railing against scum

The Day Capitalism ate Democracy (and burped)

2010-01-22T16:27:00.000-08:00

So, unless you happen to be living in a cave you probably read about this debacle.

The SC only had to decide on whether Citizens United, a right-wing non-profit's political hit movie on Hillary ran afoul of McCain-Feingold. Instead, the conservatives on the SC decided very shamefully that the broader question of whether Corporations looked uncannily like human beings and thus merited First Amendment protection, had to be decided now. And whoa, in fact decided that Corporations could do whatever the fuck they wanted to swing elections. Cause they are no different from you and me.

Why now, you ask, when the Health Care bill is on life-support and the 2010 mid-term elections round the corner? If you're like me, you may wonder if perhaps the Corporatists organized this effort. Maybe the usual culprits got together, big banks and big Pharma, and decided, hey, we better get control over members of Congress before their sorry asses make any more trouble for us.

Rants aside, one of Anthony Kennedy's (he is after all supposedly the swing vote) arguments is that if the First Amendment can be applied to you and me, it could also be applied to associations of citizens:

"If the First Amendment has any force, it prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens or associations of citizens, for simply engaging in political speech."

So, a corporation is an association of citizens? Are you shitting me? An association? Kind of like, uhh, people who spontaneously get together and march down a street protesting a war? A group of similar-thinking individuals who have a bone to pick with someone or something? Who have a fire in their butts? What absolute, unvarnished, rubbish!

Does a wretched cashier who gets paid minimum wage working at a Wal-mart store qualify as a citizen in this grand association? Does he get any say in determining who Wal-mart decides to lobby for or against?

Since the SC overturned a law dating all the way to 1907 (whatever happened to the idea of respecting settled law!) on constitutional grounds, I suspect that that's it. Congress cannot make any law overturning this decision unless the Constitution is specifically amended. And good luck with that people!

If I could take a moment and speculate foolishly on how the future will play out in this country, it is this: Capitalism will turn into uber-Capitalism, the difference between the haves and the have-nots already historically high will become ridiculously high. Civil disobedience will return to mainstream America, and who knows maybe even a revolution in my lifetime. Maybe America will prove Marx right about the possibility of unequal distribution of power and of income, and its disposition to depression and unemployment, ultimately leading to the demise of Capitalism.

Obama cries mama!

2010-01-22T16:07:00.000-08:00

So, I don't know if you read Krugman's column today. He urges the House Dems to pass the Senate bill. Never mind that the leader (i.e. the president) is missing just when the Massachusetts shit hit the Senate fan.

I agree with Krugman. It is hard to remain loyal to Obama when he makes a wimpy remark like:

I would advise that we try to move quickly to coalesce around those elements of the package that people agree on.

One thing I would advise Obama is that he had better quickly coalesce around his values; otherwise people will agree he is a package without a spine. How much lower will you lower the bar, Mr. President?

Consumerism

2009-12-26T20:51:00.000-08:00

Sorry for taking such a long break (for all my imaginary fans who've been waiting impatiently for a post since 2007), but what can I say...I've had nothing to say. After all, one needs to be a little crazy to continue appeasing imaginary fans, or at least to have a massive alter ego. But now, I've reached that happy place -- either the little crazy part or the ego part, I know not, but the urge to write again has come back.

So, all of us liberals, especially the back-to-earth ones rail about consumerism. That the darn thing is a disease, it must be eradicated, it is responsible for everything from global climate change to the housing bubble. One such article is from Amitai Etzioni in the New Republic.

Well, I think all of us are wrong to focus so much on consumerism. Accusing someone of consumerism is like calling them stupid or greedy, it just doesn't work. When we tell them that consumerism doesn't buy happiness, instead why don't they try having a quiet family dinner, it is enough to make most people's blood boil. They may even think you're right, but damn it, is their God-given right, the American Way of Life, etc to do whatever they bloody well want without a do-gooder telling them otherwise.

So, I have a small suggestion. Replace the emphasis on consumerism with, instead, an emphasis on less waste. Sounds trivial, doesn't it, but think of it. If everyone couldn't throw things away, they would spend far more time ensuring that what they buy they really need.

OK, it is also a value, and as a value it is as hard to inculcate in a society used to throwing things away, but there are a few differences. The phrase "less waste" is not a negative judgment, simply a value. And as a value, it is easier to instill in people. Also, it is easier to incentivize. For instance, the EU law on manufacturers is that they are able to take back their products after they've reached their end of life.

One incentive on less waste is likely to happen -- when products become more expensive. So, a falling dollar is sure to benefit the world even as us Americans struggle to consume. This is naturally so in most developing and under-developed countries -- it is simply too expensive to buy something that one doesn't really need.

Is perjury as bad as lying to your wife?

2007-03-09T08:55:00.000-08:00

Apparently, Newt Gingrich was having an extramarital affair even as he was angling to impeach Bill Clinton for his dalliances with Monica Lewinsky. Of course, this is a familiar Republican pattern: Strom Thurmond's racism even as his pecker apparently is not capable of distinguishing color; and that Florida ex-Congressman Mark Foley who was writing legislation to protect children while writing pornographic instant messages to his own underage pages.

But Newt's justification for his peccadilloes is amazing: he claims that Clinton was guilty of "perjury," so deserved to be prosecuted while he was only lying to his wife. This is what he said when asked if he was having an affair at the same time:

Mr. Gingrich: The honest answer is yes. …. I drew a line in my mind that said, ‘Even though I run the risk of being deeply embarrassed, and even though at a purely personal level I am not rendering judgment on another human being, as a leader of the government trying to uphold the rule of law, I have no choice except to move forward and say that you cannot accept … perjury in your highest officials.

Ahh, I see, Mr. Gingrich. It is excusable to lie, but to get caught lying, now, that's a big no-no.

The insulation of America

2007-02-19T18:40:00.000-08:00

Mummified man found in front of TV:

"SOUTHAMPTON, N.Y. — Southampton police responding to burst water pipes in a Hampton Bays home found the mummified body of the owner — dead for more than a year — sitting in a chair in front of a television.

The television was still on."

Another reason I am thinking of moving to India.

Operation Iraqi Freedom in Action

2007-02-19T18:20:00.000-08:00

The irony is almost overdone. As reported by the Los Angeles Times on the sentence of a U.S. Marine in the intentional killing of an unarmed and innocent Iraqi man, Hashim Ibrahim Awad in Hamandiya:

"Pennington told Folsom he regretted his actions but that he and other Marines were frustrated by their ill-defined mission in Iraq and the inability to tell friend from foe.

'As callous as it sounds,' he said, every Iraqi was considered 'guilty until proven otherwise.'"

Baker vs Neocons in pursuit of Iraq's oil

2006-12-10T00:13:00.000-08:00

pbs.org

Antonia Juhasz writes in Alternet about the Iraq Study Group's report:

"The report calls for the United States to assist in privatizing Iraq's national oil industry, opening Iraq to private foreign oil and energy companies, providing direct technical assistance for the 'drafting' of a new national oil law for Iraq, and assuring that all of Iraq's oil revenues accrue to the central government."

So, Baker's calling for a realpolitik way of dealing with the crisis, including letting Iran have its pound of nuclear flesh -- which Ahmadinejad will surely extract -- while the neocons fret and fume, wanting to persist in their muscular militaristic (and failing) solutions.

But, mind you, both their goals are the same: the privatization of Iraq's oil assets and allowing for military presence in the middle east. With peak oil round the corner, and the world's 2nd largest oil reserve languishing, there's much money to be made if only...

It sure seems that the power-brokers are losing patience with GW, and sending Baker in to straighten him out seems like the last step before something more dramatic. Wonder if impeachment is imminent. Signs in the media should reveal more.

Democrats' new strategy

2006-09-23T06:36:00.000-07:00

democrat.com

Democrats warn Chavez: Don't bash Bush:

"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Two of President Bush's staunchest domestic critics leapt to his defense Thursday, a day after one of his fiercest foreign foes called him 'the devil' in a scorching speech before the United Nations.

'You don't come into my country; you don't come into my congressional district and you don't condemn my president,' Rep. Charles Rangel, D-New York, scolded Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-California, was blunt in her criticism of the Venezuelan leader. 'He is an everyday thug,' she said."

The strategy? Don't bash Bush, only we can do that.

C'mon Dems: don't beat around the Bush.

Chavez on Bush

2006-09-21T06:29:00.000-07:00

Julie Jacobson
AP

Holding up a copy of Noam Chomsky's book, Hugo Chávez attacks 'devil' Bush in UN speech:

In a 15-minute address to the annual gathering of international leaders in New York, President Chávez said he could still 'smell sulphur' left behind by the 'devil', George Bush, who had addressed the chamber 24 hours before.

The Guardian also reported that:

Delegates and leaders from around the world streamed back into the chamber to hear Mr Chávez, and when he stepped down the vigorous applause lasted so long that it had to be curtailed by the chair.

When madmen rule...

2006-09-20T05:31:00.000-07:00

rawstory.com

First, it was pointing out Saddam as deserving of regime change. Now it appears to be Ahmadinejad's turn.

'You deserve an opportunity to determine your own future,' Bush told the people of Iran.

'The greatest obstacle to this future is that your rulers have chosen to deny you liberty and to use your nation's resources to fund terrorism and fuel extremism and pursue nuclear weapons.'

Doesn't he worry that people will catch on that he's using the same tired lines before invading a country? Or is it he just doesn't care? What was it he once said?

"There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."

Well, Mr. President, if we can't get fooled again, why are you trying to fool us twice?

Abusing the memory of 9/11

2006-09-08T20:22:00.000-07:00

cooperativeresearch.org

Sometimes you wish your predictions didn't come true. I wish mine hadn't. I had predicted in an earlier entry that Bush and the Republican Congress would use 9/11 as a platform to pass laws legalizing Guantanomo torture and warrantless spying. And sure enough, here it comes:

President Bush pressed Congress on Thursday to approve new military tribunals to try terrorism suspects, a day after he admitted the CIA ran secret prisons overseas where accused militants were detained.

And:

Speaking at a public policy forum in Atlanta, Bush also urged Congress to endorse his administration's domestic eavesdropping program.

'I will continue to use every element of national power to pursue our enemies and to prevent attacks on the United States of America,' Bush said.

The one predictable attribute of scum is that you know it is going to stink.

Pentagon Report: Iraq & civil war.

2006-09-01T17:32:00.000-07:00

ridiculopathy.com

The New York Times reported acerbically, that:

The Pentagon distributed the report on a Friday afternoon before a long weekend, a common time for government officials to put out bad news. A Pentagon officials denied that this was the intent and said the report was issued when it completed.

A snippet of the report:

“Conditions that could lead to civil war exist in Iraq, especially in and around Baghdad, and concern about civil war within the Iraqi population has increased in recent months.”

In the meantime, the U.S. Comamnd in Baghdad is doling out $20 mil of our money to the corporation which will best monitor the "tone of Iraq news stories filed by U.S. and foreign media."

Remember the story about fixing the news on Iraq by having soldiers write them and paying Iraqi reporters to pass them off as their own? An intern for the Lincoln group even detailed his experience on Democracy Now!

Well, here's the sequel...talk about bringing democracy to a country by the barrel of a gun or with a barrel full of dollars.

Housing values since 1890s to now

2006-08-30T18:14:00.000-07:00

Here's the blog from Nouriel Roubini which refers to this.

Man using walker deemed not a terrorist

2006-08-29T00:12:00.000-07:00

71-Year-Old Gitmo Detainee Released:

The oldest detainee at Guantanamo Bay — an Afghan man who is at least 71 and hobbled around the U.S. prison in Cuba using a walker — has been sent home, his lawyer said Monday.

And I am sure this poor old soul will get a lot less attention than that media darling John Karr who was released from the "who killed JonBenet" circus.

More on the man:

Khan was not charged with a crime and Ryan [his attroney] said the government never said why he was detained.

"We couldn't figure out why he was there," Ryan said. "He could barely walk and he could barely hear."

Khan told his lawyers he believes he's around 78, but doesn't know his exact age. He is at least 71, according to military records obtained by The Associated Press.

The coming economic collapse...

2006-08-28T21:55:00.000-07:00

army.mil

I've been subscribing to the housing bubble theory for a while. That when the stock market bubble collapsed, there was only a mild recession (lasted 2 quarters) despite the tremendous loss of wealth. The money, I speculate, went to another bubble -- the real estate bubble, which is about to burst, with dramatic consequences for the U.S. and the world. There aren't many economists who come out and say this (although many academics do). Stephen Roach did, and then changed his mind. Now, Nouriel Roubini follows with his thoughts on a recession:

I have analyzed in detail in my last blog why we will soon have a housing related recession; these views have been widely picked in the press, most prominently by Paul Krugman in his Friday column in the NYT. While, as Krugman correctly points out, I may be the only “well-known” economist who is arguing that we will have a housing-led recession, many other very prominent economists – including Krugman himself as well as Ed Leamer (who calls a soft landing scenario a “fantasy”), Jim Hamilton (see also here) and Bob Shiller (who predicted the tech bust stock of 2000 and is now predicting a housing bust) – are now of the view that there are serious risk of a housing market bust that could then have macro consequences.

