Creationism, creation science and “intelligent design” theory are all religious theories of creation offered to explain the origins of the universe and are based on varying interpretations of the Bible. ADL has consistently opposed these troubling initiatives and advocates the right of students to learn science independent of religious doctrine (more).

* Religion in the Military: ADL is concerned that religious harassment and unwelcome proselytizing are an ongoing problem in the military and the nation’s service academies. The League calls for Congressional oversight and hearings toward the adoption of consistent guidelines to address reports of religious intolerance and proselytizing in the armed forces (more).

Voting Rights

ADL has long demonstrated a strong commitment to voting rights for all Americans. We support the Voting Rights Act by working to break down barriers to full ballot access for all people, including language-minority citizens, to ensure that all Americans are able to exercise their right to vote (more).

The statement includes other ADL policy recommendations on:

* Religion in the Campaign

* Domestic and International Terrorism

* Strong U.S. Leadership Worldwide and in the United Nations

* Hate Crimes, Hate Symbols, Electronic Hate

* Equal Rights: Affirmative Action, Gender Equality, Same-Sex Marriage and Reproductive Freedom

* Gun Control

* Life Insurance Discrimination

Israel as a Strategic Threat to Russia and the U.S.

Israel as a Strategic Threat to Russia and the U.S.

By Bob Finch

Israel has amassed a nuclear arsenal that has been variously estimated at between 200-400 nuclear weapons. Some commentators have argued this makes it the world’s fourth most powerful nation in the world. A former Pentagon official and whistle-blower, Daniel Ellsberg, said that Israel could have close to 400 nuclear weapons. “That’s more than Britain, China, India and Pakistan, and probably more than France,” said Ellsberg.

Since the early 1970s the ziocons in American politics, have operated on the convenient, but highly dubious, assumption that what is good for the Israel is good for America. This assumption ignores a critical issue: whether America is wise to continue providing economic assistance, military hardware, and technological assistance, to the Jewsish state, as it has done since 1967, so that it can develop intercontinental nuclear missiles that could threaten the U.S.? Of course, Zionists would argue, it is highly unlikely that Israel would ever want to threaten its bountiful provider but why should Americans put themselves at risk?

The long term goals of the Jews-only state in Palestine are firstly, to gain political and military independence from all other countries. Secondly, to protect not only the reign of Jews within its borders but all Jews around the world, “Unlike many countries, including the United States, the Israeli state does not belong, even in principle, to those who reside within its borders, but is defined as the state of the Jewish people, wherever they may be.” (Noel Ignatiev ‘Toward a Single State Solution: Zionism, Anti-Semitism and the People of Palestine’). Thirdly, to increase the strategic territory of the Jews-only state to make it more difficult for it to be obliterated with nuclear weapons. Russia, the U.S., and Iran all have the strategic “depth” to survive a limitted nuclear exchange.

As regards the first objective, the jews-only state still has a significant technological, military, and economic, reliance on America. As regards the second objective, the Jews-only state has probably developed medium range nuclear missiles which can reach any country in the Middle East. It has also developed long range nuclear missiles which could pose a retaliatory threat to Russia, Europe, and China. But whether it has developed nuclear missiles which could reach the United States is another matter. The jews-only state can’t be far off such a missile given the sophistication of its space programme, “Israel is midway through a drive to establish a space program, much of it devoted to military purposes.” (Yoichi Clark ‘ The Wrong Stuff’ Pacific News Service).

In recent years, however, the Jews-only state has acquired four submarines from Germany which it could arm with nuclear cruise missiles. “Israel’s acquisition from Germany a few years ago of three Dolphin-class submarines capable of launching conventional and nuclear-tipped cruise missiles? The 1,720-ton diesel-electric submarines are among the most technically advanced subs of their kind in the world. Each can be equipped with four cruise missiles, which Israel reportedly tested in the Indian Ocean in 1999. (Uzi Mahnaimi and Matthew Campbell, “Israel Makes Nuclear Waves with Submarine Missile Test,” London Sunday Times, June 18, 2000) The subs will cruise the Mediterranean, the Red Sea, and, ominously, the Persian Gulf -which tends to confirm the views of the late Israeli scholar, Israel Shahak, a leading dissident, who argued that Israel’s strategic goal is hegemony from Morocco to Pakistan. (See Israel Shahak, Open Secrets, 1997, chapters four and eight).”

So, even if the Jews-only state does not yet have nuclear missiles which could reach America it has submarines which could probably traverse the oceans to bring America within range of its nuclear weapons. It is bizarre that America helped to fund the acquisition of these subs for the Jews-only state.

As regards the vulnerability of the jews-only state because of its tiny size. In the 1960s, the Soviet Union was an unquestioned superpower which possessed a fairly efficient, but vastly powerful, military machine. The Jews-only state then acquired a tiny number of nuclear weapons – primarily to protect the conquests it had made over neighbouring Arab countries. However, even at that early stage, the Jews-only state was also planning to develop a nuclear capability to offset what seemed like the Soviet Union’s overwhelming nuclear superiority, “American-born Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard obtained satellite-imaging data of the Soviet Union, allowing Israel to target accurately Soviet cities.” (Warner D. Farr, LTC, U.S. Army ‘The Third Temple’s Holy of Holies – Israel’s Nuclear Weapons’ The Counterproliferation Papers Future Warfare Series No. 2).

At that time, the Soviet Union may not have worried unduly about such a tiny nuclear threat from the Jews-only state. Since then, however, there has been a dramatic turn around in the relative power between the Jews-only state in Palestine and Russia. Such has been the calamitous political and economic decline of Russia, and the prodigious political and economic development of the Jews-only state that the latter is beginning to pose an increasingly serious threat to the former superpower. The existence of a Jews-only state with a plethora of powerful nuclear weapons on Russia’s doorstep has now gone far beyond the realms of a modern Cuban missile crisis in the Middle East. It’s a little difficult to credit it but basically a country with a mere six million people is getting closer to nuclear parity with a country of 120 million. Russia and the Jewish state are now in a sort of mad predicament. Russia would be highly unlikely to launch a nuclear attack against the Jews-only state because the Jews would retaliate causing large scale losses in Russia. However, this nuclear parity is deceptive. There is no equity between them so that in the maddest of situations, where the survival of one country or the other was at stake, the Russians have the upper hand. Russia could completely obliterate the Jews-only state making the country completely uninhabitable but the Jews-only state could not do this to Russia because of its vast size. True, it could make large parts of Russia uninhabitable but the Russian state and a substantial proportion of its population is almost certain to survive.

The irony of the situation in which the Jews-only state wants to become so powerful that even the U.S. will fear to challenge it, is that the Jews-only state in Palestine seems to be able to obtain almost any military technology it wants from successive American governments without America being in the slightest bit worried about the military implications for its own national security. With each transfer of military technology and military hardware, the Jews-only state becomes militarily stronger and thus more capable of striking a terrible blow to America. And yet since 1967, all American administrations have seemed perfectly willing to provide most types of military hardware and technology to the Jews-only state.

The dominance of Jewish interests over American interests could also be seen in 2003 when the ziocons pushed the Bush regime into a proxy zionist war against Iraq. The ziocons hoped this would be the first of many zionist proxy wars against anti-zionist Arab/Moslem countries – devastating each country in virtually the same way as the Jews-only state has devastated Palestinian society.

For the ziocons, America’s proxy zionist war against Iraq was intended to defeat a country which posed a minimal challenge to the regional dominance of the Jews-only state. They were not in the slightest bit concerned that America might struggle militarily against an Iraqi insurgency which was predicted not only by many civilian commentators but by many in the American military itself. The proxy zionist war against Iraq has ended up with America losing thousands of troops and suffering a huge financial strain on its economy. The zionists could not lose. The zionists would benefit if America was able to easily defeat Iraq, and the Moslem countries that aren’t subservient to the Jews only state, conversely, they would also benefit if America struggled to defeat such countries and ended up weaker, militarily and economically, than before. If the zionists manage to extract more military hardware and advanced military technology from the Americans during the occupation of Iraq this will continue the process of reducing the huge disparity in military power between themselves and America. By far and away the biggest reduction in the military disparity between the Jews-only state and America will occur if the zionists manage to develop, with or without America assistance, intercontinental nuclear missiles that could reach America. This will enable them to pose a considerable military threat to their main benefactor and protector.

The idea of the Jews-only state possessing nuclear missiles which could threaten America is not an issue which is discussed in America. It is politically impossible for Americans to discuss the nuclear threat from the Jews-only state because American politicians do not recognize the existence of the Jews-only state’s nuclear weapons. “The U.S. government has never acknowledged that Israel possesses nuclear weapons, even though the world knows otherwise, thanks to the whistleblower, Mordechai Vanunu. (London Sunday Times, Oct. 5, 1986).

This is quite remarkable. Perhaps Americans are not concerned that yet another government is capable of launching nuclear missiles against their country. This seems to run counter to America’s national security and its national interests. Perhaps the reason why it has never become a political issue is because the American media and American politics is dominated by “Israel first” Jews who are not worried about America being threatened by the Jews-only state in Palestine. Even more amazing is that American politicians do not seem in the least bit bothered about the Jews-only state stealing American secrets or American military technology to help it develop nuclear missiles which could threaten America. But then again, America’s Christian evangelists spend more of their time supporting the Jews-only state in Palestine than they do defending their own country from the “Israel first” traitors stealing American technologies and threatening America’s security.

The critical question Americans need to reflect upon, while they are boosting Jewish supremacy in the Middle East, donating vast subsidies to the Jews-only state, and providing it with the world’s most sophisticated military technology, is whether it is in their interests to allow the Jews-only state to develop nuclear weapons that could reach America. Given Jewish dominance of the media it is highly likely the zionists will continue to keep the topic a part of the wide range of taboos. If America continues to help the Jews-only state acquire inter-continental wmds without discussing the political and military implications for American security this is a clear indication of zionist control over American politics. This leads to the conclusion that the Jews-only state in Palestine has colonized America and is currently treating it as a resource for its own benefit. There could be no clearer example of Jewish domination of the West than America’s willingness to implement the foreign policies of another country, the Jews-only state in Palestine, and its failure to defend itself against its Jewish colonisers.

You Know You’re An Anti-Semite If …

You Know You’re An Anti-Semite If …

You Know You’re An Anti-Semite If……

by Mark Farrell

You Know You’re an Anti-Semite if you realize the last several heads of Federal Reserve were Jewish, know why, and are cognizant of the fact that there is nothing “federal” about the Federal Reserve.

You Know You’re an Anti-Semite if you remember the numerous bombings that Israel has done against the U.S. and its friends, such as the USS Liberty, the LaVon Affair, the King David Hotel, etc.

You Know You’re an Anti-Semite if you realize what the (K) and (U) symbols mean on food products and metals, and you try to avoid purchasing such products so that the rabbis who make tens of millions of dollars on these products through their kosher excise tax won’t get your money.

You Know You’re an Anti-Semite if you question why Israel bombs Lebanon when Lebanon apprehends Israel’s soldiers in Lebanon, but Lebanon never bombs Israel when Israel grabs Lebanese or Palestinian citizens.

You Know You’re an Anti-Semite if there are no pictures of you saying the pledge of allegiance with Israel’s flag in the background.

You Know You’re an Anti-Semite if you’ve never worn a Jewish beanie, and scratch your head when someone calls a beanie that y-word.

You Know You’re an Anti-Semite if it saddens you when you hear that Israel has done its routine bombing of an apartment building or farm in an effort to kill someone it suspects of being a “terrorist,” and know that Israel’s definition of a “terrorist” is typically someone who refuses to believe that Jews are God’s special “Chosen Race.”

You Know You’re an Anti-Semite if you’ve heard of either the Catholic’s St. Simon of Trent or the Orthodox’s St. Andrei Youshchinsky, and know what caused their deaths.

You Know You’re an Anti-Semite if you wonder when the government will actually DO something about AIPAC’s virtual plutocratic dictatorship over American politicians.

You Know You’re an Anti-Semite if you recognize the clearly Jewish names in Tyco’s falling, and Enron’s, and a host of other companies.

You Know You’re an Anti-Semite if you question why Israeli criminals are consistently allowed to flee to Israel, where they stay secure in the thought that Israel’s high courts have specifically stated that a Jew should have to stand trial before non-Jews.

You Know You’re an Anti-Semite if you can’t understand how Israel is allowed to build its Wall of Separation right through the homes of non-Jews without just – even any – compensation.

