Iran's next in line... when will the rain of terror start?

.... most likely courtesy of the US and/or UK. The terrorist group Jundulluh has claimed responsibility for the attack which killed some 30 people including 6 senior Iranian military personnel. 

What is Jundullah anyway? Even the sanitized wikipedia entry lists alleged international support and funding, from countries including the US, UK, Saudi Arabia, Sweden and Pakistan. Iran is already accusing the US and UK of involvement in this latest bombing, and this history of US/UK etc involvement appears solid. The degree of US funding appears to be around $400,000,000. Even the very establishment-friendly Daily Telegraph national newspaper published an article in 2007 in which links between CIA and Jundullah, as well as black operations to destablize Iran's government were approved and sanctioned by the Bush Administration. Significantly, this group is not included in the State Department's FTO (foreign terrorist organization) list, even though it is far more active in bombing outrages and other incidents of terrorism than most of the other organizations listed. 



Then there is this article in the UK Daily Telegraph. A quote extracted:

Quote:

The operations are controversial because they involve dealing with movements that resort to terrorist methods in pursuit of their grievances against the Iranian regime. In the past year there has been a wave of unrest in ethnic minority border areas of Iran, with bombing and assassination campaigns against soldiers and government officials.

So, what is the difference between the activities attributed to "al Qaida' and those associated with Jundullah? Bombings and assassinations are all terrorist acts, regardless of the identity of the perps are. But is "al Qaida" any less involved with the US government than Jundullah? Maybe not. Osama bin Laden is (was?) is alleged to be the leader of "al Qaida", but the sworn testimony of whistleblower and former FBI Turkish-American translator Sibel Edmonds alleges that Osama bin Laden was working for the US Government right up until 9/11. Ms Edmonds' direct quote:

Quote:

“I have information about things that our government has lied to us about. I know. For example, to say that since the fall of the Soviet Union we ceased all of our intimate relationship with Bin Laden and the Taliban - those things can be proven as lies, very easily, based on the information they classified in my case, because we did carry very intimate relationship with these people, and it involves Central Asia, all the way up to September 11.”

Of course the mainstream US media has not reported on this story, presumably because it makes the "boogeyman out to get us" which they have been promoting 24/7 for 8 years appears more like the "boogeyman who is fighting for certain interests within the US government".

So, there is a welter of evidence that the US (UK and others) supports and funds terrorist groups, on the tax payer...(that makes us all guilty of funding terrorism). It's yet one more in thousands of similar pieces of evidence that the "war on terrorism" is nothing of the kind, and should be viewed with the utmost skepticism. It appears that the previous administration were controlled by thugs, and by default, so is the current one, in that the groups we accuse of doing terrible things are doing it on our dollar.... and we're being fed the usual pack of lies to justify the continuation of state-sponsored thuggery.

I have to add that despite the fact that the Iranian government under Ahmadinejad and the fundamentalist clerics is not exactly a paragon of decency (!!), it remains inappropriate that the nation of Iran remains singled out as the target for the next Israeli/Neocon demand for a war of aggression. As with Iraq and Afghanistan , it will not be the *government* of that country which will face a rain of terror from the skies.... it will be the blameless Iranian people.

The war on drugs... BOGUS!

In 2001, the Portuguese government decriminalized the possession/use of most "recreational" drugs, including marijuana, heroin and methamphetamines. Statistics reveal that since then, fewer people are turning to drug use, and the number of people seeking treatment for drug abuse has soared.... on other words, the policy has proven to be a resounding success.

In the US (and many other places in the world), the Portuguese approach has been roundly ignored. Why is this?

If the powers-that- be really are concerned with maintaining the health of the nation in the area of drug abuse, then nobody has paid a blind piece of attention to this (and other) studies. It appears that either
(a) the powers-that-be don't give a flying fuck about public health issues, or
(b) the powers-that-be don't give a flying fuck about public health issues unless profitable to wellplaced corporations, or
(c) the powers-that-be keep things the way they are because of laziness, inertia and/or inefficiency, or
(d) the powers-that-be keep things the way they are because changing things would mean 'loss of face" for certain high profile people who have championed the so-called "war on drugs", or
(e) the powers-that-be keep things the way they are because going Portugal's way would likely see a decrease in revenue streams for certain wellplaced parties who benefit from the illegality of these substances, or
(f) the powers-that-be keep things the way they are because America is very traditionalist in approach, and old habits die hard, or
(g) the powers-that-be keep things the way they are because drug abuse is rampant amongst inner city minorities, and we are a nation which actively maintains "institutionalized racism". A way of keeping the black and latino communities down is to keep them fighting amongst themselves, and the proliferation of street gangs is a most effective vehicle for such. The story of widespread cocaine importation in the 1980s which was written up in the San Jose Mercury, and the deliberate setting up of crack houses in numerous cities simultaneously and specifically targeting the black communities, is witness to this.