Will the "strong dollar" finally fall? If it does, it could have beneficial effects on the trade deficit, but disastrous effects on the country's ability to borrow, not to mention loss of equity for all the global investment in the dollar. A "dollar bubble" burst? Hurting the entire world? Nasty!

The newest corporate kitty...

2006-08-27T12:44:00.000-07:00

Iraq came and went...when people looked the other way, Halliburton, Bechtel and others happily raided the public's money to build infrastructure at cost-plus inflated prices that the military with public's money had destroyed.

Then, it was Katrina...people died, there was an outcry, the corporates came and raided the public trough again.

Now, the latest opportunity for looting from the public is "border security." Little Bush turned Boy King after 9/11, is probably going to push for millions of dollars to be diverted once again to "secure" the border with Mexico. [Timing is everything: 9/11 anniversary is the perfect opportunity to ask Congress to fund these projects] Secure from what? From agri-businesses making enormous profits off paying substandard benefits to illegal workers? Or everyday Americans from using the labor line to get some cheap Mexican muscle to get their home remodeling projects done?

The usual parties of the military industrial complex are in play for this money:

The Bush administration is expected next month to choose an industry consortium to erect a high-tech security shield along the U.S. borders, launching one of the federal government's most ambitious public-works projects in years.

The Department of Homeland Security calls the proposed Secure Border Initiative Net the 'most comprehensive effort in the nation's history' to gain control of more than 6,000 miles of border with Mexico and Canada as well as 2,000 miles of coastline.

SBInet is a centerpiece of President Bush's efforts to fortify the porous U.S.-Mexico border at a time when Congress is locked in a struggle to overhaul the nation's immigration laws. Administration officials say they intend to proceed with the security net regardless of the outcome of the debate over immigration legislation.

The multibillion-dollar undertaking has ignited an intensely fought contract battle among industry teams headed by four leading defense companies - Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon - and Ericsson, the Swedish-based telecommunications giant with U.S. headquarters in Plano, Texas.

height of stupidity?

2006-08-24T13:16:00.000-07:00

Macaca nemestrina
wanprc.org

When Virginia's incumbent Senator George Allen was campaigning, an aide from his Democratic opponent Jim Webb's campaign, followed him around videotaping him. The aide, S.R. Sidarth is an American of Indian origin, born in Virginia. He had introduced himself to Allen before taping him. Not only does Sidharth capture Allen making a racist remark, the moronic Senator actually makes it on film while addressing Sidharth and referring to him as "macaca." Worse, he prefaces his racist remarks by saying he wants to run a positive campaign. I mean, how dumb can you get. Capitol Hill Blue says this is nothing new, and the Daily Show has a field day with it.

Amnesty Intl: Israel committed war crimes

2006-08-24T12:59:00.000-07:00

Qana massacre
yalibnan.com

Amnesty International issued a report that says:

First-hand information gathered by recent Amnesty International research missions to Lebanon and Israel points to an Israeli policy of deliberate destruction of Lebanese civilian infrastructure during the recent conflict.

And also that:

The Israeli Air Force launched more than 7,000 air attacks on about 7,000 targets in Lebanon between 12 July and 14 August, while the Navy conducted an additional 2,500 bombardments. The attacks, though widespread, particularly concentrated on certain areas. An estimated 1,183 people died, about one third of whom have been children, 4,054 people were injured and 970,000 Lebanese people have been displaced.

Compare that with 44 Israeli civilians dead. 44 Israeli civilians on one side, 1183 Lebanese on the other with a third of those children. The facts speak for themselves that if it is a terrorist who targets innocent people, Israel has killed far more innocent civilians in this war. Its claims that this was collateral damage rings hollow in the face of this AI report.

The height of idiocy...

2006-08-22T12:02:00.000-07:00

uncyclopedia.org

Sometimes, something is so obvious that it would insult the reader for me to write about it. Like if I were to headline that there was sectarian violence in Iraq. Or that innocent Iraqis had been sexually abused and tortured in Abu Ghraib. Or that 2+2 is 4. Or that President Bush is, well, a man whose skills are better utilized perhaps in a line manager's job at the local Burger King. Assuming he would be OK not taking long vacations of course.

I've refrained from picking on President Bush because that is so overdone it is boring and tiresome (not to mention giving too much power to this man), but one is so aghast when one reads and listens to what this man has to say-- as this exchange shows -- that I had to write (the audio is also worth listening to).

REPORTER: A lot of the consequences you mentioned for pulling out seem like maybe they never would have been there if we hadn't gone in. How do you square all of that?

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: I square it, because -- imagine a world in which you had Saddam Hussein who had the capacity to make a weapon of mass destruction, who was paying suiciders to kill innocent life, who would -- who had relations with Zarqawi. Imagine what the world would be like with him in power. The idea is to try to help change the Middle East.

Now, look, I didn’t -- part of the reason we went into Iraq was -- the main reason we went into Iraq at the time was we thought he had weapons of mass destruction. It turns out he didn't, but he had the capacity to make weapons of mass destruction. But I also talked about the human suffering in Iraq, and I also talked the need to advance a freedom agenda. And so my question -- my answer to your question is, is that -- imagine a world in which Saddam Hussein was there, stirring up even more trouble in a part of the world that had so much resentment and so much hatred that people came and killed 3,000 of our citizens.

You know, I've heard this theory about, you know, everything was just fine until we arrived, and then, you know, kind of that we're going to stir up the hornet's nest theory. It just -- just doesn't hold water, as far as I'm concerned. The terrorists attacked us and killed 3,000 of our citizens before we started the freedom agenda in the Middle East.
REPORTER: What did Iraq have to do with that?
PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: What did Iraq have to do with what?
REPORTER: The attack on the World Trade Center?
PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Nothing, except for it's part of -- and nobody has ever suggested in this administration that Saddam Hussein ordered the attack. Iraq was a -- Iraq -- the lesson of September the 11th is, take threats before they fully materialize, Ken. Nobody has ever suggested that the attacks of September the 11th were ordered by Iraq.

Richard Heinberg on a possible Iran attack...

2006-08-20T12:25:00.000-07:00

idioteca.it

Will the White House attack Iran before November to preserve a Republican majority in Congress? What is the Shia-Sunni divide in middle east politics, and how do the protagonists see this? Full article here. Excerpted below:

In discussing the likely scope of the air campaign, [Terence] Ward foresees a bombing lasting two weeks, targeting 1,000 sites including sea ports, missile defense systems, military bases, airports, industries, and 20 nuclear facilities.

Iran’s response is not hard to guess. The nation has hundreds of undeclared dock and port facilities along its Persian Gulf coast. The Iranian Navy recently conducted exercises in the Strait of Hormuz, in which a thousand small Iranian boats simulated attacks on American ships. The Strait is the world’s only access point for millions of barrels per day of OPEC oil. The passage of tankers through this narrow waterway would almost certainly be interrupted for days, weeks, and perhaps months if hostilities erupted.

An attack on Tehran would also unleash an enormous backlash against the US in Shia areas of Iraq, possibly making the American presence in that country untenable. The Iranians’ capabilities in this regard have not been lost on US military leaders. According to Ward, from American military leaders’ perspective this is a mission from hell. The Pentagon brass are uncertain what targets to attack, because American and European intelligence agencies have found no specific evidence of clandestine activities or hidden facilities. Thus it would be virtually impossible to gain confirmation of the effectiveness of air strikes in eliminating Iran’s nuclear program. Recently, General Pace, head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, apparently forced the White House to agree not to use nuclear weapons in its planned bombing campaign. This rebellion by the military has infuriated the White House.
Ward also provided a helpful perspective on the Shia-Sunni divide in Middle East. He noted that the bulk of oil reserves on the planet lie in Shia territory:

The Shia of Saudi Arabia would love to have the same control over their oil revenues as their Shia brothers in Iraq. Long oppressed by the Sunni Wahhabi rulers, these Shia go on pilgrimage to Iran and will react in subtle and overt ways if Iran is attacked. Bahrain is over 95% Shia and has experienced unrest before along the Shia/Sunni divide. Dubai is a large center of Persian-speakers and Iranian influence. Kuwait is also 30% Shia. In Aramco and KOC, the Shia vastly represent the local skilled labor force. An incident like the attempt on the Abqaiq collection stations by al-Qaeda operatives is not out of the question.

Ward pointed out that the Saudi and Jordanian monarchies speak openly of a radical “Shia crescent” across the Middle East, and that both ruling families would support a US strike against Iran. The Shia-dominated government of Iraq strikes fear in the hearts of Saudi leaders because they know it emboldens Shias in the Saudi oil-rich Eastern Province of al-Hassa. It is the emergence of Iran as a regional power that is their principal concern, not Israel.
Southern Lebanon is Shia majority, and Syria’s Bashar al-Assad is a member of the Alawite Shia sect. The alliance between Hezbollah and the Syrian regime is strong, and Iran has provided monetary and military assistance to Hezbollah for decades. Thus the current conflict in southern Lebanon carries a deep resonance across the region.
Ward also notes:

Many Sunnis view the US and Shia cooperation in Iraq as a conspiracy against them—a “Wahhabi containment policy.” The profound conviction among much of the Arab world today, including the Saudi royal family, is that the U.S. plans to do the same to Saudi Arabia that they have engineered in Iraq. Like Iraq, the theory goes, Saudi Arabia would be divided into three parts. The moderate Hashemites of Jordan would regain their historic control of the holy cities of Mecca and Medina; autonomous Saudi Shia would control the oil-laden Eastern Province; and the Wahhabis would be left baking in the sands of the Nejad Desert.

Thus the bombing of Iran could trigger wider chaos in the region, provoking not only temporary oil shortages and a global recession, but a wholesale reconfiguration of the Middle East in ways difficult to foresee.

My new hero

2006-08-18T13:18:00.000-07:00

latimes.com

I had predicted in a previous post that, come the 9/11 anniversary, BushCo and the GOP congressional mob would go hysterical over the terrorist threat and wrap themselves in the flag to justify creating new laws to legitimize both the fascist warrantless spy program as well as the "what-Geneva-convention?" military tribunals.

Anna Diggs Taylor, a US District Court judge in Detroit, by ruling against the spy program has likely proved me wrong and I love her for that.

This is because she has ruled the warrantless spy program unconstitutional by stating

that the wiretapping program violates the 1st and 4th Amendments to the Constitution, which respectively protect free speech and prohibit unlawful searches. She also held that the program, formally known as the Terrorist Surveillance Program and run by the National Security Agency, violates the federal Administrative Procedures Act and the separation-of-powers doctrine.

Woo, hoo! Well, it may be too early to celebrate, but hopefully, she has closed the door on any congressional action between Sep 11 and the start of a new (hopefully-Democratic-controlled) congressional term. Congress cannot make any laws in violation of the Constitution, so unless the appeal is upheld, it may be beddy-bye time for the program...unless of course, the Dems cave.

Bush's reaction?

"I strongly disagree with that decision, strongly disagree. That’s why I instructed the Justice Department to appeal immediately. And I believe our appeals will be upheld.”

“We believe, strongly believe, it’s constitutional,” the president added. “And if Al Qaeda is calling into the United States, we want to know why they’re calling.”

The same old idiotic "Al Qaeda-calling" routine...when he knows pretty well he can get a warrant for that with the FISA courts anytime, and can even get the warrant after the fact. Chimp on a treadmill.

And the RNC headlined this ruling as:

"Liberal Judge Backs Dem Agenda to Weaken National Security."

Sore as always...and mean as hell.

Destroy, then Rebuild

2006-08-17T13:03:00.000-07:00

latimes.com

The same pattern as Iraq: first, destroy everything -- hey, we need to use up those "smart" bombs -- then, rebuild everything. Either way, the Lockeed's and Halliburton's benefit. Money gets channeled from the U.S. public to favored private companies. Meanwhile millions die from preventable causes like diarrhoea.

The LA Times reports that the same rebuilding is being planned for Lebanon:

The Bush administration is scrambling to assemble a plan to help rebuild Lebanon, hoping that by competing with Hezbollah for the public's favor it can undo the damage the war has inflicted on its image and goals for the Middle East.

Gee Swell, compete with Iran and Syria in seeing who can do the most destruction, and then again with rebuilding. Having BushCo in charge of marketing the U.S. image is like using Mel Gibson to market Kosher food.

Onward to Iran through Lebanon

2006-08-14T16:02:00.000-07:00

uchicago.edu

Seymour Hersh writes in the New Yorker what many people perhaps had suspected all along:

The Bush Administration, however, was closely involved in the planning of Israel’s retaliatory attacks. President Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney were convinced, current and former intelligence and diplomatic officials told me, that a successful Israeli Air Force bombing campaign against Hezbollah’s heavily fortified underground-missile and command-and-control complexes in Lebanon could ease Israel’s security concerns and also serve as a prelude to a potential American preëmptive attack to destroy Iran’s nuclear installations, some of which are also buried deep underground.

If this was planned well in advance by the U.S. and Israel, it now becomes obvious why Syria has been given the cold shoulder after its help with interrogating suspected Al Qaeda terrorists after 9/11.