You Know You’re an Anti-Semite if you don’t think non-Jews should go to jail for their religious beliefs, as many Christians currently do in Canada and in parts of Europe if they cite the Book of John.

You Know You’re an Anti-Semite if you watched the online video “Understanding Anti-Semitism” online and said, “I knew that.”

You Know You’re an Anti-Semite if you wonder how 6 million Jews reportedly died in the “Holocaust,” yet, according to Jewish sources, there was actually a slight increase in population of the Jews at the end of the war.

You Know You’re an Anti-Semite if you you’re tired of watching the Holocaust-propaganda videos Jews make on an average of 1 every 10 days–60 years after the war’s end–and also wonder when they’re going to make a film about the 60 million Russians who were murdered by mostly Jewish bolsheviks in the former Soviet Union, such as by NKVD/KGB head Kaganovich.

You Know You’re an Anti-Semite if you’re aware of the Jewish influence to get the U.S. involved in Iraq, and are knowledgeable of the Israel-firsters quickly pushing America towards Israel’s next enemies, Iran and Syria.

You Know You’re an Anti-Semite if you put America’s interests before that of Israel.

You Know You’re an Anti-Semite if you breathe and aren’t Jewish.

SECRET HISTORY – 1945: GIs act to stop the war machine

1945: GIs act to stop the war machine

By Dustin Langley, Navy Veteran
Sep 20, 2007, 06:11

Email this article Printer friendly page

Home by Christmas!

In the months following the end of World War II, some in Washington wanted to use the 12 million men and women in uniform against the Soviet Union and the growing anti-colonial movements throughout the world. Some even favored immediate military action against the Soviet Union, which had been a U.S. ally and played a decisive role in the war against Nazi Germany and a major role against Imperial Japan.

But the Soviet Union was a socialist country and thus a class enemy of the big capitalists that the Washington government represented.

Also, with the defeat of the Japanese military, movements for independence surfaced in Indonesia, Indochina, and the Philippines, where the Anti-Japanese National Liberation Army, known as the Huks, had already liberated several provinces. U.S. imperialism faced a threat to its Asian holdings and wanted the military to secure these spoils of war.

Washington�s plans were thwarted by a massive uprising of troops in both the European and Asian Theaters. Large demonstrations took place in the Philippines, Hawaii, France, Germany, Guam, Japan, Korea, India, Burma, Austria, Great Britain, and in the United States.

More than 60 percent of U.S. military personnel were draftees. Many others had volunteered in the wake of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Almost all wanted to return home after the end of the wars against Germany and Japan.

Soldiers who had been stationed in the European Theater were the first to protest. They returned to the United States to discover that they were going to be shipped to the Asian Theater for occupation duty. On Aug. 21, 1945, some 580 GIs from the 95th Division signed a protest telegram to President Harry Truman.

When Gen. Harry Lewis Twaddle tried to assemble the 95th to issue orders to deploy for occupation duty, the Washington Post reported, �the boos from the soldiers were so prolonged and frequent that it took [Twaddle] 40 minutes to deliver a 15-minute speech.�

Members of the 97th Division hung banners from their train, which was taking them to California to be shipped out to Asia, reading, �We�re being sold down the river while Congress vacations.�

Families give support

At home, military families added their support to the growing resistance. Congress was flooded with letters and telegrams demanding that the troops be brought home. As Christmas drew near, some sent baby booties to their representatives in Congress with a note that read, �Be a good Santa Claus and release the fathers.�

Sen. Elbert D. Thomas, who headed the Military Affairs Committee, said: �Constituents are on their necks day and night. The pressure is unbelievable. Mail from wives, mothers and sweethearts demanding that their men be brought home is running to almost 100,000 letters daily.�

From October through December 1945, the �Bring the Boys Home by Christmas� movement grew among rank-and-file GIs and their supporters at home. The unrest increased in January, when it was revealed that Truman had decided to reverse the policy of releasing all troops with two years of service by March 20, 1946. This disclosure sparked spontaneous demonstrations.

On Jan 8, 1946, thousands of soldiers in Paris marched down the Champs Elysees to a rally in front of the U.S. Embassy with the demand: �Get us home!�

On Jan. 9, the New York Times reported that 4,000 GIs had tried to rush the headquarters of the United States Forces in the European Theater to present their demand to be sent home to Gen. Joseph T. McNarney. Speakers at the demonstration sent a telegraph to Congress that asked, �Are the brass-hats to be permitted to build empires?�

Protests continued and two days later the GIs won a meeting with general staff officers. On Jan. 11, the Times headline read, �GIs in Frankfort Deride McNarney As They Fail to Get Sailing Date.� The story reported that there were also demonstrations by rank-and-file soldiers in London and Vienna.

Five hundred soldiers rallied in the Trocadero in Paris to demand the firing of Secretary of War Robert Patterson. They also elected a committee to meet with a group of senators about to visit the area.

This meeting issued what the New York Times called �an enlisted man�s Magna Carta,� with the following demands:

1. Abolition of officers� messes, with all rations to be served in a common mess on a first-come-first-served basis

2. The opening of all officers� clubs at all posts, camps and stations to officers and enlisted men alike

3. Abolition of reserved sections for officers at recreational events

4. Abolition of all special officers�quarters and the requirement of all officers to serve at least one year as enlisted men except in time of war

5. Reform of army court-martial boards to include enlisted men

GIs have �strike fever�

On Jan. 13, the Times reported: �The fact is the GIs have strike fever. Almost every soldier you talk to is full of resentment, humiliation and anger. He acts exactly as workers have acted and by doing so drew the GI�s criticism in the past. … But now the shoe is on the other foot. The GIs now feel they have a legitimate gripe against their employers.�

In response to the GI protests and their growing support at home, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower announced a new schedule of demobilization on Jan. 15. This schedule, however, did not meet the GIs� demand for the release of all soldiers with two years� service by March 20, 1946; instead, it provided for the release of those with 30 months� service by April 30.

While the movement fell short of winning all its demands, it was successful in forcing Washington to demobilize the army. This gave enormous space for the Soviet Union to recover from the bloody war and for the liberation struggles in China, Indonesia, Indochina and elsewhere.

The movement also revealed the great potential for military members� resistance to the imperial ambitions of Washington. One of the ruling class�s greatest weaknesses is that it is forced to rely on working people as soldiers in its wars of conquest, and these working people have interests that are directly opposed to those of Washington and Wall Street.

As the criminal occupation of Iraq continues, revolutionaries and progressives have an obligation to support and encourage organizing and resistance by the rank and file.


Iraq Veterans Against the War:<
GI Special:

Appeal for Redress:

Different Drummer:

Courage to Resist:
War Resisters Support Campaign:

Dissent or Disgrace

Dissent or Disgrace

By Chris Floyd:

“So, ironically, in the end it does come down to us after all. There’s nothing left but that long-term cultivation — person by person, moment by moment — plowing on despite our utter abandonment by the national leaders and civic institutions that could have stopped or slowed the horror of the present and the horror to come. We will have to go through it now.” – Chris Floyd

How does it become a man to behave toward this American government to-day? I answer that he cannot without disgrace be associated with it.

— Henry David Thoreau

Every day it becomes clearer that Thoreau’s answer is the only basis for a genuinely effective resistance to the accelerating depredations of the Bush-Cheney regime. Disassociation, boycott, filibuster, strike — call it what you will, but the Gandhian tag might be the best: “non-cooperation with evil.” The corruption and authoritarian tyranny that the regime has imposed on the nation are evil. The war of aggression it has launched against Iraq is evil. The war of aggression it is fomenting against Iran is evil. If you would not be complicit in evil, then you must not cooperate with it, and you must not acknowledge its power as rightful or legitimate (however powerless you may be to resist its application by brute force).

If there is to be any way out of the nation’s death spiral into darkness, ruin and dishonor, this noncooperation must begin at the top. There is not enough time left now for a broad movement from the general public to rise up and force the ouster of these criminals. Naturally, any and all efforts to raise consciousness of the dire situation and mobilize the public against the regime are welcome and should continue. But even putting aside the mass lethargy and media-addled distraction and indifference that have characterized public reaction to the filth heaped upon them by the regime year after year, it is simply a logistical and organizational impossibility to put together the kind of unprecedented outpouring of street protest and civil disobedience it would require for a grass-roots effort to dislodge the regime in its remaining time in office. Yet in that time, the regime will have mired the nation so much more deeply in intractable evil that even the most well-intentioned successor will be left with nothing but monstrous choices between atrocious and somewhat less atrocious outcomes, with each decision drenched in innocent blood.

So while we can all hope and work to see such noncooperation and dissent spread throughout the general public — a long-term cultivation looking toward the harvest of a better, more honorable society down the line — the immediate evil embodied in the crooked Bush-Cheney regime can only be thwarted by action on the institutional level. As I’ve noted elsewhere, Thoreau’s answer should be taken up by every person in public life, beginning with the senators and representatives in Congress. There should be noncompliance, nonrecognition of this illegitimate authority, disassociation from taking part in its workings. No Bush appointees should be approved; indeed, they have already shown their unfitness for office by agreeing to work under the criminal regime in the first place. All legislation offered by the regime should be rejected outright; it is dishonorable to treat with a faction whose unprovoked, unnecessary “war of choice” in Iraq has now killed more Americans than were murdered on 9/11. The only “negotiation” acceptable with such bloodstained wretches is settling the terms of their exit from power.

For above all, impeachment should be moved to the top of the congressional agenda. It should be the overriding, all-consuming priority of the people’s representatives. For this is the inescapable, stone-cold truth: nothing, absolutely nothing but impeachment, will stop the Bush-Cheney regime from carrying out its criminal agenda.

We have seen in recent days some heartening moves toward restraining the regime. The effort led by Sen. Christopher Dodd to put a hold on legislation that would excuse the telecoms’ complicity in Bush’s illegal surveillance schemes is a welcome development. And as Jonathan Schwarz reports, is launching a major public awareness campaign to try to head off a war with Iran. These are very small straws in a howling wind — but then again, it only takes a few straws to start a fire. And as noted above, all efforts to put fetters on the regime should be encouraged. But the history of the past seven years has proved over and over and over again that the Bush-Cheney regime will simply ignore any attempt by Congress or the courts to limit its rapacious agenda and its exercise of arbitrary power.

Congress passes laws forbidding torture; Bush and Cheney ignore them. Congress issues subpoenas and demands documents for its corruption probes; Bush and Cheney ignore them. Bush’s “signing statements” explicitly state that he will follow only those parts of the law that suit him. Congress could vote tomorrow that Iran cannot be attacked without a formal declaration of war, and Bush would attack whenever he chooses anyway, calling it an extension of the congressionally authorized action in Iraq, a “defensive” action to protect the troops. Congress can pass any law it wants, but if you have an executive branch that considers itself above the law — as this one demonstrably does — then it doesn’t matter. As long as Bush and Cheney remain in power, their criminal enterprise will go on.

Thus impeachment is not a “distraction” from efforts to end the war in Iraq, or stop a new war with Iran, or quell the vast and sickening corruption of the regime. It is their prerequisite. And even if impeachment is “politically impossible in the present circumstances,” as Bush enablers like the pusillanimous Nancy Pelosi likes to tell us, it should be shoved to the forefront of national debate nonetheless. Let us have a “constitutional crisis;” let us bring our festering sickness to a boil. Let’s lay it all out, and let people declare once and for all where they stand. Are you for the republic, or do you hold with tyranny, torture and mass murder? Let’s draw the line at last, and be done with all pretense.

But we know that what should be done will not be done. We see that the Democrats have taken impeachment “off the table.” We see that far from stopping or curtailing the war in Iraq, Pelosi and the Democratic leadership punish those among their number who dare speak the truth: that Bush has indeed sent American soldiers to have their heads blown off for his amusement, for his aggrandizement, for his radical agenda of loot and dominion. We see that far from stopping the rush toward a new war with Iran they are instead abetting it, declaring their overwhelming assent to the deceitful casus belli Bush has offered. We see, with despair, that the national Democrats share the regime’s radical agenda of endless militarism and hegemonic sway, differing only on a few points of style and decorum, and a desire to see more “competence” in Iraq and “future wars.”

So, ironically, in the end it does come down to us after all. There’s nothing left but that long-term cultivation — person by person, moment by moment — plowing on despite our utter abandonment by the national leaders and civic institutions that could have stopped or slowed the horror of the present and the horror to come. We will have to go through it now.

