Gerald Ford

As you watch the reports about the Greatness of President Ford there is one little fact that will not be present. In December of 1975 Gerald FOrd and Henry Kissinger met with Indonesian Dictator Suharto. IN that meeting Ford gave Suharto the green light to invade the country of East Timor. As a result of that invasion an estimated 300,000 people were slaughtered. The reason Ford supported the invasion of East Timor and it subsequent slaughter. These bastards were communists. Yes I said communists. These TImorese needed to be massacred for the belief that the people should have a fair and equal distribution of wealth and power. How dare they not embrace free market economics and the rape of their resources.
See you in hell President FOrd.

President Carter

So it seems President Carter has caused a little stir in America. It turns out he has written a book critical of Israeli policies towards the Palestinians. As a result he has had at least one prior engagement canceled. He was to give a talk at Brandeis University but was told that he would have to debate the ravenous plagerizer Alan Dershowitz. Carter refused saying something to the effect that Dershowitz doesn't know what the fuck he is talking about.
The book hadn't even been released and the Israeli Lobby was already in full swing. We had Speaker-elect of the House condemn Carter's use of the term apartheid. Ironically or maybe not Israel blocked Rev. Desmond Tutu from going to Palestine on a fact finding mission. From where I sit it seems as if the Lobby has done it job, for the most part. They are trying so hard not to allow the term apartheid from being used. I had a letter to the editor printed in the Journal Sentinel calling Israel an aprtheid regime and was surprised that there was no response.
Is apartheid a legitimate word for what is happening in the Occupied Territories? I would have to say of course. There are roads that only Israelis are allowed to travel on. They criss cross the West Bank in an attempt to grab more and more land while relegated the Palestinians to little Bantustans or "homelands" like they had in SOuth Africa. People are given certain rights in the Occupied Territories due to their ethnicity. There are Palestinians without enough water yet the settlers have swimming pools. THough, what I just read in Haaretz(Israel's New York TImes) is that the government has passed a law making it illegal for an Israelis to drive a non-Israeli in their car. No shit. It will be against the law in January for an Israeli citizen to transport a Palestinian or any human rights worker. Now if that isn't apartheid I don't know what is.
Now just imagine for a moment what the US press would say if Iran made it illegal for an Iranian to transport a Jew in an Iranian car. Better yet, imagine the what the press would have had to say if the Soviets made it illegal to transport a Jew in a Soviet car. There would be outrage. Not in this case though. Business as usual. Fuck the Palestinians. Thank Speaker Pelosi.

Haaretz Article. If you don't believe me.

Iraq Study Group Pt.I

So the much-anticipated Iraq Study Group has published it finding and printed out copies for us all to read. Of course, I went and got my copy the day they were released and boy what exciting reading. Most of it had already been leaked to the press so there really wasn’t a whole hell of a lot of new stuff for a discerning news junkie like myself. Still I read it anyways just so that I would know what was actually in it. This way when the “free” press reports on it I will be able to sift through the disinformation and see which parts they leave out of their reporting. Mostly three things, one of which surprised me, not because it made sense but because it was even mentioned in America, interested me. The other two weren’t surprises just a reaffirmation of what I already truly believe.
I won’t start with the surprise but instead on of the things that least surprised me. Upon reading this, one thing stood out at me immediately and reminded me of why things get done the way they do. It came to my attention that we could gather ten politically intelligent people, I’m not talking Poly-Sci grads just people who pay real attention to the world, set up a committee and that group of ten people could have written this report. First off the writing is below the level that newspapers are written in. It seems like it is written so that even a child could be able to read it.
The recommendations that the panel came up with are also very, very weak intellectually. I swear that we could grab ten people off the bus, random people, and they would have come up with basically the same ideas. Here is just one example of what the Washington Brain Trust came up with. “Recommendation 77: The Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary Of Defense should devote significantly greater analytic resources to the task of understanding the threats and sources of violence in Iraq.” No really this is what the great and revered Statespeople and “realists” were able to come up with. Basically the government should try to find out why and where violence is coming from. This is what they suggested. What is funny is that the press did their part to tell us how this panel was going to come up with great ideas and they fell all over themselves to praise the members.
Virtually every recommendation is obvious. For instance, #40 “The United States should not make an open-ended commitment to keep large numbers of American troops deployed in Iraq.” Basically, we should not occupy the country for ever or let the Iraqi government think we will provide for the security of the State of Iraq, which is, of course, our duty due to international law.
As a kid, I used to think that our leaders/rulers were smarter than us or me. I used to think that in order to be Secretary of State, Supreme Court Justice or Secretary of Defense one had to be intelligent. As I slowly got older I began to realize that these leaders may be marginally more intelligent then the average American. The last six years have proven to me that not only does one not have to be intelligent to be in government but also it may actually be a hindrance to one’s career. How Americans could ever accept leaders of this poor quality is truly depressing. Luckily for me like the rest of America, I have “must see T.V.” that can distract me from the real world.

My letter to the editor 12/1/06

U.S. must find a way to get out of Iraq
-title theirs not mine-

Thank you for printing Sen. Chuck Hagel's thoughtful analysis of the Iraq war ("How U.S. must exit Iraq," Perspectives, Nov. 28). It is crucial for our politicians to find a way out of Iraq.
Many pundits claimed that the Democratic victory in November was a referendum on the war. Yet almost the next day, Democrats assured the country that they weren't going to do anything to speed our exit from this disaster.
As a member of the so-called left, I find it humorous that I may have a choice in the 2008 presidential election between a Republican who is against the war, Hagel, and a Democrat, Sen. Hillary Clinton, who is for the war. If it truly comes down to that, I know which side I will be voting for. Some things are far more important than party affiliation.
Justin Loper
Shorewood
Journal Sentinel

Iran, Iran so far away.

In the paper today I read about a letter that the President of Iran wrote to the American public. What I found most interesting is that the paper didn’t print it. Nor did it print even any excerpts. To many this might not seem strange but then again 30% believe Bush was responsible for 9/11. Something that has been bothering me for sometime is how can a designated enemy of the US write a letter to its people and no media reprints it?
How can a people make informed decisions in respect to elections if they are uninformed? How can a real democracy function without information? It can’t. This is one of many reasons why I don’t believe America is a Democracy. Oh ya, people vote but that doesn’t make it a democracy. People used to vote in Saddam’s Iraq and no one would have called that a Democracy. If you have one candidate or two clones there is no choice. If you don’t have a grasp of the issues how can you choose wisely? Why is it that people don’t have a grasp of the issues? Because the American media is total garbage that sucks up to power.
Whenever Osama Bin Laden releases an audio tape our press talks about it. They don’t replay the entire broadcast or even a major segment of it. You can’t find it reprinted in your newspaper either. At best they reprint a line or two out of context. So we are led to believe that we must launch wars all around the globe to fight this shadowy figure but are not allowed to read what he says. We are all supposed to go along with the “War On Terror” yet we’re not given the information about our enemy. So we are just to believe what out trusted leaders tell us. If history proves anything it is that you should never trust your leaders yet that is exactly what the sheep of America do.
I decided years a few years ago to find Bin Laden’s speeches and read them. In order for me to do so I had to go to the British Broadcast Company’s web site. It turns out that the English are more democratic and less fearful of their population then America is. We are not to be allowed to read about what bin Laden says. Maybe this difference between the two nations is why the majority of Brits were against the war whereas 70% of Americans were for it. It must be said that our news media did everything in their power to link Saddam to 9/11 even though the facts showed something totally different.
Now our government is revving up for a confrontation with Iran under the guise of Nuclear Weapons and their threat to the nation of Israel. Remember that the Iranians have no missile that can reach the States yet we must be kept scared. If anyone has been paying attention this all revolves around the protection of Israel who already has hundreds of nuclear weapons, with our Government’s tactic approval. Part of the disinformation campaign, the majority of news we get is really disinformation, is that the President of Iran, Ahmadinejad, is in control of the Islamic Republic of Iran. What our worthless media conveniently forgets to mention is how Iran is truly ruled by a bunch of unelected clerics. The media had no trouble reminding us when the last leader Khatami, the reformer, was in power. When the kids rose up a few years ago the clerics came in with their proxies and beat the shit out of the protestors. The media was certain to inform us then that Khatami really wasn’t in power it was the clerics who ruled. Nowadays though it would seem as if a major shift in control has happened in Iran and no one noticed.
As far as nuclear weapons are concerned, it is wholly hypocritical for us to decide that other nations are not allowed to possess them. It can be argued that according to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Iran is not to build nuclear weapons and this would be correct. What most people don’t know, and the media does it job not to tell us, is that America is supposed to be getting rid of their nukes. That bit of information is not relevant according to our free press. What the media also refuses to mention is that Israel is armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons but I guess that too is not relevant. Sure some may argue that Israel’s nuclear weapons may have started an arms race in the Middle East but of course, that would go against the media’s narrative of Israel the innocent perpetual victim. Actually maybe what is needed in the Middle East is some good old-fashioned Mutual Assured Destruction. Maybe just maybe the Israelis would be forced to take their boot off the neck of the Palestinians since they are getting terribly close to being asphyxiated.
So as our leaders openly threaten Iran with the use of force it is important that the American public get informed. (If you think that war with Iran is possible read my first entry on this blog.) The sad thing is that people won’t be informed unless somehow the writers of Lost or Desperate Housewives can somehow slip it into their scripts. Our country was led into a disastrous war with Iraq because the media forced us to. The media had at its disposal all the information that the alternative press had yet refused to give it airtime. Instead the media amplified the lie filled rhetoric of our government as it fulfilled its role as mouthpiece for the corporate controlled government and its minions. I have no reason to believe the same thing won’t happen again, even with what we know now.
Amhaminejad's Letter to the U.S. People