Lunar Landings

40 years ago, the Apollo program climaxed with the first manned mission to the Moon, Apollo XI. Today, there a few people who claim that this program did not take place, and the whole thing was staged in a studio in Burbank, or wherever. For those debunkers, consider this:

The Soviets, for military and security reasons, were closely monitoring the Apollo program at a point when the US and USSR were locked into the arms race and the Cold War, and the prestige of being the first to the Moon and back was enormous. Had the Apollo program been faked in even the slightest way, the Russians would have jumped on it and exposed the fraud for the world's media, to embarrass the US at a time when bogged down in a long, unpopular war in Vietnam; the Soviets would have so loved that! The Soviets reluctantly accepted they had lost the race to the Moon.

Then, there were 6 more successful lunar missions, and also the "successful failure" of Apollo XIII, until the program was abandoned some 2 years later. We would have had to pull the wool over the Soviets' eyes in 7 consecutive, incredibly expensive fakes. The Russians remained mute.

Yes, the Apollo landings did happen, of that there is no doubt. And best wishes and happy 40th Anniversary to all who participated in this wonderful pioneering and peaceful adventure.

Iranian election, and the events of 56 years ago...

One banner which reappears time and again in the recent election protests: "Coup 1953, Coup 2009". Iranians (who like other middle easterners appear to have longer attention spans than we westerners) haven't forgotten how 56 years ago, their parliamentary democracy was violently overthrown in CIA led coup, Operation TP-AJAX, to be replaced by a vicious dictatorship, in order to further the profit margins of private US and European (oil) corporations. 

Obama even acknowledged this event in a recent speech in Cairo to the world's muslim community where he maintained that the US "isn't at war with the world's Islamic community" ...  honestly... (!!). But then he admonished Iran regarding "behaving themselves in the global community", as regards their alleged (but unproven) program to manufacture nuclear weapons. Such a flagrantly duplicitous statement doesn't go down well with Iranians, makes the US appear even more arrogant and is more of a diplomatic faux pas than helpful. The US (and Iranian) people would obviously prefer stable relations between the two countries, but as far as the US (and current Iranian powers-that-be) are concerned, that seems to be entirely a different matter.

Its probably more about flowing testosterone on both sides, and the paranoia of "losing face", or seen to be "weak".... not to mention the recurring problem of hardline religious conservatives such as Iranian president Ahmedinejad, and others who shall remain nameless

Auditing the "Federal" Reserve....

HR 1207, introduced by Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) has now got 224 sponsors, with Rep. Kucinich (D) OH being the 218th, thus taking HR 1207 out of Committee to a full debate in Congress. All indications are that this Bill is going to have a rough time, especially in the Senate, and will probably get defeated, and Federal Reserve is marshaling all the lobbying power at their disposal to keep this bill from becoming law.

This bill is seeking accountability and transparency re. the "Federal" Reserve. Why would such a standard concept in an official institution be seen as such a threat? What kind of practices might be threatened (or even stopped) by the legal requirement of such accountability?

My speculation on this, is that because of the (private, non-Federal) nature of the "Federal" Reserve Bank, it will be ruled that Congress has no jurisdiction over the rules and laws governing how the "Fed" works, and the Bill will be quietly dropped for such technical reasons. Of course, the national media will ignore the issue and accuse those who level any criticism of the "Fed" as being wacko conspiracy theorists. Such is the current state of play in the corporate media arena.

Piracy....

The Indian Ocean is massive and thus its impossible to know exactly what goes on the recent piracy off the East African coast. However, we believe mostly what we want to believe, prefer to believe, or are more comfortable believing, and what story gets the endless repetition in the national media. The clear winner in the story stakes, is that these Somalis are a bunch of opportunists without a cause. The probability that piracy emerged as a result of foreign corporate irresponsibility/criminality combined with the lack of formal policing/coastguards in the waters off the Somali coast, is heresy. 

The squashing of unorthodoxy has long been a national pastime, and its never been more popular as in the last few years.

The pot calling the kettle... part 24539

The paranoia about Iran and North Korea is absurd and overblown beyond all proportion. The wars in which both nations have been involved in modern history have been local affairs, against their neighbors; Iraq in the 1980s and South Korea in the 1950s respectively. In Iran's case, they were attacked by US ally Iraq. Neither Iran nor NK have a current intent, or a past track record of far-reaching imperialism accompanied by wanton violence, and neither have the means to even fantasize along those lines, let alone accomplish such. The temptation for NK to develop nuclear weapons, and the possibility that Iran might want to follow suit, is to lessen the chances of being attacked, end of story. The US (and allies) have a track record of initiating dozens of wars in recent decades.. this cannot be denied.. and it is difficult or impossible to rationalize "national security" as a reason for any of them. 