Perhaps, Rafik Hariri's death was arranged just so the Syrian army would leave Lebanon. Leading the way for Israel to take one of the periodic Hezbollah cross-border attacks and use it as rationale for an escalation. Once Beirut was bombed and Hezbollah retaliated by firing Katyusha rockets into Israel, Israeli civilians got behind the government in full support. Giving Israel the green light to do a full aerial bombardment of Lebanon.

The LA Times had a story about how Israel was struggling in this war, and that aerial bombardment was absolutely the wrong strategy. Not only was it ineffective, it only served to highlight to the world, Israel's cavalier attitude to the loss of Lebanese civilian lives.

In a sense, the U.N. ceasefire resolution was needed as much by Israel (and the U.S.) in terms of saving face -- or at least having time to wipe the poo off their faces -- as by Lebanon in terms of staunching even more loss of civilian losses.

Fascism and Islam

2006-08-11T15:41:00.000-07:00

You may say Bush should know about fascism, which in its most generic form means a totalitarian consolidation of state and corporate power. But really, why indeed did he say:

this nation is at war with Islamic fascists

I mean really, are we even at war? And are our opponents Islamic fascists?

Using the reductional adjective Islamic to describe terrorists (or fascists) would be fair if the phrase oil-based were used to similarly preface any mention of U.S. mideast policy. It doesn't take an Einstein to figure out the connection between the two.

I think fascism was deliberately introduced in his speech. Not only does it mollify the talk-show mullahs and the Fox News clerics who have for a while referred to terrorists -- and for that matter insurgents and probably everyone who opposes the U.S. -- as "islamo-fascists," it has a more sinister connotation. Timed during Israel's invasion of Lebanon, it draws a giant circle around Hezbollah, Hamas, Iraqi insurgents, the states of Iran and Syria and probably all suspicious-looking Muslim men and draws the Fuhrer's mustache on every one of their upper lips, as if to say,

Be afraid, very afraid and let us take the strong measures needed to protect you.

Tantrum by the Los Angeles Times

2006-08-09T21:34:00.000-07:00

beyondchron.org

Apparently the powers that be, want Lopez Obrador to quitely step aside from his presidential bid. Much like Bush v Gore, we have a country which is divided in its choice of president. Calderon has eked out a narrow advantage of 0.57% a difference that Lopez Obrador has every right to contest and demand a recount. Not so says the Los Angeles Times:

The tribunal could still call for a broader review, but Mexican law is wary of full recounts lest the election-day work of those conscripted ballot-counting citizens be undermined.

Bah Humbug! I say. This is the letter I sent them, which most likely is not getting published:

Your support for the justification not to do a full recount -- that the election-day work of ballot-counting citizens would be undermined -- is as backward as the Bush administration's rationale that the Iraq war continue to be prosecuted so the soldiers who died, didn't die in vain.

A recommended recount of 9% of the ballots by itself suggests significant irregularities in the election. Given our own history of the flawed 2000 presidential election, when a full recount of Florida most likely would have made Gore the winner, it is in Mexico's best interest to put all doubts to rest and do a full recount.

Altered Oceans -- series on LA Times

2006-08-09T21:22:00.000-07:00

latimes.com

Kudos to the LA Times for an awesomely researched and presented series on how our oceans are getting spoiled and how humans are ultimately going to pay the price.

Maybe Congress should just adjourn for the rest of the year

2006-08-06T00:00:00.000-07:00

And now for some good news. Congress Is Stalled on New Terror Laws according to the Los Angeles Times.

It now looks like both the laws to set up a framework for military tribunals and for the NSA warrantless spying, are going to have to wait till Congress comes back from its undeservedly long holiday (Aug 7 - Sep 4).

I predict some grandstanding with the anniversary of Sep 11 as background, when they come back. Also, that they will be in a hurry to enact something which gives Bush a total pass on both fronts. After all, come November, the God's Own Party may not be in the majority.

Committee of shame

2006-08-05T23:42:00.000-07:00

politicalfriendster.com

Four CA counties enacted ordinances restricting genetically modified seeds in their counties. This was done democratically with hard-fought battles against the likes of Monsanto and friends.

On June 28, 2006, the Democrat-controlled Assembly Committee on Agriculture has voted to pass a bill SB 1056 onto the full Assembly. This bill is likely to be heard in August. The bill if passed by the legislature, would overturn the wish of these counties, and worse, take away the rights of local counties to exercise control over biotech in their own communities.

What can possibly allow such a piece of legislation to get passed by the committee? I mean, have they heard of the will of the people? Or is it that the pockets of the agri-lobby are so deep, they couldn't resist dipping their grubby little fingers in them?

See who makes up this committee of shame.

The CAL GE-Free group has tools for you to act.

Wrapping themselves with the Israeli flag

2006-07-27T09:59:00.000-07:00

nytimes.com

Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi should be ashamed of themselves. While Lebanon burns and fellow shiites call for a ceasefire, Dean and Pelosi make statements condemning the Iraqi premier Nouri al-Maliki for statements he had made against Israel.

The supposedly leftist Dean had this to say:

The Iraqi prime minister is an anti-Semite,' the Democratic leader told a gathering of business leaders in Florida. 'We don't need to spend 200 and 300 and $500 billion bringing democracy to Iraq to turn it over to people who believe that Israel doesn't have a right to defend itself and who refuse to condemn Hizbullah.

Meanwhile, consider what the Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora had to say while pleading for a cease-fire:

Are we children of a lesser God? Is an Israeli teardrop worth more than a drop of Lebanese blood?

Israel -- the callous state

2006-07-19T18:47:00.000-07:00

smh.com.au

So, yes, it is beseiged by states which sponsor terrorism against it. But terrorism is simply the flailing of marginalized groups. Agreed, people do die, but in the name of moral equivalence -- you kill mine, and I will kill yours -- the jewish state is indifferent to the loss of civilian lives on the other side. The hypocrisy is stunning -- our civilians are so precious. But yours, we can attack and kill in great numbers without conscience.

This past week, Lebanese fatalities number in the 100s, while Israeli civilian casualties is about a dozen. A telling statistic.

An LA Times editorial posits that Israel is uninterested in a ceasefire because it wants to destroy all Hezbollah infrastructure even if civilians are caught in the crossfire. The reason: Hezbollah will then be incapacitated to retaliate when Israel attacks Iran...which is supposedly what the military is strategizing for.

If true, this loss of civilian lives is all the more cruel and it borders on terrorism itself, the only difference being that terrorism squarely targets civilians whereas for Israel it is a by-product, a side effect that raises no moral eyebrows.

Our tax dollars at work to blindfold us

2006-07-07T00:09:00.000-07:00

secretservice.gov

Gee, whiz...how can we screw the public with their own money:

The federal government will pay a Texas law school $1 million to do research aimed at rolling back the amount of sensitive data available to the press and public through freedom-of-information requests.

Who knows what will be discovered through FOIA requests? Embarrassing stuff like, Bush sat on his ass when he could have done something to prevent 9/11? Or incriminating stuff like perhaps, the President lying through his grimaced face about Iraq's WMDs.

Wouldn't want that now, would we?

Powerful piece from George Lakoff

2006-07-05T11:09:00.000-07:00

betterworldheroes.com

It is time to tell an inconvenient truth about Iraq: it is an occupation, not a war.

Our nation has been held trapped in a fallacious War Frame that serves the interests of the Bush administration and the Republican Party. The term “cut and run,” used to vilify Democrats, is defined relative to the following frame:
There is a war against evil that must be fought. Fighting requires courage and bravery. Those fully committed to the cause are brave. Those who "cut and run" are motivated by self-interest; they are only interested in saving their own skins, not in the moral cause. They are cowards. And since those fighting for the cause need all the support they can get, anyone who decides to “cut and run” endangers both the moral cause and the lives of those brave people who are fighting for it. Those who have courage and conviction should stand and fight.

Once the false frame is set, it is hard to use any pure self-interest frame that ignores the just cause of fighting evil. That is the trap the Democrats have fallen into. Their proposed slogans evoke self-interest frames: John Murtha’s “stay and pay and ”John Kerry’s “lie and die” have an X-and-Y structure that evokes, and thus reinforces, “cut and run.”

Independence day bahstard

2006-07-04T23:01:00.000-07:00

Firedoglake

New Haven Independent: Lieberman Launches "Cut & Run" Campaign:

In a sign that he fears for his political future, three-term U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman announced outside the state Capitol Monday that his reelection campaign will take out petitions to get his name on the November ballot as an independent -- just in case challenger Ned Lamont beats him in an Aug. 8 Democratic primary. Lieberman's brief announcement signalled both the spin he'll use to try to limit the political fallout of the move, as well as the main tack he'll use to try to blunt Lamont's challenge.

I never did like Lieberman, a slick slimy politician, the kind that this country could do well without. In addition, squatting in a Democratic seat, he dilutes the Democratic message. I mean, do we really need a Democrat who sounds marginally different than Dick "I like torture" Cheney!

Military medics participating in torture

2006-07-03T11:17:00.000-07:00

cbs.com

Dr. Steven Miles is the author of "Oath Betrayed: Torture, Medical Complicity and the War on Terror.” He researched government documents to come to the conclusions in his book, where he clearly documents the multiple cases of medical complicity in torture.

On Tavis Smiley (PBS -- June 30th) he had this to say:

"This breaks my heart because, first off, I'm a doc, so these are my colleagues. When I look at the way that military medicine acted in World War II, Korea, Vietnam and Gulf War I, I can't find anything that looks like this. This is a non-recognizable military medical system to me and it wasn't just Iraq. There are multiple prisons in Iraq, multiple prisons in Afghanistan and Guantanamo."

He goes on to say:

Because the problem is that the Congress allowed the president to suspend the Geneva Conventions and we allowed our Congress to suspend the Geneva Conventions. At some point, we have to assume a national responsibility as citizens for what our government does on our behalf. This is not a book about the rightness or wrongness of the war, but it is a book about what we as a society have tolerated. We built the Geneva Conventions to protect prisoners of war and we have stood by as those standards have been taken down.

Frank Rich of NY Times, on Rep. Peter King

2006-07-01T23:33:00.000-07:00

When the NY Times, LA Times and WSJ broke the banking scandal, Congressman Peter King most strenuously called for a criminal investigation of the NYT.

In a fitting response, Frank Rich heaps scorn on King:

'Representative King, so eager to label others treasonous, has humiliating headlines of his own to counteract: he's the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee who has so little clout and bureaucratic aptitude that he couldn't stop the government led by his own party from stripping New York City, in his home state, of 40 percent of its counterterrorism funding. If there's another terrorist attack, he may be the last person in New York who should accuse others, as he did The Times on the House floor on Thursday, of having blood 'on their hands.'

Pundits salivating over Rove v Dems battle over Gitmo

2006-06-30T10:35:00.000-07:00

wikipedia.org

Oh, oh! The pundits have started spinning again. As to what Rove will do, and how Dems need to fight back. The backdrop is the SC ruling that the current Gitmo trial process is illegal. So, what is Bush planning to do? Take it to Congress to make it legal. Bill "I'll lick any conservative ass to get a vote" Frist has already indicated his willingness.

Here's a pundit's presciption on TPMCafe:

To thwart this tactic, Democrats need to clamor for legislation calling for no bail, confidential reports to Congress on the danger to the country from these prisoners (conducted by the 911 Commission), trials starting no later than in the fall, and harsh penalties.

In other words, show the American public that Dems can be tough on security.

I say this is folly of the first water. Rove (or Rove's media alter-ego) sets the rules of the game, the media hype it up, the Dems are supposed to play by those rules.

Hell, no. My prescription to the Dems: don't back down, stand for your principles. Tell it like it is. The Iraq war was a mistake and created more terrorists. If the terrorists hate our freedoms and want to take it away, why is Bush helping them by taking it away from us?

So, what has the GOP been doing? Creating more terrorists and diluting our freedoms. Is this a party you would trust?

Supreme Court squashes Bush's power-grab

2006-06-29T15:49:00.000-07:00

wikinews.org

No doubt you've heard about the U.S. Supreme Court decision today that the administration's plan for tribunals for Gunatanomo prisoners (Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld), was illegal. That Bush had better go to Congress for authorization since they violated the Geneval convention.

And no doubt you were elated. Here's what you probably missed that sounds extremely positive.

Marty Lederman writes about the decision's most important implications:

1. That the President's conduct is subject to the limitations of statute and treaty (see, e.g., footnote 23, and the Kennedy and Breyer excerpts that Orin Kerr quotes).

2. That Congress's enactments are best construed to require compliance with the international laws of armed conflict, absent contrary legislative direction.

3. That Common Article 3 of Geneva aplies as a matter of treaty obligation to the conflict against Al Qaeda. (See also the AMK concurrence: 'The provision is part of a treaty the United States has ratified and thus accepted as binding law. By Act of Congress, moreover, violations of Common Article 3 are considered 'war crimes,' punishable as federal offenses, when committed by or against United States nationals and military personnel. See 18 U. S. C. § 2441.') This ruling has enormous implications for the Administration's detention and interrogation practices, because the Administration's legal conclusion that CA3 does not apply, and that we will not apply it as a matter of practice, was the key linchpin to the entire edifice of legal maneuvers that led to waterboarding, hypothermia, degradation, etc. See my post here. Per today's decision, the Administration appears to have been engaged in war crimes, which are subject to the death penalty. Although I don't think due process would allow prosecution based on conduct previously undertaken on OLC's advice that CA3 did not apply (after all, the Chief Justice concluded, in the D.C. Circuit, that CA3 did not apply), practices going forward are bound to change, and quick. (I'm sure the memos are being drafted and distributed in the CIA and DOD even as we "speak.")