This is liberation.

I think John Kerry was right about a lack of education and one's chances of ending up in Iraq. This is what we have our troops doing. Real classy. What a bunch of good patriots.

It is pretty obvious we studied Israel's behaviour towards Arabs.
No wonder they want to kill us.

Another Fucking Racist

What the fuck is terrorism.

Terrorism is a term thrown around a lot lately due to the fact that the U.S. was attacked on Sept. 11th 2001. Everyone can agree, besides those 30% who believe Bush was behind the attacks, that those attacks were terrorism. It fits the most basic definition of terrorism, which is basically, the use of force against a civilian population with the goal of changing the policies of that people’s government. That seems simple enough and as a result should be applied broadly but never seems to be. As it turns out, it is never terrorism if you are the one terrorizing. In order for something to be considered terrorism it must be received never handed out. For instance, a Palestinian blowing themselves up at a bus stop full of soldiers and some civilians is terrorism. This is simple enough and everyone agrees with that. What people seem unable to grasp is that if the US drops a bomb on a water treatment facility, a television station or in a neighborhood that too is terrorism. 9/11 was a terrible day for the people in the buildings, on the planes and their loved ones. No one deserves to be killed for the actions of their government regardless of what those actions are. The innocent civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq do not deserve to die because of the dictatorships that led their respective countries just like average Israelis who were being killed also deserve to live. Still one is terrorism and one is “defense”. In other terms terrorism is used by the weak “defense” is used by the strong. “Israel has a right to defend itself” but the Palestinians don’t?
If an alien people invaded America and kicked us out of our homes, would we have the right to resist or would that be terrorism? If that same alien people were dropping bombs on apartment buildings and continuously launching artillery at us would we call it their “defense”? Was George Washington a terrorist? Probably to the British he was. Was he right to kill the British or should he and the rest just lived as subjects? Were the Contras in Nicaragua terrorists or freedom fighters? Depends who you ask.
The beauty of the word terrorism is that it is meant to apply only to the weak. If the Palestinians were launching artillery shells into Israel and “accidentally” killing civilians would it be considered terrorism or “defense”? Is the accidental slaughter of over 45,000 Iraqi civilians by US war toys terrorism? Can any innocent civilian death be an accident when every war planner knows full well that civilians will die as a result of military action. Of course, these dead are euphemistically called “collateral damage”. That makes it seem okay. “The war was noble and these people had to die ‘accidentally’, overall though it was worth it”, that is what “collateral” damage means.
If it is morally wrong for a “terrorist” to knowingly kill civilians in an attempt to change the actions of a hostile government than it is equally immoral to knowingly kill civilians through the use of guided missiles. In both instances the planners knew that their actions would kill civilians in advanced. For once our people were at the receiving end of violence and we freaked out and killed at least 60,000 civilians as a response. That is twenty times the number killed in America. Since virtually everyone thought that attacking the people of Afghanistan was the right thing to do, it begs the question. Would it be okay for the Afghan people to come back and kill 300,000 Americans? Of course not. So it only makes sense that the most powerful nations, who have the means to kills millions, have a bigger responsibility to not respond the way they do. Violence is violence. If it okay for us then it is okay for them. If it wrong for them it is wrong for us. No one has the right to kill another person unless we all have that right.

The Democrats Don't Care

Screw the Palestinians, Full Steam Ahead

By KATHLEEN and BILL CHRISTISON

At a panel on the defense and foreign policy impact of the midterm election, sponsored two days after the election by Congressional Quarterly, Steven Simon, late of the Clinton administration and still a member of the Democratic, pro-Zionist mainstream at the Council on Foreign Relations, pronounced on prospects for Palestinian-Israeli peace and essentially declared it not worth anyone's effort. Using words, a tone, and a body language that clearly betrayed his own disinterest, he said that Hamas is "there" (exaggerated shrug), that the Israeli government is in turmoil after its Lebanon "contretemps" (dismissive wave of the hand), that both sides are incapable of significant movement, and that therefore there is no incentive for anyone, Democrat or Republican, to intervene (casual frown indicating an unfortunate reality about which serious people need not concern themselves). There is simply no prospect for more unilateral Israeli withdrawals and therefore for any progress toward peace, Simon said in conclusion -- signaling not only a total lack of concern but an utter ignorance of just what it is that might bring progress, as if Israeli unilateralism were truly the ticket to peace.

Thus spake the Democratic oracle. Not that anyone who knows the Palestinian-Israeli situation from other than the selective focus of the Zionist perspective had any expectations in the first place. No one ever thought the new Democratic Congress would hop to and put pressure on Israel to make peace. Just remember John Kerry and Hillary Clinton, to say nothing of Bill Clinton, when any question of the Democrats' stance arises. And don't forget Nancy Pelosi, who rushed to condemn Jimmy Carter for using the word "apartheid" in the title of his new book and for whom, according to a Jewish Telegraphic Agency profile, support for Israel is personal and "heartfelt." One Jewish activist and long-time friend described her as "incredibly loyal" (interesting term) and as feeling Jewish and Israeli issues "in her soul."

But Simon's brief disquisition on the futility of even making an effort was particularly striking for its profound dismissiveness and its profound blindness to what is and has been going on on the ground. Simon's "contretemps" in Lebanon was no mere embarrassing misstep but a murderous rampage that killed 1,300 innocent Lebanese and dropped over a million cluster bomblets in villages across the south, left to be discovered by returning residents. But the Democrats don't care, and Steven Simon considers this hardly worth a second thought. Israel gets itself in trouble, showing its true brutal nature in the process, and this gives Simon and the Democrats a handy excuse to avoid doing anything.

Eighteen Palestinian innocents in Beit Hanoun in the northern Gaza Strip were murdered while sleeping in their beds a day before Simon spoke, killed by Israeli shellfire, round after round fired at a residential housing complex -- 16 members of one extended family and two others who came to help them after the first round exploded. The Democrats don't care. Steven Simon considers this not worth a mention.

In the six days preceding this incident, Israel assaulted Beit Hanoun the way it assaulted Jenin and Nablus and other West Bank cities in 2002 -- a murderous assault reminiscent of Nazi sieges or of the Russian siege of Chechnya, in which in these six days 57 Palestinians were killed, to one Israeli soldier. The dead include Palestinian fighters and a large number of civilians, including children and including two women shot down in the street while attempting to lift the Israeli siege of a mosque. The mosque was leveled. The Democrats don't care. Steven Simon considers this not worth a mention.

In the four months preceding this six-day siege, the Israelis killed 247 Palestinians in a prolonged attack on Gaza. Of the dead, two-thirds are civilians, 20 percent children. Of nearly 1,000 injured, one-third are children. The Democrats don't care. Steven Simon considers this not worth a mention.

Israel is planning a larger siege of Gaza, concentrating not just on Beit Hanoun in the north but on Rafah in the south, ostensibly to unearth arms-smuggling tunnels. This has been going on for years; Rafah has been the scene of Israel's murderous pummeling periodically since the intifada began -- in 2003 when Rachel Corrie was killed trying to protect the home of an innocent family from demolition, in 2004 when hundreds of homes were demolished in multiple sieges and a peaceful protest demonstration was strafed from the air. But the Democrats don't care. Steven Simon considers this not worth a mention.