But in closing, I’d like to quote something I wrote a few weeks ago that sums up my feeling about where we stand and what we are called upon to do in this bleak historic hour:

Yet we must keep sounding the alarm, even in the face of almost certain defeat. What else is our humanity worth if we don’t do that? And if, in the end, all that we’ve accomplished is to keep the smallest spark of light alive, to help smuggle it through an age of darkness to some better, brighter time ahead, is that not worth the full measure of struggle?


Anti-war Movement and Media:

Ramp Up Resistance to War in Iraq

By Les Blough, Editor
Jan 12, 2008, 06:45

Email this article Printer friendly page

With everything going on in Pakistan, Palestine, Sudan, Congo, Venezuela, Bolivia, Colombia, Nicaragua, Ecuador and last but not least, the listless presidential election campaigns in the U.S., media and popular attention is drained from the ongoing bloody U.S. occupation in Iraq. We will soon be coming to the end of the 5th year of this war and viewing the inane speeches of those who would be the next president of the United States, we see no sign that the war will end. US children who were 12-13 years old when the war began are now being sent off to Iraq to kill and be killed. How shall we respond?

  • Anti-war Movement: The center of the anti-war movement abroad and in the U.S must remain focused on Iraq. I have received many letters and articles, critical of the anti-war movement. Some critics complain of splintering groups and others spend time and energy arguing over ideological differences among groups – while people in Iraq continue to die. But organizing action in the streets is absolutely umperative.Anti-war organizations like Troops Out Now!, International Action Center, ANSWER and many others need our participation and support. If you don’t like one of them, join another, but join and participate in actions underway and being planned for 2008. I know leaders in anti-war groups who pay costs for marches and protests out of their own pockets. Some even put them on their credit cards and pay later. People who think they are anti-war and stay on the sidelines and criticize these committed revolutionaries need to re-evaluate their stance. These organizations do not need attacks from the left – they need our help and participation.

  • Alternative Media: Those of us in the alternative media must intensify our focus on the center of U.S. butchery abroad – Iraq. The governments of the ruling class have now opened many fronts for occupation and colonization. Some involve direct military attacks (e.g. Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Palestine and now Pakistan) while others involve covert operations (Iran, Sudan, Colombia, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Nicaragua). We now learn of plans to insert thousands of troops and CIA agents into Pakistan. The U.S. just announced plans to send 3,000 more marines into Afghanistan. U.S. military “advisors” and CIA are involved in covert operations in Sudan and the other Latin American countries named above.We must counter-attack on each front with vigor in the new world revolution. But the point of the U.S. spear-head is in Iraq where 180,000 U.S. military personel are deployed and countless non-military including “private security officers” are working (and in some cases killing) for the occupation. One year ago, 175 corporations reported employment of 48,000 non-military bringing the total fighting for the occupation to about a quarter million U.S. personnel in Iraq. Today, mercenaries … the so-called “contractors” … number about 93,000.

Our witty researcher and satirist correspondent, Raja Chemayel reports that in Iraq today there are:

150.000 U.S. regular military
30.000 surge military (total 180,000)
4.500 British-lap-dogs
93.472 Mercenaries called , Contractors.
1.554 Israeli “interior-decorators”

… and about a total of 2.449 other Coalition of the Willing-Puppets

Raja’s numbers total 279,514, well over a quarter million personnel, fighting the Iraqi Resistance.

In the alternative media, we must ramp up our exposure of the U.S. slaughter in Iraq and faithfully report the brutal attacks against Iraqis and the successes of the Iraqi Resistance.

  • URUKNET: There are a large number of websites which report daily on the war in Iraq – too many to name here. Read, comment on these Iraq-war reports, share them with others and encourage their writers and editors. If your are a writer, write exclusives for these sites, helping to inform and build their readership. But in particular, we ask our readers to check in daily with our friends at URUKNET ( -the world’s #! website for daily, reliable information on what the United States government is doing to the people of Iraq.

With their military on the defensive and their economy wrecked, the U.S. government has never been more vulnerable to whatever pressure we can bring to bear on them. We must do everything we can to contribute to the growing world revolution taking place right now – all around us. But we must maintain a strategic focus on the U.S. war on the people of Iraq.

See the latest Iraqi Resistance Report from Free Arab Voice via URUKNET!

– Les Blough, Editor

U.S., Israel and Iran: Who is threatening who?

U.S., Israel and Iran: Who is threatening who?

By Ali Moayedian

Shahab-3 test firing in 2006

Iran has been conducting war games – code-named “Noble Prophet” – in Persian Gulf’s Strait of Hormuz. As part of these exercises, Iran test-fired some 9 medium and long range missiles on Wednesday. Not surprisingly this generated huge amount of noise and “concern” by U.S. government officials.

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said this is “evidence that the missile threat is not an imaginary one.” “Those who say that there is no Iranian missile threat against which we should build a missile defense system perhaps ought to talk to the Iranians about their claims

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the test bolsters the U.S. argument that Tehran is a threat and a missile defense system is needed in Europe.

A White House spokesman called the tests “completely inconsistent with Iran’s obligations to the world” and said they further isolate the country. Iran should “refrain from further missile tests if they truly seek to gain the trust of the world,” said Gordon Johndroe, spokesman for the National Security Council.

Also, the Iranian missile tests have provoked widespread criticism in the U.S. Congress, where lawmakers called them provocative and urged stronger U.S. and international pressure on Tehran.

Persian Gulf
(space photo by NASA)

But let’s take a look at what we are dealing with here:

  • Iran is effectively surrounded by American troops which are based in Iraq, Afghanistan, Turkey and Persian Gulf.

  • Iran is being threatened almost daily by American and Israeli officials. Even nuclear attacks on Iran have been contemplated and discussed.

  • U.S. and Israel have nuclear weapons. Iran doesn’t.

  • U.S. and Israel have invaded other countries in the region. Iran hasn’t.

  • Israel recently conducted a massive exercise over the Mediterranean consisting of around 100 planes. This was supposed to be a dry run in preparation of a possible attack on Iran.

  • A just published expose piece by investigative journalist Seymour Hersh has revealed that the Bush Administration has stepped up its secret moves against Iran by budgeting $400M to create chaos in Iran and to destabilize the regime.

  • U.S. Congressional Resolution H.CON.RES 362 ( calls on the president to stop all shipments of refined petroleum products from reaching Iran. It also “demands” that the President impose “stringent inspection requirements on all persons, vehicles, ships, planes, trains and cargo entering or departing Iran.” Experts say the measures called for in the resolutions amount to an act of war.

  • U.S. has held many intimidating war games in Persian Gulf and just finished another one!

The fact is it is the U.S. troops that have barged in Iran’s backyard and threaten to enter the house.
Now why is it so upsetting if Iran fires a few missiles to say we are ready? Should we instead expect them to kneel down and submit, because that fits our interests? Iran has repeatedly stated that they will attack back if they are attacked. However, this defensive posturing is conveniently interpreted as provocation by both U.S. and Israel while ignoring their own offensive posturing!

There is no way out of this stalemate except for dialogue and diplomacy. Iran has repeatedly signaled readiness to engage in negotiations without any preconditions. U.S. has however repeatedly shunned Iran’s offers and continues to insist on “verifiable uranium enrichment freeze by Iran” as a precondition to negotiations. Many analysts and experts are pressing the Bush Administration to drop the precondition and engage in dialogue. It’s time to heed the advice of these experts.

War will not benefit Americans, Israelis or Iranians. In fact many experts have sounded the alarms that an attack by U.S. or Israel on Iran will engulf the whole region in fire and have global repercussions. This warning shouldn’t be taken lightly. It is time to focus the world’s energies on addressing important issues such as global warming, food shortages, poverty and diseases. No more killing and destroying please!

Common Sense And Survival

Common Sense And Survival

By William H. Kötke

The graph line of the global population explosion now goes upward almost vertically. The graph line of reserves of resources that fund that explosion falls precipitously. The point at which population crosses the food production line is the point of the beginning of the coming mass die-off of human population.

Since Babylon, the type of human culture that we live in has featured an emperor or surrogate who is surrounded by a handful of wealthy militarist/financiers. These people own and rule the realm. This class has historically gained their power and wealth by feeding off the people and by growth/conquest. This class has always urged growth as the means to increase their power and wealth. There were always new fertile lands to conquer and peoples to enslave. The configuration of the culture of empire which we call civilization, has not changed in six thousand years. Today in the U.S.A. less than one per cent of the population has more than three quarters of the wealth. Certainly they have enough wealth to buy and run the government and have a land ownership pattern that rivals the land barons of Guatamala.

This culture has increased its population by running a net deficit of the fertility of the earth. The soils, forests, fish stocks, pure water and over-grazed and desertified landscapes have been sacrificed to the god of growth. Now there are no more fertile lands to conquer and exploit, but the population continues to grow and the fossil fuel production reaches peak and begins to decline. The culture that has no vision of the future and no purpose other than material consumption hits the wall.

In the past few centuries the elites have gained a new method of growth/conquest. The lever of Science/technology has been used to further their power. Through the creation of industrialism, we now live in a manufactured environment. We civilized people have created machines and been conditioned by the machine world until we begin to act in a machine-like manner. Powerless, we are thoroughly dependent upon the machine for our food and shelter survival. Alienated and atomized, we move around trying to fit into a niche in order to obtain survival. The pressure to move to a job breaks nuclear families apart and certainly precludes the existence of extended families. We have become interchangeable ciphers in the industrial machine. We have been culturally conditioned from birth to have great regard for non-living manufactured items and have been alienated from living things. We have more regard for the dead wood of a church than for a living forest.

Today, when we look at the numbers and look back at those millions of acres of exhausted and eroded soils, common sense tells us that this is the end. The Patriarchs of empire have committed us to a fundamental biological error. Any organism that wantonly kills that which feeds it will not endure very long. The culture of empire does not have a political problem; it has a biological problem. It lives in a bubble of self-created definitions and has a dysfunctional relationship with the life of the earth. One might say that if the humans can’t keep the planet alive, they certainly can’t live here.

For several million years our successful ancestors maintained adaptation to the ecological energy flows of the earth. Now, humans have become so biologically maladapted that we are in the third mass species die-off, the last one being the dinosaurs.

It’s just common sense that we throw out the whole of the culture of civilization. If even a small part of the human species is to endure, we must return to foundational principles.

The millenniums-old project of the imperial elites to control every thing in front of them and indeed, wishfully, the universe, has failed.


The human species is seriously out of balance with the natural world. The obvious answer to this is for the species to regain balance with the natural world. Simple common sense morality would say that first we need a society that agrees that each of us is alive and not a bio-robot and that each of our lives have intrinsic value. We shift from a war/competition – death focus to a principle that all life has value. Life is the growth system. Consuming living ecologies in order to amass piles of baubles is ultimately not a growth system.

Common sense morality would say that we humans should aid the living earth and that the simple morality would be that we humans aid in the complete ecological restoration of the earth back to its climax condition. This is the least that we could do given the grievous damage that has occurred. Of course this is also the pathway toward our survival.

A modern human normally enters the world in an austere hospital, possibly experiencing birth trauma. The child is baby-sat by a TV and then later turned over to a mass education institution for further conditioning. After graduating they get to work in a cubicle until they retire and die.

In a culture in which the growth of life is the paramount focus, the pregnant mother would become a center of community energy. Recent scholarship has shown us how important it is for both mother and baby to receive soothing and comforting energies. Great community energy would also be focused on the children. Just like all the other species around us, the “growing” of children would be a central activity. In a Life culture we would assume that the society would be formed in such a way as to encourage every possible talent of each individual. As we symbolically move out of the patriarchal/intellectual to the feminine/feeling mode the social dialog changes. The successful growing of life of all kinds requires a feeling for it and some application of the intellect. We would begin to follow perceptions and conclusions brought to us by our feelings rather than conclusions derived solely from intellection.


It’s just common sense. If humans want to live on this planet they will have to restore the life of the earth. This seems like a tall order but the imminent death of billions is also a large event.

Answers have come bubbling up out of our mass intuition. For decades skills have been building in the practice of Permaculture so that seed communities can restore ecosystems, build soil fertility and produce more food per acre than the industrial system. Hand-made houses with solar advantages built from local materials are scattered around the planet. There are examples of hand-made houses with solar advantages that can heat and cool themselves without outside energy. The world-wide move to ecovillages is well under way with Russia alone having now over eight hundred.

