Thursday, August 29, 2002
The Leader of the Far Reich
Apparent valid concerns for the company kept by das neue Führer, Dummya (not just Gestapoleiter John Asscrack)
Apparent valid concerns for the company kept by das neue Führer, Dummya (not just Gestapoleiter John Asscrack)
Remember what Theodore Roosevelt said in 1918:
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
By what IS treason punishable?
I believe that even in the 21st century, treason remains the highest crime, punishable by the highest penalty. Hmmm, interesting concept. This would not be good for someone who is such a big supporter of capital punishment.
Instant Karma's gonna get you
Gonna knock you right on the head
You better get yourself together
Pretty soon you're gonna be dead
What in the world you thinking of
Laughing in the face of love
What on earth you tryin' to do
It's up to you, yeah you
Instant Karma's gonna get you
Gonna look you right in the face
Better get yourself together darlin'
Join the human race
How in the world you gonna see
Laughin' at fools like me
Who in the hell d'you think you are
A super star
Well, right you are
Well we all shine on
Like the moon and the stars and the sun
Well we all shine on
Ev'ryone come on
Instant Karma's gonna get you
Gonna knock you off your feet
Better recognize your brothers
Ev'ryone you meet
Why in the world are we here
Surely not to live in pain and fear
Why on earth are you there
When you're ev'rywhere
Come and get your share
~John Lennon
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
By what IS treason punishable?
I believe that even in the 21st century, treason remains the highest crime, punishable by the highest penalty. Hmmm, interesting concept. This would not be good for someone who is such a big supporter of capital punishment.
Instant Karma's gonna get you
Gonna knock you right on the head
You better get yourself together
Pretty soon you're gonna be dead
What in the world you thinking of
Laughing in the face of love
What on earth you tryin' to do
It's up to you, yeah you
Instant Karma's gonna get you
Gonna look you right in the face
Better get yourself together darlin'
Join the human race
How in the world you gonna see
Laughin' at fools like me
Who in the hell d'you think you are
A super star
Well, right you are
Well we all shine on
Like the moon and the stars and the sun
Well we all shine on
Ev'ryone come on
Instant Karma's gonna get you
Gonna knock you off your feet
Better recognize your brothers
Ev'ryone you meet
Why in the world are we here
Surely not to live in pain and fear
Why on earth are you there
When you're ev'rywhere
Come and get your share
~John Lennon
Tuesday, August 27, 2002
Instead of Jason or Freddy Kruger, it's Rechtsanwaltsgeneral John Asscrack in the center of my nightmares...
from the San Francisco Chronicle
EDITORIAL
Ashcroft -- above the law?
Friday, August 23, 2002
THE CHAIR of a congressional committee should not be forced to issue a subpoena to get the U.S. attorney general to respond to basic questions about the administration of justice in this country.
And Americans who worry about civil liberties should not have to file a lawsuit to determine whether their government is scanning library records or monitoring the e-mail of people who are not suspected of any crime.
But the Justice Department appears unwilling to subject itself to even the most rudimentary levels of accountability over the way it has handled the vast new powers it acquired under the so-called Patriot Act last year.
Extraordinary arrogance calls for extraordinary steps.
So, Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., the House Judiciary Committee chair, has threatened to subpoena Attorney General John Ashcroft if he continues to resist requests for the administration to disclose how often it has used its new investigative powers.
"I've never signed a subpoena in my 5 1/2 years as chairman," Sensenbrenner told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. "I guess there's a first time for everything."
It is important to note that Sensenbrenner is not asking for specifics that could endanger an investigation. He merely wants to know whether the government is using this powers. It is not only a reasonable request in an democracy. It is an essential one.
The American Civil Liberties Union, along with the Electronic Privacy Information Center and the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression,
added their weight to the pressure on Ashcroft this week by filing a Freedom of Information request.
The groups are asking the Justice Department how many times it has:
-- Traced the telephone calls or e-mails of people who are not suspected of any crime.
-- Directed a library, bookstore or newspaper to produce information about materials acquired by an individual.
-- Conducted "sneak and peek" searches in which the targets were not informed until after the fact.
-- Investigated U.S. citizens and other legal residents on the basis of "activities protected by the First Amendment," such as attending a rally or writing a letter to the editor.
As Chris Finan, president of the American Booksellers group, said, "When the FBI is given the power to investigate what people are reading, the American people deserve to know how that power is being used."
And Americans should not have to go to court to get an answer.
from the San Francisco Chronicle
EDITORIAL
Ashcroft -- above the law?
Friday, August 23, 2002
THE CHAIR of a congressional committee should not be forced to issue a subpoena to get the U.S. attorney general to respond to basic questions about the administration of justice in this country.
And Americans who worry about civil liberties should not have to file a lawsuit to determine whether their government is scanning library records or monitoring the e-mail of people who are not suspected of any crime.
But the Justice Department appears unwilling to subject itself to even the most rudimentary levels of accountability over the way it has handled the vast new powers it acquired under the so-called Patriot Act last year.
Extraordinary arrogance calls for extraordinary steps.
So, Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., the House Judiciary Committee chair, has threatened to subpoena Attorney General John Ashcroft if he continues to resist requests for the administration to disclose how often it has used its new investigative powers.
"I've never signed a subpoena in my 5 1/2 years as chairman," Sensenbrenner told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. "I guess there's a first time for everything."
It is important to note that Sensenbrenner is not asking for specifics that could endanger an investigation. He merely wants to know whether the government is using this powers. It is not only a reasonable request in an democracy. It is an essential one.
The American Civil Liberties Union, along with the Electronic Privacy Information Center and the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression,
added their weight to the pressure on Ashcroft this week by filing a Freedom of Information request.
The groups are asking the Justice Department how many times it has:
-- Traced the telephone calls or e-mails of people who are not suspected of any crime.
-- Directed a library, bookstore or newspaper to produce information about materials acquired by an individual.
-- Conducted "sneak and peek" searches in which the targets were not informed until after the fact.
-- Investigated U.S. citizens and other legal residents on the basis of "activities protected by the First Amendment," such as attending a rally or writing a letter to the editor.