Gaza, of course, is not the only Palestinian territory being raped and pillaged. Its 1.4 million residents are the most distraught -- living imprisoned in a territory with the highest population density in the world, walled in with no exit except as Israel sporadically allows, being deliberately starved by the official policy of Israel, which dictates to the U.S., which dictates to Europe, vulnerable to constant Israeli assault. But the West Bank's 2.5 million Palestinians are not much better off. They continue to be killed by Israelis and squeezed by Israel's separation wall, by settlement expansion, by movement restrictions, by theft of agricultural land, by diminishing economic opportunity, and by massive Israeli-fostered unemployment. Their death toll is only minimally less than Gaza's.

This obscenity of oppression and murder does not faze the Democrats or any of Israel's Zionist supporters in the U.S. Whatever Israel wants is all right with the Democrats. The 110th Congress will screw the Palestinians just the way the Republican 109th did.

Kathleen Christison is a former CIA political analyst and has worked on Middle East issues for 30 years. She is the author of Perceptions of Palestine and The Wound of Dispossession.

Bill Christison was a senior official of the CIA. He served as a National Intelligence Officer and as Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis. They spent October 2006 in Palestine and on a speaking tour of Ireland sponsored by the Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign

Pete Seeger

This is what our government supports.

It is finally over!!!!

Well the election is finally over. No more commercials telling us how terrible the candidates are. I really wish that we lived in a society that one; cared about politics vs. the politician’s character and two; actually knew history. Instead we live in a civilization where the past has been deleted from our memory and people don’t care about politics. We are often told that we aren’t supposed to talk about politics; religion and I’ll add class. This is probably why we live in a society where religion decides our policies, no one knows what goes on and we have the most uneven wealth distribution in the western world. If we don’t talk about these things, why should we expect anything to get better?
Last night the people of Wisconsin went to the polls to enshrine discrimination into our Constitution. The only way for such a hate filled amendment to pass was for the twenty- somethings to decide that they don’t need to vote. Had the echo boomers, Gen-Yers, or the millennials come out to vote they could have swayed the election. Instead they sat at home and allowed a bunch of fucks to decide that I shouldn’t have the right to see my girlfriend in the I.C.U. The funny thing is that the younger people bitch about Bush and have no right to. Television is far more interesting than human rights. In an attempt to find a silver lining in such a travesty of humanity, I think I may have found one. The Republican hate mongers used up one of their last nasty ploys to get elected and it didn’t even work for them. Now next election they might have to run on their platform, which will never get them elected. So they shot their load and they still lost. Unfortunately homosexuals were the victims. God I hope they fight back! I am extremely angry that our state is filled with so many stupid wacko religious people. This is another product of our societies refusal to discuss politics, religion and class.
While we are on the topic of stupid religious wackos lets not forget the death penalty initiative. This one I can’t blame on World of Warcraft. Even if Generation Y had voted this one would have still passed. Too many people are fill with vengeance to see that murder is wrong in all cases. This referendum was what pushed me to vote for Governor Doyle. I had no plans on voting for him but once I got my ballot I had to rethink. Doyle is the only thing stopping our state from re-instating the death penalty. I hate the death penalty more than Democratic Politicians so I had to hold my nose and vote for Doyle. I had to do it. Executing people is what Saddam was just convicted of.
So the Democrats won the House and look poised to take the Senate. If this happens Bush will have dust off his veto pen. Remember that Bush only vetoed one bill, the one banning torture. Classy. If the Democrats are what the electorate thinks they are then they should start sending bills to Bush that help the average people for him to veto. Imagine him vetoing a raise in the minimum wage. I, of course, expect that the Democrats will just take their position in between the Republicans and the center.
I hope that the take over of Congress by the Democrats might slow down our shitty government. Maybe the Government will stop handing all our wealth to a tiny minority of obscenely rich white guys. I know I am calling for a redistribution of wealth but what do you expect from a Marxist. Only in a society ruled by the rich can the term “wealth redistribution” be a dirty word whereas “wealth concentration” is never even spoken in public.
We must start talking about class, religion and politics; our society needs us to. If we as Americans actually started talking about these issues the world, not just America, would end up a much better place. Our citizens would end up educated on issues that affect everyone. No longer could our rulers say things like, “The terrorists hate our freedom.” The people would be too educated and would respond with things like, “Don’t the Muslims hate us for what we have done to them over the decades? From our support of some of the most egregious human rights violations from Israel to Saudi Arabia, to the overthrow of democratically elected governments like Iran.” Until we get to the point where people get educated about politics we will continue to be ruled over by a tiny group of the ultra-rich who care solely about themselves and their wealth.
As that terrible human being, Ralph Nader once said, “You better get turned on to politics otherwise politics will turn on you.” I hate him so much, stupid seat belts and the Freedom of Information Act. What a bastard.

The Death of Saddam

The verdict of death by hanging for Saddam is a travesty. Not because he was innocent but because it was victor’s justice at its worst. How can an occupied country hold a fair trial? Everyone knows that Saddam is guilty of horrendous crimes against humanity. That fact is in no way in doubt. What is in doubt is if a person can get a fair trial when the judges are seen as nothing other than puppets.
First off, Iraq is not free. Iraq’s judiciary is not free due to the country’s status as being occupied. Iraq’s criminal justice system is not theirs but ours. America has decided what their laws will be, more accurately L. Paul Bremer. Why couldn’t we have done this in a more transparent or neutral site? There is no reason why we couldn’t have held this trial at The Hague in Holland like we have with Milosevic and the butchers of Rwanda. What was the reason for such a hasty trial in such a troubled country? The government wasn’t even able to protect the lives of Saddam’s defense lawyers. Yet this is supposedly the best environment to hold a landmark trial.
One of the main reasons that the U.S and its Iraqi puppets didn’t want this trial held in Holland is the death penalty. The US government wanted Saddam put to death, as did their Iraqi puppets. The desire of his victims for his life is understandable but ours is not. It is well known that the Europeans would not sentence a human being to death because, as enlightened people, they view the death penalty as inhumane. Of course, the killing of humans is the reason Saddam was being tried. So it is interesting to murder him. Before anyone mentions the Old Testament remember that the root word for Christianity is Christ, not Moses. Christ taught to turn the other cheek but very few Christians follow this part of the doctrine.
Another main reason, the US feared trying Saddam at the International Criminal Court at The Hague, is that the US cannot control it. For instance, during the trial of Milosevic, Gen. Wesley Clark was summoned to testify by the defense. I cannot remember anyone, of any significance, being called by Saddam’s defense team. This seems interesting due to the US government’s support for Hussein during his most vicious human rights violations. If I were trying to defend myself from the US, I would call people like George H.W. Bush, Bob Dole, Don Rumsfeld or James Baker. Instead none of these people were forced to testify. Therefore, US support for Saddam’s terrible crimes, was sent down the memory hole.
I truly believe that Saddam should be held responsible for his crimes. He committed some hideous acts on fellow humans or allowed his subordinates to do so, we all know about his son’s sadism. I wish that the US could have done the right thing for once. They could have taken the moral high ground and either sent him to The Hague or waited until the Iraqis were controlling Iraq. Instead they wanted a quick trial and a death penalty. It is amazing how our leaders, who profess to be such moral Christians, don’t follow any of Jesus’ teachings.

Why the Democrats don’t deserve to win but why I hope they will.