Bill Mollison, one of the co-originators of Permaculture says that, “Without permanent agriculture there is no possibility of a stable social order.” The intuitively forming ideal is extended families occupying their own private permaculture design with a number of these families occupying a watershed. A number of watersheds constitute a bioregion. This is a natural social/political framework in which the needs of the earth are re-presented in human society because the humans are advocating for the life and gaining survival from that life. We might call this biological democracy.

Human/earth centered, rather than object centered, this new movement promises to become the next human culture. Human social institutions tend to form around food survival systems and be resonant with the morals and purpose of those different activities to gain food; we would expect the new culture to do the same. When some or all of the seed communities make it through the apocalypse, they will be the ancestors.

Many flail about trying to save the dying beast of empire by recycling their tin cans or inventing free energy machines but it is just common sense that if we want to aid the life of our great, great grandchildren we will ignore the dying beast and put our living energies into the new way of life.

Reality Check: The Democrats are the Real Problem

Reality Check: The Democrats

are the Real Problem

Mike Whitney

Dissident Voice – Obama’s candidacy is over; kaput. He’s already stated that he has no intention of stopping the war, so he has disqualified himself. That’s his prerogative; no one put a gun to his head. His op-ed in Monday’s New York Times just removes any lingering doubt about the matter. What Obama proposes is moving the central theater of operation from Iraq to Afghanistan. Big deal. Why is it more acceptable to kill a man who is fighting for his country in Afghanistan than in Iraq?

It’s not; which is why Obama must be defeated and the equivocating Democratic Party must be jettisoned altogether. The Democrats are a party of blood just like the Republicans, they’re just more discreet about it. That’s why people who are serious about ending the war have to support candidates outside the two-party charade. The Democrat/Republican duopoly will not deliver the goods; it’s as simple as that. The point is to stop the killing, not to provide blind support for smooth-talking politicos who try to mask their real intentions. Obama made his choice, now he can suffer the consequences.

Nancy Pelosi is a perfect example of what the Democrats are all about. Just look at the way she brushed aside the people who got her elected. They mean nothing to her. In a matter of months, the “San Francisco liberal” has achieved what former-Speaker of the House Hastert could only dream of; she’s driven the Congress’ public approval ratings into single digits for the first time in history making her the worst speaker of all time. She rubber-stamped the FISA bill, concealed what she knew about the CIA’s global torture programs, and vowed to stop any public effort to hold the administration accountable for its war crimes. (No impeachment) She has betrayed her most ardent supporters and single-handedly transformed an already-emasculated congress into a purely ceremonial body incapable of doing the people’s work.

At least Bush never betrayed any of his supporters. Never. Pelosi is worse than Bush, much worse.

And yet, liberals still insist that we should vote the Democratic ticket. In your dreams!

What leftist or progressive is not totally fed-up with the Democrats cagey “bait-and-switch” hypocrisy? Voting the Democratic ticket is not a sign of “hope”, it’s a sign of being a schmuck. The Democrats have done nothing to stop the war and will do nothing to stop the war. The Obama candidacy is merely a way to replace one group of genocidal maniacs with another. Who needs a charismatic, flannel-mouth glamour boy to lead us into battle when a senile fogy with “anger management” issues will do just fine.

Voters of conscience should reject that choice altogether. Just as they should reject the “lesser of two evils” theory which does not apply when ordinance is being dumped daily on innocent civilians. It has to stop.

Obama is not an antiwar candidate that is merely a fiction maintained by his public relations team. In fact, he wants to beef up the military with 65,000 additional ground forces and 27,000 more marines. He’s also stated that he will add “two additional combat brigades to Afghanistan” and encourage NATO to make “greater contributions — with fewer restrictions.” In his op-ed he boasted, “As president, I will make the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban the top priority that it should be. This is a war that we have to win.”

He also added this ominous warning:

“The greatest threat to that security lies in the tribal regions of Pakistan, where terrorists train and insurgents strike into Afghanistan. We cannot tolerate a terrorist sanctuary, and as president, I won’t. We need a stronger and sustained partnership between Afghanistan, Pakistan and NATO to secure the border, to take out terrorist camps and to crack down on cross-border insurgents. We need more troops, more helicopters, more satellites, more Predator drones in the Afghan border region. And we must make it clear that if Pakistan cannot or will not act, we will take out high-level terrorist targets like bin Laden if we have them in our sights.”

Obama supporters should take their candidate at his word. What he is proposing is a dramatic escalation and expansion of the war into another sovereign country. How is this consistent with the demands of his base or the millions of Americans who believe that Obama represents real change.

It’s time for a reality check; the Democrats are the real problem not the Republicans. If the path to peace requires crushing the Democratic Party and its blood-thirsty candidates; so be it. The main thing is to stop the killing. If Obama won’t do it; we’ll find someone who will.

The Dangers of Neo-Conservative Economic Policies

The Dangers of Neo-Conservative Economic Policies

by Ron Paul

The dangers inherent in the foreign policy advocated by the neo-conservatives are well known. While many Americans have become increasingly aware of those dangers, far less attention has been focused on the dangers of neo-conservative economic policies. This issue is of critical importance right now, because many are mistakenly pointing their fingers at the free market as the culprit behind our current economic plight.

There are only a few in elected office who have any real loyalty to free markets and limited government. The agenda of neo-conservatives in the economy calls for a very active central government. Indeed, while there are some neo-conservatives who continue to use the rhetoric of limited government, and who oppose increases in the federal income tax as a way to maintain the political benefits that apply to those who talk about free markets, it is now the neo-conservatives who promote fiat monetary policies even more than those on the liberal left.

While I have been a strong proponent of cutting taxes on all Americans, and therefore supported the tax reductions offered by President Bush, the neo-cons argue that tax rate reduction alone is the key to “getting the government out of the way” of economic growth. Moreover, they invariably argue for tax reductions targeted toward the wealthy, and toward multinational corporations.

Over the years, I have offered several tax plans designed to assist hard working middle-class Americans to pay for their needs, whether these needs be health-care related, educational or to pay the costs of fuel. A few years back when I introduced one such bill, a prominent Republican approached me on the House Floor and asked, half in anger and half in amazement “why did you do that?” Shortly after that, the committee chairman at the time, also a Republican, sent out a release strongly attacking my tax cut bill.

So, while the liberal economic agenda includes more taxes and spending, the neo-con economic program simply looks to target some tax cuts to preferred groups, but ignore the economic big picture. The neo-con economic agenda is to “borrow and spend” and it is that agenda, even more than the tax and spend ways of many liberals, that has cast us in economic peril at this time.

Simply, on spending, the neo-cons and the liberals share views, just as they share similar views on foreign policy. While each side tries to claim the mantle of change, reality is that more of the same is not change.

The fiat monetary policy we now follow is the most significant factor contributing to our economic peril, and it is central to the neo-con agenda. As we hear new calls to empower the Federal Reserve Board, we should be aware that underlying all neo-conservative policies is the idea of monetary inflation. Inflation is the technique used to pay for the regulatory-state and the costs of policing the world.

What Happened To The Anti War Movement Of The 1960’s?

What Happened To The Anti War Movement Of The 1960’s?

By Ibrahim Turner

29 July, 2008

Are we now trying to change things in the wrong way?
What could be the right way to change things?

Millions demonstrated in the 1960’s against the Vietnam War all around the world but more so in America. It eventually stopped the war in Vietnam but did it change the American psyche supported by the usual suspects in Europe and the Industrial Military complex? Did it stop the interference of the CIA ‘Blackwater types’ overthrowing governments with death squads in many Latin American countries and elsewhere since then? And now the current wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and soon to be in Iran? Where is it all leading? What is the real purpose behind all this? Is there a purpose other than greed and domination over weaker poorly defended countries by military and financial means under the (benign) care for people and the resources, by the World Bank and the IMF? What could be a higher purpose than that?

Written in 1973, what he saw coming – the predictions of this man are frighteningly accurate. And remember this was before the rise of the Neocons, before the ‘Islamofacist axis of evil’ doctrine pushed by them to ‘pre-emptive war ‘in seven countries outlined in their documents blatantly published for all to see. For the Neocons it has not panned out as they wished, with no throwing of bouquets of flowers greeting the ‘coalition of the willing’ in Iraq, (did anyone with common sense seriously believe that?) and no oil revenues from Iraq oil paying for the war as Wolfowitz cavalierly predicted.

Where do they go from here? The current propaganda is in full swing for an attack on Iran, with the same lies as when Saddam was supposed to be able to have WMDS and could ready his biological weapons in 45 minutes.

Extracts from “Needs of a New Age Community”, J.G.Bennett, 1973.

The World Situation

It is highly improbable that the world will get through the next thirty years without some very dramatic events, particularly events to do with the working of our society. Our society is not adapted to withstand the strains that will come; it can only cope with changes that are slow. It is based on complex institutions such as those that deal with the production and distribution of goods. The institutions have very large bodies and very small brains, like the dinosaurs that are now long extinct. They work from a primitive instinct of self-preservation according to traditional patterns of behaviour and response. They do not work even with the intelligence of an individual human being. When inevitable shortage of necessities comes about they will not be able to adapt.

There are many people who have already lost confidence in institutions and the way of life they now dominate. Their first reaction was to put all their attention on what was wrong – all the stupidity and destructiveness – and we had that period in the 1960’s, the period of political activism. People tried to stop the development of destructive weapons, to stop wars, to promote social justice and to combat racialism. This ended in a very wide disillusionment. People saw, without understanding it, that something worked to make things become their own opposite. They saw that the people who tried to work for peace played into the hands of those who created war; that those who tried to liberalize institutions played into the hands of the hard-liners and that those who worked for decentralization provided weapons for those who wanted to concentrate military or industrial power in the hands of the few, whether management or labour, or of whatever political ideology.

Now in the 1970’s, there is already a different climate. People are tending to look for a way of life that ignores or even discards institutions. There are two important trends that are apparent in heavily industrialized countries such as Japan, Europe and North America: one is the tendency to group together in small communities, so that now there are tens of thousands all over the world; the other is to look for quick ways of transformation, of arriving at a new kind of life independent of the outer world forces (there are large scale spiritual movements which many millions of people are experimenting with).

In my view there will be a general disillusionment with all of this by the 1980’s. That will be the time of the onset of panic. Visible loss of trust in the institutions could come about explosively if there were a sudden shortage of foodstuffs, and just a few years of bad harvest would be enough. But even without that there will be panics. This does not mean a time of revolution and sudden collapse. Governments and institutions will try to adapt to the changing climate of thought and feeling in the world. It will then become evident that what is needed is a change in attitude that today very few are able to accept; a change from the tendency of the last two or three thousands years to regard expansion as good in itself, to a different life attitude which even regards contractual concentrations as good in itself.

Such a change of attitude is so much against things as they are now that it will truly be a revolution. Every one of us in spite of what we think remains geared for all practical purposes, to expansion. There are very few of us who are really prepared to look for a way of life in which we would live with less instead of more. The lesson cannot be learned by common sense because people close their minds to it. It can only be learned by bitter experience. That bitter experience will come in the period of time from the 1980’s to the early part of the next century. By then, either we shall have got through or we will have collapsed.

This period is the greatest opportunity that has existed for many thousands of years for the spiritual. Not for thousands of years has there been such a need for people who are able to work. The reason for this is that the transition from one system to another can only come through the third force. It cannot come from the passive majority or the active minority, from the governed or the power possessors.

If we talk of the role of the spiritual we must understand that this is not the usual perspective. Everyone, in some way or other, recognizes that we are in a moment of great transition; but for the most part the predictions made by people are entirely humanistic. People look at the human situation and what man can achieve. By and large, they ignore the defects of human nature and take it that man will behave fairly, if not very rationally, and will make use of his intelligence and creative powers to build a world in which the achievements of man’s intelligence will play a dominating role. The picture is of man increasing his domination over the material world and of even achieving mastery over forces, which at present are too strong for him, such as the forces of disease and old age, to create a future that is secure for the human race. There is no regard for the consequences to the natural order and there is no attempt to answer, or even ask, the question; “What is it all for? What really will have been achieved by all this?”

The climate of thought of the last epoch has been based on the sacredness of every human life and the right of every human being to his own fulfilment. This has worked itself out and brought us to the point of saturation in the desire for more, to fulfil oneself by ‘being’ more even at the expense of others, or at the expense of nature.

What is in front of us is the need to change to a cosmic purpose, that every life serves for something, not just for its own satisfaction, and not for some otherworldly purpose either.

“What is the sense and significance of life on the earth and in particular of human life?”

Our lives are not our own.