The likelihood of Iran attacking a European country, or the United States, is as far fetched as aliens landing on the W.H. lawn. The possibility of the US, or Israel, (or a US led coalition) attacking Iran is very real however, and the neocons have been itching for such a conflict since 1999. We're addicted to making war, but we are in denial about it.

Some people are after a war with North Korea? (!!)

If NK (or rather lunatic Kim and his crazy government) is a genuine security threat to the region (as opposed to a bit of testosterone-induced bluster with the odd nuke test and missile launch), then perhaps the nations in that region should deal with it. Perhaps they should organize their own coalition of the willing, issue a "disarm or else" ultimatum, and go to war if as a last resort. I say the US should stay out of it this time around. We're already in two endless, major wars against countries on the far side of the globe, neither of which were a proven threat to US national security, and which have cost our tanking economy $1 trillion so far. We can't afford a 3rd simultaneous war, especially if it spreads and drags other countries in (no names). We've also proven ourselves a lousy, godawful global policeman for the last few decades... so lets stop digging that hole any deeper. If we lay off this time around, maybe we may gain a little bit of respect and regain some friendships (perhaps even make some, yikes what a concept), after the last 8 years debacle. But maybe we're so addicted to conflict that the powers-that-be won't be able to resist another fight.

Bloomberg, and his weasel brigade....

Regarding the recent arrest of patriot Luke Rudkowski, after asking "His Excellency", NYC Mayor Bloomberg a difficult, but relevant question:

What pathetic little weasels Bloomberg and his cronies are. It is becoming more and more apparent that our alleged "representatives" are doing their utmost to insulate themselves from the people they are *allegedly* representing. This denotes either complicity in criminal activity (thus questions from the public are unwelcome), or their opinion of ordinary people is so low that they cannot stoop to addressing the questions of what, in their kinds, are the "unwashed masses". It is also abundantly clear, all over the world, that police departments' priorities are to protect these mega-criminals from challenges by the people, thus further insulating them from the awkward questions that are impossible to answer without telling blatant lies and obvious fabrications.

This kind of police activity is becoming de rigeur here in the West: one famous case last year involved a journalism student, in a *privately run class*, asking Sen. John Kerry an awkward question: the police present in the room were obviously under instruction to use force to quell any verbal challenges, and the man was instantly assaulted with a taser, without warning, repeatedly, while retrained on the ground, merely for using his First Amendment rights as a citizen of the United States, for asking a question which has not been answered satisfactorily (by Kerry of anyone else), to date, in any public forum. As the West degenerates into various degrees of proto-fascism and oligarchy, expect more of this in the coming years. Perhaps another false flag terrorist attack is on the cards, in order to speed up the general process of the destruction of freedom.

If a politician cannot, or refuses to answer questions from the public in a representative democracy, then he has no right to be in office. So the question now is, if the public are now forbidden from asking questions, do we still have any semblance of a real democracy? The answer is a clear, resounding, NO.

Psychopaths are us?

Anyone who *orders* torture must have some degree of psychopathic personality disorder, at the least, especially in the knowledge that torture produces garbage "intelligence". Torture is fundamentally against any principles of civilized human conduct. Those who *execute* methods of torture would, of course, benefit from having a psychopathic kind of personality, but the consequences of disobeying orders is likely to be considered more important than any moral issues raised by torturing people; in the military, shit rolls downhill, (aka chain of command).

There are people in very senior positions in this administration who exhibit psychopathic traits. Furthermore, when many of the neoconservatives within (and associated with) the Bush Administration have a blatant track record of hatred and phobia towards arabs and muslims, and that a principle aim of the neoconservatives within this administration is to demonize the muslim community worldwide..... it's hardly surprising that torture would be part of their M.O. They probably even derive pleasure from the knowledge that they have the power and motivation to inflict great pain from the comfort of their offices and executive suites.

Fred Phelps and inverted Christianity...

Today, gays and lesbians protested outside the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka KS, bastion of the "Rev". Fred Phelps' agenda of bile and hatred spewing. Its amazingly odd that such bizarre interpretations of Christianity can gain mainstream traction...but I guess in Kansas, anything goes?

These hatemongers cherrypick the bible looking for whatever fits their preordained agenda, while ignoring the legion of material that contradicts, or is inconvenient. If these folk are so entangled with following Biblical dogma to the letter, then they should perhaps be demonstrating other such "abominations" such as working on the Sabbath, or eating shellfish etc. Why this medieval old Testament focus on gay and lesbian people, especially considering that Jesus himself never said anything against homosexuality?

Cherrypicking the most convenient or conclusion-friendly facts is the same method used by the 9/11 Commission regarding their fatally flawed "investigation" into the September 11, 2001 attacks, or the Bush Administration's methods when it came to justifying their preordained war against Iraq. The pre-selection of material that fits a pre-ordained conclusion, or agenda (while ignoring everything that doesn't fit) is the classic methodology of bad science. But since we live in times of a War Against Science™ on many fronts, such manipulation and distortions of reality are par for the course.