War Crimes! Of course, it doesn't seem like Bush can be prosecuted since the ruling came after his memos legitimizing torture, but surely any subsequent actions violating CA3 of the convention are culpable.

What was also encouraging was Rep Jane Harman, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, taking a strong position on the illegality of the tribunals (hopefully the Dems won't cave in to the "weak-on-defense" line that the Republicans have been beating them up with). Here's what she said:

"Since 9/11, the Bush administration has operated in the 'fog of law' -- expanding executive branch power, ignoring the will of Congress, bypassing courts and disregarding international law," Harman said in a statement.
"Today's Supreme Court decision will help lift that fog. The opinion makes clear that the president's power is not unlimited when it comes to holding people without due process."

Patsy hits out against vigilante

2006-06-28T10:38:00.000-07:00

slipgrid.net

The Hill reports that

House Republican leaders are expected to introduce a resolution today condemning The New York Times for publishing a story last week that exposed government monitoring of banking records.

The resolution is expected to condemn the leak and publication of classified documents, said one Republican aide with knowledge of the impending legislation.

Well, if this isn't the bahstard of the month winner...

House Republicans after failing to do their oversight duty of this president's lurch toward an unmitigated power-grab, go after the media for doing its job of informing the public.

Well, someone has to do it, you patsies...sitting on your fat butts, devouring off the public trough, signing yourselves fat raises while refusing to raise the minimum wage, pocketing big Pharma and big Oil's lobbying dollars, passing out public money in the form of tax cuts to the wealthiest, and worst of all, giving this president a total pass while he uses and abuses 9/11 for his own (and his fat handlers') gain.

Then picking on the New York Times for informing the public. Well, hell, we don't want to be protected in secret. Tell us what the president is doing in our names and we'll tell him if it is legal and doesn't violate our rights. That's democracy, you schmucks. Better yet, whenever he does something illegal (like the many programs slowly leaking out), slap him upside down. Ask him why he thinks he can make law, instead of you bozos.

Also: Check out this hilarious post from Joshua Micah Marshall in Talking Points Memo.

Global warming? No..we didn't do it.

2006-06-27T20:39:00.000-07:00

truthout.org

Today's bahstard moment, from ABC News:

In the White House, only hours after that old elm had fallen, Bush was addressed by a reporter, thus: 'I know that you are not planning to see Al Gore's new movie, but do you agree with the premise that global warming is a real and significant threat to the planet?'

'I have said consistently,' answered Bush, 'that global warming is a serious problem. There's a debate over whether it's manmade or naturally caused. We ought to get beyond that debate and start implementing the technologies necessary … to be good stewards of the environment, become less dependent on foreign sources of oil…'

Notice, he only said we should use less foreign oil. Implication: open up the reserves, drill everywhere you can, hell with the environmental regulations, hell with conservation and CAFE standards. What do these bastards think? That their children and grandchildren will be protected in gated communities and big fat bank balances?

And I mean by bastards, the puppet-masters pulling Bush's strings.

Update (June 28): LA Times reports that:

American cars and pickup trucks are responsible for nearly half of the greenhouse gases emitted by automobiles globally, even though the nation's vehicles make up just 30% of the nearly 700 million cars in use, according to a new report by Environmental Defense.

Full report from the Environmental Defense.

Churchill sacrificed at imperialism's altar

2006-06-27T14:29:00.000-07:00

Andy Manis - AP

WP reports:

The top official at the University of Colorado's flagship campus called on the school Monday to fire Ward Churchill, the professor who compared some World Trade Center victims to a Nazi and then landed in hot water over allegations of academic misconduct.

Ward Churchill is a professor at University of Colorado. Shortly after 9/11, he wrote an essay characterizing the technocrats working in the World Trade Center as "little Eichmanns." According to Wikipedia, Eichmann who was sentenced to death in Israel for his role in the Holocaust was tasked as

"Transportation Administrator", which put him in charge of all the trains which would carry Jews to the Death Camps in the territory of occupied Poland.

Some including Churchill saw Eichmann as an ordinary man blindly doing his duty even if that involved participating in the Holocaust. For more, see Hannah Arendt's book, Eichmann in Jerusalem.

Right-wingers, foaming at the mouth at what they perceived as an attempt at desecrating innocent, fallen Americans, started an effort to oust Churchill, and after hearings and miscellaneous other charges tagged on, we're at the culmination of that effort.

There are many books out there which portray America as an imperial country which is ruthless in its desire for global resources and hegemonic power. Insiders like John Perkins in Confessions of an Economic Hit Men, have even outlined how this is done. While FOIA was instituted to make government more open, the government has in response, outsourced the nasty work of imperialism to close-mouthed companies often working hand-in-hand with agencies like the CIA and NSA.

So, what is an American citizen's responsibility in this? Had we lived under the thumb of a ruthless dictator we could have sloughed off any such accusation. But with much-touted high-minded ideals like freedom and democracy defining our belief in our political system, it is not so easy. The reality is most of us are living in a bubble oblivious of and uncaring about what our government does on our behalf and how we're perceived from the outside. As oblivious as a woman in Afghanistan wearing a burqa, is about women's rights.

If we truly believed our BS about our country (and, really, we don't even have uniform federal voting rights, and "money" is on the same footing as "speech" in elections), we would be hypocrites, no doubt. And indeed, we would be "little Eichmanns" supporting CIA-sponsored assassinations of democratically-elected leaders and resource-based wars like the recent Iraq war which results in the death of many thousands of people.

Personally, I don't believe the BS. Democracy and freedom are both highly compromised. Perhaps this is the best one can hope for in such a powerful nation, and perhaps our freedoms are better in the U.S. than in most nations, but it falls far short of the rhetoric.

So, my point is perhaps we citizens are all little Eichmanns but there is very little we can do about it. Imperialism is a natural outgrowth for nations especially one that is so hegemonic as the U.S. All we can do is keep fighting against that in whatever way we can, and perhaps make a brief difference every once in a while. Depressing? Perhaps, but also relieving.

'Liberal Media' attacked for revealing bank snooping

2006-06-25T17:40:00.000-07:00

slate.msn.com

Apparently the New York Times has been targeted exclusively as the primary party responsible for the revelations of the latest government snooping into international bank records.

Rep. Peter King (N.Y.), draping himself with the stars and stripes, has even gone to the extent of asking the Attorney General to investigate and prosecute the Times! One wonders why the Wall Street Journal, which also broke the story at the same time as the Times, was spared.

Consider this measured response from the Exec Editor Bill Keller of the New York Times (I've highlighted a particularly interesting section):

The press and the government generally start out from opposite corners in such cases. The government would like us to publish only the official line, and some of our elected leaders tend to view anything else as harmful to the national interest. For example, some members of the Administration have argued over the past three years that when our reporters describe sectarian violence and insurgency in Iraq, we risk demoralizing the nation and giving comfort to the enemy. Editors start from the premise that citizens can be entrusted with unpleasant and complicated news, and that the more they know the better they will be able to make their views known to their elected officials. Our default position — our job — is to publish information if we are convinced it is fair and accurate, and our biggest failures have generally been when we failed to dig deep enough or to report fully enough. After The Times played down its advance knowledge of the Bay of Pigs invasion, President Kennedy reportedly said he wished we had published what we knew and perhaps prevented a fiasco. Some of the reporting in The Times and elsewhere prior to the war in Iraq was criticized for not being skeptical enough of the Administration's claims about the Iraqi threat. The question we start with as journalists is not "why publish?" but "why would we withhold information of significance?" We have sometimes done so, holding stories or editing out details that could serve those hostile to the U.S. But we need a compelling reason to do so.
Forgive me, I know this is pretty elementary stuff — but it's the kind of elementary context that sometimes gets lost in the heat of strong disagreements.

He also makes mention of the failure of the Times in the past failure of the Times in not questioning the government line on Iraqi WMD's aggressively.

Privacy, shivacy...the failure of conservatism

2006-06-24T16:53:00.000-07:00

voanews.com

Jonathan Turley, the law professor from GWU has a good column in today's LA Times about the illegal government surveillance programs that have been recently unearthed. He points out how the government's behavior is exactly the opposite of what it should be:

With regard to its own conduct and information, the administration has fought against the notion of transparency — from refusing to disclose meetings with lobbyists, to denying Congress information needed for oversight, to threatening journalists with prosecution for revealing secret programs such as the NSA domestic surveillance program. Yet, when it comes to citizens, the administration demands total transparency to allow it to monitor everyday transactions and conduct.

I'd like to make one more counterpoint to those reporters who wasted by the "balanced reporting" disease, are prone to whiningly question critics with "But, if the government were open about what they're doing, won't Al Qaeda find out!"

Other than Ben Franklin's response to such naivete -- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" -- the same argument could be made against domestic criminals who take far more lives than Al Qaeda ever has. Why not trust our security to the local police by surrendering all our freedoms? Presumably the police will secretly monitor all its citizens and ensure no crime takes place. My point is laws have a purpose of informing its citizens what is and what isn't illegal, and how the government goes about its business. As citizens of a participatory democracy, we can only make laws when we know what the government is doing on our behalf. This also dovetails into my earlier post on unchecked military powers.

If the government truly needed surveillance powers because that's the only way it can protect us, there is a forum to request these powers -- it is called Congress. It allows citizens to get informed and involved in the process of making law. What this government has done is use September 11 as an excuse to grab extraordinary powers secretly with no public knowledge or consent. There is no excuse for this -- it is just blatantly illegal and must be stopped.

So, my question is to all high-minded conservatives...what is happening to your brethren in the Republican party, and will you simply standy by and allow this republic to be sacrificed?

Thoughtcrime is terrorism now.

2006-06-24T12:31:00.000-07:00

nytimes.com

Thoughtcrime, coined by Orwell and enacted in a recent movie "Minority Report", is becoming reality. Alleging an Al Qaeda plot to topple the Sears tower in Chicago, the FBI arrested 7 Florida men on Thrursday night on terrorism charges, an event that sent anchors go rabid on the likes of Fox News. Well, what a difference a day or two makes.

According to the New York Times:

Mr. Gonzales acknowledged that the men, who had neither weapons nor explosives, posed 'no immediate threat.' But he added, 'they did take sufficient steps that we believe does support this prosecution.'

In general, Mr. Gonzales said, homegrown terrorists 'may prove to be as dangerous as groups like Al Qaeda.'

Apparently the 7 Florida men who only had poverty and Haitian origin in common had said something incriminating to an FBI informant which was enough for the AG to jump up and down and make a big brouhaha about. Initially claiming that they were related to Al Qaeda, the FBI backed off that assertion in a hurry when they found out, according to the NYT that the "group wore uniforms bearing a Star of David and met for Bible study."

They were charged under an anti-terrorism clause making "material support" for Al Qaeda punishable by up to 15 years.

This comes on the heels of an unfortunate Lodi youth of Pakistani origin, convicted for allegedly attending a terrorist camp -- a charge which was never proved. The informant (paid a quarter of a million dollars by the FBI) in this case was an older Pakistani man who egged the young man on to say and do things which landed him in trouble. After that young man was convicted, one of the jury members admitted to being pressured:

“I was under so much stress and pressure (from the other jurors) that I agreed to change my vote,” Lopez, of Sacramento, said in her statement. “I never once throughout the deliberation process and the reading of the verdict believed Hamid Hayat to be guilty.”

A frightened and pliant population, a government eager to assume total control, the warnings of Orwell and the words of Herman Goering spoken at the Nuremberg trials (below), are coming true day by day.

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."

More on the indifference of nations...

2006-06-23T14:08:00.000-07:00

Continuing my previous post, Democracy Now! has an interview with Nadia McCaffrey - the mother of Spc. Patrick McCaffrey - who is accusing the Pentagon of a deliberate cover-up.

After being accidentally killed by Iraqi forces, she was told that National Guardsmen Spc. Patrick McCaffrey and 1st Lt. Andre Tyson were killed in an ambush despite the fact that the military knew the truth. In fact, Nadia was tipped off by friends of McCaffrey who had been with him in Iraq.

This has happened before with Patrick Tillman, the NFL star who had given up his fame and fortune to go fight the good war for the U.S after 9/11. He too died from friendly fire, but the world was told a different story, of stirring heroism, the "he went down fighting for his country" bit. It was especially ironic that the military did not honor his noble sacrifice and commitment by treating his case with integrity. Instead, the true story of how he had died went up all the way up the chain of military brass and was squashed for political gain.

The fight is never a "good fight" when it is undertaken by a nation state especially one that is provided scant supervision by both Congress and a preoccupied public.

The indifference of nations

2006-06-22T17:20:00.000-07:00

Reuters

Whenever entities outside of people are bestowed with priviliges normally not given to people, bad things happen. I am talking about nation states and corporations. With corporations, enough has been written about the evil done by this faceless entity.