“Why do you take such care of your sheep and cows; is it because you want their lives to be happy and successful; or is it because you want their meat and wool and hides? Don’t you see that it may be the same with you? Why shouldn’t there be some superhuman farmer who feeds you and takes care of you because he needs something from you?”

I was always sure that we must exist to serve some purpose. The mutton and wool doctrine means that the higher powers are not so much interested in our lives as in our deaths. A sheep becomes a saleable asset when it has been slaughtered. He went on to suggest that wars occur on earth when more human deaths are required.

Our lives must serve some better purpose than the satisfaction of our personal desires and ambitions. The idea that the aim of life is the ‘pursuit of happiness’ has got the world into its present trouble. But this does not mean that human life on earth need be as meaningless and frustrating as most lives are today.

Man is not merely a domestic animal serving the needs of the higher powers. He has a very high destiny, but he can attain it only if he earns it.

We see around us suffering and injustice. Virtue is not rewarded, wickedness is not punished. We see mankind helplessly drifting towards a wretched state of overpopulation, depletion of resources and wholesale pollution of our Mother Earth. There is real danger of total disaster by way of an atomic war. A new horror is on the horizon in the shape of new diseases to plants, animals and man. An era of fresh plagues that chemotherapy will be powerless to cure has been predicted. Altogether, the prospects for the next fifty years are pretty terrifying.

True happiness is the aim of all life; but happiness is not achieved by pursuing it. Real happiness is spontaneous and comes when one is living according to one’s nature. The trouble is that few people know their own nature or what real happiness is.

Real happiness comes from the secure feeling that one is doing the right thing in the right way. People crave for security and do not see that there is no security unless one is doing the right thing.

Israeli Violations Constitute Provocative Escalation’

Israeli Violations Constitute Provocative Escalation’

Hussein Assi Readers Number : 177

29/07/2008 The Islamic Resistance in Lebanon issued a statement in which it denounced the Israeli enemy persistence of violating the Lebanese sovereignty, especially during the last few days, as a provocative and unacceptable escalation.

The Islamic Resistance called on Lebanese authorities and United Nations concerned bodies to denounce the Israeli violations and take serious moves in response to them.

The statement recalled that “one mere violation of the Lebanese airspace and barriers constitutes a flagrant breach to the Lebanese sovereignty,” highlighting that “this assault was recurring hundreds of times during only one week, day and night, and in all regions from the North to the South and from East to West, accompanied by illusory maneuvers taking place above the Southern coast with the participation of the warlike, exploratory planes and helicopters and under the eyes of the international forces in Lebanon (UNIFIL) and its warships.”

The statement stressed, in conclusion, that the Zionist entity recent violations were tantamount to an insolent excessiveness in targeting the sovereignty, insulting the national dignity, violating the international laws. It called to put urgently an end to this phenomenon, urging all co

Israel’s ‘Right to Exist’

Israel’s ‘Right to Exist’

I have heard it for the entirety of my 61 years of life–Israel’s ‘Right To Exist’. In fact, in recent memory I have heard this phrase more than I’ve heard ‘Happy Thanksgiving’ or ‘Merry Christmas’ or even ‘Have a Good 4th of July’.

Israel seems to exist quite well. Her people have a very high living standard compared to the rest of the world. Israel has the most sophisticated armed forces in the Middle East, if indeed not the world. According to one of our former presidents, Israel is said to possess several hundred nuclear weapons and if we are to believe some of the things said by Israel’s leaders in recent years she is ready to destroy mankind if her leaders choose to do so.

Israeli’s live a very good life style, second to none. A swimming pool in every back yard on stolen land, plenty of food, jobs, stocks, cash, you name it. Their quality of life continues to grow and prosper every month of every year.

Now what I have a problem with is this–doesn’t the United States of America also have a ‘Right to Exist’?

Yes we do, but unfortunately that right is being taken away from us every second, every minute, every hour, every month and every year and all for the sake of Israel’s ‘Right To Exist’. What’s wrong with this story? Well, I’ll explain what’s wrong with it and believe me, its not that hard to figure out.

Israel’s ‘Right To Exist’ has virtually bankrupted the United States, and all of it off the backs of hard-working Americans for the last sixty years. We’ve given Israel untold billions of dollars NEVER TO BE REPAID, to say nothing of the military hardware in the billions we (I should say the United States) just flat-out gives them, including free training for their fighter pilots.

The United States continues to supply Israel with cash payments every day in the millions of dollars, and remember–THIS IS BORROWED MONEY. Do you understand this my fellow Americans? We borrow money for the sake of Israel but yet we do not barrow it for the sake and safety of our own citizens. This money must be paid back by us our children, their children and their children and this cycle will never be broken until the Untied States gives up its passionate attachment to the Jewish state.

Our sons and daughters are paying a very heavy price in Iraq. 4000+dead, tens of thousands wounded so badly that their lives will never be the same and who knows when it will end.

The United States is fighting this war in Iraq all for the sake of Israel. Americans getting killed, wounded and us spending billions of tax dollars we don’t have, and for what? Let me remind you, in case you have forgotten–FOR ISRAEL’S RIGHT TO EXIST.

The ugly truth is that the United States can’t take much more. It is bending to the very breaking point of no return, and now the war drums beat once again in Israel that we must attack Iran or they will. When Israel spouts this aggression the gas prices go up and up, along with the price of food and just about everything else we need so that America can exist. It is a heavy burden on the American people, Israel’s benefactors. Many in this country are losing their homes, their jobs and can’t even afford food and all because they gave everything they had for Israel’s ‘Right to Exist’.

This year the United States has gone through so many natural disasters it boggles the mind. One after the other–fire, floods, tornadoes, you name it and we’ve had it and up to our collective eyeballs. And through all of this, where has America’s greatest ally been? I haven’t seen Israel hand over a red cent to this country when it was in need. Israel could care less about us, their benefactors the USA. If we were broke and down to our last cent, you can bet the ranch that Israel would demand it go into her coffers and God help any politician who would vote against it.

But then, why do we even bother discussing such business as politicians voting in America’s best interest? It goes without saying that when Israel wants something she gets it, no strings attached from a subservient President and congress.

It’s time we cut this step child Israel lose and let her make it on their own. No more wars for Israel. No more money, no more nothing. If Israel wants money let her people earn it. If they want a war LET THEM FIGHT IT ON THEIR OWN. NO MORE AMERICAN BLOOD OR TREASURE SPENT ON ISRAEL’S ‘RIGHT TO EXIST’.

For those who think I am wet behind the ears on this one, think twice–I know all too well what Israel thinks about Americans, because 41 years ago I saw them murder my shipmates in cold blood with no remorse in their black hearts or in their vacant souls. Their entire war machine was bought and paid for– you guessed it–by you, the people of the United States and they used that to murder America’s sons.

History will repeat itself if the Government doesn’t wise up soon, and they won’t unless they hear from you, me and the rest of the American public as we demand no more free rides for any country, and especially not Israel. America has its own ‘Right to Exist’ and no one, not even the Jewish state, should come before our own family and friends.

Phillip F. Tourney

Survivor, USS Liberty June 8 1967

Co-Host of The Liberty Hour Radio Program



The intensifying saber rattling and war of words between the US and Israel, on one hand, and Iran have generated a great deal of hysteria, war fever and confusion.

Senior Israeli cabinet members have threatened nuclear war against Iran. The western media has given the erroneous impression that Iran is poised to wipe Israel off the map. Some understanding of the military issues involved is badly needed.

First, missiles. Iran announced its Shahab-III missile is ready to retaliate against any Israeli attack on its nuclear facilities. This missile is not long-ranged, as media wrongly claims, but a medium-ranged. Iran says it can deliver a two ton warhead over 2,000 km. But Israeli and US sources say Shahab’s maximum range is around 1,200 km, which puts much of Israel out of its range.

This obsolescent missile is highly inaccurate, particularly at maximum range. It is liquid fueled, meaning it is very vulnerable to air and missile strikes while being prepared to fire. Israel has developed tactics using aircraft, missiles and drones to attack enemy missiles in pre-launch phase. Iran has an estimated 24 Shabab-III’s.

The other missiles Iran fired this week were short ranged models of no strategic value. Tehran was even caught doctoring the pictures it issued of the multiple missile launch to cover up the failure of one of the missiles to fly. This embarrassment reinforced the view that Tehran is trying to hide its military weakness behind a lot of chest-pounding and missile theatrics.

Israel, by contrast, has around 50 Jericho-II nuclear-armed missiles with a range from 900-2,700 miles, putting every Mideast capital and parts of Russia, Pakistan, and Europe within range. Each Jericho-II carries a warhead that can destroy a major city.

Medium-ranged missiles are almost useless without nuclear warheads. Iran has no nuclear weapons, and even if it did manage to develop them, it would be many years before a compact warhead could be developed that could be carried atop a missiles and withstand heavy G-forces. Until Iran has nuclear warheads, Iran’s Shabab’s will be more for show than military utility.

*Other systems – Israel has an indestructible nuclear triad. In addition to the Jerichos, which are housed in caves and mobile, Israel has one of the world’s top air forces with long-ranged US-supplied F-15I’s and F-16’s that can deliver nuclear weapons to Iran. Germany provided Israel with three Dolphin-class subs that are said to be armed with nuclear cruise missiles. At least one sub is always on station off Iran’s coast. In addition, Israel new Ofek-3 military satellite provides full coverage of Iran and surrounding region. Israel also shares US satellite and other sensor data in real time.

Israel has probably the world’s second or third most potent air force, with around 400 state of the art, US-supplied combat aircraft and among the world’s most skilled pilots. The IAF is supported by a galaxy of electronic warfare systems, drones, and long-range recon. Israel’s Arrow is the world’s most advanced operational anti-ballistic missiles system and is expected to down over 85% of any incoming missiles.

Iran’s Air Force has only about 165 airworthy combat aircraft, mostly of 1960’s and 70’s vintage. The only aircraft it has that can reach Israel are 18-20 Soviet-era SU-24’s, and a handful of decrepit 40-year old, US-supplied F-4 Phantoms and F-14’s dating from the Shah’s day.

Thanks to unlimited US support, Israel is two full military generations ahead of its enemies, and even further advanced in electronic warfare and command and control.

A single nuclear weapon would destroy Israel, as its partisans warn. But this is also true of Egypt, where a single nuke on the Aswan Dam would inundate the nation and kill millions. It also applies to the Syria, Lebanon, the Gulf Emirates, Jordan, and Iraq. Only Saudi Arabia and Iran have strategic space. Even so, one nuclear strike on Tehran would cripple Iran for years.

Thanks to its strategic triad, Israel’s nuclear forces are indestructible, hence capable of devastating retaliation against any enemy nuclear strike. The Bush administration has vowed nuclear retaliation against any nation that attacks Israel with nuclear weapons.

Given these facts, we can see how false are claims trumpeted by the west that Iran is a dangerous military power that is about to eradicate Israel. The facts are quite the reverse.


Democrat Michael Donihe says he brings a clean slate to the race for the congressional seat held by U.S. House Rep. David Davis, R-1st.

“I have no ties to any business or organization, but only to the citizens of the 1st District of Tennessee,” he said in a recent interview.

Democrat Michael Donihe, 48, has never served in an elected office, he said his top priority would be to do away with the Federal Reserve – a pretty bold subject that not many candidates have broached.

“We’re facing times worse than the Great Depression,” he said. “I saw my parents when I was growing up in the ’50s and ’60s, and they got to enjoy the American dream.”

Donihe says Congress must abolish the Fed

– an institution he calls “the central bank for profit, which does not act in the interests of the average American.”


Haiti: Mud cakes become staple diet as cost of food soars beyond a family’s reach


Haiti: Mud cakes become staple diet

as cost of food soars beyond a family’s reach

In Cité Soleil, one of Port-au-Prince’s worst slums, making the clay-based food is a major income earner. Mud cakes are the only inflation-proof food available to Haiti’s poor. Photograph: David Levene

At first sight the business resembles a thriving pottery. In a dusty courtyard women mould clay and water into hundreds of little platters and lay them out to harden under the Caribbean sun.

The craftsmanship is rough and the finished products are uneven. But customers do not object. This is Cité Soleil, Haiti’s most notorious slum, and these platters are not to hold food. They are food.

Brittle and gritty – and as revolting as they sound – these are “mud cakes”. For years they have been consumed by impoverished pregnant women seeking calcium, a risky and medically unproven supplement, but now the cakes have become a staple for entire families.