With the election less than a week to go, we are all being bombarded with political bullshit. The media keep telling us what the polls are saying and what the trends are. Every move is overanalyzed to the point where it has no meaning. We are told about George Allen using a racial slur but not about his politics. So this will be my only entry about the elections until after because I am getting sick of the bullshit coverage.
Right now the polls show that a large majority, 2 to 1, say the war in Iraq is a disaster. What is the Democratic Party’s plan for Iraq? They don’t have one. Instead you have Hillary saying we need to stay the course, Joe Biden saying we should split the country into three parts, John Murtha saying we should move our troops to Kuwait and then you have Kerry/Feingold who are saying we need to get out. Why won’t anyone say what is obvious and morally right? We should ask the Iraqi people what they want us to do. It is their country, not ours. Many say that we have to stay otherwise the place would descend into civil war. This is just a revamped version of the “white man’s burden” but 21st century style. We, white America, are the smart ones who should take care of the Iraqis because, as brown people, they are unable to take care of themselves. Is it even possible to doubt that the reason we can’t leave is because we want control over their oil resources?
It is obvious that the Democrats agree that we must control Iraq otherwise they would launch a campaign aimed at the large majority of us who are now against the war. They aren’t though. They are so scared of the Republicans that they refuse to go on the offensive. Instead we hear people say that the Democrats don’t want to look weak on National Security. Of course, the Democrats are weak on National Security because they are weak on everything. They decided years ago that they were too scared to not have super cushy jobs and that in order to keep those jobs they would have to suck the corporate tit. So a party that once claimed to be the party of the people is now just the party for the corporations. As a result they have been unable to champion a populist agenda because it goes against what a tiny minority of rich white assholes want.
What is the platform of the Democrats? In 1994 when the approval rating of Congress was near rock bottom, the Republicans didn’t run on “We aren’t the Democrats”, they ran on what they claimed to believe. Instead of biting their tongues, in hope that the Democrats might lose, they went on the offensive. They created a simple little document called the Contract With America. Newt Gingrich and the other white men gave the public a list of what they wanted to accomplish. (Don’t forget about Newt in 2008) Years later they have abandoned it but it got them elected and they kept power for twelve years before their corruption finally bubbled to the surface. Why can’t the Democrats offer a list of what they want to accomplish? Because they have no such list or idea for that matter and they still fear any idea put forth will be attacked by the opposition and their corporate donors.
The polls show that a majority of the US population thinks that our country should have some form of universal health care coverage. The last number I saw was an ABC poll that put the number at 61%. Here is a winning issue but the Democrats can’t put forth the idea because they are weak. They are so afraid of being called a socialist, a title I where with pride, that they refuse to make it part of their platform. Then there is the cost of prescription drugs, what are the Democrats planning on doing about that? Then there is our environment; poor Democrats don’t want to piss off their toxic creating donors so that issue is off the table. Then there are unfair payroll taxes, can’t touch that because that would piss off too many rich white assholes. Then there is the Israeli/Palestinian conflict the main reason Arabs hate our government and the main recruiting tool for “terrorists”. In this case the Democrats fall over themselves attempting to show who really supports the horrendous Israeli war crimes more. You’ve got Howard Dean calling the Iraqi Prime Minister an anti-Semite for showing his support for Hezbollah, the Democrats in Congress voting to stand by Israel even while they littered Southern Lebanon with over a million cluster bombs (war crime) and used chemical and radioactive weapons (war crime) and we’ve got Hillary saying that the illegal wall, Israel is building to confiscate as much land as possible, only hurts the “terrorists”.
There is nothing the Democrats stand for. They are a bunch of wishy-washy power seekers. We are always told that the Democratic candidate is only sounding more moderate to win an election yet once they are elected they actually get even more right wing. There is little that the Democrats have done in the last twenty years, on a national level, which has been good for anyone. They haven’t helped the poor or people of color. They haven’t stood up for human rights anywhere. They haven’t attempted to slow the pollution of our planet. They haven’t stopped corporations from harming us. They haven’t stood for peace. What really have they done?
Even with all that I still hope that the Democrats win at least one house of Congress. I don’t have any hope that Democrats will help the people of the country besides those who are in the country club. They won’t stand tough for a measly minimum wage increase to 1970’s levels. They won’t stand up against the polluters who pay for them to be elected. They won’t stop Israel’s ethnic cleansing of its indigenous population. They won’t get us out of Iraq. The one thing they may do is slow down the American Empire just a little bit. If this is the case, that alone is a reason for hope. Maybe just maybe our country will end up in a gridlock and we will stop harming the people of the world all just to make the tiny white rich assholes obscenely richer at the expense of real human beings, no matter if they are brown or white.

Propaganda?

Wanting it Both Ways

Politics is sad. Or maybe, American politics is sad. Our citizens continue to elect total nimcompoops who are only self-interested. Yes, there are always exceptions but for the most part they are all full of shit.
One day I thought about making a list of right wing rhetoric and how they want "it both ways". Take the "sanctity of life" and the bombs we drop. The bullshit from Bush about not wanting to take human life to save other human life but that was the exact purpose of our invasion of Iraq.
So I thought maybe some others out there could help me fill up a good list that we all can use against right wing nonsense.

First off there is Democracy. The RW, NeoCOns and Bush speak glowingly about the spread of Democracy and its great benefits. While at the same time supporting autocrats and dictators world wide. Hugo Chavez is a dictator and the Sauds are our moderate allies.
They claim to be the ones who truly love the country and the left is treasonous yet they do everything in their power to not to pay taxes to fund the country they purport to love.
They are fiscally more responsible then the Democrats. This one I don't need to even expand on.
Reagan gets the credit for bankrupting the Soviets but the Democrats were in control of Congress yet when you bring up the huge deficits created by Reagan then it becomes the Democratic Controlled Congress's fault.
Claim to be for the "Free Market" but they are for subsidizing industry, allowing tax dollars to be spent on pollution clean-up left by industry, want to protect certain American industries, and on.....
They want us to believe that supercomputers and 1500 scientists can't predict future weather patterns but want us to believe their predictions for Social Security.
Republicans were whining about giving Bush nominees for Federal Judges an "up or down vote" but refused to allow Clinton nominees the chance to get a vote at all.
The Right claims to be against regulations unless it is regulating sex, euthanasia, drug use, reproduction, art and on and on...
Tout adoption as the alternative to abortion unless you are a gay couple.
They claim to be strong on defense but always show so much fear and weakness by being "terrified" by weak tin pot dictators without weapons.
They say people should be held responsible for their actions unless it is something like Abu Ghraib, "bad intelligence", after war planning, Sept. 11 etc
Claim the UN is useless until it is needed.
They tell us that the Treasury Bonds backing Social Security are just "pieces of paper" but they wouldn't say that to Japan, Saudi Arabia or China.
Criticism is unpatriotic unless they are the ones criticizing.
They continue to spew nonsense about "our dependence on foreign oil" yet don't fund real alternatives.
One standard right wing complaint is that Government is intruding into our lives but they did everything in their power to try keep Terry Schiavo alive.
Against special treatment for certain groups in regards to college admission unless they are the rich white kids of Alum.
For State's Rights unless they control the Federal Government.
The pretend to be champions of the Constitution but don't believe a jury of ones peers is capable of hearing malpractice cases.
For open markets for American products only.
Claim the Democrats are a hazard to our safety all the while they outted a CIA agent.
Claim to support Religious peoples abd family values unless of course you are a mexican immigrant.
Claim market forces rule except when it comes to labor following capital.
That is my incomplete list. I'm sorry if it isn't the easiest read, I have drank way too much coffee this morning so there may be some typos. I look forward to everyones additions.

