What exactly is wrong with a man going into a men's room looking for anonymous sex ?
Why is it illegal ?
Who cares ?
Egregious crimes have been committed by uncountable numbers of our high elected officials that have resulted in the death, dismemberment, immolation, starvation and poisoning of millions of people, and so far not ONE of them has spent a minute behind bars. Few have even lost their jobs.
But one guy goes for a quick weenie wank and from our duly elected representatives and the pimp media erupts a deafening ubiquitous self-righteous roar -
What's most frightening about the Larry Craig debacle is not about getting hit on in the crapper, its that there are actually POLICE hiding in toilets everywhere, waiting to bust us.
Think about it - next time you go pee in a public restroom. My advice is to hold it til ya get home. Not worth the risk.
Odds are there's a cop in there, hanging out (!) -- just waiting to slam the cuffs on some poor slob - like us.
This country's gestapo doesn't stop at snooping on emails or eavesdropping telephone calls, or spy video cams.
Read the transcript of the Craig bust from June 2007.
What scares ya ?
That Craig might have been looking for some ?
What's the big deal ?
Here's what scares me.
That every goddam place we go there's a cop, or a camera.
That under the lie of some loonie War of Terror, we are being surveilled and spied upon, literally everywhere.
And, get this straight- this means YOU. And they want you to KNOW it.
Especially if you are UnWhite.
Here is a section from the transcript of the interrogation after the bust.
The Cop says:
"I just, I just, I guess, I guess I'm gonna say I'm just disappointed in you sir.
I'm just really am. I expect this from the guy that we get out of the hood. I mean, people vote for you."
Did ya get that ?
"I EXPECT this from a guy... out of the HOOD"
What ? whatwhatwhat ?
The COP says he EXPECTS this from an UNWHITE person, but not from a nice white guy, a SENator forchrissakes.
He EXPECTS it.
I have heard not one word about this from anywhere. Sharpton ? Are you awake ?
The Press is positively enthralled with Craig's sexuality, but not one peep about a cop blatantly and publicly proclaiming his fundamental racial prejudice, proud of his pattern of racial profiling.
As for his fellow Senators- do you think they would be treating Craig like Typhoid Tom if this wasn't about faggots ?
Men are supposed to fuck WOmen, hookers, young girls, their secretaries, other Senator's wives- whatever. That's all fine.
Senator David Vitter and who knows how many others admit to seeing the DC Madam and her stable. Hey thass OK. Its just Men being Men.
There's a littttle Strom Thurmond in alla us boys, ya know.
Har Har.
But Craig- uh oh. A faggot. Mark Foley redux.
String him up. We gotta show America what we do to Faggots around here.
Ya do what Tucker Carlson says (on National TV, to great applause) he did- ya go back with a few testosterone poisoned good ole boys, and kick the faggot's ass.
Har har har.
Now I think they got the right man, but for the wrong things.
I don't care who Craig licks, or where. I don't care where he sticks any part of himself, or how.
That's up to him and the consenting adult lickorstickee.
I do care that Craig was a war-mongering racist hypocrite, who has the blood of thousands on his hands.
A man who rushed to vote for the very spying that bit him.
He deserved to be outed as a murderer, a snoop, a gay bashing homophobe, a willing and enthusiastic reactionary bastard.
So, good that he's gone.
But not at this price.
Because we are next.
Right now, thousands -- hundreds of thousands - of us are being arrested, and imprisoned by the I.C.E. for being Brown.
Right now, the President and his stooges have the power to name us as traitors and not only bust us, but imprison us as enemy combatants.
And not just bust us, and imprison us, but take away everything we own.
Just because they think or have reason to believe us "to have committed, or to pose a significant risk of committing"
various acts, in their SOLE judgement.
So, do you see ?
Do you see that we are all walking into the toilet, every day ?
And that we are all subject to the whims of millions of cops who are just sitting there, hiding, waiting for us to drop our drawers ?
Let down our guard for an instant ?