It is not for the taste and nutrition – smidgins of salt and margarine do not disguise what is essentially dirt, and the Guardian can testify that the aftertaste lingers – but because they are the cheapest and increasingly only way to fill bellies.

“It stops the hunger,” said Marie-Carmelle Baptiste, 35, a producer, eyeing up her stock laid out in rows. She did not embroider their appeal. “You eat them when you have to.”

These days many people have to. The global food and fuel crisis has hit Haiti harder than perhaps any other country, pushing a population mired in extreme poverty towards starvation and revolt. Hunger burns are called “swallowing Clorox”, a brand of bleach.

The UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation predicts Haiti’s food import bill will leap 80% this year, the fastest in the world. Food riots toppled the prime minister and left five dead in April. Emergency subsidies curbed prices and bought calm but the cash-strapped government is gradually lifting them. Fresh unrest is expected.

According to the UN, two-thirds of Haitians live on less than 50p a day and half are undernourished. “Food is available but people cannot afford to buy it. If the situation gets worse we could have starvation in the next six to 12 months,” said Prospery Raymond, country director of the UK-based aid agency Christian Aid.

Until recently this Caribbean nation, which vies with Afghanistan for appalling human development statistics, had been showing signs of recovery: political stability, new roads and infrastructure, less gang warfare. “We had been going in the right direction and this crisis threatens that,” said Eloune Doreus, the vice-president of parliament.

As desperation rises so does production of mud cakes, an unofficial misery index. Now even bakers are struggling. Trucked in from a clay-rich area outside the capital, Port-au-Prince, the mud is costlier but cakes still sell for 1.3p each, about the only item immune from inflation. “We need to raise our prices but it’s their last resort and people won’t tolerate it,” lamented Baptiste, the Cité Soleil baker.

Vendors of other foods who have increased prices have been left with unsold stock. In the Policard slum, a jumble of broken concrete clinging to a mountainside, the Ducasse family tripled the price of its fritters because of surging flour prices. “Our sales have fallen by half,” said Jean Ducasse, 49, poking at his tray of shrivelled wares.

The signs of crisis are everywhere. Aid agency feeding centres reported that the numbers seeking help have tripled. At a centre in the Fort Mercredi slum rail-thin women cradled infants with yellowing hair, a symptom of malnutrition. “Now we’re having to feed the mothers as well as the babies,” said Antonine Saint-Quitte, a nurse.

In rural areas the situation seems even worse, prompting a continued drift to the slums and their mirage of opportunities. Lillian Guerrick, 56, a subsistence farmer near Cap Haitien, yanked her seven grandchildren from school because there was barely money for food let alone fees. “I’ve no choice,” she said, a touch defensive, amid wizened corn stalks.

Anecdotal evidence suggests school attendance nationwide has dropped and that those who do make it to class are sometimes too hungry to concentrate. “I use jokes to try to stimulate my students, to wake them up,” said Smirnoff Eugene, 25, a Port-au-Prince teacher.

Border crossings to the Dominican Republic are jammed with throngs of merchants hunting lower prices in their relatively prosperous neighbour.

“Beep beep, out of the way!” yelled one teenage boy, sweating, veins throbbing, as he heaved a wheelbarrow impossibly overloaded with onions through a crowd at Ouanaminthe’s border bridge.

Haiti’s woes stem from global economic trends of higher oil and food prices, plus reduced remittances from migrant relatives affected by the US downturn. What makes the country especially vulnerable, however, is its almost total reliance on food imports.

Domestic agriculture is a disaster. The slashing and burning of forests for farming and charcoal has degraded the soil and chronic under-investment has rendered rural infrastructure at best rickety, at worst non-existent.

The woes were compounded by a decision in the 1980s to lift tariffs, when international prices were lower, and flood the country with cheap imported rice and vegetables. Consumers gained and the IMF applauded but domestic farmers went bankrupt and the Artibonite valley, the country’s breadbasket, atrophied.

Now that imports are rocketing in price the government has vowed to rebuild the withered agriculture but that is a herculean task given scant resources, degraded soil and land ownership disputes.

There is a hopeful precedent. A growing franchise of localised dairies known as Let Agogo (Creole for Unlimited Milk) has organised small farmers to transport and market milk, generating jobs and income and cutting Haiti’s £20m annual milk import bill.

President René Préval has hailed the scheme as a model but Michel Chancy, a driving force of Veterimed, a non-governmental organisation which backs the dairies, was wary. “For 20 years politicians have been talking about reviving agriculture but didn’t actually do anything. If this food crisis forces them to act then it is a big opportunity.” That was a big if, he said.

Walk along a beach in the morning and you find Haitians gazing at the azure ocean horizon, dreaming of escape. They are fiercely proud of their history in overthrowing slavery and colonialism but these days the US, the Bahamas, the Dominican Republic – anywhere but home – seems the best option.

The only thing stopping an exodus are US coastguard patrols, said Herman Janvier, 30, a fishermen on Cap Haitian, a smuggling point. “People want out of here. It’s like we’re almost dead people.”

The last time Janvier tried to flee he was intercepted and interned at Guantánamo Bay. “I offered to join the American army. I offered to clean their base. They said no. So I am back here, on a boat with no motor, doing what I can to survive.”

The Big Bailout: America as a Full-Spectrum Kleptocracy

The Big Bailout: America as a Full-Spectrum Kleptocracy

Where this is headed: Eventually the thieves will turn on each other. In fact, it’s happening right now.

Its name somewhat anachronistically means “assembly of old men.” George Washington famously — and, it must now be admitted, with excessive optimism — characterized it as an institutional saucer intended to cool legislation passed in the intemperate heat of the moment. Its members demand, with entirely unwarranted self-approval, to be called, collectively, the World’s Greatest Deliberative Body.

Sober observers understand it to be the most corrupt legislative assembly in human history. To those characterizations of the United States Senate we must now add another, perhaps the final one: Gravedigger of the republic.

With the Senate’s passage of the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac bailout last Saturday (July 26), the United States of America has now become the world’s first full-service kleptocracy, a form of government described earlier in this space as a government of, by, and for the robbers.

We are supposed to pretend to believe that the Senate, so great was its anxiety over the nation’s economically distressed homeowners, met in a rare Saturday session for the sole purpose of administering the balm of Gilead on hardworking families who confront the bleak prospect of foreclosure.

There may be people who believe such a thing, or at least profess to do so. They are pretty much the kind of people who believe that peace, prosperity, and progress will magically ensue after next January 20, when the Holy One, Barack Obama (peace be upon him) ascends to the presidency, not astride a White Horse, but rather mounted upon a flying unicorn that emits healing rainbows from its butt.

No, it’s not the travails of the productive that would earn such attention from the Senate. When the Senate sacrifices so much as a minute of its down time, it does so not to relieve our burdens, but to add to them in the interest of their fellow parasites.
Thieves in suits, the private sector version….

When Congress created the Federal Reserve in 1913, it did so in a lame-duck session. The Fed’s proponents described its handiwork as an independent entity that would prevent “panics” and maintain the integrity of our currency and financial system.

The Fed was presented to the public in pseudo-populist drag: It was supposedly the bane of the big banking interests. This was, in every particular, a conscious inversion of the truth. The Fed was, is, and every shall be a product and protector of those interests. It has practically destroyed the value of US currency, and engineered numerous financial crises, including the one currently unfolding.

The measure passed last Saturday is being described to the public as a “homeowner” bailout. It is nothing of the sort. It supposedly creates an independent oversight mechanism to rein in the excesses of Fannie and Freddie. This, too, is an unalloyed falsehood.

Let us disambiguate the key issue right now. This is a measure to nationalize Fannie and Freddie, plundering the population at large — through direct taxation, the more insidious tax called inflation, or both — to bail out two fascist entities that have been used to enrich the politically connected super-rich through the most corrupt means imaginable.

Furthermore, this measure prefigures the eventual nationalization of the entire financial system under the supervision of an executive branch official with practically unlimited power to appropriate and allocate funds without congressional action. OK, sure, he has to file a report with Congress regarding his expenditures. But this takes place after the fact, and Congress will be able to do nothing but complain, if it can bestir itself even to that extent.

Thieves in more expensive suits, the public sector version: The Senate Democratic leadership. The Republicans, of course, are just as bad, if not worse.

Congress has yielded its war powers to the executive branch. It has now effectively surrendered the power of the purse, as well. What, then, remains by way of the legislative branch’s ability to check the executive?

Nobody responsible for this is willing to admit that truth; they’re too busy taking refuge in contrived ambiguities.

The figure sent out to pollute headlines and palliate a nervous public last week was that fixing Fannie and Freddie will cost “at least” $25 billion. That’s a bit like saying there are “at least” 25 gallons of water in Lake Michigan.

The Congressional Budget Office, in an artful display of tactical equivocation, said that the bailout could cost anything from $100 billion down to “nothing.” That latter estimate would be dismissed as magic thinking were it not a transparent and cynical effort to propagate such delusion among that part of the public paying attention to the ongoing economic collapse.

As the Wall Street Journal summarized, the $25 billion figure was arrived by following a time-honored government accounting algorithm: Some accountant at the CBO threw a dart at the wall. In fact, the bailout measure places in the hands of Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson the discretionary authority to pour as much money into Fannie and Freddie as he deems necessary. He can extend an unlimited credit line to either or both of those government-chartered companies; he can use federal funds to buy shares in either, or both.

There is no limit to what can be spent on the bailout, or the extent of government involvement it will entail. In his efforts to lobby congressional Republicans on behalf of the bailout, Paulson reportedly assured them that he has “no intention” of using those extraordinary powers. This means, of course, that they will be used immediately. It also means, inevitably, that Fannie and Freddie will be nationalized, and that taxpayers will pay the full burden of the bailout.

Senate Republicans — clap-torn whores, every one of them — put up a show of reluctance, perhaps because the White House likes a little role-playing action of that sort. This meant that Treasury Secretary Paulson had to convene several meetings with Republicans in order to pretend to overcome their reluctance to support a measure that will impecuniate their constituents in order to pay off the imponderably huge bad debts assumed by politically protected thieves.

The Fannie/Freddie bailout is another example of the familiar equation behind corporatism (or, to use the more loaded synonym, fascism): The risks are subsidized, the losses are socialized, and the profits are privatized.

There are former corporate executives who spend their days looking at striped sunlight and showing with their backs to the wall for crimes identical to those of former Fannie CEO Franklin D. Raines and his comrades. But because Raines and his posse used a Government-Sponsored Entity to commit their crimes, they’re free to enjoy nearly all the fruits of their fraud.

The Great Poker Face, he ain’t: Paulson looks on in visible alarm as his dimwitted boss pontificates on the supposed health of the US economy.

I find it remarkable that next to nothing has been said by way of condemning Raines and his fellow corporatist thieves.

Doing so is nearly as unthinkable as permitting those two government-sponsored companies to fail, as they should.

According to former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, the bailout wouldn’t be necessary if people were willing to do their part by throwing their money away without the government forcing them to do so: “Emergency legislation was necessary because market participants were unwilling to buy Fannie and Freddie’s debt; investors doubted that the government-sponsored enterprises were healthy enough to repay it and did not draw sufficient reassurance from the implicit guarantee of federal support.” This is why, according to Summers, “Anyone who cares about the health of the US economy should welcome the … rescue plan for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac….”

Quick quiz: What’s the difference between a common armed robber (such as this convenience store bandit), and the Federal Reserve? The first steals money from the cash register; the second steals the value of the money in the cash register.

Imagine an armed robber lecturing his victim that it wouldn’t have been “necessary” to threaten the victim’s life, and the lives of his family, if they had simply handed over their money on demand, and you’ll have a suitable moral parallel to the statement above. Eventually — and for that, read “pretty damn soon” — the entire daisy-chain of fraud we call our financial system will devolve into a scene of violent chaos akin to the denouement of Reservoir Dogs, only immeasurably bigger and unimaginably bloodier.

Already, the robber’s pact holding the system together is starting to fray, as fractional reserve banks start gagging on each other’s IOUs. Witness the fact that cashier’s checks being issued by California’s newly federalized IndyMac bank aren’t being honored by other banks: Customers who cash out of IndyMac are finding that they won’t be able to access their funds for up to two months. It’s not difficult to imagine the impact this will have on households who expected to use those funds to make mortgage or tax payments, or have other irrepressible financial needs.

It took roughly a tithe of FDIC’s deposit insurance fund to bail out IndyMac. Last week’s bank failures — First National Bank of Nevada and Arizona’s First Heritage Bank — involved combined assets of about $3.6 billion.