As Chris Finan, president of the American Booksellers group, said, "When the FBI is given the power to investigate what people are reading, the American people deserve to know how that power is being used."
And Americans should not have to go to court to get an answer.
GEORGE W. BUSH HATES AMERICA
from Yahoo! News
Thu Aug 22,12:01 PM ET
By Ted Rall
Political Prisoners and the Post-9/11 Police State
NEW YORK--The United States is a nation of laws. The police arrest suspects they reasonably believe to have broken the law, not citizens who happen to disagree with the government's politics. Cops don't go after people preemptively because they might commit a crime someday. In America, people are considered innocent until they're proven guilty in a court of law. They enjoy the right to a fair trial by a jury of their peers as quickly as possible. And of course they're entitled to the counsel of an attorney.
These fundamental rights, taught in every civics class, define what it means to be American. When other countries fill their prisons with political dissidents, we wonder aloud what it must be like to live in such lawless places. When we watch films like "Midnight Express," in which an American drug smuggler rots in a Turkish prison, we shake our heads not at the sentence--after all, he's guilty--but at the lead character's railroading through the court system and the abuse he suffers at the hands of his guards.
Before September 11, no patriotic American would have disputed the last two paragraphs. Sadly, legal guarantees that every American considered a sacred birthright have been shredded virtually overnight, and many people don't seem to care. Just as a World Trade Center built over the course of five years was destroyed in under two hours, a presidential impostor has used a phony "war on terror" to systematically unraveled two centuries of basic jurisprudence in less than a year.
George W. Bush may not have read Gibbon but he possesses the morals and cunning of a gangster; in a country still stunned by last fall's attacks, that seems to be enough.
The "war on terror," we're told, requires new tactics. Law enforcement--which somehow now includes the military, CIA ( news - web sites), FBI ( news - web sites) and NSA--needs stronger tools. Terrorists are sneakier and smarter than your garden-variety mafia don. So now they're no longer "accused terrorists" but rather "enemy combatants." Who cares if these "enemy combattants" are American citizens? They can be held forever, or to be more precise, until the federal government "defeats terrorism." And while they're awaiting that distant day, Bush's "detainees"--not prisoners, since his first decisive victory has been in his jihad against the English language--don't get to see a lawyer. This works out well because Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld--who has anointed himself judge, jury and executioner--won't offer them a chance to prove their innocence in court.
For the Bushies, see, guilt and innocence aren't the point. The detainees aren't in prison for what they've done. They're there because of what they might do, for whom they know--for what they think. They are political prisoners.
Americans have watched with aggressive disinterest as images of 564 captured Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters squatting in their Guantánamo dog pens fill their living room screens. Human rights activists warn that these inmates, who hail from 38 countries, are being abused. At Camp Delta in July and August, three men tried to hang themselves and another slashed his wrist with a plastic razor. According to the Army, Guantánamo internees have staged hunger strikes to protest the conditions of their captivity. Others are being forcibly medicated with antidepressants and anti-psychotic drugs.
Even worse than the day-to-day torture is the interminable legal limbo. U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ruled July 31 that "the military base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, is outside the sovereign territory of the United States." So Guantánamo isn't the U.S., which means that the prisoners can't seek redress in American courts. But it isn't Cuba either. The POWs can go to the World Court in The Hague ( news - web sites), notes Kollar-Kotelly--but the United States routinely ignores international rulings.
Bush asserts that we're at "war" whenever he calls for increased government surveillance and tax cuts, and decreased freedom and social programs. But then he turns right around and claims that the Guantánamo captives, soldiers captured while bombs fell and bullets flew, aren't "prisoners of war" at all. Being declared a POW, after all, would entitle these schlubs to certain rights under the 1949 Geneva Conventions: freedom to refuse to answer questions, release at the end of hostilities, decent treatment, i.e., not being held in six-by-eight-foot dog pens under the blazing tropical sun. This linguistic chicanery is amusingly convenient, but it will look like madness the next time American soldiers captured overseas apply for POW status.
If you think about it--and there's been very little serious thinking since September 11--what did these guys do to deserve being imprisoned in the first place, much less indefinitely? They fought for the Taliban. In Afghanistan ( news - web sites). Against the Northern Alliance. In Afghanistan.
These prisoners--er, detainees--didn't attack the United States. They didn't even know anyone who attacked the United States. They're being held not because of who they are, but because of what they might do--and because of what they think.
This is not the American way.
The same goes for the 750 people the Justice Department ( news - web sites) picked up on visa and immigration charges since September 11. There are millions of illegal immigrants in the United States, but Bush's feds only sought out those whose ethnicity (Arab), ancestry (Muslim) and political beliefs (opposed to U.S. foreign policy) made them a target. These people aren't terrorists, or even accused terrorists--they're political prisoners, doing time for what they think and what they might do.
Not even Americans are safe from Bush's anti-constitutional assaults on law and basic decency. Remember Jose Padilla? Attorney General John Ashcroft ( news - web sites) crowed in June that his men had "disrupted an unfolding terrorist plot to attack the United States by exploding a radioactive dirty bomb." Now government officials admit that they've got zero evidence and that Padilla is at best a "small fish." Nevertheless, they plan to detain this American citizen indefinitely, without trial.
Similarly Yaser Esam Hamdi, the "other" American Talib captured in Afghanistan, has been held in the brig of the Norfolk Naval Station since April 5. On August 16 U.S. District Judge Robert Doumar demanded that the government, which hasn't even bothered to explain why Hamdi should be held as an enemy combatant, must do so. "This case appears to be the first in American jurisprudence where an American citizen has been held incommunicado and subjected to an indefinite detention in the continental United States without charges, without any finding by a military tribunal, and without access to a lawyer," Doumar wrote.
There are few more sickening sights than George W. Bush wearing a lapel pin bearing an image of the American flag. Bush and his creepy henchmen can wrap themselves in nationalistic symbolism all they want, but these right-wing thugs aren't patriots. They may pledge allegiance to the flag, but they despise the republic for which it stands.
from Yahoo! News
Thu Aug 22,12:01 PM ET
By Ted Rall
Political Prisoners and the Post-9/11 Police State
NEW YORK--The United States is a nation of laws. The police arrest suspects they reasonably believe to have broken the law, not citizens who happen to disagree with the government's politics. Cops don't go after people preemptively because they might commit a crime someday. In America, people are considered innocent until they're proven guilty in a court of law. They enjoy the right to a fair trial by a jury of their peers as quickly as possible. And of course they're entitled to the counsel of an attorney.