Craig was one of Them. But he was one of Us as well.
And ya better believe it-
You're next.
Read more!!
Friday, August 31, 2007
Monday, August 27, 2007
DRANT #250: DUICIDE IN BASRA
Depleted Uranium threatens thousands of lives in Basra, government turns blind eye
–researcher
Voices of Iraq:
http://66.111.34.180/look/english/article.tpl?IdLanguage=1&IdPublication=4&NrArticle=53649&NrIssue=2&NrSection=4
URUKNET:
http://www.uruknet.de/?s1=1&p=35723&s2=28
"...Not mentioned in the article is the reason for this child's eyes being in the condition you see in this photo.
The child rubbed DU dust into there eyes and scratched it into the tissues around them leading to the cancer you see eating this kids eyes out.
Not since Hiroshima/Nagasaki have these nasty effects been so visible to all humans the world over..."
Basra, Aug 27, (VOI) – Radiation levels in selected regions of Iraq's southern province of Basra warn of imminent danger to thousands of local residents who might be more prone to cancer and birth deformities, according to Khajak Vartanian, an environmental radiation measurement specialist from the province.
"Basra has experienced an unprecedented rise in solid cancer cases during the past four years: 62 cases per 100,000 persons compared to 35 in 1997," Vartanian explained.
Exposure to military depleted uranium (DU) pollution has not only increased solid cancer cases in the province, but caused severe birth deformities in newborn babies, he added. "Other cases of renal failure, skin disease, allergy, infertility and recurrent miscarriages were also attributed to DU pollution," he indicated, adding that most of the reported cases were close to the contaminated sites.
According to Vartanian, the problem began during the second Gulf War in 1991 when the U.S.-led coalition forces used depleted uranium weapons to bomb Iraqi military sites and economic infrastructure. During the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, depleted uranium shells and ammunition were also used against Iraqi military targets in Basra, which were close to residential areas.
Totaling the number of radiation sites in Basra by 2004 as 100, the environment researcher accused local and central governments of negligence in dealing with the problem. In 2004 the Iraqi government allowed residents and traders to sell iron waste from the battlefield, which added to the increasing incidences of cancer in the province.
When asked about the highly contaminated sites in Basra, Vartanian said that most reported cases were from neighborhoods close to radiation sites, particularly from the neighborhoods of al-Zubair, Abu Khaseeb, al-Qarna and other overcrowded districts.
Commenting on the proper measures for alleviating a potential disaster, Vartanian said that all contaminated materials must be removed from Basra and buried in uninhabited areas. "A proposal was submitted to the Iraqi government to temporarily designate Maqbarat al-Dabbabat (Tanks Cemetery), 200 km west of Basra, for this purpose… but it went unheard," he added.
Recent statistics show that 1,400 armored vehicles belonging to the Iraqi army were destroyed by DU shells in 1991 and were reused by the Iraqi forces during the U.S.-led war in 2003.
Basra is a Shiite province with a 20% Sunni population. It is located 590 km south of Baghdad.
COMMENTS BY REGISTERED READERS OF URUKNET
Comment posted: by masher1 on 27 Aug 2007 - 19:12
Not mentioned in the article is the reason for this child's eyes being in the co ndition you see in this photo.
The child rubbed DU dust into there eyes and scratched it into the tissues aroun d them leading to the cancer you see eating this kids eyes out.
Not since Hiroshima/Nagasaki have these nasty effects been so visible to all humans the world over.
DU or Uranium-238 used as weapons WILL stop.
Read more!!
Sunday, August 26, 2007
DRANT #249: LOBSTER LUNCH
I send this without comment.
The unspeakable speaks so eloquently that there is truly nothing to add.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The New York Times
Hear a General, Hug a Sheik: Congress Does the Iraq Circuit
August 26, 2007
http://select.nytimes.com/mem/tnt.html?emc=tnt&tntget=2007/08/26/world/middleeast/26visits.html&tntemail0=y
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG and DAMIEN CAVE
WASHINGTON, Aug. 25 — On a Sunday morning in early August, just hours after Congress had recessed for the summer, Representative Jan Schakowsky and five of her colleagues boarded a military jet at Andrews Air Force Base. Three flights and a Black Hawk helicopter ride later, they were lunching on asparagus soup and lobster tortellini at the home of Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker in Baghdad.