With nation states like the US and Israel, civilian lives (if it is Palestinian or Iraqi) are treated with scant respect. Even when their citizens would react with horror at discovering the kinds of things done in their names.

After a bout of Israeli attacks on Gaza, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert apologized for the untargeted assassinations, which claimed the lives of about 14 innocent Palestinians in recent days, including five children. But aren't these actions tantamount to terrorism?

HENRY SIEGMAN, a senior fellow on the Middle East at the Council on Foreign Relations and a visiting professor at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London made a very compelling argument in the Los Angeles Times of such an equivalence:

The vast disproportion between Palestinian civilian casualties from Israeli 'mistakes' and Israeli casualties from Palestinian terrorist assaults also brings into question the distinction between the two. It suggests that the killing of Palestinian civilians is, at the very least, more a matter of Israeli indifference than a mistake. Not a single Israeli has been killed by a Kassam rocket since Israel's disengagement from Gaza last year, although during this period Palestinian civilians have been killed by Israeli artillery and airstrikes virtually on a daily basis. (According to B'Tselem, the Israeli human rights group, Israeli forces have killed about 3,400 Palestinians since the intifada started, and Palestinians have killed about 1,000 Israelis).

The bottom line is that nation states just cannot be entrusted with the unmonitored use of military power. When the military is to be used, the circumstances must be clearly delineated by the people, the consequence of such military exercise must be measured and the people informed.

The prosecution of the Iraq war was a far cry from such a prescription. With Congress abdicating its responsibilities, with the military subjecting its own citizens to "Psy-Ops", the president having the authority to declare anyone an "enemy combatant" subject to secret imprisonment, and torture, with no quantification of civilian casualties and military coffins arriving in the stealth of night, the people are woefully uninformed. We believe we're trusting George W. Bush to do the right thing, but it is really the unaccountable entity of the U.S. nation state we're trusting. Fools, us!

The Press Derides Dems on Iraq; The Public Praises Dems on Iraq

2006-06-22T11:58:00.000-07:00

huffingtonpost.com

Chalk one up for Eric Boehlert:

What's so odd is despite the fact poll after poll shows Americans, completely fed up with the Iraq failure, agree with the Democratic initiative to start bringing the troops home, it's Republicans who are being portrayed by clubby Beltway insiders as having the winning hand.

Suskind says U.S. deliberately bombed Al Jazeera

2006-06-21T11:21:00.000-07:00

amazon.com

Perhaps the truth will come out in a decade...Bush certainly -- in leaked memos on conversations with Blair -- expressed intent to even bomb Al Jazeera's headquarters.

Democracy Now! reports:

In “The One Percent Doctrine”, investigative journalist Ron Suskind writes: 'On November 13 [2001], a hectic day when Kabul fell to the Northern Alliance and there were celebrations in the streets of the city, a U.S. missile obliterated Al Jazeera's office. Inside the CIA and White House there was satisfaction that a message had been sent to Al Jazeera.' In an interview with CNN, Suskind said government sources had told him there was “great anger” within the Bush administration over Al Jazeera’s coverage of the invasion of Afghanistan. He added: “I'll tell you emphatically it was a deliberate act by the U.S.”

Pulling a Rove on Rove...

2006-06-20T12:36:00.000-07:00

From the LA Times:

"'Our amendment does not establish a timetable for redeployment,' Levin said. 'It does urge that a phased redeployment begin this year, partly as a way of moving away from an open-ended commitment and a way of avoiding Iraqi dependency on a U.S. security blanket.'"

The Dems have finally coalesced around a strategy. Anticipating that Bush will reduce troop numbers before the Nov election (even as he is disavowing that), they've introduced a non-binding resolution to begin drawdown this year.

Putting the idiot-in-chief and his Machiavellian puppet-master Rove in a tight spot. If they draw down the troops, the Dems can say, "See, we told you so." If they don't draw down, the polls will be against the Repugs.

Did the Dems just maybe pull a Rove on Rove?

Dumb pipes should remain dumb

2006-06-20T11:01:00.001-07:00

senate.gov

CS Monitor reports:

Meanwhile, the Bells and cable companies are filling inside-the-Beltway newspapers with full-page ads, by coalitions such as Hands Off the Internet, that argue against 'legislating massive new regulations' that they say will stifle Internet growth and innovation.

The very same broadband monopolies that want to stifle innovation and are notorious for their lack of imagination and enterprise are arguing that preserving the Internet as-is with regulation will actually stifle innovation. Please, when did these fat, lazy monoploies ever exhibit the slightest tendency toward innovation. Hell, I'll take Google's, Yahoo's or Apple's words before I take these bastards'.

Nice touch though, by the telcos and cable monopolies, talking in Orwellian terms to the Republican-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee.

I was watching this in CSPAN, and one point I heard the appropriately-named Senator Brownback say that he was trying to do away with the non-discriminatory nature of the Internet with regard to the telcos!! The conversation went something like this:

Cohen (Comcast CEO): new regulation, bad.
Chris Patrula (Earthlink rep): it isn't new regulation..it merely preserves the status quo of the Internet w.r.t. non-discrimination.
Cohen: it is only the status quo w.r.t. telcos. Cable companies providing broadband are in new territory.
Brownback: oh, i've been trying to free the telcos of that requirement for a long time.

Killer, isn't it? He's been trying to free the telcos from the requirement of non-discrimination for a long time...

Pie in the sky

2006-06-20T10:37:00.000-07:00

spacedaily.com

Reuters reports that:

Amid concerns over an expected North Korean missile launch, the United States has moved its ground-based interceptor missile defense system from test mode to operational, a U.S. defense official said on Tuesday.

Lord help us -- our half-baked missile defense shield has been activated. The only tests conducted so far have been gamed. Hopefully, we don't have any "friendly fire" incidents like the Patriot missiles when deployed in Israel.

A USA Today report has more to say on this.

Troop withdrawal and red herrings...

2006-06-18T17:55:00.000-07:00

bartcop.com

Now, why did we go into Iraq in the first place?

OK, you mean aside from the irrational neo-con "gotta get Saddam" hysteria?

It's the oil stupid! When the black stuff supplies dwindle, we need to have our military in the middle east. In Iraq, and within striking distance of Saudi Arabia.

Check out what the Los Angeles Times says about the U.S. Air Force:

U.S. military officials say that addressing the question of when they will allow the Iraqi air force to acquire combat capabilities is years away. The U.S. Air Force, they say, will retain control of Iraqi airspace for the foreseeable future, regardless of any drawdown of ground troops.

So never mind the troop withdrawal. That will happen and we will say we've withdrawn when we keep say 50,000 troops out there. Like in South Korea. The air force will never relinquish airspace control, and while we have that, it would be hard for, say, the Chinese to get their hands on the dirty black stuff under the desert sands.

While talking about Congress...

2006-06-17T13:46:00.000-07:00

mkweb.bcgsc.ca

Congressmen, Rats what's the difference!

A new study co-authored by Dr. William Parker, a Duke University professor of experimental surgery, found that dirty rats have better immune systems than their clean lab-bred brethren.

The studies give more weight to a 17-year-old theory that the sanitized Western world may be partly to blame for soaring rates of human allergy and asthma cases and some autoimmune diseases, such as Type I diabetes and rheumatoid arthritis. The theory, called the hygiene hypothesis, figures that people's immune systems aren't being challenged by disease and dirt early in life, so the body's natural defenses overreact to small irritants such as pollen.

I've always wondered why allergies seem so problematic here in the US (even accounting for Big Pharma marketing).

Of course, this study may be as flawed as the red wine-studies of the past. These studies claimed that red wine was better for your heart because more teetotallers had heart problems than imbibers. It failed to account for those imbibers who had to give up drinking because they had to take medications. And this group skewed the results in favor of the imbibers. (Hey, tell people that coffee, alcohol and desserts are good for them, and they're not going to look too closely at the study).

In this rat survey, they may have failed (I don't know that they did) to account for those wild rats whose immune systems were compromised and ended up killing them in the process. THat is, the only available wild rat sample are those with strong immune systems. The same sample could survive in the lab skewing the results, perhaps?

Good going, Lois Capps

2006-06-16T17:56:00.000-07:00

wikipedia.org

On a more positive note, this is what (my) Congresswoman Lois Capps said:

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the resolution before us. Let us be clear from the outset that those who have opposed the Iraq war stand solidly and proudly in support of our troops and their families. To suggest that calling for the return home of our brave troops somehow denigrates their service and their sacrifice is absurd. We can best support our troops by bringing them home.
Mr. Speaker, the terrible numbers we have bandied about here are not mere statistics. Each one represents the tragic story of a ruined life and a shattered family, 2,500 troops dead, more than 18,000 wounded, many so grievously. The average tour for National Guard members has been 342 days, turning the lives of countless American families upside down.
The material cost of the Iraq war is about $320 billion. But you can never put a price on its toll in human suffering, nor can you realistically argue, Mr. Speaker, that the war in Iraq has made our country safer or advanced our effort to combat global terror.
Those that come to the floor and link Iraq to 9/11 are certainly wrong. They are factually wrong, because there remains no evidence that Saddam was involved in the al Qaeda attacks on our Nation, and they are morally wrong to invoke the memories of the victims of September 11th to justify this indefensible war of choice.
I am pleased that al Zarqawi is dead, but his death does not change the fact that Iraq has become a haven for terrorists and the best recruitment tool we could have handed our enemy. No, Mr. Speaker, those who oppose this war are not soft on security. We believe strongly and passionately that keeping the troops in the middle of this increasingly bloody civil war only weakens our security.
It is a disgrace it has taken so long for Congress to spend a few hours of this day debating the Iraq war, but the American people will not be fooled. They recognize that a debate on a cynical and politically motivated resolution is no substitute for a thoughtful Iraq policy that advances our national interests and listens to the voices. Let us vote ``no'' on this resolution.

The party of Crooks debates the party of Lesser Crooks

2006-06-16T16:57:00.000-07:00

It is an election year, and Republican representatives have bought it into Rove's magic routine of once again pointing to a rabbit and declaring it a lion. They're hoping the public will cheer and clap once again.

A resolution got passed. That the war on Iraq was actually a part of the GWOT (or "Global War on Terror"), didn't you know. That people won't figure out it is actually a Global War on Truth.

And who knows, when crooks debate crooks, the public may just throw up their hands, and say "whatever."

The Detroit Free Press reports:

The highly partisan resolution would shun specific timetables for redeploying troops out of Iraq and casts the war as a central front in the war on terrorism.

The pig gets fatter...

2006-06-14T14:00:00.000-07:00

home.houston.rr.com

Another pay raise for our Congress. To the tune of $3,300, which brings their annual salary to $168,500.

You see, they've set it up so that they don't even have to vote on it. It is automatic.

The minimum wage of $5.15 was set in 1997 and hasn't gone up a penny since then. Two years later, Congress, as part of an ethics reform package -- yes, really!! -- made annual cost-of-living raises automatatic.

So, they don't have to justify their pay scales in front of a hostile public. And the public is likely to be hostile as long as Congress continues to ignore the common man and line its pockets with corporate money and tar its soul with deceit and injustice.

The Washington Post reports:

Despite record low approval ratings, House lawmakers Tuesday embraced a $3,300 pay raise that will increase their salaries to $168,500.

Science in service to the ego

2006-06-13T11:19:00.000-07:00

hiroshima.jp
[Hiroshima tricycle]

On the heels of reports from Guantanomo about medical professionals helping the military torture prisoners, Los Angeles Times reports that scientists are literally salivating at being able to work on the next generation of nuclear bombs.

Science, instead of being used in service of humanity, is now being used by scientists to titillate their bored brains.

Well, what else can you say about how the heads of the two labs, both competing to work on these new nukes, characterize the enthusiasm of their scientists? Mental masturbation backgrounded by the image of millions of charred and vaporized bodies?

To remind these cavalier cerebrals of the cost to humanity, perhaps they should be required to hang a photograph by their desk of the Hiroshima tricycle (pictured above) on which little Shin's body was crisped by a satirically named bomb called Little Boy.

Here's what the lab heads had to say:

'I have had people working nights and weekends,' said Joseph Martz, head of the Los Alamos design team. 'I have to tell them to go home. I can't keep them out of the office. This is a chance to exercise skills that we have not had a chance to use for 20 years.'

A thousand miles away at Livermore, Bruce Goodwin, associate director for nuclear weapons, described a similar picture: The lab is running supercomputer simulations around the clock, and teams of scientific experts working on all phases of the project 'are extremely excited.'

Israel and Iran -- more alike than not.

2006-06-08T20:30:00.000-07:00

The arrogance of 2 nations (and their duplicity) was demonstrated in 2 stories: one, Israel's assasination of a top Palestinian government official (at a time when Abbas was trying to work out a peace deal), and two, Iran's resumption of nuclear fuel enrichment (at a time when the rest of the world -- including the US -- was making major concessions to Iran).

Thumbing noses at other countries. Signalling their desire to play only by their rules.

Ironic that these same countries are threatening each other.