These fundamental rights, taught in every civics class, define what it means to be American. When other countries fill their prisons with political dissidents, we wonder aloud what it must be like to live in such lawless places. When we watch films like "Midnight Express," in which an American drug smuggler rots in a Turkish prison, we shake our heads not at the sentence--after all, he's guilty--but at the lead character's railroading through the court system and the abuse he suffers at the hands of his guards.
Before September 11, no patriotic American would have disputed the last two paragraphs. Sadly, legal guarantees that every American considered a sacred birthright have been shredded virtually overnight, and many people don't seem to care. Just as a World Trade Center built over the course of five years was destroyed in under two hours, a presidential impostor has used a phony "war on terror" to systematically unraveled two centuries of basic jurisprudence in less than a year.
George W. Bush may not have read Gibbon but he possesses the morals and cunning of a gangster; in a country still stunned by last fall's attacks, that seems to be enough.
The "war on terror," we're told, requires new tactics. Law enforcement--which somehow now includes the military, CIA ( news - web sites), FBI ( news - web sites) and NSA--needs stronger tools. Terrorists are sneakier and smarter than your garden-variety mafia don. So now they're no longer "accused terrorists" but rather "enemy combatants." Who cares if these "enemy combattants" are American citizens? They can be held forever, or to be more precise, until the federal government "defeats terrorism." And while they're awaiting that distant day, Bush's "detainees"--not prisoners, since his first decisive victory has been in his jihad against the English language--don't get to see a lawyer. This works out well because Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld--who has anointed himself judge, jury and executioner--won't offer them a chance to prove their innocence in court.
For the Bushies, see, guilt and innocence aren't the point. The detainees aren't in prison for what they've done. They're there because of what they might do, for whom they know--for what they think. They are political prisoners.
Americans have watched with aggressive disinterest as images of 564 captured Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters squatting in their Guantánamo dog pens fill their living room screens. Human rights activists warn that these inmates, who hail from 38 countries, are being abused. At Camp Delta in July and August, three men tried to hang themselves and another slashed his wrist with a plastic razor. According to the Army, Guantánamo internees have staged hunger strikes to protest the conditions of their captivity. Others are being forcibly medicated with antidepressants and anti-psychotic drugs.
Even worse than the day-to-day torture is the interminable legal limbo. U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ruled July 31 that "the military base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, is outside the sovereign territory of the United States." So Guantánamo isn't the U.S., which means that the prisoners can't seek redress in American courts. But it isn't Cuba either. The POWs can go to the World Court in The Hague ( news - web sites), notes Kollar-Kotelly--but the United States routinely ignores international rulings.
Bush asserts that we're at "war" whenever he calls for increased government surveillance and tax cuts, and decreased freedom and social programs. But then he turns right around and claims that the Guantánamo captives, soldiers captured while bombs fell and bullets flew, aren't "prisoners of war" at all. Being declared a POW, after all, would entitle these schlubs to certain rights under the 1949 Geneva Conventions: freedom to refuse to answer questions, release at the end of hostilities, decent treatment, i.e., not being held in six-by-eight-foot dog pens under the blazing tropical sun. This linguistic chicanery is amusingly convenient, but it will look like madness the next time American soldiers captured overseas apply for POW status.
If you think about it--and there's been very little serious thinking since September 11--what did these guys do to deserve being imprisoned in the first place, much less indefinitely? They fought for the Taliban. In Afghanistan ( news - web sites). Against the Northern Alliance. In Afghanistan.
These prisoners--er, detainees--didn't attack the United States. They didn't even know anyone who attacked the United States. They're being held not because of who they are, but because of what they might do--and because of what they think.
This is not the American way.
The same goes for the 750 people the Justice Department ( news - web sites) picked up on visa and immigration charges since September 11. There are millions of illegal immigrants in the United States, but Bush's feds only sought out those whose ethnicity (Arab), ancestry (Muslim) and political beliefs (opposed to U.S. foreign policy) made them a target. These people aren't terrorists, or even accused terrorists--they're political prisoners, doing time for what they think and what they might do.
Not even Americans are safe from Bush's anti-constitutional assaults on law and basic decency. Remember Jose Padilla? Attorney General John Ashcroft ( news - web sites) crowed in June that his men had "disrupted an unfolding terrorist plot to attack the United States by exploding a radioactive dirty bomb." Now government officials admit that they've got zero evidence and that Padilla is at best a "small fish." Nevertheless, they plan to detain this American citizen indefinitely, without trial.
Similarly Yaser Esam Hamdi, the "other" American Talib captured in Afghanistan, has been held in the brig of the Norfolk Naval Station since April 5. On August 16 U.S. District Judge Robert Doumar demanded that the government, which hasn't even bothered to explain why Hamdi should be held as an enemy combatant, must do so. "This case appears to be the first in American jurisprudence where an American citizen has been held incommunicado and subjected to an indefinite detention in the continental United States without charges, without any finding by a military tribunal, and without access to a lawyer," Doumar wrote.
There are few more sickening sights than George W. Bush wearing a lapel pin bearing an image of the American flag. Bush and his creepy henchmen can wrap themselves in nationalistic symbolism all they want, but these right-wing thugs aren't patriots. They may pledge allegiance to the flag, but they despise the republic for which it stands.
Friday, August 23, 2002
From the New York Daily News, commentary from Chris Matthews: "Attack Iraq? No"
Occcasionally, he does get it right:
The American people are not committed to a U.S. invasion of Iraq. Vice President Cheney's staff is. The White House speechwriting office is. The guys they're working under are.
But what about the families of those who will do the fighting? What about the country that will suffer the casualties and bitterness that are the wreckage of every war? A new Washington Post/ABC poll finds that 57% of us back a ground attack on Baghdad. But that's if there are no significant casualties. Faced with that hard-to-ignore prospect, 51% oppose it.