McCain and the media vultures

I have no love for McCain, and I really dread the possibility of a "President McCain"... but this nascent media circus re. a "possible affair with a lobbyist" is as much BS as the other "sex scandal" that everyone was obsessing about 9 years ago. IF McCain had had an affair with a lobbyist, so fucking what? It's McCain's (alleged) business, his wife's business, and the lobbyist's (alleged) business, and nobody else's! When we get so bent out of shape regarding gossipy trivia, an indiscretion in the PRIVATE LIFE of a politician (and not even proven), while all the real gnarly stuff gets glossed over and ignored, things are in a really sad way.

Our nation's consciousness is a mess, and our priorities seem to be more ass backwards than ever before.

Obama for "change"? Pull the other one!

"CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN.... STAND FOR CHANGE" .....

Amongst the current crop of front-running candidates, who is going to represent and support "change"? Obama talks part of the talk, and makes it appear on the surface as if he is for the people...(he's damned good at it, he is an excellent orator). However, if he prevails in November, he will not walk any of the walk (let alone half of it). He's 2 moves in front of the rest of us, and the muscle that will be assembled in an Obama White House are 5 moves in front of him.

There will be no change, apart from the spokesperson in the form of the CEO. It will remain business as usual. Another 4 years of the current "in pur faces" approach could result in civil unrest, and the most effective way of defusing that potential is to get behind a charismatic intelligent person with communication skills (albeit insincere ones), i.e. someone who can string a sentence together, to present a fresh, more velvet gloved approach to towards whatever kind of society that the powers-that-be would like to realize, or impose upon us.

Having said this about Obama... Clinton would be several degrees worse. I also believe that the majority of America isn't ready for a black person of any gender, or a woman of any race (sadly).

Hence my prediction that McCain will win in November, by fair means or foul.

Let's see.

Election Observations....

There is no doubt about the Democratic Party's ability to select two candidates to run for president and vice president. However, can a nontraditional/unconventional team consisting of a white woman and a black man win the hearts of "middle America" over a traditional/conventional Republican pair; I have my doubts, unfortunately. I don't have a list of democratic "electables": any candidate which represents the base, or core values of the party (for example Dennis Kucinich), as opposed to "Republican-Lite", have been been ignored by the media, and thus been denied the publicity and face recognition required for any hope as a front-runner. The lion's share of the attention has been given to Clinton and Obama. Similarly on the the Republican side, the candidate closest to traditional values of the party, Ron Paul, has been actively shut out of the circus by the media.

The majority of the voting public are starved for the time to do the necessary reading/research into the strengths and weaknesses of the candidates. Had these two designated outsiders (Paul and Kucinich) been given the same degree of attention and publicity given by the media to the favorites (Romney/Huckabee/McCain Clinton/Obama), then maybe we would see their percentages up in a similar range? I guess we will never know, because the media will continue to ignore them. Why does the media ignore them?.... now that's a hard one to know, but I very much doubt that "merit" comes within several light years of being a parameter in that equation.......

NewsMax: virtual toilet paper that I wouldn't wipe my virtual ass with.

Hands up... who is getting spammed relentlessly by NewsMax?

To paraphrase John Cleese's retort to Manuel in Fawlty Towers, these folks are such a "waste of (cyber)space". Their latest garbage is beyond ridiculous, or what.. to claim that the National Intelligence Estimate report on the lack of a nuclear weapons program in Iran is the work of "Iranian extremists" score highly on the "giggle factor" index. So Ahmedinejad and company are the CIA's paymasters? Tell that to the Israelis! (rolls eyes).

My little morning greeting to these imbeciles at NewsMax went as follows.

Good Morning Appeasers,

If you really want people to see the world the way you see it, how about delivering some genuine news items, rather than episodic, ridiculous conspiracy theories and cheap Bush Admininstration propaganda. Why talk down to the US public as if everyone is a bunch of total morons? You output is reminiscent of a hybrid of Baghdad Bob, Joseph Goebbels and "Dick and Jane". I guess thats par for the course re. the likes of Bill O'Reilly and company: see who can shout the loudest, content be damned!

So please quit spamming me. Thankyou.

Bloggulator (sic).

Maybe, someone, somewhere on the payroll of Ruddy's little "Weekly World News" wannabe empire, might wake up.

Democracy... It's sadly over in the United States, no doubt.

To what extent does "publicly elected government" (as is popularly perceived) affect peoples' lives, as compared with powerful privately run institutions? Unelected bodies, for example the banking system, the mortgage and credit card companies, credit rating organizations, corporate employers, health management organizations etc. etc., have a huge influence in directing and shaping people's everyday existence, and the less a person earns , the greater extent that these institutions have in inflicting their will, which runs the gamut from "minor inconvenience", all the way to what is becoming known as "financial terrorism".