Breaking laws western-style

2006-06-08T00:10:00.001-07:00

Apparently 14 European countries have been secretly colluding with the CIA to allow it to torture suspects in secret prisons ("black sites") in Poland and Romania, according to an investigation by Swiss senator Dick Marty after a seven-month inquiry.

Should we be surprised?

Aren't laws meant to be flouted? Chains of steel for the poor and mere spider webs for the rich, as someone said. In this case, one set of laws for western countries (the more "pious" ones), and another for the Islamic ones.

The science of torture

2006-06-08T00:10:00.000-07:00

In its rewrite of the Army Field manual, the Pentagon not only excised strict adherence to the Geneva Accord standards, it has officially acknowledged the use of psychological torture. Using medical professionals to observe and interview detainees gives the interrogators specific ways of questioning detainees, as reported by the LA Times.

Hurricane Katrina and Hypercars

2006-06-05T15:07:00.000-07:00

hypercar.com

Now, you may be wondering what Katrina and Hypercars have in common.

Or even, what a hypercar is. The short explanation is, it is an ultra-light car powered by hydrogen.

To me, how we're looking at the two problems of damaging Cat 4 hurricanes and peak oil bear a dismal similarity of ignored reality.

In today's radio segment, Democracy Now! interviewed environmental journalist and president of Blue Frontier Campaign David Helvarg and quoted from his piece in the LA Times:

“Those who think they can rebuild in harm's way using the same assumptions that worked in the last century or who believe they can manage nature by stockpiling generators and water bottles are living in a dangerous fantasy. Unfortunately, theirs a fantasy we are having to pay for.”

So, obviously, our approach to land management in coastal areas susceptible to hurricanes, is terribly flawed. We build a nice house on the Florida coast, mother Nature destroys it, we collect on insurance and build again. And the government encourages this foolishness. Rather than recognize the effect of global warming, forbid developers from building on hurricane pathways (never mind the view), our government ignores global warming and subsidizes such bad practices.

Global warming, is of course, caused by our frenzied burning of fossil fuels.

And that brings us to the hypercar. Sustainability guru Amory Lovins and his Rocky Mountain Institute's answer to the problem of transportation energy and global warming is to build a car which burns hydrogen with water vapor as the only effluent. No pollution, no oil, voila! Problem solved.

So, what's the problem with this approach?

Two things: one, our love affair with personal transportation is what led us into this mess in the first place. It is what gave rise to suburbia and its attendant problems. (James Howard Kunstler has much more to say on this). Shouldn't we be looking at a way of waking up people to this problem?

Idealists can say, it isn't the automobile per se, that's the problem, but rather how the automobile manufacturers conspired with oil companies to build highways, destroy public transportation and encourage suburban development. Perhaps we can start clean, have our toys and not be used by them? As I said, I believe only idealists (living in a non-corporate world) would say this.

The second thing wrong with the hypercar is that it will take a lot of energy to build it and its fuel infrastructure. Petro-energy, that is. Energy that is in short supply and should morally be used to ease our transition into an energy-poor future. To prevent possible catastrophes when an energy shortage results in other shortages like that of food with deadly implications for under-developed countries.

In the end I would say, Amory Lovins' vision is a familar one. The U.S. has for long projected an image of entitlement. It has justified its behavior as "preserving the American way of life," which was very obviously for an American to consume much much more than the average global citizen did. The hypercar is an expression of this entitled view. As Americans, we don't have to change our consumer culture to cope with the changing energy situation. Rather, we just go on consuming, just using a different product. Thus, the answer to consumerism is consumerism itself. This is the irony expressed by the vision of an avowed sustainability expert.

Ishaqi follows Haditha pattern

2006-06-03T23:39:00.000-07:00

BBC

It is a deadly pattern. First, insurgents hit the U.S. military. Probably from safehouses, or with support from some townspeople. Next, the troops get enraged, lose it, and engage in collective punishment by killing innocents. Then, there is a cover-up. Following that, news organizations questioning locals, discover discrepancies. Then, there is an investigation.

Just as in Haditha's case, this has terrible consequences on everyone involved. And it is fueled both by the insurgency's hatred for the presence of U.S. troops and the desire of this incompetent administration for propaganda. [If only they spent half as much effort and money on figuring out how to do things right instead of this futile propaganda, we'd be so much better off.]

In Ishaqi's case, the military today cleared the troops. But perhaps, it will be reopened at a later date?

BBC reports on this, as also Democracy Now! with its original report from Schofield from KR who interviewed the Iraqi police:

MATTHEW SCHOFIELD: There are two accounts. There’s a U.S. military account, and then there’s an Iraqi police account of what happened.

As you know, the U.S. military account is that after showing up and getting into a shootout to get into this house, the house collapsed during the shootout. People were killed either in the shootout or by the collapsing house. They left. They found four bodies and left. They found this suspect. They arrested him. And that's pretty much that story.

The other story is that the house was standing when the U.S. troops went in. They were herded into one room -- eleven people herded into one room, executed. U.S. troops then blew up the house and left.

We were talking with the police officer who was first on the scene earlier today. He explained the scene of arriving. He said they waited until U.S. troops had left the area and it was safe to go in. When they arrived at the house, it was in rubble. I don't know if you've seen the photos of the remains of the house, but there was very little standing. He said they expected to find bodies under the rubble. Instead, what they found was in one room of the house, in one corner of one room, there was a single man who had been shot in the head. Directly across the room from him against the other wall were ten people, ranging from his 75-year-old mother-in-law to a six-month-old child, also several three-year-olds -- a couple three-year-olds, a couple five-year-olds, and four other -- three other women.

Lined up, they were covered, and they had all been shot. According to the doctor we talked to today, they had all been shot in the head, in the chest. A number of -- you know, generally, some of them were shot several times. The doctor said it's very difficult to determine exactly what kind of caliber gun they were shot with. He said the entry wounds were generally small and round, the exit wounds were generally very large. But they were lined up along one wall. There was a blanket over the top of them, and they were under the rubble, so when the police arrived, and residents came to help them start digging in, they came across the blankets.

They came across the blankets. They picked the blankets up. They say, at that point, that the hands were handcuffed in front of the Iraqis. They had been handcuffed and shot. And the Iraqi assumption is that they were shot in front of the man across the room. They came to be facing each other. There is nothing to corroborate that. The U.S. is now investigating this matter, along with the Haditha matter. That's kind of where we stand right now."

The ultimate weapon in the War on Truth

2006-06-03T23:04:00.000-07:00

When mistakes are made, the U.S. government classifies the data and gets any attempted lawsuits thrown out by bringing out the ultimate weapon on truth, State Secrets Privilege.

The NSA wiretapping cases could be dismissed. The cases involving mistaken identities -- Maher Arar, a Syrian-born Canadian and Khaled el-Masri, a German of Kuwaiti descent -- in which innocent men were tortured, have already been dismissed on those very grounds.

Sibel Edmonds, who alleged an FBI coverup pertaining to 9/11, still hasn't been able to tell her story; her lawsuit has likewise been dismissed.

The sad truth, as the New York Times reports, is that this privilege, determined in a 1953 case by the Supreme Court was itself based on a government lie, the same sort of lies we're fed now.

But critics of the use of the privilege point out that officials sometimes exaggerate the sensitivities at risk. In fact, documents from the 1953 case that defined the modern privilege, United States v. Reynolds, have been declassified in recent years and suggest that Air Force officials misled the court.

An accident report on a B-29 bomber crash in 1948 was withheld because the Air Force said it included technical details about sensitive intelligence equipment and missions, but it turned out to contain no such information, said Wilson M. Brown III, a lawyer in Philadelphia who represented survivors of those who died in the crash in recent litigation.

'The facts the Supreme Court was relying on in Reynolds were false,' Mr. Brown said in an interview. 'It shows that if the government is not truthful, plaintiffs will lose and there's very little chance to straighten it out.

Zinsmeistering reality

2006-06-01T17:42:00.000-07:00

aei.org

What do you do if you're Karl Zinsmeister, the newly appointed chief domestic advisor to Pres. Bush and a lowly newspaper, local to your city, publishes a profile of you that includes quotes that now embarass you? What kind of quotes you ask? Like,

People In Washington are morally repugnant, cheating, shifty human beings.

Or, how about:

A significant number (of journalists) are whiny and appallingly soft.

Well, your response is you simply change the blasted piece. Repost it to a bigger forum (how about the American Enterprise Institute's magazine) with your quotes nicely burnished.

Why let a little thing like reality get in your way...power and perception go hand in glove in what is the latest Bush rework of the English language...let's call it zinsmeistering. The Washington Post wonders tongue-and-cheek what Zinsmeister could do to all unfavorable reporting.

Of course Helen Thomas has to ask Tony Snow about this. Editor and Publisher carries their exchange.

The Syracuse New Times, which carried the original interview is thinking about possible legal action, according to Editor and Publisher.

Our taxes to market the military

2006-05-27T09:52:00.000-07:00

Billions are spent each year to market and propagandize the military, to attract young men and women to join, and also to create a certain image to the rest of the world. Never mind the truth, the democracy or our commitment to human rights, it is all about the image.

It is in service to this enterprise that resulted in the torture at Abu Ghraib, the willy pete (or White Phosphorus) used on civilians at Falluja, and now the execution-style killing of civilians by the Marines at Haditha.

If not for the photographs and the witness reports in Time, this crime would have been covered up. Just as Abu Ghraib would have been.

"Some lawmakers are asking the Marine Corps why an investigation wasn't launched earlier if the intelligence team's pictures contradicted the squad's account," the LA Times reports.

The answer lies in the marketing of the war which is systematic and deliberate. Cover-ups are part and parcel of this effort. And a system like this one merely encourages law-breakers. Perhaps Haditha was an example, as Congressman Murtha puts it, as Marines cracking up under pressure, but it is too easy to create such an environment if the military is interested in spinning this war.

It is this that is a crime and must be stopped.

Don't want to serve in Iraq? Admit you're gay.

2006-05-25T17:23:00.000-07:00

cbs.com

Interesting as the LA Times reports: "The number of military members discharged under the Pentagon's 'don't ask, don't tell' policy on homosexuals rose by 11% last year, the first increase since 2001, officials said Wednesday. "

Now, why would this be?

Think the disastrous war is encouraging more gays to come out of the closet?

What's bad for my enemy could be bad for me

2006-05-25T15:32:00.000-07:00

si.com

Interesting turn of events with the FBI's raid on Democratic Rep. William Jefferson's Capitol Hill office. Jefferson had stuffed wads of bills in his home freezer, and it seems is guilty of taking bribes to grease a company in its bid to get a Nigerian contract. So, you'd think this is perfect for the Republicans -- no longer tainted as the K Street gang in the fat pockets of Abramoff. Good timing for November, no?

But...surprise, surprise, in a bipartisan effort House Speaker Dennis Hastert with House Dem leader Nancy Pelosi condemned the raid, and asked for the documents seized from congressman Jefferson's office to be returned.

Hmm...what axe is Hastert grinding...what could be more important than the November election?

ABC news peels the onion: "Law enforcement sources told ABC News that convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff has provided information to the FBI about Hastert and a number of other members of Congress that have broadened the scope of the investigation. Sources would not divulge details of the Abramoff’s information."

Now, it all makes sense! Good Ol' boy Denny Hastert does not want to go the way of Cunnigham or Ney, and probably has some little secrets stored away on his office computer that he'd rather the FBI just didn't see.

Stolen Votes? Unfair system? The True American Idol?

2006-05-25T14:14:00.000-07:00

news14.com

When more people (65 million) vote than have ever voted before, questions arise. Were their votes fairly handled? Was the system adequate? Did anyone get disenfranchised?

Beat the Press: American Idol Special: Was the Vote Kosher?: "Folks, this isn’t about hanging chads determining which of America’s political dynasties will place their scion in the White House. This is the American Idol. The people must have confidence in the system."

hah!

Ha ha ha -- Using a crook to prosecute his assistant

2006-05-25T10:26:00.000-07:00

nytimes.com

Counsel Says He May Use Cheney in Libby Trial: "A court filing on Wednesday by the special counsel in the C.I.A. leak case suggested that Vice President Dick Cheney would testify as a government witness in the trial of his former chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby Jr."

More on the NSA spy program

2006-05-24T10:04:00.000-07:00

The LA Times published my letter today:

The aspect of the NSA's domestic spying program that most troubles me is this administration's claim that in order to protect the public, it has to keep the program in the dark. It will not inform the public about its policies, it will not seek approval from Congress or the courts and, consequently, it must be trusted to do the right thing.

If this claim is legal, for the survival of the republic, it must be made illegal at once.

Wired reveals the ATT - NSA operations

2006-05-23T18:31:00.000-07:00

wired.com

So, after 9/11, NSA asks ATT to allow it to wiretap all data going through its WorldNet backbone. ATT says, sure, and builds a room to split the router data into this room, where computer equipment analyzes it for the NSA. An ATT technician by the name Mark Klein gets worried about all these Orwellian tactics, and rats to EFF. EFF sues ATT. The U.S. government joins the case and invokes State Secrets Privilege, and asks the judge to throw it out. Apparently, the judge (Vaughn Walker) is a libertarian, so it will be interesting to see if he does so, on June 23.