Is this a strong popular base from which to launch a preemptive attack on a country on the other side of the world? To send several hundred thousand servicepeople on a mission to take over a country, remove its political leadership from power and install one of our choosing?
It's time to recall the Powell doctrine of the 1980s. It's even more important to recall the two words that gave it historic resonance: Vietnam and Beirut.
With memories of those misconceived missions still fresh, then-Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger and his chief military assistant, Gen. Colin Powell, drafted new criteria for overseas military involvement: War should be a last resort. It should be undertaken only in the presence of precise political and military goals with clear popular support from the public and Congress. There must be a clear exit strategy and an unhesitating will to deploy overwhelming force.
The great danger, Powell understood, lay in sending troops for a narrowly defined mission, only to see their role expand. The term is "mission creep."
So we drop tens of thousands of airborne into Baghdad. We lay siege to the government. We round up anyone who looks important. We face down snipers in the streets. We look for dictator Saddam Hussein. We wear gas masks to protect us from whatever chemical and biological weapons he has stockpiled. A threatened Israel mobilizes for war.
All this comes to pass against the backdrop of an Arab and Islamic world in riot.
Then comes the messy part. Our troops in Baghdad morph into a nervous constabulary force. Their mission: Guard the streets, shoot snipers, arrest the suspicious, keep order, find the Saddam loyalists, round up the members of his ruling party, root out plots, battle the terrorists.
For how long? How long were we in Beirut before that lame-brained mission ended with a barracks being blown sky-high by a suicide bomber? How long were we in Saigon before we gave up trying to decide where our mission was less popular: at home or in Vietnam?
This invasion of Iraq, if it goes off, will join the Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, Desert One, Beirut and Somalia in the history of U.S. military catastrophes. What will set it apart for all time is the immense - and transparent - political stupidity.
A mission to attack an isolated enemy will isolate us. A mission justified by the fight with terrorism will give birth to millions of terrorist-supporting haters.
Occcasionally, he does get it right:
The American people are not committed to a U.S. invasion of Iraq. Vice President Cheney's staff is. The White House speechwriting office is. The guys they're working under are.
But what about the families of those who will do the fighting? What about the country that will suffer the casualties and bitterness that are the wreckage of every war? A new Washington Post/ABC poll finds that 57% of us back a ground attack on Baghdad. But that's if there are no significant casualties. Faced with that hard-to-ignore prospect, 51% oppose it.
Is this a strong popular base from which to launch a preemptive attack on a country on the other side of the world? To send several hundred thousand servicepeople on a mission to take over a country, remove its political leadership from power and install one of our choosing?
It's time to recall the Powell doctrine of the 1980s. It's even more important to recall the two words that gave it historic resonance: Vietnam and Beirut.
With memories of those misconceived missions still fresh, then-Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger and his chief military assistant, Gen. Colin Powell, drafted new criteria for overseas military involvement: War should be a last resort. It should be undertaken only in the presence of precise political and military goals with clear popular support from the public and Congress. There must be a clear exit strategy and an unhesitating will to deploy overwhelming force.
The great danger, Powell understood, lay in sending troops for a narrowly defined mission, only to see their role expand. The term is "mission creep."
So we drop tens of thousands of airborne into Baghdad. We lay siege to the government. We round up anyone who looks important. We face down snipers in the streets. We look for dictator Saddam Hussein. We wear gas masks to protect us from whatever chemical and biological weapons he has stockpiled. A threatened Israel mobilizes for war.
All this comes to pass against the backdrop of an Arab and Islamic world in riot.
Then comes the messy part. Our troops in Baghdad morph into a nervous constabulary force. Their mission: Guard the streets, shoot snipers, arrest the suspicious, keep order, find the Saddam loyalists, round up the members of his ruling party, root out plots, battle the terrorists.
For how long? How long were we in Beirut before that lame-brained mission ended with a barracks being blown sky-high by a suicide bomber? How long were we in Saigon before we gave up trying to decide where our mission was less popular: at home or in Vietnam?
This invasion of Iraq, if it goes off, will join the Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, Desert One, Beirut and Somalia in the history of U.S. military catastrophes. What will set it apart for all time is the immense - and transparent - political stupidity.
A mission to attack an isolated enemy will isolate us. A mission justified by the fight with terrorism will give birth to millions of terrorist-supporting haters.
Thursday, August 22, 2002
You may have already seen this on another site, such as that of the Baltimore Chronicle, but I couldn't resist. I wish it was broadcast on all the major television networks' news where all the numbskulls are being spoonfed whatever "news" sells.
Open Letter to America from a Canadian
~W.R. McDougall
Dear America:
And so it has come to this. Your once-great nation has fallen into madness, an affliction of mass denial that brings shivers up the spines of millions outside your borders. Yours is a sick nation. But most of you carry on as though nothing at all is the matter.
Dark, evil operations run rampant in the secret corners of your government institutions. A dubiously constituted government pursues war at will anywhere on earth, discussing nuclear options that become points for cheerful chatter over lunch. Your military and intelligence agencies employ terrorist tactics around the globe even as they insist that such tactics are necessary in the fight against terrorism.
You have become a nation of monsters, America. Hypocrites. Murderers. Fools.
Your constitution is a shambles thanks to "national security" measures resulting from what might well be U.S.-government-sanctioned terrorist attacks in New York City and Washington D.C., covert provocations designed to justify a malevolent, poisonous, oil-based military economy.
Never mind that earth-friendly technology already exists to once and for all end dependence on oil, coal and nuclear energy from huge, out-of-control utilities and corporations. You would rather pay through the nose for your insecure comforts, wouldn't you America, and make others pay with their blood.
At the same time, you stand by as the Israelis' secular Zionists--whom you support through the supply of arms and money--slaughter untold numbers of innocents in the West Bank, then blame the Palestinians for bringing the terror upon themselves. (True, there are abominable Arab suicide bombers in Israel's midst. But are they not driven to madness and desperation by your infernal support of international terrorist politics?)
As I write these words, you support a nation run by a convicted murderer by the name of Ariel Sharon who with impunity is carrying out war crimes as cruel and horrendous as those of other sadistic tyrants in history. And you say, in your utter cynicism, 'When will these Palestinians bring this war to an end?'