Great Political Commercial

Hurricane Hugo

Why does Washington fear the Venezuelan President so much? Why is Washington working so hard, actually bribing and threatening nations, to get other countries to vote with them to put Guatemala on the UN Security Council instead of Venezuela. It isn't as if the Venezuelans would have veto power like the world's rulers deserve. In fact they would have very little power since the world has decided that the US, Russia, England, China and France are the only important countries of the world and has granted them veto power. What’s even more wonderous are the attacks against Hugo Chavez by Democrats like Chuck Rangel and Nancy Pelosi. Is it the man we fear or his message? This is the real question.
As we speak the US is bullying countries into voting with them to put Guatemala on the Security Council. John, I can't get confirmed to the UN, Bolton is telling Venezuela to back down and give up on their attempt to get a seat on the Security Council. Never you mind that Guatemala, the lesser of two evils in our Empire's eyes, is systematically slaughtering street kids. Also forget that like most of the Third World, Guatemala's elites are enriching themselves at the expense of the poor in their nation. As usual, these are all good things in Washington's eyes.
The easily elected leader of Venezuela is a dictator our sheepish media tell us. He is a "thug" according to Nancy Pelosi. Christ, Nancy Pelosi wouldn't ever call our President a thug even though the description fits him much better. Both Bush and Chavez came to power around the same time and guess who is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands. Not Hugo. Yet it is Hugo who is the thug. Even though our President has just been given the power, by Congress, to indefinitely hold prisoners without the right to a trial yet it is Hugo who is becoming Authoritarian.
There are two main reasons our Empire is fearful of Hugo. Today I will only address one of the two. The main reason that Washington, both parties, fears the Venezuelan President is because he offers a different view of the world. One that is not supposed to be voiced and when it is, in our country, we can count on the obiedient media to refer to those suggestions as crackpot or utopian. National healthcare is some pie in the sky idea that isn't feasible unless of course you are one of those uncompetitive utopian nations like Canada, England, France, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Holland, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Italy, Austria, or Switzerland. When was the last time you bought something from Sweden(Erickson phones) or Finland(Nokia). Better yet, we are told how much better our for-profit healthcare system is. Still where is the political movement in any European country to institute for-profit American style healthcare? It doesn't exist because the concept is so widely popular that only a fool would advocate some change.
Just imagine if Venezuela had been on the Security Council during the lead up to our invasion and occupation of Iraq. They would have had the lap dog, Mexico's, seat. If my memory serves me right the Mexicans didn't support our illegal and immoral invasion but they weren't vocal critics and did nothing to stave off the tragedy. Had the Venezuelans been on the Council we would have seen the them using the forum to show how illegal and unnecessary this war was. They may have even sponsored envoys which would have really pissed of our Empire.
If anyone had the chance to see Hugo Chavez's over the top performance at the UN last month, they can understand why the US is scared of their message, "Another world is possible." My main disappointment about the speech was Chavez's reference to Bush being the devil. I had really hoped that Chavez would have turned out to be an atheist but oh well. I can overlook it though, since he follows Christ's teachings teachings far closer than our holier than thou born again fake. Still it was a little disappointing to see him use such infantile, Bush-esque, rhetoric.
I agree that his rhetoric was over the top and may have done himself more damage than good but why, one must ask, does he have such strong feelings. It could be that the CIA attempted to overthrow him in April 2002. The CIA involvement was obvious, to anyone who knows even a basic history of Latin America, because the only country in the Western Hemisphere that didn't condemn the coup was the US. While the rest of the Americas were calling for the Democratic will of the Venezuelans to be respected the Bush Administration called for the opposite but with the same terminology. The outrageous level of rhetoric that goes unchallenged by our media should be frightening to any and all American whom are not members of the ruling elite. It doesn't matter what the facts are because the media create the true facts. Remember how Saddam was responsible for 9/11.
Again this shows how weak our country really is. Greedy oligarchs who are terrified of ideas entering the lexicon of the world hold up our whole society. They do not want to be removed from their undeserving position of world rulers. They understand that their hold is flimsy once exposed to light so they send out faithful Democrats to use harsher words for a populist than that of a man who is responsible for the deaths of 655,000 people. Who the fuck are the real thugs? Us!

At least some newsman cares.

Quick Rant

I was going to apologize for not writing lately, due to my working on the third shift, but I realized that there is no one there.
Two things
First why can't North Korea build nuclear weapons? WHy do we, America, have the right to keep tens of thousands of nuclear weapons but North Korea is not allowed to have one? When was the last time North Korea used a Weapon of Mass Destruction? When was the last time Americans did? Some could argue that the sanctions applied to Iraq by both Bush I and the great liberal Clinton were form of weapons of mass destruction. Sure it wasn't all spectacular with big explosions but nontheless the sanctions killed at least half a million children alone. When Madeleine Albright was asked by Leslie Stahl, on 60 minutes, about the half a million dead kids, she didn't deny it, instead she said that they thought the price was worth it. How fucking sick. Here we have all these fake liberals crying about the war in Iraq yet where were they when Clinton was slaughtering them? They didn't care, plain and simple. It wasn't until lives that count, American lives, began to be lost that these pseudo-liberals began to talk about how bad Bush is.
When Clinton was forced to stop the "genocide" in Kosovo, many of us argued that invading non-nuclear states would increase the need for them to acquire the weapons. Of course, we were wrong. Genocide was being committed. Sure if you go and look at the numbers that claim doesn't stand up to the scrutiny. First off 2000 dead rebels is not genocide any more than Israel's overreaction to the Hizzbollah was genocide. If we look at the numbers, the Israelis are more guilty of genocide in Palestine then the Serbs were. Yet when will any American administration stand up to the "Israeli Lobby". We would rather piss of the entire Arab world then make the Israelis play nice. Nobody wants to be called an antisemite do they?
The second bit is that our Dear Leader has signed into law the suspension of Habeus Crpus and the right to torture people. Finally we can ram metal rods, retroactively, into the rectums of our prisoners. It is sick that Americans want to torture other humans so bad they split hairs when it comes to the Geneva Conventions. They say things like, "Well they aren't fighting for a foreign army so therefore the ban on torture shouldn't apply." THis shows the immense desire to attach electrical currents to mens testicles. We are truly a sick nation. 3000 people die and we instantly start to figure out how to legally force our captors to perform oral sex on other inmates. If you don't believe that we have, I will send you the photos, not to mention the raping of women. This is all legal now, in retrospect. We have given immunity to torturers because we are so terrified of a scattered group of Arabs who have killed less Americans then our roads have in the last month. Yet there is no war on car accidents. Americans have a, what many see as, a legimate racism towards Muslims. SO now it just makes sense that we smear human feces on them.
For all the weapons we have, we are a bunch of pussies. It is amazing. We have slaughtered millions over the last few decades and know we are led to believe that there is no legitimate right to fight back even though that is exactly what we would do. We actually invaded an entire country without a single piece of evidence and now we are torturing people under the guise of a threat for which they can not present a piece of evidence. Hey but at least the masochistic can get there kicks.

Noam

Holy Shit!

New figures have come out from the Johns Hopkins University about the numbers of Iraqis that have died as a result of our illegal invasion and continued occupation of Iraq. In our attempt to rid Saddam of Weapons of Mass Destruction, or wait to liberate Iraq, no, I mean bring Democracy to the Middle East, over 650,000 Iraqis have died. In three years the actions of our government have killed 655,000 people. In about one years time from now the number will top one million. We are truly a sick country.
As soon as this study came out our science friendly president said it was flawed. Remember that this is printed in the Lancet Medical Journal, Europe’s most prestigious medical magazine, which is peer reviewed. Also remember too, that Bush was a C student who has said he doesn’t read. Bush, who is nothing but an enemy of science, is going to tell us that this survey is flawed? C’mon you have got to be kidding me. The man is an idiot plain and simple and the people who he is surrounded by are a bunch of idiots as well. These are the same people who told us that the Iraqis would greet us as liberators. They were so certain that this would be the case that Cheney refused to answer a hypothetical question posed to him by Tim Russert about what may happen if we are viewed as occupiers and not liberators. Cheney told him that simply wasn’t going to be the case so there was no reason to even answer the hypothetical. This asshole is going to tell us that the Doctors at Johns Hopkins have a flawed study.
George Bush says that the survey is flawed. This is the same guy who stood on an Air Craft Carrier and told us that major combat operations in Iraq are over and he removed an ally of Al Queda. Yet the vast majority of all of the US causalities have resulted after Bush’s staged photo op. Did you know the Navy had to turn the ship around so the cameras wouldn’t be able to see San Diego on the Horizon? As far as an ally of Al Queda being removed, even he now claims that he never said Saddam was in cahoots with Saddam. Yet he is going to tell us that this study is flawed.
The great thing about our totally worthless media is that this number and this story will be sent down the memory hole. Bush doesn’t need to explain how the study is flawed because, one, he can’t and two, it couldn’t be explained away with a ten second sound bite in between the really important stuff, the commercials. What is truly scary is that many Americans will take Bush at his word not because he is intelligent or has a grasp of science but because they are sheep. They really believe that our government is always acting with the bests intentions and not malicious or evil, to use the fairy tale terminology so favored by Bush and his little mind. “We didn’t kill 655,000 people just so we could control the Middle East’s oil. We were trying to help people.” Luckily for the ruling elite the American public’s attention span is about as long as a ten second sound bite or a thirty second commercial. You ever wonder why the commercials are only thirty seconds?
So lets review, Johns Hopkins puts out a study in a peer reviewed medical journal after surveying thousands of households across Iraq. They interview people and are shown death certificates by most of the interviewees. They use the same techniques that they used in Kosovo and the People’s Republic of Congo that were widely accepted by the Western World, England and America included.
George Bush and his moronic crew told us so many fanciful stories. They told us of tens of thousands of gallons of mustard gas. They told us of mobile weapons labs, which were actually given to them by the British to produce hydrogen for weather balloons. They told us that Saddam was a grave threat to our existence. Rumsfeld told a press conference that he knew where the weapons were. Cheney refused to even toy with the idea that the Iraqis would resist American occupation because it wasn’t going to happen he reassured us. He also told us half a year ago that the insurgency, I believe he referred to them as terrorists, were in their last throes. So who are the ones that are flawed?

Good-Bye, Habeas corpus!