With Wachovia, Washington Mutual, and many other major banks primed to blow, the day will soon come when — in the words of James Kunstler — the FDIC will simply “choke and croak on this wad of losses…. When American depositors get screwed out of their deposits” — as they already are; vide the observation above regarding IndyMac’s dodgy cashier’s checks — “the full force of the fiasco will drag the dollar underwater like the legendary Kraken of old preying on a babe thrown overboard. Then the forces of darkness will really be loosed.”

Last week, Congress went on record regarding its priorities: With a handful of noble exceptions (conspicuous among them the stalwart Rep. Ron Paul of Texas), they demonstrated a willingness to ruin what remains of the dollar and destroy the Middle Class in order to rescue — temporarily — the uber-rich Robber Class.

The people responsible for this betrayal will be campaigning in their districts during the coming weeks. It would be instructive to them, and may be heartening to their victims, to see at least a few of them on the receiving end of timely and forceful rebukes, delivered in language — and other expressive conduct — appropriate to the occasion, and prevailing security environment.

U.S. government: We know parenting better than you


U.S. government: We know parenting better than you

Proposals would give Washington unprecedented control over kids

By Chelsea Schilling

The U.S. House of Representatives is scheduled to debate two bills that could give the federal government unprecedented control over the way parents raise their children – even providing funds for state workers to come into homes and screen babies for emotional and developmental problems.

The Pre-K Act (HR 3289) and the Education Begins at Home Act (HR 2343) are two bills geared toward military and families who fall below state poverty lines. The measures are said to be a way to prevent child abuse, close the achievement gap in education between poor and minority infants versus middle-class children and evaluate babies younger than 5 for medical conditions.

‘Education Begins at Home Act’ – HR 2343

HR 2343 is sponsored by Rep. Danny Davis, D-Ill., and cosponsored by 55 Democrats and 11 Republicans. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that implementing the Education Begins at Home Act would cost taxpayers $190 million for state home visiting plus “such sums as may be necessary” for in-hospital parent education.

While the bill may appear to be well-intentioned, Pediatrician Karen Effrem told WND government provisions in HR 2343 to evaluate children for developmental problems go too far.

“The federal definition of developmental screening for special education also includes what they call socioemotional screening, which is mental health screening,” Effrem said. “Mental health screening is very subjective no matter what age you do it. Obviously it is incredibly subjective when we are talking about very young children.”

While the program may not be mandatory for low-income and military families, there is no wording in the Education Begins at Home Act requiring parental permission for treatment or ongoing care once the family is enrolled – a point that leads some to ask where parental rights end and the government takes over. Also, critics ask how agents of the government plan to acquire private medical and financial records to offer the home visiting

“There’s no consent mentioned in the bill for any kind of screening – medical, health or developmental,” Effrem said. “There are privacy concerns because when home visitors come into the home they assess everything about the family: Their financial situation, social situation, parenting practices, everything. All of that is put into a database.”

Effrem said it does not specify whether parents are allowed to decline evaluations, drugs or treatment for their children once they are diagnosed with developmental or medical conditions.

“How free is someone who has been tagged as needing this program in the case of home visiting – like a military family or a poor family?” she asked. “How free are they to refuse? Even their refusal will be documented somewhere. There are plenty of instances where families have felt they can’t refuse because they would lose benefits, be accused of not being good parents or potentially have their children taken away.”

When WND asked Effrem how long state-diagnosed conditions would remain in a child’s permanent medical history, she responded:

“Forever. As far as I know, there isn’t any statute of limitations. The child’s record follows them through school and potentially college, employment and military service.”

Effrem said conflicts could also arise when parents do not agree with parenting standards of government home visitors.

“Who decides how cultural tolerance is going to be manifested?” she asked. “There’s some blather in the language of the bill about having cultural awareness of the differences in parenting practices, but it seems like that never applies to Christian parents.”

‘Providing Resources Early for Kids’

The Pre-K Act, or HR 3289, is sponsored by Rep. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, and cosponsored by 116 Democrats and Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla. Estimated to cost $500 million for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2013, the bill provides funds for state-approved education. Government workers would reach mothers and fathers in the hospital after a baby has been delivered to promote Pre-K programs.

“They give them information about Child Care Resource and Referral Network so they can get the child into a preschool or daycare that follows the state standards and get the mom working as quickly as possible,” she said. “It’s always that sort of thing: It’s a list of resources, it’s intruding on parental autonomy and authority and it’s not necessarily accurate or welcome information.”

While parents may choose to be involved in preschool programs, Effrem said the Pre-K Act poses similar concerns about government trumping parents’ rights.

“Once they are involved, they don’t have any say over curriculum,” she said. “There’s plenty of evidence of preschool curriculum that deals with issues that have nothing to do with a child’s academic development – like gender, gender identity, careers, environmentalism, multiculturalism, feminism and all of that – things that don’t amount to a hill of beans as far as a child learning how to read.”

Effrem said the Pre-K Act extends a “really messed-up K-12 system” to include even younger, more vulnerable children.

“This is an expansion of the federal government into education when there really is no constitutional provision for it to do so.”

Note: Concerned individuals may contact their representatives and senators.

Acts of War

Acts of War

By Scott Ritter

The war between the United States and Iran is on. American taxpayer dollars are being used, with the permission of Congress, to fund activities which result in Iranians being killed and wounded, and Iranian property destroyed. This wanton violation of a nation’s sovereignty would not be tolerated if the tables were turned and Americans were being subjected to Iranian-funded covert actions which took the lives of Americans, on American soil, and destroyed American property and livelihood. Many Americans remain unaware of what is transpiring abroad in their name. Many of those who are cognizant of these activities are supportive of them, an outgrowth of misguided sentiment which holds Iran accountable for a list of grievances used by the U.S. government to justify the ongoing global war on terror. Iran, we are told, is not just a nation pursuing nuclear weapons, but is the largest state sponsor of terror in the world today.

Much of the information behind this is being promulgated by Israel, which has a vested interest in seeing Iran neutralized as a potential threat. But Israel is joined by another source, even more puzzling in terms of its broad-based acceptance in the world of American journalism: the Mujahadeen-e Khalk, or MEK, an Iranian opposition group sworn to overthrow the theocracy in Tehran. The CIA today provides material support to the actions of the MEK inside Iran. The recent spate of explosions in Iran, including a particularly devastating “accident” involving a military convoy transporting ammunition in downtown Tehran, appears to be linked to an MEK operation; its agents working inside munitions manufacturing plants deliberately are committing acts of sabotage which lead to such explosions. If CIA money and planning support are behind these actions, the agency’s backing constitutes nothing less than an act of war on the part of the United States against Iran.

The MEK traces its roots back to the CIA-orchestrated overthrow of the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadeg. Formed among students and intellectuals, the MEK emerged in the 1960s as a serious threat to the reign of Reza Shah Pahlevi. Facing brutal repression from the Shah’s secret police, the SAVAK, the MEK became expert at blending into Iranian society, forming a cellular organizational structure which made it virtually impossible to eradicate. The MEK membership also became adept at gaining access to positions of sensitivity and authority. When the Shah was overthrown in 1978, the MEK played a major role and for a while worked hand in glove with the Islamic Revolution in crafting a post-Shah Iran. In 1979 the MEK had a central role in orchestrating the seizure of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, and holding 55 Americans hostage for 444 days.

However, relations between the MEK and the Islamic regime in Tehran soured, and after the MEK staged a bloody coup attempt in 1981, all ties were severed and the two sides engaged in a violent civil war. Revolutionary Guard members who were active at that time have acknowledged how difficult it was to fight the MEK. In the end, massive acts of arbitrary arrest, torture and executions were required to break the back of mainstream MEK activity in Iran, although even the Revolutionary Guard today admits the MEK remains active and is virtually impossible to completely eradicate.

It is this stubborn ability to survive and operate inside Iran, at a time when no other intelligence service can establish and maintain a meaningful agent network there, which makes the MEK such an asset to nations such as the United States and Israel. The MEK is able to provide some useful intelligence; however, its overall value as an intelligence resource is negatively impacted by the fact that it is the sole source of human intelligence in Iran. As such, the group has taken to exaggerating and fabricating reports to serve its own political agenda. In this way, there is little to differentiate the MEK from another Middle Eastern expatriate opposition group, the Iraqi National Congress, or INC, which infamously supplied inaccurate intelligence to the United States and other governments and helped influence the U.S. decision to invade Iraq and overthrow Saddam Hussein. Today, the MEK sees itself in a similar role, providing sole-sourced intelligence to the United States and Israel in an effort to facilitate American military operations against Iran and, eventually, to overthrow the Islamic regime in Tehran.

The current situation concerning the MEK would be laughable if it were not for the violent reality of that organization’s activities. Upon its arrival in Iraq in 1986, the group was placed under the control of Saddam Hussein’s Mukhabarat, or intelligence service. The MEK was a heavily militarized organization and in 1988 participated in division-size military operations against Iran. The organization represents no state and can be found on the U.S. State Department’s list of terrorist organizations, yet since the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 the MEK has been under the protection of the U.S. military. Its fighters are even given “protected status” under the Geneva conventions. The MEK says that its members in Iraq are refugees, not terrorists. And yet one would be hard-pressed to find why the 1951 Geneva Convention on Refugees should confer refugee status on an active paramilitary organization that uses “refugee camps” inside Iraq as its bases.

The MEK is behind much of the intelligence being used by the International Atomic Energy Agency in building its case that Iran may be pursuing (or did in fact pursue in the past) a nuclear weapons program. The complexity of the MEK-CIA relationship was recently underscored by the agency’s acquisition of a laptop computer allegedly containing numerous secret documents pertaining to an Iranian nuclear weapons program. Much has been made about this computer and its contents. The United States has led the charge against Iran within international diplomatic circles, citing the laptop information as the primary source proving Iran’s ongoing involvement in clandestine nuclear weapons activity. Of course, the information on the computer, being derived from questionable sources (i.e., the MEK and the CIA, both sworn enemies of Iran) is controversial and its veracity is questioned by many, including me.

1 2 3 NEXT PAGE >>>

Towards a populist economics

Towards a populist economics

By Joseph Danison

As book titles go, The Shock Doctrine is arguably the most evocative in recent years. Naomi Klein’s reflection on the predatory behavior of the Neanderthal economics preached by the late Milton Friedman at the University of Chicago is certainly timely as we enter a period of economic shock and awe. As conditions worsen, we may become suggestible in our distress and willing to adopt solutions proposed by those who have dropped the economic bombs in the first place.

In truth, we suffer from economic Stockholm syndrome because we tend to identify with those who have abducted us and held us in debt peonage. Take for example the bail out of the Bear Stearns bucket shop on Wall Street. Numb and mesmerized, we stare slack jawed at Ben Bernanke and repeat the mantra: “Bail out the rich. Save the financial system. Bail out the rich. Save the financial system.”

It’s the equivalent of those in steerage and squalor voting to give those on the upper decks first crack at the lifeboats. And it’s the best thing to do under the circumstances! After all, they’re the smart ones, right? They’re the ones who understand the system, and if they go belly up, well . . . we’re all screwed, too, aren’t we? Realistically now, if we didn’t bail out Bear Stearns and other bucket shops, and banks, and Fannie and her brother, Freddie, the whole house of cards would come tumbling down and we’d all be selling apples on street corners, wouldn’t we?

We are a rare breed of obliging masochists, perfect schmoos for our latter day overseers, because we have made ourselves complicit in our own exploitation by adopting an American dream unknown to the generations that have come before. Once upon a time, this dream was renowned in the world for its simplicity and rectitude: work hard and follow the rules and you will succeed. That dream was transformed somewhere along the line through the magic of “trickle down economics” into something approximating: don’t work hard, work smart. Play the system and let somebody else carry the baggage. And don’t feel bad about it.

We have become a nation of investors and financial speculators in terms of our understanding of what constitutes economic activity. Better than 51 percent of American households own stocks, largely in the form of mutual funds, pension funds, and 401(k)s. The playground of the rich and famous, the stock market, became more appealing to the middle class around the time the world began to “flatten,” to use the idiotic metaphor of Tom Friedman, and the development of information technology led many to boast that the US economy was changing its blue collar character. The dirty old smokestack economy began to be shipped overseas. The new economy would be pretty much white collar, composed of software developers and paper shufflers of the information age, not to mention those who punched keys on cash registers.