You recklessly wage combat on other fronts, too. At home, your War on Drugs is a disastrous 30-year folly--a gigantic con game designed to benefit lethal cartels, corrupt politicians and menacing intelligence agencies across the planet.....
With your government's support, crooked multinationals like Monsanto buy up the world's water supplies, and take possession of the world's vegetation through Frankenstein technology already known to cause illness.
Does the FDA care about any of this? It does not. It has long been on the bandwagon to foist genetically altered food on the Guinea Pigs of the country--including every man, woman and child on America's increasingly toxic soil.
You are a nation of suckers, America, to be bled dry of your hard-earned pay through outrageous bank schemes, Wall Street rip-offs and fake government budget grabs. Your Pentagon cannot account for trillions in lost dollars.
Does this bother you? Not in the least.
Your whole economy is controlled by what is for the most part ravenous, international private banking interests in the form of The Federal Reserve, which with your government's consent leads you down the garden path to certain financial ruin thanks to a national debt you will never be able to repay.
How is it that private banks are responsible for issuing your currency? How is it that they are allowed to charge ridiculous interest rates on what they issue? By decree, this was supposed to be the responsibility of your government, which could create its own currency without charging interest.
Do you realize your congress could dismiss these banks in an instant if it so wished? But don't ever count on it. More important matters are pressing. The upcoming election needs investment.
These very same money men are the ones who, through unmonitored and unrepresentative world committees, are driving countries like Argentina into hopeless debt and social upheaval. These greedy overlords are creating strife and suffering on a scale too tragic for words in nation after nation. Just look at Africa.
They've got their sights on America, now, too; disrupting economic stability through so-called free trade initiatives and provisions for special favors and the endless flow of cash to corporate monstrosities like Enron.
Amid all this, where are those who are supposed to represent your interests, America? For the most part, your congressional representatives are nothing but swine gathering at the corporate troughs. Your president is a white-collar thug, a hypocrite who through his actions celebrates war, repression and greed even as he gives lip service to peace, freedom and justice.
George W. Bush deceives you daily, the war monger hiding behind a phony patriotism. He is an Enron buddy boy, a spoiled child lying in his teeth about his past and current dirty deeds.
Does he care about you America? Hardly. This is altogether obvious to those outside your borders who are politically aware and awake to the world around them.
You were never concerned about the disgraceful practices of George's ruthless father, either, a Bin-Laden cohort and friend to criminals and killers in global drug, oil and terrorist enterprises. Iran. Vietnam. El Salvador. Chile. Guatemala. Iraq. And on and on. The never-ending bully-boy story of blood, guns, drugs and money.
Does any of this matter? No, it's simply time to eat.
Go get your ten-billionth burger, America. Fatten your already fat asses with bacteria-and-hormone-ridden meat and do nothing as you sit stupefied before your mind-numbing television sets awaiting the next episode of sad families being humiliated on "Cops."
Few among you are the least bit concerned that no real investigation of 911 has taken place, that no serious investigation of the anthrax attacks is moving forward, that no authentic investigation of Enron, or the murder of one of its top executives, is underway.
How many of you give the slightest damn about the totalitarian measures your government is taking to keep its secret meetings, grubby files and treasonous activities from your eyes?....
When did you stop caring, America? Was it after your own FBI and intelligence agencies plotted the murder of President John F. Kennedy? Or is this just the raving lunacy of the conspiracy nut? What does your gut tell you, America? Is something a little amiss here?
Forget about it. Have some Pepto-Bismol.
Today, in futility, your own government goes to court against itself for information you are entitled to by law. But this is hardly deemed vital news in the community. It is a fleeting reference in an electronic sea of meaningless banter. For proof, just look to all the spineless wimps who constitute your mainstream news media.
Today, you excoriate, ridicule and ostracize the brave and true among you. Your best investigative journalists are fired from their jobs and ignored. Congress's few courageous souls are laughed at and dismissed out of hand as crackpots. The most honest and conscientious political leader in the country, Ralph Nader, is a powerless, near-invisible curiosity easily side-lined by hired goons.
America, you are a goddamn shame.
What law matters now in your despicable state? What justice? What truth?
When will you wake up?
If you had your druthers, you would right now gather your courage, take to the streets and march on Washington D.C in the millions. But I know you will do no such thing. The vast majority of you are spiritually, emotionally and intellectually dead.
As I write these words, I can only imagine what additional horrors your shadow government might be planning in what will surely be an attempt to justify militarism and totalitarianism on a universal scale. A nuclear explosion in one of your cities, perhaps? A massive bio-chemical attack?
Or perhaps it will be some Arab terrorist who finally commits the terrible deed, his last thought before death being the promises you made to him before you killed his family.
Open Letter to America from a Canadian
~W.R. McDougall
Dear America:
And so it has come to this. Your once-great nation has fallen into madness, an affliction of mass denial that brings shivers up the spines of millions outside your borders. Yours is a sick nation. But most of you carry on as though nothing at all is the matter.
Dark, evil operations run rampant in the secret corners of your government institutions. A dubiously constituted government pursues war at will anywhere on earth, discussing nuclear options that become points for cheerful chatter over lunch. Your military and intelligence agencies employ terrorist tactics around the globe even as they insist that such tactics are necessary in the fight against terrorism.
You have become a nation of monsters, America. Hypocrites. Murderers. Fools.
Your constitution is a shambles thanks to "national security" measures resulting from what might well be U.S.-government-sanctioned terrorist attacks in New York City and Washington D.C., covert provocations designed to justify a malevolent, poisonous, oil-based military economy.
Never mind that earth-friendly technology already exists to once and for all end dependence on oil, coal and nuclear energy from huge, out-of-control utilities and corporations. You would rather pay through the nose for your insecure comforts, wouldn't you America, and make others pay with their blood.
At the same time, you stand by as the Israelis' secular Zionists--whom you support through the supply of arms and money--slaughter untold numbers of innocents in the West Bank, then blame the Palestinians for bringing the terror upon themselves. (True, there are abominable Arab suicide bombers in Israel's midst. But are they not driven to madness and desperation by your infernal support of international terrorist politics?)