Our government has finally rid them of that little inconvenience that is the right to challenge one’s detention. It goes back to 1215 and was a check on the power of the English King John. Yet today, after those 3000 people died, we now must throw it out in our attempt to create our own King. “We live in dangerous times unlike any time since 1215. These are different times.” Talk about a bunch of bullshit. We are slowly creating an elected Emperor who can do as he so chooses. If the President wants to use a Mexican-American to distract attention from his own failed policy and hold him indefinitely that’s fine. We can’t have that pesky Supreme Court deciding what is legal or not. We are now led to believe that Bush is so extremely competent, except on 9/11, that he can read the Geneva Conventions and interpret them, when I doubt he can find Geneva on a map.
Here are two good pieces of bullshit rhetoric.
The first is the idea that the Democrats can’t stand up to the President for fear of being labeled weak and losing the election. This latest law should have been filibustered but the Democrats are more concerned about being re-elected to Congress, because they have the easiest job in the world with automatic pay increases, then protecting the Constitution they vowed to uphold. Instead we are told that this election is too important which sounds very familiar.
During the 2004 election, us Nader voters were told the election was far too important to vote for someone who stands with you. Instead we were told we must vote for a guy who wants to increase troop levels and escalate an immoral and illegal war. This was a life or death situation we were told. Yet when numerous Democrats knew, prior to the election, that the President was secretly listening to our telephone calls, they said nothing. Sure maybe disclosing that information could have swung the election towards the Democrats but they, knowing how extremely important this election was, chose to do nothing. So was the election really that important?
Now we have the Democrats voting to get rid of Habeas Corpus under the guise that they must not lose the next election because abortion on demand is far more important than the right to challenge one’s detention by the State. All of our elected rulers are tools especially the Democrats. I hold the Democrats to task because Republicans are only concerned about not paying taxes. When one falls for the root of all evil, even when their supposed holy book warns them, why should we expect them to have morals. If this election, or any other, truly mattered then the Democrats would fight accordingly. Instead, all they do is remind us of how important this election is. Refusing to mention that it is important only for them.
The next piece of bullshit rhetoric is the one being spewed by Bush and his posse. They keep claiming that we must win this war otherwise we are all screwed. Of course they need to tie the illegal aggressive war, the crimes of Nuremberg, to the war against resistance towards our Empire. Instead of forcing the Israelis out of the Palestinian Occupied Territories, which is the moral thing to do, they invade and occupy another Muslim nation. Neither parties want to force Israel to get out of the Occupied Territories because they are beholden to the "Israeli Lobby and fear being labeled an Anti-Semite.
So if this aggressive war is necessary for the Empire to win then why not fight it as if you wanted to win. Why not call a draft in order to have enough troops to win? Why not get rid of the tax cuts for the extremely wealthy, since they are the ones reaping the benefits of the Empire and its illegal war? Why not? Because this war is in no way important to America, outside of the ruling classes and the oil barons. The Empire doesn’t want to steal the oil but control it. If you don’t believe me, wait, I will be writing a column like this in a decade when a Democratic leader tells us we need to send troops to Columbia or Central Asia to fight drugs. I’m certain, if this administration wasn’t filled with people who have a dual loyalty to the state of Israel we would be in Venezuela right now.
Habeas Corpus has been the basis for humane law for centuries and we have now rid ourselves of it. Three thousand people die, the same amount that die every month on the roads, and we decide to give the President powers that he should never have. To all those who think that, “Well when we get a Democrat in office they will reverse this.” When in history has a ruler given up their power? We shouldn’t believe any of their bullshit rhetoric because there is no truth in it. If we do fall for it we have only ourselves to blame. Unfortunately, since 9/11, we have become complete dipshits, from the conspiracy that Bush, the genius, orchestrated 9/11 to the idea that terrorists hate our freedoms shows that many have drank the kool-aid.

Essay from 2002

This is a reprint of the original essay I wrote in the summer of 2002. I have reprinted this here to show that a person without a college degree is more fit to be running this country then all the assholes that currently do. I made a few predictions that didn’t come true but I made a few that did.
Enjoy


Today in the Journal-Sentinel there was a report that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein is positioning his forces in and around Baghdad and other cities. He’s doing this most likely to make his removal more difficult and bloody. Luckily for the U.S., we’ve been practicing Urban Warfare for a decade or so, knowing that cities are slowly covering more and more of the planet.
Going into Iraqi cities is going to be a messy operation. We will have thousands of troops walking through alleys and into buildings. This isn’t like the villages in 'nam or even the West Bank. Baghdad was once a cosmopolitan metropolis with tall buildings and Chevy Trucks. If you’ve followed the Jewish occupation of Palestine you’ve seen how simple and cheap it is to booby trap doors and buildings.
It is well known to anyone who’s watched the evening news that Saddam doesn’t really care about the welfare of his people. He is more that willing to use them as “human shields”. Human shields is really just as euphemism for innocent civilians who are protected under the Geneva Convention and aren’t to be targeted but if they are then they are human shields. It is very likely that we could kill thousands of civilians in the cities of Iraq. Also, Al Jazeera, Russian and French journalists who are already there will broadcast this war all over the world.
Why do innocent civilians deserve to be killed over the petroleum reserves in Iraq? We’ve found it is a lot cheaper to kill humans in order to satiate our addiction for energy than it is to install solar panels on the roofs of U.S. houses. How spending 70 billion on war can be cheaper than alternative fuel sources is beyond my reasoning. Unless you figure that Lockheed, Boeing, Raytheon, TRI and McDonald Douglass stand to make a shit load of money replacing Tomahawk Missiles and other death machines. I guess also that transnational oil companies stand to make a lot of money at the same time. Our oil companies are sick and tired of the French and the Russians reaping the profits from the Iraqi oil. They want a piece of that black pie.
Saddam is a dictator plain and simple. He has a terrible record of oppressing his people and fattening his wallet. This has never been a crime in the past. From the Suharto family in Indonesia to Somoza in Nicaragua to the Saudi royal family. Christ, even the people who ran Mexico for 70 years fall into this category. What tends to be the crime is the overthrow of these regimes by the people of the country. From the Sandinistas to Castro.
We have no moral or legal right to attack Iraq. We won’t ask the UN Security Council for the go ahead because we know that three of the permanent members would veto it. They have already informed us of that fact. Maybe France, Russia and China are the new “Axis of Evil”. Watch out France you’re next.
The Bush administration is claiming we need to do this for our own security. A pre-emptive move they claim. If this is a moral justification, then shouldn’t Iraq be attacking us under the same notion? Never mind, the US is a hypocritical nation.
Anyone who thinks that a nation will attack the US is a fucking moron. We can, will and have destroyed whole nations. No one is going to attempt to wipe Israel off the map either. They are all aware that the Jews have 200 nuclear missiles and the US war machine on their side.
Saddam wants more than anything to remain in power and wouldn’t do anything to jeopardize that. Though if he knows his end time is soon nothing is stopping him from using these phantom weapons of mass destruction against our soldiers. Die for oil suckers. Attacking America would for sure lead to his death and most people don’t want to die. It’s a natural instinct deep in our genetic makeup and it is hard to fight against.
I do agree that the Iraqi people would be better served by a democracy, if the democracy were real and open, unlike our own. The only problem with having a democracy in Iraq is that most likely the Iraqi people would want to nationalize the oil under their feet. Could you imagine a nation saying, “Look. This is our oil and we will do what we please with it. Hands off.” That would really piss off Haliburton, ExxonMobil, ChevronTexaco and the rest of the richest companies in the world.
So we would be better off installing a puppet, a puppet that would allow all the profits from Iraqi resources to flow into the pockets of a few extremely rich westerners. Who could then turn around and give us our two candidates for the next presidential election. Once the oil companies candidate, either one, it doesn’t really matter, won the election we could then go to war again and steal some more natural resources. Our government won’t stop until we increase our consumption from 25% of the world’s resources to maybe 50%. Yet, we are still just 4.5% of the world’s population. Why is it that people all over the world hate us? Oh ya, its our open and free society.
Our leaders are Christian, right? There must be something in their “holy” text that makes them act so crazy. Maybe it’s the Ten Commandments.
Lets take a quick look at some of those.
Worship no God but me. Well that is a no-brainer, we worship the Almighty $.
Do not worship any false idols. The Pledge of Allegiance?
Do not use the Lord’s name in vain. That is the only way they use their lord.
Observe the Sabbath and keep it holy. We started bombing Afghanistan on a Sunday just as the Packers were kicking off.
Do not commit murder. Hmmm.
Do not steal. Hmmm.
Do not bear false witness. Hmmm.
Do not covet your neighbor’s possessions. Hmmm.
So where do you think all these people screaming for Saddam’s head will end up after they die?
See you in hell Cheney.