In other words, in the information age, we were all going to become capitalists, more or less, investing in the productive activity of others, as we deluded ourselves with the idea that finance is a productive activity. The financial sector began to account for a larger and larger share of our GDP as the Wall Street geniuses designed ever more arcane “financial products,” Alan Greenspan kept interest rates low, and the home owning class began to view housing as another investment opportunity. We thought we could leverage ourselves into the lifestyles of the rich and famous in the new economy with a newly structured American dream.

Welcome to the new economy, and if you’re looking for someone to blame, look in the mirror. What is your American dream? Let me guess. You were planning to retire on the proceeds of your investments and rental income, maybe supplemented by a Social Security check, and an occasional lottery windfall. Well, you’re in for another episode of the shock doctrine when you finally realize that the rich are different from you and me. The rich live in an exclusive club and your McMansion does not qualify you for membership. When the ship goes down, they will sail away and leave you thrashing in the cold, dark sea. And it was you who gave their interests priority because you never understood what your interests and the interests of the American people generally are.

The stock markets will crash, and with it your American dream. Bet on it. Many of the rich you admire are doing just that. Take Jim Rogers, for example, the commodity king. He lives in Singapore. His kids are learning Mandarin. He’s very short the American dream and long on China. He could care less about the American people because in his mind and the minds of the global elite the earth’s billions of people are a faceless mass whose IQ taken together does not add up to the collective IQ of his own group, numbering in the mere single digit millions, who together own about 85 percent of the world’s wealth.

Follow the pied pipers of finance into the maw of your own financial oblivion if you must, but before we become too dazed and confused, remember that it doesn’t have to be this way. The founders of our republic employed a phrase that was not mere political rhetoric. They designed a system intended for use by “we the people.” That system was co-opted long ago by “we the privileged elite.” They did this because they were able to convince the ignorant mass of people that it was in their best interest that the financial system should be in private hands . . . their hands.

By now it should be clear to those people who are awake and taking notes that the Federal Reserve Banking System is a privately owned and operated financial system, not subject to oversight by the people’s government. It has never been audited nor will it ever be audited so that the people may know with certainty exactly how it operates. It is a temple of mystery in which the wealthy worship their self-interest. It exists in defiance of the spirit and letter of the law as defined in our Constitution.

By now, it should be clear, or becoming clear, that this privatized financial system is a colossal failure. It failed before in a spectacular way in 1929. Prior to that, before the inauguration of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, the private financial system of the 19th Century failed regularly and with doleful consequences for we the people. This was why the Congress, asleep at the wheel, passed the Federal Reserve Act in the first place; because they were told it would stabilize things and prevent the boom and bust cycle that did such harm, though it never seemed to upset the apple carts of the rich. It was the acolytes of the rich who jumped from windows and stained the pavement, not the rich themselves.

As the shock builds and reverberates in every sector of the economy and around the world, bear in mind that it does not have to happen this way. Congress could reverse the malevolent economic trends within a month by acting to nationalize the private banking system to serve we the people as the founders intended.

There are a number of thinkers working today to create awareness of a populist economics that has been suppressed and forgotten, mostly notably Ellen Hodgson Brown, whose book, The Web of Debt, describes the solution with remarkable clarity. Others include the pioneer Stephan Zarlenga at the American Monetary Institute. Richard Cook whose articles can be readily found on the web is another voice of clarity and compassion.

There are two overriding factors that make a truly populist economics possible, however. The first is nationalism, a patriotic love of the constitutional republic bequeathed to us by our founders. The second is a moral concern for all the people, a sentiment that is conspicuously lacking among the wealthy, men such as Jim Rogers, and other internationalists who have jumped ship and abandoned traditional sentiments such as devotion to one’s own nation.

But, there are those in the wealthy elite, whose love of country cannot be impugned, men such as T. Boone Pickens who appeared before Congress recently and proclaimed loudly that he was an American patriot first and only secondly an oil man, as he offered to Congress the Pickens Plan to resolve our energy crisis and revive our job market through wind power.

A truly populist economics does not aim to “soak the rich” with some variation of a New Deal wealth redistribution plan because the rich are people, too, many of them, looking for solutions to our national crisis. A populist economics does not depend upon an income tax, a mechanism of wealth transfer from producers to investors and speculators, those who own our national debt, many of whom are not Americans, whether they hold US passports or not.

The economic debacle that is staring us in the face must be seen as an opportunity for the American people to begin thinking for themselves. It is time for the doors of the mysterious money temple, called the Federal Reserve, to be flung open, and for a national debate about money to begin. We can all be shocked back to the basics of our constitutional heritage, our true patriotic concern for the general welfare, and our creative can-do American ingenuity. Or, we can give up on the promise of democratic institutions and surrender to the hostile takeover of those who dream of the ultimate privatization: the fascist ideologues of an imperial presidency and a global New World Order.

Your Tax Dollars at Work

Your Tax Dollars at Work

By Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

28/07/08 “Lew Rockwell” — – Frédéric Bastiat famously observed that the State costs us in ways we can see and ways we cannot see. Economists tend to focus on the second type because they elude public perceptions. What inventions are we denied because of regulations? What might have been done with the resources that are diverted in taxes or higher prices due to protectionism? The answers demonstrate that, because of intervention, we are worse off than we know.

Sometimes, however, we should also look at the potentially seen costs of the State, if only because the State doesn’t want us to see those either. These are the direct destructions caused by some State activity, most especially war. Seeing war in photographs changes things. It causes us to observe the State’s war and what it is doing to people: us and them.

This is why the State doesn’t want pictures of US wounded or dead circulating in public. The media mostly obey. Did you ever notice that? You are being shown only what the government wants you to see. The State does not want you to see dead soldiers or suffering families of those shot and killed.

Instead the State wants you to believe that the Iraq War is about patriotism, 9/11, national pride, the campaign to make you safer, the administering of justice, manhood and courage, and all the rest of the cover-ups for what war really is: murder and destruction paid for by you and me and made legal solely because it is the State and not someone else doing it.

Take a picture of dead soldier, or the child of a killed Iraqi family, broadcast it on your blog, and what happens? Photo journalist Zoriah Miller has found out. He was kicked out of his “embed,” which is the name for the pack of journalists permitted to travel with a group of soldiers and report what those in command want reported. Afterwards, he was prohibited from traveling in any Marine-patrolled area of Iraq. The military command worked to get him kicked out of the country altogether.

Yes, it all seems very pre-modern and primitive, and contrary to all our pieties about the free flow of information, the first amendment and all that. But from the government’s point of view, it is running the war, and it should control what people know about it to the same extent it controls everything else about the war. As a result, after 4,000 dead soldiers, countless hundreds of thousands of Iraqi dead, millions of wounded on all sides, there are only a handful of bloody pictures to be found anywhere.

Amazing isn’t it, just how effective the State can actually be when it cares intensely about something? And why does it care so much? One reason, they say, is that photos provide the enemy with information about the effectiveness of their attack and the response. In effect, that’s like claiming that anything but approved propaganda amounts to subversion and treason. In any case, we can be pretty darn sure that when the enemy makes a hit, the enemy knows about it.

Another claim – and actually they have said the same thing from World War I until the present day – their main interest is in protecting the families of the dead from shock, privacy violation, and humiliation. Maybe that sounds plausible, but another way to look at it is that the State is most especially interested in continuing to foster the myth that these kids are dying for their country, and there are no more important people to convince of that than the parents of the dead.

But actually, only the most naïve could possibly believe that this is what the rules are wholly about. They want to protect the rest of us from reality. The Vietnam war lost massive support at home when the military loosened up on photojournalism. The handful of pictures we have from World War II all date from a period after FDR too bowed to public pressure.

At one level, it is pathetic that we need pictures to underscore what war is all about. But since the ancient world, the masses at large have proven susceptible to believing every myth about the grandeur and glory of war. We imagine that we as a people are going abroad to bring justice, truth, and liberty to some unenlightened and threatening foreign tribe. This has been the constant theme since the ancient world.

Then we see the pictures. It turns out that the unenlightened tribe is a collection of individuals pretty much like us. They are made of flesh and blood, have families, worship God, and struggle with pretty much the same issues that all people everywhere have always struggled with. There is no great glory in killing them, nor in being killed by them.

But the State says that sometimes war is necessary. If our masters really believe that, why hide its costs? Let us see precisely what we are getting into here. If it is justified, let us see why and how, and let us observe what we are giving up in exchange for the just war.

The truth is that the State must hide not only its wars but all of its activities. It hides its inflation. It hides the effects of its taxation and its protectionism. It fears anyone who draws the cause-and-effect connection between its activities and their deleterious consequences for the rest of us. It is the most destructive force in our world. Because that truth is so momentous, the State does everything possible to hide the smallest drop of blood.

The State wants us to all go on with our lives, believing it, loving it, and seeing only the pictures it wants us to see.

Pull the Plug on the War State

Pull the Plug on the War State

By Charley Reese

27/07/08 “Anti War” — — Hopefully, the next president, whoever he is, will have sense enough to realize that an anti-missile site in Eastern Europe is not worth rekindling the Cold War with Russia.

Though the press pays little attention to it, the Bush administration has already practically wrecked relations with Russia by insisting on adding the Eastern European countries to NATO and siting his anti-missile system in the Czech Republic and in Poland. The Russians are right that it represents a threat to their security.

President Bush’s lame excuse that the system is designed to protect Europe from Iranian missiles is no doubt another deliberate lie. I can’t think of any reason whatsoever for Iran to attack Europe, and I’m sure the Iranians can’t, either. Iran hasn’t attacked anybody for more than 100 years. They would have absolutely nothing to gain by firing a few missiles at Europe. It doesn’t make any sense at all.

Nor does it make any sense to add the small countries of Eastern Europe to NATO. This was a war-fighting alliance set up at the end of World War II specifically to deter and, if necessary, go to war with the Red Army. The Soviet Union set up its own alliance, the Warsaw Pact.

When the Soviet Union collapsed, Russia withdrew its army from Eastern Europe and dissolved the Warsaw Pact. The United States should have dissolved NATO. Its sole purpose vanished with the Soviet Union. It has no enemy, unless fools in the U.S. create one. The American politicians have used it in the Yugoslavian Civil War, and now has it involved in the Afghanistan insurgency. Why the Europeans put up with this nonsense is beyond me.

As for including little countries, that’s a strategic blunder. Do you think that if the Russians one day launched nuclear missiles at the United States that Poland and Lithuania would go to war against their large neighbor? Will France become a nation of teetotalers?

In fact, including small countries in military alliances is worthless posturing. All you do is allow the little country to get you into trouble by its bad behavior. The little country is confident that its big ally will rescue it if it goes too far in antagonizing its larger neighbors. It’s like a spoiled brat with a bodyguard. Sixty years after its founding, Israel is still at war with most of its neighbors precisely because it has no incentive to make a sensible peace. Why should it? It has its American attack dog. The only peace treaties it has signed are with Egypt and Jordan, both of which the U.S. bribed to make peace. Bribe or not, in both cases it’s a cold peace.

Believe it or not, we are not at war with any nation at the present. We made war on Iraq, but that has long since become nothing but an occupation. We are occupying or trying to occupy Afghanistan, but other than that, we are not at war. Why then do we need military alliances? Why do we need troops in Korea, Japan and Germany? Or, I hasten to add, Iraq and the Persian Gulf?

President Bush’s war on terror is a false metaphor, and a dangerous one at that. There is no terrorist army or air force. There are some gangs of criminals. What the president did when he adopted this specious metaphor about a war on terror was to commit the United States to perpetual war. Ask your local warmonger how he defines victory in the war on terror. Ask why when Iraq was very violent we couldn’t leave, and now that it’s less violent, we can’t leave. Ask him how he defines victory in Iraq or in Afghanistan.

We really have neither a republic nor a democracy. We have a war state and an empire. We should pull the plug on both.

“My fellow citizens, we are embroiled in the greatest financial crisis our nation has ever faced

“My fellow citizens, we are embroiled in the

greatest financial crisis our nation has ever faced

and we will have to take emergency action to keep

the entire system from melting down.”

“The banking industry is walking on pins and needles, hoping the bad news doesn’t become a self-fulfilling prophecy that drives bank depositors to demand withdrawal of funds en masse…….. There is a high likelihood the American banking system will fail, and you will likely be the last to know. The more panicked you get, and withdraw funds, the worse the implosion. In an effort to avert runs on the banks, will the news media delay informing the public of the current dire situation, which appears to be an inevitable system-wide banking collapse?” (MORE)