As I write these words, you support a nation run by a convicted murderer by the name of Ariel Sharon who with impunity is carrying out war crimes as cruel and horrendous as those of other sadistic tyrants in history. And you say, in your utter cynicism, 'When will these Palestinians bring this war to an end?'
You recklessly wage combat on other fronts, too. At home, your War on Drugs is a disastrous 30-year folly--a gigantic con game designed to benefit lethal cartels, corrupt politicians and menacing intelligence agencies across the planet.....
With your government's support, crooked multinationals like Monsanto buy up the world's water supplies, and take possession of the world's vegetation through Frankenstein technology already known to cause illness.
Does the FDA care about any of this? It does not. It has long been on the bandwagon to foist genetically altered food on the Guinea Pigs of the country--including every man, woman and child on America's increasingly toxic soil.
You are a nation of suckers, America, to be bled dry of your hard-earned pay through outrageous bank schemes, Wall Street rip-offs and fake government budget grabs. Your Pentagon cannot account for trillions in lost dollars.
Does this bother you? Not in the least.
Your whole economy is controlled by what is for the most part ravenous, international private banking interests in the form of The Federal Reserve, which with your government's consent leads you down the garden path to certain financial ruin thanks to a national debt you will never be able to repay.
How is it that private banks are responsible for issuing your currency? How is it that they are allowed to charge ridiculous interest rates on what they issue? By decree, this was supposed to be the responsibility of your government, which could create its own currency without charging interest.
Do you realize your congress could dismiss these banks in an instant if it so wished? But don't ever count on it. More important matters are pressing. The upcoming election needs investment.
These very same money men are the ones who, through unmonitored and unrepresentative world committees, are driving countries like Argentina into hopeless debt and social upheaval. These greedy overlords are creating strife and suffering on a scale too tragic for words in nation after nation. Just look at Africa.
They've got their sights on America, now, too; disrupting economic stability through so-called free trade initiatives and provisions for special favors and the endless flow of cash to corporate monstrosities like Enron.
Amid all this, where are those who are supposed to represent your interests, America? For the most part, your congressional representatives are nothing but swine gathering at the corporate troughs. Your president is a white-collar thug, a hypocrite who through his actions celebrates war, repression and greed even as he gives lip service to peace, freedom and justice.
George W. Bush deceives you daily, the war monger hiding behind a phony patriotism. He is an Enron buddy boy, a spoiled child lying in his teeth about his past and current dirty deeds.
Does he care about you America? Hardly. This is altogether obvious to those outside your borders who are politically aware and awake to the world around them.
You were never concerned about the disgraceful practices of George's ruthless father, either, a Bin-Laden cohort and friend to criminals and killers in global drug, oil and terrorist enterprises. Iran. Vietnam. El Salvador. Chile. Guatemala. Iraq. And on and on. The never-ending bully-boy story of blood, guns, drugs and money.
Does any of this matter? No, it's simply time to eat.
Go get your ten-billionth burger, America. Fatten your already fat asses with bacteria-and-hormone-ridden meat and do nothing as you sit stupefied before your mind-numbing television sets awaiting the next episode of sad families being humiliated on "Cops."
Few among you are the least bit concerned that no real investigation of 911 has taken place, that no serious investigation of the anthrax attacks is moving forward, that no authentic investigation of Enron, or the murder of one of its top executives, is underway.
How many of you give the slightest damn about the totalitarian measures your government is taking to keep its secret meetings, grubby files and treasonous activities from your eyes?....
When did you stop caring, America? Was it after your own FBI and intelligence agencies plotted the murder of President John F. Kennedy? Or is this just the raving lunacy of the conspiracy nut? What does your gut tell you, America? Is something a little amiss here?
Forget about it. Have some Pepto-Bismol.
Today, in futility, your own government goes to court against itself for information you are entitled to by law. But this is hardly deemed vital news in the community. It is a fleeting reference in an electronic sea of meaningless banter. For proof, just look to all the spineless wimps who constitute your mainstream news media.
Today, you excoriate, ridicule and ostracize the brave and true among you. Your best investigative journalists are fired from their jobs and ignored. Congress's few courageous souls are laughed at and dismissed out of hand as crackpots. The most honest and conscientious political leader in the country, Ralph Nader, is a powerless, near-invisible curiosity easily side-lined by hired goons.
America, you are a goddamn shame.
What law matters now in your despicable state? What justice? What truth?
When will you wake up?
If you had your druthers, you would right now gather your courage, take to the streets and march on Washington D.C in the millions. But I know you will do no such thing. The vast majority of you are spiritually, emotionally and intellectually dead.
As I write these words, I can only imagine what additional horrors your shadow government might be planning in what will surely be an attempt to justify militarism and totalitarianism on a universal scale. A nuclear explosion in one of your cities, perhaps? A massive bio-chemical attack?
Or perhaps it will be some Arab terrorist who finally commits the terrible deed, his last thought before death being the promises you made to him before you killed his family.
Monday, August 12, 2002
A quote I read at liberalslant.com that really sums things up:
“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 peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
~ Herman Goering (second in command to Adolph Hitler) at the Nuremberg Trial
“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 peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
~ Herman Goering (second in command to Adolph Hitler) at the Nuremberg Trial
Sunday, August 11, 2002
"The Frontier Ghandhi," Abdul Ghaffar Khan, is a model for breaking stereotypes. The article below from Nick Megoran, a graduate student at the Department of Geography, University of Cambridge, talks about Khan's work and the biography of his life, Nonviolent Soldier of Islam by Eknath Easwaran.
As United States CIA officers continue operations against Afghan warlords in advance of this June's Loya Jirga legislative council, demagogues from Afghanistan to the United States still characterize the war for public observers as a struggle against either 'American imperialism' or 'international terrorism.' Both of these tacks, while they tend to rouse audiences, necessarily pit one side against another. In this light, a 1999 book about the life of a lesser-known peacemaker, which serves as a warning and hopeful challenge to seekers of sovereignty and to anti-terrorists, deserves a second look.