Darfur

Wow,
I now know more about Sudan and Darfur then I thought possible.
Okay lets leave oil out of this for the moment. I think oil is being coming the cliché reason nowadays.
Your friend is right on many points I believe. The number of rebel groups is kind of hard to pin down because they seem to be changing all the time. Basically what we have in Darfur is a reaction to rebels trying to take down the government in Khartoum. The whole thing is kind of complicated but I will try my best to convey what I have just taken in.
The rebels are farmers. They are pro-Chad and pro-Eritrea. They are Islamists in nature. They may or may not be led by a former ally of Bin Laden's, Hassan al-Turabi, more on him later. From what I can tell though they, the victims, basically started it. They attacked the government first in an attempt to overthrow it.
The Government was humiliated numerous times by the rebels and they got pissed. So they unleashed hell on the rebels. At first the Sudanese Government wasn't prepared to fight in the desert and the rebels, like most insurgencies exploited that weakness. Typically though governments catch up and go overboard. Think Serbia's reaction to Albanian rebels in Kosovo. So during the start of the conflict the government was only able to punish the rebels with vicious air raids.
In Sudan there was already a long time animosity between the farmers and the Arab nomads. The fact that the nomads are Arabs and the rebels are Islamists kinda fucks up the whole Arab/Black narrative. There has been a long drought in the region and as a result there was very little cultivatable land to be had. So the farmers and the nomads had to battle it out for land.
Since there were already problems between the farmers and the nomads, who had been previously armed by Quadaffi (Sp?), it wasn't difficult to rally them in support of the government against the rebels. These nomads became the Janjaweed. The Sudanese government armed them to the teeth creating a paramilitary force.
I have a hard time calling this genocide in the classic sense as does the UN. It really seems like impropriate force and massive war crimes. To me genocide is more like the Jewish holocaust, where an entire ethnic group is systematically being exterminated. This is simply not happening in Darfur. Yes it is ugly, terrible, and should be stopped but it is not genocide. It has the appearance of genocide. The refugees fleeing into a neighboring country, a perceived ethnic difference, villages torched and children being slaughtered.
OK, western intervention, the Government of Sudan is not cool to the idea that Western troops coming into his country. This is why to date the peacekeepers have been Africans. Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, is fearful of the fact that he is a war criminal and does not want to be arrested by Western Forces. So he will not agree to a western force.
Now on Bin Laden and the supposed rebel leader Hassan al-Turabi. After the Iraq invasion of Kuwait Bin Laden lobbied the government of Saudi Arabia to bring an army of the mujadeheen (sp?) to expel Saddam from Kuwait. The government instead allowed the West to intervene and station combat troops in the Arabian Peninsula, one of the reasons given by Bin Laden for 9/11. Bin Laden was invited to Sudan by Hassan al-Turabi. Osama actually married on al-Turabi’s nieces. In return for protection, Bin Laden spent his money building infrastructure.
Al-Turabi has connections to the Muslim Brotherhood as do most influential populist Islamists. He rose to power in Sudan and became the second most powerful man in the country. Of course, if the second most powerful person gets too popular the most powerful man usually takes action. That was the case here. Omar al-Bashir arrested al-Turabi as a threat to Sudan and imprisoned him. He was then released in 2003 and teamed up with the main rebel group at the time, the JEM, Justice and Equality Movement. He of course denies this.
I have had a hard time finding any information about oil in the Darfur region, which is not to say that the information isn’t there or that there is no significant oil supplies in Western Sudan. From my own old recollection oil is a factor mainly because the government is oil rich and the Chinese, with Security Council veto power, get oil from the country. Bin Laden believes that the call by the west for action in Darfur is cover for a takeover of Sudan and its oil wealth, kinda like Iraq. I think that many distrust the West for good reason. Anyone who doesn’t think that the War In Iraq pt.2 is about oil is either stupid or in denial. I also do believe that the West has been creating a new form of colonialism in the form of capital control.
I hope that was helpful. I didn’t really know anything about the conflict because there are just too many shitty things happening all at once all over the globe and it is too hard to pay attention to all. Over all I think your co-worker may be right on a lot of it.
Here are some of my sources I used.
Human Rights Watch
Images of War Dead
London Editorial from Tawianese Paper
Wikipedia

Five Years Later

9/11/06
Today is the fifth anniversary of the hijacking and surely it will be wall-to-wall coverage on all the networks. They will ask if we are safer five years later and all the experts will claim that we are. They will ask what we have learned five years later and so on. Just the same drivel and garbage that passes for news in America. We can again expect the media to do its part in ignoring any facts that may cast the event in any other terms except, us the victims against those bad Arabs. So since we can’t count on our media to inform us on things that aren’t somehow related to our celebrities, I figured I would explore some of them.
“A Scripps-Howard poll of 1,010 adults last month found that 36% of Americans consider it "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that government officials either allowed the attacks to be carried out or carried out the attacks themselves”(Time 9/11/06 Vol.168 No.11) What!? Over one third of the general population actually believes that the government was involved? I guess this is the same country where 70% believed Saddam had a hand in 9/11. Still, how can one third of Americans actually believe their government was involved yet not react. If these people really believe that our Government actually slaughtered 3000 of its own citizens, why are they sitting in their homes? This is the crime for Saddam Hussein is being tried for in Iraq, “the murdering of his own people”. Is it that these people are so terrified of their government that they refuse to act?
Five years later and the mass media finally have admitted that the first responders are suffering from a variety of illnesses due to working in the environment around the collapsed World Trade Centers. For years the media did its part and kept quiet but recently this has changed. They are beginning to report on the illnesses and the costs the people will have to endure. It seems they are trying to create a mini-scandal about the Governments lack of help for these firefighters, police, guardsmen, and on. If we lived in a decent society that believed in taking care of its people, this would all be moot. If we had free healthcare none of this would be an issue because we would already be taking care of these brave citizens. Since 9/11 has been not only called “an act of war” and used to start two wars, the Pentagon should be paying for the treatment. Though we don’t live in a decent society, so we shower the defense contractors with hundreds of billions of tax dollars when just a few billion could take of these people for the rest of their suffering. That is the patriotic and shameful thing to do.
Just in case anyone didn’t realize it, today is Patriot Day. On October 25, 2001 our House of Representatives voted 407-0 to call on President Bush to designate September 11th as Patriot Day. On Sept 4th 2002 Bush used his power as President to do so and has every year since. This year's Press Release
It turns out that Congress was quite busy the week it was voting to create a Patriot Day for us Americans to observe. Two days earlier my fine Congressman James Sensenbrenner introduced a little Resolution entitled “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001” better known by its acronym the USAPATRIOT act. The next day the House voted it for. One day later, the Senate passed it, and then 24 hours later it became law with the swipe of a pen by our President. It goes against all conventional wisdom to think our Government could work so quick and effectively. As it turns out our Government can work really rapidly when it is removing rights from it’s citizens and increasing it’s own power.
Finally the line about the “terrorists” hating our freedoms is sure to pop up on the news today. The idea that Al- Zawahiri hates our bill of right is hard to stomach. He hates freedom of speech? The fact that Americans buy that garbage is the reason they buy all the rest of it. It is a known fact that he and Bin Laden dream of creating an Islamic State in the Arab peninsula that would most likely be under Shariah law which is nothing but oppression. This is all true but is it really believable that they think they will take over our country, kill our leaders and convert us all into Muslims? Please. History shows that typically people fight for freedom not the other way around, unless of course we are talking about the State.
So why are they attacking us? Have they ever said why? Yes. Virtually every speech aired on AL Jazeera from either Bin Laden or Al-Zawahiri lists their goals. For the oddest reason though the American press never airs or reprints the speeches in whole. If we are lucky they will reprint about three lines about infidels or something out of context.
Of the four major reasons, only one has been addressed with disastrous results. One of Bin Laden’s gripes was the presence of thousands of US combat troops in Saudi Arabia, home to the holiest sites of Islam. The US has changed their policies in regards to that one by moving all combat troops into Iraq.
Our Government has been lying to us since 9/11 and at the same time grabbing more and more power while slowly stripping our rights away. They have used the attacks as a pretext to invade the second largest known oil reserves in the world. The Republicans have used September 11th to scare the nation and get re-elected. Surveillance cameras are going up in major cities around our nation to “protect” us. I now wish I hadn’t checked out that book on Hamas from the library. We have no reason to believe anything the government or the media says in regards to terrorism. Instead we should think the opposite.