The main contact most people have directly with "government" comes around in April each year, when taxtime comes around. Apart from that (as well as any need to contact the emergency services), contact with "government" remains largely indirect. And then, one has to examine "government", to determine on whose behalf this "tool of force" (as you call "government") is largely acting. The overwhelming evidence is that "government", when not serving itself, is almost always acting in the service of big business. The great unwashed public (peasantry?) is being cut out of the equation. If you look behind the new Massaschusetts auto-insurance laws, as you mention, the most pragmatic guess would point to lobbying on behalf of the insurance industry, to influence the state government into passing those very regulations.

Private enterprise/corporate America is affecting and controlling people's lives not only directly, via its own rules and regulations, but also in its ever increasing ability to control/run government. This is Mussolini's fascism in action to a tee, although many people would instantly cover their ears on hearing the other "F-word" used to describe what they still might see as a bona fide "democratic republic" (50% of the people are still under the impression that their votes actually do count for something)! We now have a uniform coalescence of state and corporate power, where there is little to distinguish between the two. Bland feel-good references to the "people's representatives", when referring to "elected government", are becoming yet more unrealistic and redundant in time; an individual and collective denial of the failure of democracy.

Google and Censorship......

I just "googled" the author Sander Hicks. Hicks is a playwright, journalist, songwriter and activist. He founded Soft Skull Press, Inc. in 1996, the same company that released the unauthorized biography of George W. Bush, (the author of which died shortly afterwards). Hicks was the lead singer in the band "White Collar Crime "from 1996 to 2003. He has some controversial political viewpoints, something that is now being increasingly regarded as suspicious (or even criminal) in these days of raging paranoia on the part of government/corporate.

The first two google entries for "Sander Hicks" display a warning: [B]"this site might damage your computer"[/B]. (!!!!!). Try it! How the hell can a website "damage a computer", according to the great gods of google? What kind of crack have the googly-mooglies been smoking now? If you try to go to Sander Hicks' website via Google, it won't even let you in (!), instead displaying a dire warning *not to go there*. So naturally, I went there. It's a perfectly normal working website, and my computer, OS and browser remains predictably intact. The site didn't crash, or spew a load of obnoxious pop-ups, or anything else sinister or weird. There are numerous websites on the net that *are* unstable, and will hang your machine., which google doesn't mention....

Can anyone shed any light on the latest round of google paranoia and arbitrary lockouts? Are there any other sites out there which come with similar warnings? The Sander Hicks censorship appears to be politically motivated. Is this the shape of the "net to come", when people with unconventional viewpoints have their webpages blocked or are subject to phony warnings, courtesy of the overlords? When the internet is subject to this kind of crap, the rest of society will probably follow suit.. down the toilet.

Giuliani: Villain of 9/11, never a hero.

Mr. Giuliani is on very shaky ground when it comes to talking about terrorism: his Mayoral office misled New Yorkers as to the extreme dangers from the toxic dust fallout from the 9/11 attacks, to the extent that thousands of people are now suffering chronic and severe illnesses, including mesothelial cancers; several hundred have died already, including a number of members of the FDNY and NYPD.

If anything, Giuliani's office's actions have exaggerated the toll of the attacks, and could result in more premature deaths during the coming decade than what happened on the day of 9/11 itself. The dangers from breathing such a dense atmospheric suspension of sub-micron particles of asbestos, PCBs, mercury, lead, cadmium and other toxic elements and compounds are well known to his office (and others), and any action taken by Giuliani and company in lying to, or misleading New Yorkers as to the safety of the air and water should be regarded as criminal negligence and gross dereliction of duty. People should be charged for multiple counts of manslaughter at the very least, and that includes not only Giuliani and his complicit officials, but also parties in the White House (James Connaughton et al) who ordered the EPA to lie about the dust, even altering the scientific data gathered on the toxicity/content of the dust to make the situation appear much safer than in reality.

This issue must be raised by the mainstream media in the coming election campaign, but to date, virtual silence still reigns. If the American public were aware of this scandal to just 5% of the extent they know about, for example, Paris Hilton's antics, Giuliani would never again be regarded as the "hero of the 9/11 attacks, but instead, one of the villains.

High School Cannon Fodder

Teenage kids are being increasingly targeted as cannon fodder by aggressive recruitment drives by the Department of Defense. Are these children wise to the ways of the world? Hell, no way. Ethnic minorities and working-class whites are undoubtedly in the bull's eye - the military is sold to them as an attractive and even glamorous mode of employment that's way more exciting than flipping hamburgers or punching cash registers, in an employment world where institutionalized racism still hangs on... (please excuse the hint of rhetoric there). Many of these kids really do believe the recruitment hype... including the one about "proudly fighting for America in the name of freedom and justice". I have no bother with that concept at all, if were real and sincere, that is, when it refers to an occasion when America gets genuinely attacked. (Of course I hope none of us here will ever see that happen).