Readers accustomed to tracking the affairs of Pashtun leaders in the daily paper can get to know a remarkable Pashtun peacemaker in Easwaran Eknath's Nonviolent Soldier of Islam. The book tells the story of tribal leader Abdul Ghaffar Khan, who was born in 1890 outside Peshawar and went on to work alongside Mahatma Gandhi. His journey, against the daily skirmishes and negotiations in Afghanistan, provide hope for a devastated country attempting to emerge from more than two decades of warfare.
The son of a village chief, Khan witnessed British forces' repression of an uprising in his home Northwest Frontier province in 1897. Alongside this colonial oppression, devastating cycles of violence precipitated by blood feuds scarred his Pashtun society and made a profound impression on the young Khan. Although a physically strong man with a brilliant mind, he rejected a coveted commission in an elite British Indian army unit and a place to study in England. Instead, he determined to oppose the British oppression of his fellow Afghans. But instead of using weapons of warfare, Khan fought this struggle by providing education.
He traveled throughout rural tribal areas preaching hard work, self-sacrifice and forgiveness, and led efforts to establish schools for peasant children. His work earned him the respect of fellow citizens, who gave him the honorary title 'Badshah Khan' - or Khan of Khans. The British saw him as a threat, however. They censored his schools and imprisoned Khan; in the end, he was to spend one third of his long life in prison.
Over the course of his non-violent campaign, Khan forged a close relationship with Mahatma Ghandi, even becoming known among locals as 'the Frontier Ghandi.' Khan spread Ghandi's civil disobedience movement to the Afghan frontier region, urging his people to return British medals, withdraw from British universities, and stop practicing in British courts.
Perhaps most remarkably to readers accustomed to Taliban-style religious rhetoric, Badshah Khan organized 100,000 uniformed men as the Khudai Khidmatgars, or 'Servants of God' - the world's first professional non-violent army. With regimental discipline, these men foreswore violence and dedicated themselves to education, poverty relief and raising the consciousness of the peasants. The Khudai Khidmagtars formed the key Muslim component of the popular non-violent movement that precipitated the British withdrawal from India.
But Khan's joy was short-lived, for reasons that will also resonate with current readers. A strong advocate of Indian unity, he was appalled at the fighting following independence in 1947 that led to the partition of the sub-continent into Muslim and Hindu states. Nevertheless, he maintained close ties with his Hindu friends, earning the ire of the Pakistani authorities who imprisoned him as 'pro-Indian.' He insisted to the end that Muslims and Hindus were better off together, and deplored tensions between the two states.
Abdul Ghaffar Khan died on January 20 1988, at the age of 98. His funeral led to the first visit of an Indian Prime Minister to Pakistan in three decades. It also occasioned a temporary cease-fire observed by Soviet and mujaheddin forces fighting in Afghanistan, to allow his burial near Jalalabad.
Today, with missiles landing in Jalalabad, this accessible and inspiring account of one of history's greatest peacemakers provides valuable insights to readers concerned with the plight of contemporary Afghanistan. In particular, the book offers four lessons. First, it reminds us that no nation is a slave to its past. The Pashtuns are often caricatured in Western media as a 'warlike people.' However, Badshah Khan shows us that even the most deeply ingrained cycles of violence can be broken once violence itself is disavowed. Second, it challenges the image many have, post-September 11, of Islam as a religion of violence. Badshah Khan was a devout Muslim, but his faith did not lead him to endorse militarism - even in the face of outrages committed against his own people. Rather, he believed that the Prophet Mohammad's life set an example of non-violence. He worked closely with other faith communities, strongly influenced by Ghandi's preaching of Jesus' injunction to 'love your enemy.'
The other two lessons of the book bear on understanding of American, rather than Central Asian, politics. By documenting the terror that British colonialism wrought in the cause of "progress," Eknath reminds us that wars fought in the name of abstractions like "civilization" can be the cruelest of all. Like the British a century earlier, in the past two decades Soviet, Taliban and American forces have wrought great suffering on the people of Afghanistan. Yet all fighters have been convinced they were fighting for noble causes. Finally, Badshah Khan's story teaches that hope can arise from remarkable places. It shows that courageous individuals motivated by love and determination can transform history. In an uncertain moment in the war on terrorism and the development of nations, Eknath's book deserves close reading by a wide audience.
Nonviolent Soldier of Islam: Badshah Khan, A Man to Match His Mountains (2nd edition)
by Eknath Easwaran
240 pp. $24.00 (hardcover)
Nilgiri Press, 2000
As United States CIA officers continue operations against Afghan warlords in advance of this June's Loya Jirga legislative council, demagogues from Afghanistan to the United States still characterize the war for public observers as a struggle against either 'American imperialism' or 'international terrorism.' Both of these tacks, while they tend to rouse audiences, necessarily pit one side against another. In this light, a 1999 book about the life of a lesser-known peacemaker, which serves as a warning and hopeful challenge to seekers of sovereignty and to anti-terrorists, deserves a second look.
Readers accustomed to tracking the affairs of Pashtun leaders in the daily paper can get to know a remarkable Pashtun peacemaker in Easwaran Eknath's Nonviolent Soldier of Islam. The book tells the story of tribal leader Abdul Ghaffar Khan, who was born in 1890 outside Peshawar and went on to work alongside Mahatma Gandhi. His journey, against the daily skirmishes and negotiations in Afghanistan, provide hope for a devastated country attempting to emerge from more than two decades of warfare.
The son of a village chief, Khan witnessed British forces' repression of an uprising in his home Northwest Frontier province in 1897. Alongside this colonial oppression, devastating cycles of violence precipitated by blood feuds scarred his Pashtun society and made a profound impression on the young Khan. Although a physically strong man with a brilliant mind, he rejected a coveted commission in an elite British Indian army unit and a place to study in England. Instead, he determined to oppose the British oppression of his fellow Afghans. But instead of using weapons of warfare, Khan fought this struggle by providing education.
He traveled throughout rural tribal areas preaching hard work, self-sacrifice and forgiveness, and led efforts to establish schools for peasant children. His work earned him the respect of fellow citizens, who gave him the honorary title 'Badshah Khan' - or Khan of Khans. The British saw him as a threat, however. They censored his schools and imprisoned Khan; in the end, he was to spend one third of his long life in prison.