America is dumb as shit

Islamofascists? What the hell does that mean? Why is it being used by the Bush Administration? Why don't Americans understand what fascism is? Why can politicians spew bullshit without anyone stopping them? Because the Americans are dumb as shit.
First off the use of the term fascism. Does fascism apply to the loose knit group of Islamists who want to attack America? No. Fascism requires that there be a State involved. That is why Spain under Franco, Italy under Mussolini and Germany under Hilter are considered fascist.
Notice that during WWII our government wasn't going around referring to those fascist States like Hitler's Germany as ChristianFascists. To do so would be a major insult to the Christians of the world. Therefore it should follow that Muslims may be a little offended by the term. To be fair, our great allies, the Saudis are truly fascists and zealots. But just forget that.
The use of fascism is solely to invoke a certain feeling. Namely fear.
IT is sad that people are more interested in the fictional world then the real one. They would rather watch someone's life on TV than participate in their own. We are a little too docile here in America. Remember too that when fascism comes to our shores it will be holding a Bible in one hand and a flag in the other. That is how it always works. Will it be called ChristianFascism? Maybe by non-Christians.V.P. Wallace's Essay For the New York Times on Fascism 1944

Why War With Iran is Insane!

Normally I don't write diaries. Actually this is my first time. I was getting ready to email my mother one day about Zarqawi's death being celebrated and suicides at Gitmo being called a PR stunt and an act of war, when suddenly this came out instead.
Just when you thought these nutcases had gone too far they are getting ready to go even further. According to a former CIA analyst the US is moving forces into the Persian Gulf to give us the option of attacking Iran. If we truly are getting ready to attack Iran it proves that we are undoubtedly being led by a bunch of madmen and one madwoman. It is as if we are all on one big bus and the driver is drunk and rumors around Washington are that Bush has fallen off the wagon. Launching the war in Iraq has been one of our greatest foreign policy blunders in US history but attacking Iran would make this war seem quaint.
Many will argue that the US isn't really thinking about attacking Iran because of our latest actions. They will say, "See the Bush administration has opened up dialogue with the country for the first time in 27 years. It is unprecedented." This undertaking, by Bush, is merely a way to show the world that we tried everything in order to stave off this war but those Iranian are nuts. (They are Muslims remember) It is similar to when Bush went to the UN Security Council one last time, before the start of The War in Iraq, to prove that at least he tried to work multilaterally.
I know this is going to sound a wee bit cynical but this world has led me in that direction. Is it possible that Bush knows that the US Congress is most likely going to fall into the hands of the Democrats this fall? If and when this happens the Democrats will take over leadership positions in Congress and control the agenda. With this new power the Democrats will launch investigation after investigation into the Bush Administration. From Katrina to the intelligence leading up to Iraq to the billions of dollars unaccounted for in Iraq to, shit there are so many reasons and Karl Rove knows it. Many may argue that no person would use such an exercise just to stay in power. If so ask yourself this one, why did this administration hold the vote to authorize the use of force against Iraq right before the 2002-midterm elections? It wasn't like the Congress couldn't have waited until after the elections but then Republicans would have been unable to use a Democrat's vote against it in their campaign commercials. With Condee and Dick running around saying that the "smoking gun may come in the form of a mushroom cloud over one of our major cities" it wasn't like people were purposely and unnecessarily scared, as irrational as it all was. The resolution was simply a political ploy and 2500 Americans are dead as a result, like the pawns they are considered.
Okay now here is a little exercise. Just look at a map of the region for a moment because this is very important for two reasons. The reason or pretext for the launch of this war is that Iran is trying to acquire nuclear weapons. Even though the Iranians have stated clearly that they have no intention to build weapons, lets just say they are lying. (Personally I think that they are trying to give themselves the option to do so in the future.) Here is where that map comes in. If you look to the east of Iran you have Afghanistan and about 30,000 US combat troops. If you look to the west the US has 130,000 combat troops. Now look north to Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan where the US has Air Force bases in both of those countries. Finally to the south is the Persian Gulf with the Fifth Fleet's Navy ships and probably nuclear subs circling below the water's surface. Now I don't know about you but if I had a hostile enemy, with the world's largest military, surrounding me and I was rich in oil and gas, I would do something to attempt to balance the power. Only a pacifist would be stupid enough to not consider such an option.
So that was one important reason for our map but I said there would be two. Okay now just take a broad look at the region. Head east for a moment and we have Pakistan, a country with a large fundamentalist Islamic population, nuclear weapons, an unelected military ruler whose life has been nearly taken numerous times. Now just imagine if the region got so unstable that the military ruler was replaced with Al-Queda sympathizers with nukes. Would this extreme regime nuke India finally? If so India would launch nukes back. Killing millions upon millions.
Now move slowly to the west from Pakistan and we come upon Afghanistan. Here in Afghanistan, as I said earlier, we have some 30,000 troops that would be a prime target for Iran. This would make the Taliban resistance that much stronger making a victory, if it were even possible, nearly impossible. So it is very likely that the Taliban would come to power only to ally themselves with a fundamentalist Pakistan, with Nukes.
Head north from Iran for a moment and you find Russia in a war against jihadists in Chechnya. Now you can understand why Russia would veto action against Iran because it would make their efforts in Chechnya, which I abhor, that much more hellish. Most likely Russia would have to increase its military presence in the area. Thus expanding the war into a whole other arena, the Caucasus Mountains.
Then there are our troops in Iraq. The moment we attack Iran the border between it and Iraq becomes meaningless. It is a well-known fact that many Iraqi Shia leaders hid out in Iran during the rule of Saddam and that many Iranians are loyal to the land of Iraq because many of its most important religious shrines are there. By attacking Iran we would risk inflaming a mostly restive and pro-American, for the time being, population. Thus making the war in Iraq a much messier problem for our soldiers. Now they would have to concentrate on the whole country instead of just the Sunni TriangleTM?. Yet the whole thing is about to get much much worse.
Shia Muslims, the majority in Iran, are also in Saudi Arabia and are located primarily in the northeast, bordering Iraqi's Shia, in the oil rich region of Saudi Arabia. One of the biggest power struggles in the area has been who is going to be the main player in the region with Iran and Saudi Arabia doing the battling. So I am sure it wouldn't one bit bother Iran to attack Saudi Arabia itself. Remember too that Iran has conventional missiles that can reach Saudi Arabia's largest refineries. If they were to attack the refineries, which they have stated they will, it would plunge the world's economy into at least a terrible recession if not depression. It was a depression that started WWII.
Then there is Israel. Israel would be attacked immediately the moment our Government attacks Iran. Now with missiles raining down on Tel Aviv, Jerusalem is too sacred to Islam, how does Israel restrain itself? It refuses to restrain itself against rock throwing boys so why would they not just go ballistic on Iran, maybe even literally since they are a nuclear power? So what would Israel do? First off they would have to take out Syria because Hezbollah is stationed there and would be attacking from the north. Would then Syria get involved? It isn't that they are very capable but at this point what other choice would they have?
So now we have Israel and Syria involved. With Syria and Iran both attacking Israel, the US would have intervene to help Israel by attacking Syria. Syria would respond by attacking US forces in Iraq while attacking Israel at the same time. Israel would probably decapitate Syria as quickly as possible maybe by nuking them. It isn't like Israel will be able to stop at Syria while missiles are raining down on Haifa. Most likely too is that Iran has chemical weapons unlike Iraq. If Iran attacked Israel with chemical weapons the Israeli military would go nuts on Iran. Israel has hundreds of nuclear weapons not to mention chemical and biological weapons.
So basically the result would be a smoldering pile of rubble that used to be called the Middle East. With Asia sizzling from India to Israel the oil would stop flowing. The entire world would be in dire straits and America is part of that world. Without Middle Eastern Oil the world's economy would come to a screeching halt.
The most interesting aspect of this scenario is it is the same as the Christian's Armageddon right before the second coming of Christ. Tim Lahaye's "Left Behind" series starts with an attack from Iran against Israel. The sect in Christianity that truly believes this will happen are WASPs more specifically the born again evangelical community. Some thirty percent of Americans believe in the bible literally and, I would believe, the President is one of them. Many of those same people subscribe to the notion of the rapture. Our country is going completely and utterly insane. Which leads me to believe that we must sneak up and remove the bus driver otherwise we are all going to die.