The judge did rule, though that the documents should be kept sealed, against ATT's wishes to suppress it, but also against EFF's wishes to unseal them to the public.

Then, along comes Wired, and publishes the entire document which presumably it obtained separately from Mark Klein. Enjoy!

Wired News: Whistle-Blower's Evidence, Uncut: "Here we present Klein's statement in its entirety, with inline links to all of the document excerpts where he cited them. You can also download the complete file here (pdf). The full AT&T documents are filed under seal in federal court in San Francisco."

When moles get whacked + A 3rd CIA site

2006-05-17T15:26:00.000-07:00

abcnews.com

A story that has seen mostly a collective shrug is that of Brian Ross' and John Esposito's report that the FBI was using National Security Letters (authorized by the Patriot Act) to get the reporters' telephone records. In their blog entry, Ross and Esposito write about how and what the FBI was doing.

In a separate interview on DemocracyNow!, Ross says they're writing a piece on Friday exposing a 3rd Eastern European country which is hosting a CIA "black site." They were the first reporters (Human Rights Watch named them as possible sites) to confirm Poland and Romania as countries assisting the CIA in holding terrorist suspects and torturing them.

Separately, morons like Max Boot argue in an LA Times Op-Ed that FISA should be replaced with "legislation that gives the president permission to order any surveillance deemed necessary." Leaks, according to the venerable Boot, a Senior Fellow in National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, will apparently keep the government honest. Ha, ha!

Rep(tilian) Peter Hoekstra shows off his slime...

2006-05-13T23:37:00.000-07:00

washingtonpost.com

In his piece in the LA Times, he has the gall to say (referring to the USA Today article leaking the domestic spying database): This article hurt our efforts to protect Americans by giving the enemy valuable insights into the Terrorist Surveillance Program, which has been focused like a laser beam on Al Qaeda and its known associates.

Wow. Is this man so bereft of even a shred a integrity! Focused like a laser beam on Al Qaeda! What about the the millions of Americans who placed calls through AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth, whose records were sought by the NSA?

I am so amazed that this swine would lie like this with a straight face.

This is the letter I sent the LA Times:

If Rep. Hoekstra had been doing his job as the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, there would have been no need for a whistleblower to leak to the public that something rotten was happening in this country.

It is astonishing to me that he can state even now that this program was narrowly focused on Al Qaeda when he knows that the exact opposite is true. And, if as he says, this program was so important to our security, why did the NSA not obtain, somehow, the records of Qwest's customers? Did Bin Laden send out a memo to his henchmen not to use Qwest's service?

This country lost all credibility when it invaded Iraq under the guise of national security. Hopefully, come November, we can retire Rep. Hoekstra from his job as chairman of this vital committee and ensure that this administration never gets such a free pass.

A clear violation of the federal law...class action lawsuit?

2006-05-12T16:22:00.000-07:00

More juicy information from ThinkProgress that the Telcos could be liable for billions in damages were a class action lawsuit to be filed against them.

I have a feeling that Telco lobbyists are going to be frantically urging Congress to nullify this section retroactively. Maybe adding this to the new bills introduced by Specter and Graham.

Update (May 13): LA Times' David Savage examines the program's legality. "I would not want to be the general counsel of one of these phone companies," said Orin S. Kerr, a law professor at George Washington University and a former Justice Department lawyer who has worked on electronic surveillance.

The NY Times also quotes the same source:

Orin Kerr, a former federal prosecutor and assistant professor at George Washington University, said his reading of the relevant statutes put the phone companies at risk for at least $1,000 per person whose records they disclosed without a court order.

"This is not a happy day for the general counsels" of the phone companies, he said. "If you have a class action involving 10 million Americans, that's 10 million times $1,000 — that's 10 billion."

The New Jersey lawyers who filed the federal suit against Verizon in Manhattan yesterday, Bruce Afran and Carl Mayer, said they would consider filing suits against BellSouth and AT&T in other jurisdictions.

Personally, I would actually read a "violation" as each record of mine that was shared with the government. Which would include every call I made, which would be a monstrous sum and most certainly bankrupt the Telcos.

I wonder if Bush will decide to invoke the State Secrets Pivilege on these cases as well, and seek to dismiss them en masse.

I can hardly wait for next week...

2006-05-12T15:48:00.000-07:00

democracynow.org

Think Progress has this on what we can expect next week: "CongressDaily reports that former NSA staffer Russell Tice will testify to the Senate Armed Services Committee next week that not only do employees at the agency believe the activities they are being asked to perform are unlawful, but that what has been disclosed so far is only the tip of the iceberg. Tice will tell Congress that former NSA head Gen. Michael Hayden, Bush’s nominee to be the next CIA director, oversaw more illegal activity that has yet to be disclosed."

The Tip of the Iceberg. I can hardly wait for the Titanic to be breached....about fucking time...

Big Brother is watching you...

2006-05-12T11:54:00.000-07:00

www.afallahi.com

It is remarkable that a corporation refused to hand over the records that NSA asked for, citing that it violated Federal privacy laws.

In the meantime, the two big bastards in Congress, Sen Pat Roberts (R-Ky) and Rep Peter Hoekstra (R-Michigan) both chairing their respective Intelligence Committees, look the other way, or flat-out shoot the messenger.

Roberts atrociously says that the NSA's activities already were being scrutinized by a new subcommittee on the panel and that "calls for further oversight are unnecessary."

And Hoekstra, proving himself the bigger scum defended the N.S.A.'s activities and denounced the disclosure, saying the USA Today report "threatens to undermine our nation's safety."

Of course, some in the news (I watched Anderson Cooper spinning this issue 360 degrees) say, what's the big deal, they're just collecting telephone numbers, not actually listening in.

First, who really knows the extent of the spying, with Congress being so totally derelict in holding investigations. Make the private, I don't care, but let everyone in Congress hear the extent of it. Right now, only a few select members get to hear it, and they can't even tell their aides about it let alone the public.

Secondly, if the potential yield from this database (they're just collecting numbers) is so small, why not go to Congress and explicitly get authorization to do it. What are they afraid of, that the mastermind-terrorist-zarqaqi-who-can't-even-operate-an-automatic-rifle will somehow figure out how to use this information? Give me a break!

Bastards.

CYB with National Security

2006-05-11T23:42:00.000-07:00

This administration's stonewalling is now, "If you get too close to questioning us, we will just say you don't have security clearance to proceed any further. Na-nah, na-nah, nah-nah!"

This happened today to the warrantless wiretapping investigations initiated by DOJ at the behest of Congress.

A few days back, Russell Tice the ex-NSA whistleblower who supposedly tipped off the papers about the warrantless wiretaps, was frustrated from even speaking to Congressional committees by NSA using this same dastardly ploy with an even more ironical touch -- Congressional committees that oversee the NSA, were themselves denied security clearance.

No clearance, no investigation, as easy as that.

I think the level of frustration amongst staffers yearning to blow the whistle is really high. If the Democrats get control of the House, we're going to see a lot of that steam getting released. Hopefully the criminals in charge do get burnt, and we can put this sorry phase of non-democracy behind us.

Lying to the nation, one noxious drip at a time...

2006-05-11T16:04:00.000-07:00

By Roger Wollenberg, Getty Images

Well, we suspected it all along that the warrantless spying program involved more than just international calls.

The puppet AG, Alberto Gonzalez admitted to as much when he issued a clarification to the Senate that all his statements only referred to the spy program that Bush had publicly admitted to. And furthermore, he refused to answer if other warrantless programs exist. And maintained that the President has the right to order any such warrantless intrusion, including the right to break into a citizen's house and conduct a search. (Inspite of finessing his way around his testimony, TPM Muckraker reports that the AG likely lied to the Senate.)

Today's USA Today reports that the NSA has been amassing data about Americans' phone calls: The National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth, people with direct knowledge of the arrangement told USA TODAY.

The modus operandi is simple: when damaging leaks come out, admit only what the public would support. Pretend you've fessed up, and you only did it to keep the homeland safe. ("We want to know if Al Qaeda is calling," or something like that is what the idiot-in-chief said.)

Then, when more damaging leaks come out, spin it as if it is just old news. Or ignore it completely hoping the crooks in charge of Congress look the other way as well. You know, the liberal media, can't always believe what you read.

Texas: 50th in education, first in executions

2006-05-05T22:04:00.000-07:00

This is the face of a man wrongly executed by Texas: Cameron Todd Willingham was convicted of setting fire to his own house and killing this three children, all under the age of three, while his wife was away. In Feb 2004, he was executed for this crime.

Only problem, was that the fire was accidental, as he had maintained all along. The Innocence Project determined that the deputy fire marshall who testified from the forensice evidence, that Willingham had deliberately set the fire, was wrong and depending on old and bad science. What was worse was that this testimony was refuted by an acknowldged arson expert who presented his finding before Willingham's execution but was ignored by Gov Perry and the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles.

Texas: 50th in education, first in executions... how's that working for you? is a line from a campaign to unseat the governor.

Texas and Bad Science...why am I not surprised!

Goss resigns before getting hooked

2006-05-05T11:26:00.000-07:00

Porter Goss resigned today as CIA director. Just like that. No replacement named.

Apparently as a result of the shake-up, you know "rearranging deck chairs on the Hindenburg."

But, really, what scandal is being swept under the rug, here? C'mon now, fess up, Porter!

TPMmuckraker has been following the sorry saga of hookers involving the now-discredited Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham, and Porter Goss' #3 man.

You know, something's always fishy when it is announced on a Friday...or you could say it may stink but the weekend gas fumes just cover it up.

Rumsfeld thinks "freedom to torture" should be a core freedom.

2006-05-04T22:13:00.000-07:00

The U.S. is specifically cited here in Amnesty International's supplementary briefing to the UN Committee against Torture.

Rumsfeld has never been held accountable for the abuses at Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo, yet this document specifically cites "officially santioned procedures and policies, including interrogation techniques approved by Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld for use in Guantánamo and later exported to Iraq."

The report notes that American military officials have listed 34 deaths of detainees in U.S. custody as "confirmed or suspected criminal homicides." It suggests that the true number may be much higher, saying "there is evidence that delays, cover-ups and deficiencies in investigations have hampered the collection of evidence."

A U.N. hearing on U.S. compliance with international torture agreements begins Friday in Geneva. Can hardly wait for the outcome! And for how Bush & Co will dismiss it, and how extensively Fox News I am sure will report it.

Al-Zarqawi -- a terrorist mastermind? Really?

2006-05-04T21:44:00.000-07:00

An ABC News Video shows Al-Zarqawi fumbling with his rifle. The U.S. military unearthed a video that shows the mastermind jihadist trying to figure out how to shoot from the automatic rifle. An associate had to help him eventually.

Wonder what case it makes for the U.S.? It has held up this man to be the leader of the deadliest insurgency, so slippery and powerful that he just cannot be caught. How does that jell with what you see -- a seemingly fat incompetent man wearing New Balance shoes. Hmm, very un-jihadist, to succumb to such infidel Western practices. Should we be scared of this man?

History will reveal this man as a stooge for Bush's claims that Al Qaeda was responsible for the insurgency. That it is terrorism we're fighting not a civil war, and that that's why we're there, so that we don't fight them here. And so on. Lies and lies. Told yesterday (and today still, I am sure on Fox News). And propaganda from the military to win American minds.

Rummy caught in a lie in Atlanta

2006-05-04T16:14:00.000-07:00

After Stephen Colbert calling it like it is to the President's face, we have this follow-on act:

Interrupting this meeting (video from Crooks and Liars), Ray McGovern, a 27-year veteran of the CIA who had provided daily intelligence briefings to President George H.W. Bush, asks Rumsfeld why he lied about WMD's when he said he knew where they were. They also had an exchange on the Iraq-Al Qaeda connection.

What was sickening in the video is the partisan crowd (attending the event at the Southern Center for Internaltional Studies) trying to hush McGovern, with absolutely no care about the damage done to this country from the lies told by Rumsfeld and others. Also, some man fawining in the end...gross! Made me squirm.

Update: meanwhile Paul Pillar, an ex-CIA analyst specialising in counter-terrorism in the Middle East and Asia, had this to say to El Pais, about the purported Iraq-Al Qaeda link: "by some definitions, that could be called a lie. There was an organised campaign of manipulation."

Of course! Why is this fool still not impeached, I ask?

Sending a thief to catch a thief...

2006-05-04T10:51:00.000-07:00

The Vice President for Torture wags the finger at Russia on human rights. Human rights is one of the tools the U.S. uses to beat up states which don't bend to our will. But what a sorry messenger to send. Someone who advocated the violation of the Geneva Conventions and the U.N. convention against torture. Who specifically wanted an exemption for the CIA on McCain's torture ban (a ban Bush decied to ignore with a signing statement).

Irony, sadly, is lost on this administration.

Sucked in by corporate malfeasance

2006-05-03T16:12:00.000-07:00

'Opal Mehta' Won't Get a Life After All - New York Times: Little, Brown, publisher of the novel whose author, Kaavya Viswanathan, admitted to copying passages from another writer's books, said yesterday that it would not be publishing a revised edition of her book.