Over the course of his non-violent campaign, Khan forged a close relationship with Mahatma Ghandi, even becoming known among locals as 'the Frontier Ghandi.' Khan spread Ghandi's civil disobedience movement to the Afghan frontier region, urging his people to return British medals, withdraw from British universities, and stop practicing in British courts.
Perhaps most remarkably to readers accustomed to Taliban-style religious rhetoric, Badshah Khan organized 100,000 uniformed men as the Khudai Khidmatgars, or 'Servants of God' - the world's first professional non-violent army. With regimental discipline, these men foreswore violence and dedicated themselves to education, poverty relief and raising the consciousness of the peasants. The Khudai Khidmagtars formed the key Muslim component of the popular non-violent movement that precipitated the British withdrawal from India.
But Khan's joy was short-lived, for reasons that will also resonate with current readers. A strong advocate of Indian unity, he was appalled at the fighting following independence in 1947 that led to the partition of the sub-continent into Muslim and Hindu states. Nevertheless, he maintained close ties with his Hindu friends, earning the ire of the Pakistani authorities who imprisoned him as 'pro-Indian.' He insisted to the end that Muslims and Hindus were better off together, and deplored tensions between the two states.
Abdul Ghaffar Khan died on January 20 1988, at the age of 98. His funeral led to the first visit of an Indian Prime Minister to Pakistan in three decades. It also occasioned a temporary cease-fire observed by Soviet and mujaheddin forces fighting in Afghanistan, to allow his burial near Jalalabad.
Today, with missiles landing in Jalalabad, this accessible and inspiring account of one of history's greatest peacemakers provides valuable insights to readers concerned with the plight of contemporary Afghanistan. In particular, the book offers four lessons. First, it reminds us that no nation is a slave to its past. The Pashtuns are often caricatured in Western media as a 'warlike people.' However, Badshah Khan shows us that even the most deeply ingrained cycles of violence can be broken once violence itself is disavowed. Second, it challenges the image many have, post-September 11, of Islam as a religion of violence. Badshah Khan was a devout Muslim, but his faith did not lead him to endorse militarism - even in the face of outrages committed against his own people. Rather, he believed that the Prophet Mohammad's life set an example of non-violence. He worked closely with other faith communities, strongly influenced by Ghandi's preaching of Jesus' injunction to 'love your enemy.'
The other two lessons of the book bear on understanding of American, rather than Central Asian, politics. By documenting the terror that British colonialism wrought in the cause of "progress," Eknath reminds us that wars fought in the name of abstractions like "civilization" can be the cruelest of all. Like the British a century earlier, in the past two decades Soviet, Taliban and American forces have wrought great suffering on the people of Afghanistan. Yet all fighters have been convinced they were fighting for noble causes. Finally, Badshah Khan's story teaches that hope can arise from remarkable places. It shows that courageous individuals motivated by love and determination can transform history. In an uncertain moment in the war on terrorism and the development of nations, Eknath's book deserves close reading by a wide audience.
This would make a good headline:
"US Dissidents Call for Change in Regime, White House Fears Coup D'état"
All of this talk of cleaning house of Hussein and Arrafat, how about we start talking about cleaning our own place? I suppose we just see how much more damage can be done in the next 29 months by the covetous, the ignorant, and the chickenhawks. It has to suck to be Al Gore and wake up every day seeing everything he warned us about becoming real. Nader on the other hand, must be having a ball.
"US Dissidents Call for Change in Regime, White House Fears Coup D'état"
All of this talk of cleaning house of Hussein and Arrafat, how about we start talking about cleaning our own place? I suppose we just see how much more damage can be done in the next 29 months by the covetous, the ignorant, and the chickenhawks. It has to suck to be Al Gore and wake up every day seeing everything he warned us about becoming real. Nader on the other hand, must be having a ball.
Friday, August 09, 2002
Not voting for Republicans...priceless.
Money, get away
Get a good job with good pay and you're okay
Money, it's a gas
Grab that cash with both hands and make a stash
New car, caviar, four star daydream,
Think I'll buy me a baseball team
Money, get back
I'm all right Jack keep your hands off of my stack
Money, it's a hit
Don't give me that do goody good bullshit
I'm in the high-fidelity first class traveling set
And I think I need a Lear jet
Money, it's a crime
Share it fairly but don't take a slice of my pie
Money, so they say
Is the root of all evil today
But if you ask for a raise it's no surprise
That they're giving none away.
"HuHuh! I was in the right!"
"Yes, absolutely in the right!"
"I certainly was in the right!"
"You was definitely in the right.
That geezer was cruising for a bruising!"
"Yeah!"
"Why does anyone do anything?"
"I don't know, I was really drunk at the time!"
"I was just telling him, he couldn't get into number 2.
He was asking why he wasn't coming up on freely,
After I was yelling and screaming and
Telling him why he wasn't coming up on freely.
It came as a heavy blow, but we sorted the matter out."
------------------lyrics by Roger Waters
Money, get away
Get a good job with good pay and you're okay
Money, it's a gas
Grab that cash with both hands and make a stash
New car, caviar, four star daydream,
Think I'll buy me a baseball team
Money, get back
I'm all right Jack keep your hands off of my stack
Money, it's a hit
Don't give me that do goody good bullshit
I'm in the high-fidelity first class traveling set
And I think I need a Lear jet
Money, it's a crime
Share it fairly but don't take a slice of my pie
Money, so they say
Is the root of all evil today
But if you ask for a raise it's no surprise
That they're giving none away.
"HuHuh! I was in the right!"
"Yes, absolutely in the right!"
"I certainly was in the right!"
"You was definitely in the right.
That geezer was cruising for a bruising!"
"Yeah!"
"Why does anyone do anything?"
"I don't know, I was really drunk at the time!"
"I was just telling him, he couldn't get into number 2.
He was asking why he wasn't coming up on freely,
After I was yelling and screaming and
Telling him why he wasn't coming up on freely.
It came as a heavy blow, but we sorted the matter out."
------------------lyrics by Roger Waters