Will we ever see the Department of Defense truly live up to its name? The last two times America was attacked, Pearl Harbor and 9/11, we weren't exactly defended... (on 9/11, the USAF was deliberately stood down by Pentagon brass ?!!) .... and the other numerous wars over the last 60 years in which we have gotten into have had little, at best, to do with "defending America and liberty". The Iraq war, for example, is a particularly egregious example of how our troops have been betrayed by their government, and used as a private security force in the service of big business, and for promoting a political doctrine, which has nothing to do with the notion of "fighting for our country".

Al Gore! Environmentalism... libertarianism... big government, small government... rules and regulations... ouch!

Al Gore's son has just been busted for being a naughty boy. The nanny media predictably get all antsy about it and lump all environmentalists alongside him..... How weird things are getting:

There are some folks out there who must hate the Earth to such an extent that the slightest faux-pas by a prominent environmentalist, or a member of his family, or spokesperson is met with a shower of verbal bricks. Weird... what's so "wrong" with this planet (apart from the corporate polluters whose short term profit requirements reign supreme over every other consideration), that some people can't resist throwing bile at those who are more comfortable with a "responsible stewardship" approach? Nobody complains about running a company properly... but as soon as "looking after the planet in a sensible fashion" gets an airing, so many folk get bent out of shape. What is that all about anyway? In my book, the term "tree-hugger", as a simple example, should be a compliment,, but it's always used as an insult, or for "name-calling" intent. That is so weird.

Earth is the only place we've got.. anywhere else, (if it exists) is unknown and inaccessible. What's so wrong (or embarrassing, etc etc?) about supporting the health of the Earth for the sake of those who follow us? One would have thought that everyone with kids would be super-concerned.... but apparently not. Perhaps the animosity is generated by the necessary regulations that come with "responsible stewardship", and that these rules, regulations and laws often have a habit of getting in the way of the free market. I am no fan of big government myself, and some of my more Libertarian views get severely tested by this issue. Libertarianism is all well and good, but in the process of claiming ones rights and liberties, is it correct that we trash the rights and liberties of others en masse? Civilization is always a series of compromises.. and Alex Jones should recognize that. I appreciate much of what A.J. et al have to contribute.. but their stance on global warming and refusal to even consider that human activity could be even a contributing factor, is destroying whatever credibility he has... and that is extremely frustrating in these days of ever more powerful centralized and consolidated media, when the alternative sources need all the credibility they can muster.

Rev. Jerry Falwell died today.

The "Christian Right" is one heck of an oxymoron. :wow:

Of course Rev. Falwell will get a "Christian" funeral...however he was one of the most effective ambassadors of the "inverted Christianity" practiced by the US religious right.. which (albeit a little oversimplified) implies "blessed are the mean, for they shall inherit the earth", and "if you're not like us, then go to hell". "Moral Majority"... oh dear, oh dear. Even to this non-Christian, it is glaringly obvious that hatred and exclusion are not Christian values

Falwell and company have precious little do with Jesus Christ, apart from co-opting that name, and then using the label of "Christianity" as a means to perpetrate spiritual blackmail on their followers to wield power and make cartloads of MONEY. Charlatans like him have been pulling stunts like that throughout the ages... ie misrepresenting the words of a spiritual master and using them for their own ends. There are lots of good people who follow(ed) Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson etc. and gotten ripped off. "Falwellism", and Christianity as taught by Jesus, are so far apart as to be unreconcileable

These guys are prime examples of the false prophets that Jesus taught (Christians) to beware of. Robertson, Falwell and their ilk are playing with peoples' minds and fears and milking them for their very earthly cash. Falwell and co. are more about Mammon, mind games, manipulation and materialism. It's a flawed part of human nature we're dealing with here, which allows for con men with loud voices and public speaking skills to use the name of a revered person for greed and power. Jesus is not the only originator of a faith whose name is being used in corrupt ways wholly at odds with what the teacher intended. Any faith are subject to piracy by fakes and phonys.

Illegal Immigration...

It's always the people at the end of the chain who get jerked around. Immigrants, for example are wowed by ads placed on the Mexican side (by US agribusiness etc), encouraging migration (both legal and illegal). The employers are seldom prosecuted. Same with the 'war on drugs'... where the established dealers and distributors often have cozy relations with law enforcement, while the end users are the ones who get the shaft. Same in the military.. in the recent spates of torture and abuse in Iraq etc., its the grunts who get court martialed for carrying out orders, and the brass get away with it. Its a similar picture in whatever area of human activity you care to name.

Not a lot anyone can do about it.. its a product of human nature.

Reality is whatever you can get away with.

Immigration rally: LAPD, aided by Wackenhut and Blackwater terrorists

Here is a video of the LAPD forcibly breaking up a peaceful and permitted rally, by firing indiscriminately into the crowd.