If you haven't been following this sorry scandal which has been unfolding over the past week or two, it is an interesting case. On the surface, it seems to be the story of a 19 yr. old immigrant writer named Kaavya Vishwanathan (from India), apparently brilliant enough to get into Harvard, seduced by the American dream into trying to publish a best-seller by copying from a few books.

But what lies under the surface, while still not excusing her behavior is far less palatable. Apparently, she fell into the clutches of a "book packaging" company called Alloy Entertainment, which according to Tim Rutten, in this savage critique of this industry, creates characters and plots, then finds writers to execute them and provides editing and design to create "a package."

I especially liked John Carroll's (the former Times' Editor) quote: "Under the old local owners, a newspaper's capacity for making money was only part of its value. Today, it is everything."

Healthcare in the U.S.

2006-05-02T11:48:00.000-07:00

Study Shows Americans Sicker Than English: "CHICAGO -- Middle-aged, white Americans are much sicker than their counterparts in England, startling new research shows, despite U.S. health care spending per person that's more than double what England spends."

Well, hello! What's so hard to understand about this. Privatization demands profit for stockholders. Never mind the sick patients. Never mind that these patients were prompt about paying their contributions. How can we save the stockholders money? Why, by employing an army of lawyers, bureaucrats and nitpickers whose only jobs are to find a way to deny benefits. Something like 30% of the private healthcare cost in this country is spent on administration. As opposed to 2% on the public Medicare.

I think there's something to be said for making people accountable for their health -- make them eat wisely, get exercise and all that. But privatization is the wrong stick.

How about something like: get your checkups done properly (& freely), enroll in free preventive programs (e.g. to manage health issues), then you get free catastrophic health insurance. Even if you do have to pay for minor stuff, like flus and the like, that would be so much better than the moronic policy we have today.

Stephen Colbert whacks Bush

2006-05-01T22:13:00.000-07:00

Stephen Colbert is the host of the Colbert Report on Comedy Central in which he plays a faux conservative. He was invited to speak at the While House Correspondents' annual shindig, where he uncompromisingly hazed Dubya, who was actually on the same podium (with Laura).

Check out this video -- it is quite incredible.

If you hear this mentioned in the MSM, all they'll say is that it bombed as comedy. What I say is: who cares? It was news. And if you jokers in the news business did your jobs, this wouldn't even have been that.

Sad state of affairs when our journalists are wusses, and it is only the comedians who have the courage to criticize the president.

Some choice quotes:

"Here's how it works: the president makes decisions. He's the decider. The press secretary announces those decisions, and you people of the press type those decisions down. Make, announce, type. Just put 'em through a spell check and go home. Get to know your family again. Make love to your wife. Write that novel you got kicking around in your head. You know, the one about the intrepid Washington reporter with the courage to stand up to the administration. You know - fiction!"

And...

"I believe the government that governs best is the government that governs least. And by these standards, we have set up a fabulous government in Iraq."

Update: Here's a letter I sent to the LA Times after they printed something pitiful about the event.

Paul Brownfield, in his pointless essay, points out that what was missing in the blogsphere's referendum on Colbert's hazing of President Bush in the White House Correspondents Assn. dinner, was that the "red carpet was awesome."

If he had read the blogs carefully, he may have noticed that that was exactly the observation from most bloggers. The attendees of the dinner, and the press which gave scant attention to Colbert's remarks in printed and televised coverage of the event, were only too focused on the redness of the carpet, and in having a jolly time with their fellow revelers.

The pundits of the media, who were taking a holiday from reality that night, didn't need to be reminded from a comedian about a reality they had failed to hold the president accountable for. They found that decidedly unfunny.

Bush crowns himself king

2006-05-01T22:02:00.000-07:00

Bush challenges hundreds of laws - The Boston Globe: "Legal scholars say the scope and aggression of Bush's assertions that he can bypass laws represent a concerted effort to expand his power at the expense of Congress, upsetting the balance between the branches of government."

Apparently, other presidents have also asserted this right and issued signing statements, but the breadth of King George's assertions have been unsurpassed. Every law, whether or not national secruity was threatened, only applies to him at this discretion.

Ah, what the hell, why don't we crown him king, then bend over and give him a paddle, I say.

Update: Examples of laws and signing statements. This is a hoot.

Dec. 30, 2005: When requested, scientific information ''prepared by government researchers and scientists shall be transmitted [to Congress] uncensored and without delay."

Bush's signing statement: The president can tell researchers to withhold any information from Congress if he decides its disclosure could impair foreign relations, national security, or the workings of the executive branch.

Aug. 8, 2005: The Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and its contractors may not fire or otherwise punish an employee whistle-blower who tells Congress about possible wrongdoing.

Bush's signing statement: The president or his appointees will determine whether employees of the Department of Energy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission can give information to Congress.

Dec. 23, 2004: Forbids US troops in Colombia from participating in any combat against rebels, except in cases of self-defense. Caps the number of US troops allowed in Colombia at 800.

Bush's signing statement: Only the president, as commander in chief, can place restrictions on the use of US armed forces, so the executive branch will construe the law ''as advisory in nature."

Killer -- advisory in nature. Man, oh man! He really wants to be king, doesn't he!

Big brother says we don't need to know...

2006-04-29T21:02:00.000-07:00

U.S. seeks to dismiss AT&T secrets suit | Reuters.com: "SAN FRANCISCO, April 29 - The U.S. government has asked a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit by a San Francisco civil liberties group against AT&T because it says the case could reveal military and state secrets."

The sickly secretive Bush govt. wants to invoke a rarely used vestige of English Common law, called the State Secrets Privilege. Apparently, national security is at risk. Which means what. Our physical security. Or Bush's ass. Or the GOP's ass in the Nov elections.

Also, notice the clever timing of this maneuver. Filed on a Friday, so it receives the least attention.

You see, the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) had filed the lawsuit, and it seemed they had the goods. They had a former ATT technician who installed some of these "snooping equiment" for ATT, fessing up that it all seemed illegal, and that it could easily have been used to spy on Americans. The case was set to be heard on May 17. Good time to squash it now.

Yes, bastards, indeed of the first water.

Update: More on what this means for the EFF lawsuit. Essentially, it has been killed.

Today's drug cartels

2006-04-28T16:16:00.000-07:00

It seems everyone knows it, but no one will call them on it. I am talking about the pharmaceutical industry, the modern-day drug pushers, drugging an entire nation for whatever behavior it can call illness and make a quick million or two.

Agreed not all of their drugs are this way, only about 90% of them.

In yesterday's LA Times, there is a brilliant opinion piece by Bill Maher, which ends with:

Drug companies are pushers, and Congress and the FDA are the cop on the beat who's been paid to look the other way. New drugs used to have to go through a rigorous process of testing, now they just give it to Courtney Love, and if she lives, it is approved.

By the way, that FDA report about marijuana having no medical value was issued, on purpose, I am sure, on April 20 -- 4/20. That joke only makes sense to stoners. So Mom and Dad, if your kid just laughed, you might need to search his room.

I had to type all of this up. Honest. Because the article mysteriously vanished off the LA Times website!!! Call me a conspiracy theorist, but that's an amazing coincidence...just a day after his story appeared in print.

Update: Here's a letter I sent the Times:

So, someone, albeit a comedian, tells us the truth about drugs, and the Times gets so much flak it decides to remove the article from the website? I hope I am wrong, and this is just a technical glitch but if I am not, shame on the Times for caving in to big Pharma.

2nd Update: here's what the Times wrote back:

Sri, Bill Maher asks that we not post his articles on our website, and we inadvertantly did. When we discovered the error, we removed the story from the site. Most writers give us website reprint rights, but Maher is a notable exception, and we get e-mails every time we run him in the paper asking: Where's my Maher? Sorry about that.

Michael Soller
Opinion pages

McCarthy in Bushworld

2006-04-26T10:49:00.000-07:00

JOHN WEINELL says in a letter in today's LA Times,

A senior CIA officer is fired and could face criminal prosecution for following her conscience to expose illegal overseas torture prisons, and the leaker in chief reveals the confidential identity of a CIA operative for political purposes with impunity. In a just society, McCarthy would be recognized as a patriot and President Bush would be impeached as a traitor.

Well, perhaps its just that it hasn't yet come out that it was indeed Bush that leaked Plame's name...so far all that Bush has allegedly leaked was the NIE snippet contesting Joe Wilson's arguments. But the thrust of John's argument is dead on.

Mary O. McCarthy claims through her lawyer that she didn't leak the info to WP's Dana Priest on the black list of CIA detention centers round the world. Perhaps like Bush, she just OK'ed the leak, or didn't bring it up to the attention of her bosses when she found out who did. Whatever she did, McCarthyism could be redefined in Bushworld. The evil doer becomes the courageous doner (which by the way means "rotating roast meat" when referred to a kebab, which is equally appropriate).

Update: Today's WP reports that EU lawmakers found a pattern of widespread regular practice of human rights violations by the CIA involving secret flights, illegal detention and torture, in which it says European officials are complicit. Of course, the CIA has been doing illegal activities for a while. But now, it appears 9/11 has given Bush the freedom to let the wackos in the agency totally loose.

The sickness of Guantanamo

2006-04-25T22:02:00.000-07:00

So, 141 people were freed today. Out of a total of about 490. Only 10 are being charged, and none with capital offense. 4 friggin years, and they produce 10 charges. The other prisoners -- still in their shackles and their wire cages! Shocking, and this the country of laws and human rights.

Meanwhile, Bush in a speech about illegal immigrants says, "One thing we cannot lose sight of is that we're talking about human beings, decent human beings that need to be treated with respect."

Of course, he is talking to business leaders and not the Minutemen. So, he can get away with this, and perhaps be cheered for this.

Well, of course, illegal immigrants are decent people. They see an opportunity with businesses -- and people needing cheap labor -- welcoming them, and they come, never mind the laws. For more, check this out.

Well, hello, what about the denizens of Guantanamo? Aren't they decent too, at least till proven guilty? I mean isn't that the bloody law. Yet, torture and suspended habeas corpus are ok. And some inane argument that Gitmo is not on American soil, so American laws don't have to apply. They're enemy combatants and not POWs. It is not torture unless they're physically harmed. On and on, the deadly equivocation goes on. All in our names! Soiling our passports, and putting a big stamp on our foreheads as if to say "they're Americans, they're bastards! They just don't care."

I mean, of course, the Bush people take the award every single blessed day. They're bastards to the core. They strip the public of its money, and give it to rich people as tax cuts. They rip off the public's wallet, and pass it on to U.S. corporations to fix the Iraq that the U.S. defense corporations bombed and destroyed. Katrina, the same deal. Just replace a Stealth bomber with a hurricane. Callousness to the people affected. Simply move money from the public to the friendly reconstruction crony companies.

Environment, blah, blah. Who needs it. Give it away so we can drill, mine and plunder. Flora, fauna, biodiversity, indigenous peoples, poor people, sick people: who needs them. Kill, maim, plunder -- the bywords of our present lords; Equivocation, marginalization and flat-out lies the modus operandi.

Fools who believe all is well

2006-04-25T21:45:00.000-07:00

There are those whom if you ask will tell you, "Don't worry. It will all work out. It always has." This may be in response to my incredulous, "Aren't you worried about the U.S. economy? Aren't you worried about our global dependence on oil, and the oncoming peak of oil production?"

All I get in response is hand-waving and soothing words.

So, what's up with that? Can we not get past this inane confidence in the "system." History teaches us that catastrophes don't stop happening just because some dumb-ass politician with a big fat axe to grind, says they won't happen. Apparently, a famous Yale economist said the economy was on the up and up and there was nothing to fear just before the Great Depression struck.

And it isn't just me. There is no end to experts warning about these very same things. People just don't seem to care. "Ah well," they say, "don't tell me. I don't want to know. I don't care."

Am I railing against the people or the system? I think both. The status quo wants to continue as it is. No one wants to believe the economy is sick because that would mean a loss of confidence and an exodus of money out of the U.S. And unless the people wake up, and pressure politicians to tell them the truth, and make sound policies, the status quo remains.

American people

2006-04-14T11:00:00.000-07:00

Statistics shock. Esp when one lives in California. Apparently 48% of Americans would support attacking Iran if Iran continues to enrich uranium. And 40% oppose it!! What gives. Hasn't one disastrous war in the middle east been enough?

I think people who are polled should be asked the additional question: would you change your mind about attacking a country if you or your children were sent out there to do it? That should sober up people quick.

OK, one more interesting stat: Another survey cited by the LA Times says, "When respondents were asked how much of the federal budget goes to foreign aid, the median figure was 20%. When asked how much should be spent, the median was 10%."

Ha, ha. Sorry can't help it. Wish we could give up 10% of our budget on aid. Even of the 0.22% we spend, most of it goes to help U.S. contractors. Aid and war are big corporate welfare schemes. This government has mastered taking money out of the government and giving it to its crony contractors.

What is this blog about?

2006-04-14T10:56:00.000-07:00

So, bahstards is the English way of saying bastards. And you may find me saying that as I am reading the morning's Los Angeles Times, spewing coffee over my breakfast.

So, ok, for all you pacifists out there, yes, this is a very non-pacific way to disagree with people. Agreed. But I need an outlet. With a distinctly non-pacific bent to it. Thus.