Even a Fox News (!!!!) cameraperson was beaten up and her equipment damaged. Strange that the news organization whose leaders endorse this kind of move towards the hardline right end up getting their own (innocent) employees attacked.

The purpose of this officially sanctioned arbitrary violence is most likely to intimidate people from peaceful assembly (especially minorities and other targeted groups). Of course, the LAPD (and their hired private security thugs from Wackenhut, Blackwater etc) will use the standard claim that "they were provoked first".

Now there are claims by LAPD Chief William Bratton that there will be a "vigorous investigation" into the conduct of officers. Ha! Gimme a break... the police investigating the police... is this amateur comedy hour or what?

This has shades of the Miami anti-WTO demonstration some 4 years ago where Miami P.D. Chief John Timoney ordered his men (and an army of hired goons) to wade in indiscriminately attacking and terrorizing peaceful marchers.

The pattern is clear. Major city police are becoming increasingly politicized, firmly on the side of big money and hard line rightwing causes.

Rosie O'Donnell vs. the weasels in the corporate media

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Cheney to be Impeached?

On April 17, 2007, Rep. Dennis Kucinich informed his congressional colleagues by letter that he was filing articles of impeachment against Vice President Dick Cheney. This is a timely step in the right direction, in an attempt to rid this nation of the cabal of thugs and crooks occupying the White House, Cheney being the junta's head honcho.

Thankyou Rep. Kucinich. And while you are at it, it is imperative that Cheney be required to testify, under oath, about the status of US air defenses on the morning of 9/11. He must also disclose the full details of the numerous drills and wargames under his command that morning which effectively took a large proportion of the US air defense capability North into Canada and Alaska, and East out over the North Atlantic, allowing four rogue airliners to fly freely across US airspace, unhindered and unchallenged, for up to an hour and a half, in flagrant violation of all standard procedures and protocols. Furthermore, Cheney should be required to provide details as to his whereabouts on the morning of 9/11; Norman Mineta informed the 9/11 Commission, under oath, that Cheney was in the PEOC under the White House at 9-20, corrobrated by other witnesses , whereas Cheney lied to the Commission, saying that he didn't arrive there until about half an hour later.

This is just the tip of a very ugly iceberg. We the people are his bosses, and he needs to be accountable to US.

Unfortunately, the weasels in the Democratic Party leadership, who shall remain nameless, are not lending their support. Apart from having both Cheney and Bush impeached (implying a "President Pelosi", which would appear a somewhat engineered situation), it makes me wonder why the leadership of the "opposition" is taking the extraordinary step of supporting Cheney, a true enemy of the State.

In the meantime, some timely advice for Rep. Kucinich: Remember what happened to the unfortunate Senator Paul Wellstone (MN), who was killed in a light plane "accident" (!) shortly before the Iraq war started. Some of those in recent history who have done the most work for the most worthy of causes, have paid the ultimate price for their patriotism and humanity.

Love me, love my gun.

How many people have to die in a firearms attack, in order to classify it as a act of terrorism? 100? A million?

Or is it a case that in the US, no amount of firearms deaths could ever be classified as "terrorism" because ...

(1) we have a dysfunctional 230 year addiction, and love affair with guns.. and
(2) we are fighting a war against terrorism.

That would be shooting our culture in the foot.

Does anyone honestly think that we won't see a repeat of this kind of violence, all because we wrung our hands for a couple of weeks, shed some crocodile tears and said "oh how sad, oh how tragic", before the collective amnesia sets in and the story disappears from the headlines?

"The definition of insanity is the repetition of the same action expecting a different result." John Laroquette. In cases involving terrorism by the gun, just substitute "action" for "inaction".

Idiotsville, anyone?

VA Tech tragedy. :(

Every time there's a horrible multiple shooting incident like this, there's a few weeks of heated discussion over what to do about it, and how to prevent the next one. Each time, it's all hot air and no action, apart from the predictable investment in more security and more surveillance (which any determined shooter can evade). The causes of what triggers some people to "lose it completely" remain in place, unaddressed. Subsequent newsworthy events then cause our memories to blur, and then we forget... until the next time. Repeat cycle.

Because 32 people were killed in one incident, it makes the national headlines (as well it must, it's a ghastly tragedy. But what about all the 100 people who die by the gun every day in the U.S. whose deaths usually go unreported in the national media (unless its a celebrity of course)? Our society is not only sick, but in denial. It reminds me of the strange feel-good ritual we go through each year by acknowledging (on the media) the plight of the homeless at Christmas.. and then for the rest of the year, pretending the problem doesn't exist....

GM foods, bees, DNA patents, cronyism, and disaster in the making.

Bee populations throughout the US and the industrial world are dying off at alarming rates, with some nations reporting losses of up to 80%, and nobody is really sure why. Last night, I watched the documentary movie "The Future of Food" It's probably one of the scariest and most sinister documentaries of recent times, and shows Monsanto (etc) for what they really are: "planetary terrorists". But nobody in the mainstream media is talking about it. If it can be shown that GM foods are related to this bee population decline, then the reasons for the media staying mum about it are obvious. The three government agencies responsible for making sure that the food reaching America's dining rooms and restaurants is safe to consume, namely the USDA, EPA and FDA, are stacked with Monsanto board members. They probably play golf and sit on the same boards as other major players in the media as well; there is only one degree of separation in the world of the corporate elite. Hence, the nefarious activities of Monsanto and other major agribusiness and chemical/GE corporations are not only immune from mainstream media coverage, but also immune to any form of legal challenge. Monsanto is attempting to patent life itself, and soon these patents may extent to the DNA sequences of higher animals and even humans, if they get their way. And from the conduct of US senior judges involved in making legal decisions (100% behind Monsanto etc), do not be surprised if the very worst happens.

The case of Josh Wolf.

Read this link here.

Every journalist is political. And the mainstream media journalists are bound, not by their personal political convictions, but by the policies set in the boardrooms of their corporate employers. We all know that, or at least *should*. Violent beatings by police on protesters greatly outnumber violence committed by protesters; I have attended hundreds of protests in the last 6 years since the Bush regime started, and I have never once seen a bona fide protester deliberately engaging in violence against police officers *without provocation*. Those are the key phrases: "bona fide" and "without provocation". I have witnessed numerous attacks on protesters by police, and if someone defends himself, as opposed to the recommended "going limp", he will be charged with assaulting a police officer. A count of all the hospitalizations and wrecked cameras wrecked by "overzealous policing" (read mindless thuggery protected by the blue uniform), especially since the Bush regime's onset, would be spectacular.

Violence committed by stooges, however, is commonplace. An prime example of this was in the 1999 when the mainstream media were led by the nose to the downtown area, where masked thugs in the guise of "black block anarchists" were deployed by parties unfamiliar to the organizers of the demonstration, for whom a peaceful action was of an obvious and paramount priority. These individuals, with the mainstream media TV cameras ready on site with cameras rolling, threw rocks and bricks at the windows of many downtown Seattle businesses, including McDonald's and other high profile institutions. The scenes of mayhem and destruction, faithfully recorded to videotape, were duly broadcast on prime time television, and repeated over several days, effectively branding the entire demonstration as a violent affair run by rowdy and criminal elements. The mission was to trash the "anti-WTO" image in the minds of the general public that the "globalists" were "the good guys" and the demonstrators were all a bunch of out-of-control hooligans. Mission accomplished, with the aid of the Seattle Police Dept?

It is plain that urban police departments have deliberately engaged in unconstitutional activity, in alignment with the causes that attract popular demonstrations. The anti-FTAA protests in Miami 2003 was a prime example such of police tactics characteristic of tinhorn dictatorships. From the Save Our Civil Liberties website, comes the following sinister revelation:
"For almost 2 years, the Miami Police Department has desperately been trying to ensure that the 2003 FTAA police operations plan remains a secret, even from the city's own Civilian Investigative Panel which is charged with investigating the large scale police brutality that took place on November 20-21, 2003. MPD has finally revealed it's reasoning for the secrecy: releasing the plan could "jeopardize future operations nationwide" because "authorities THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY have adopted the plan". This is a stunning, yet frightening admission, as it confirms the deep suspicions of political activists who have personally witnessed the same repressive tactics travel from city to city, protest to protest. This also lends further support to the ominous statements made earlier by Miami Police Chief John Timoney, that the FTAA was "the first big event for Homeland Security...the first real realistic run-through to see how it would work."

In this case, Miami Police Chief John Timoney authorized state sponsored terrorism on US citizens peacefully going about their constitutional right to freedom of assembly and expression.

Question: How often have you, the reader, watched on mainstream television news, unprovoked police violence upon protesters? Here's your answer: Probably never, because of the unwritten rule. But the reality is sadly very different. Even if Wolf's actions could be construed as "biased", the balance of bias in mainstream media reportage towards "the status quo" and conservative or corporate causes, remains stunningly lopsided, for a so-called "democracy".

BRITAIN? or D.C.?

Judging by the way the NeoCons do international business, i.e. attack first, the standoff with Iran (re. the 15 captive British sailors) is perfect for the Bush Administration; many of history's wars have started when a small incident escalates out of control. Blair's extraordinary degree of dishonesty, as well as his support for preemptive war since the NeoCons started their global rampage on the back of 9/11, is out of character, and only further suggests that he is a weak, bought politician, and speaking on behalf of his D.C. masters.

As an afterthought: would either the UK or the US ignore 15 Iranian sailors in an Iranian military ship straying into their waters?? Excuse me while I roll around on the floor laughing my ass off.