“It was a lovely lunch, a nice-napkin lunch,” said Ms. Schakowsky, a liberal Democrat and ardent war critic from Chicago. But it was also, she said, a lunch with a message.
The featured guest was Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top American military commander in Iraq. With an array of charts and maps behind him, he told the lawmakers President Bush’s troop buildup had produced “tactical momentum,” a phrase that he would use repeatedly in Congressional briefings and that lawmakers are now beginning to use as well.
The meal was just one stop in a jam-packed tour that included visits with Sunni and Shiite tribal leaders (“a sheik engagement,” the Pentagon itinerary said), a chat with the Kurdish deputy prime minister and the all-important photographs with hometown soldiers to show constituents at election time. Just another day in Baghdad in August, high season for Congressional travel to Iraq.
The trips, highly choreographed affairs known as codels, for Congressional delegations, are an annual rite of summer for lawmakers, but they have taken on fresh urgency. With Democrats running Congress and Mr. Bush’s troop increase due for an intense re-evaluation in September, roughly 50 lawmakers have tromped through Iraq this summer, and their impressions are having a profound effect on the debate.
Last week, Senator Carl Levin, Democrat of Michigan and chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said after visiting Iraq that Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki should be ousted for making such poor progress in bridging his country’s sectarian differences. Then Mr. Levin’s Republican counterpart and Iraq travel partner, Senator John W. Warner of Virginia, dropped his own bombshell, calling on the president to begin bringing troops home by Christmas.
Congress has had notoriously testy relations with the Pentagon over the war. But with a new defense secretary, Robert M. Gates, in charge, this summer’s trips have amounted to a kind of Pentagon charm offensive. Lawmakers say Mr. Gates seems especially encouraging of their visits; six freshmen traveled to Iraq recently at his invitation.
Inside the Pentagon, some were concerned about how the top generals in Baghdad could fight the war and accommodate so many lawmakers, with all their briefings, travel and security needs. The Pentagon press secretary, Geoff Morrell, said Mr. Gates and General Petraeus were determined to do both.
“You can’t fight the war in a vacuum,” Mr. Morrell said. “The reality is that there’s an audience in Washington that you need to be attentive to.”
The trips have clearly set the story line for the September debate, cementing the perception that the military is making progress, even if Mr. Maliki is not. For the White House, which sold the troop buildup as a way to create “political breathing space” for the Iraqis to form a unity government, it’s a glass-half-empty, half-full situation.
Ms. Schakowsky, for example, came away from the Petraeus lunch convinced more than ever that “the surge is a failure.” Representative Jack Kingston, a Georgia Republican, took the opposite view; he’s now “leaning in the direction” of giving the buildup more time.
In Baghdad on Saturday, just hours after his own meeting with General Petraeus, James P. Moran, a Virginia Democrat and senior member of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, also said he was impressed with the presentation. “Based on the outline,” Mr. Moran said, “I just don’t see Congress pulling up stakes.”
The Pentagon is pleased and a senior White House official called the trips “a net plus.” And at least one Democrat, Representative Brian Baird of Washington, an early opponent of the war, has changed his mind.
Mr. Baird was especially struck by his trip to Yusufiya, a farm town about 15 miles south of Baghdad in an area long dominated by Sunni insurgents. He met the mayor, visited a market and chatted with two sheiks, a Sunni and a Shiite, who “embraced us in front of everybody out on the street,” he said.
“That’s real progress,” Mr. Baird said, though he confessed he did not tell his wife about the region’s nickname, the triangle of death, and said the whole scene was a little surreal. “You have your flak jacket on, and your Kevlar helmet and you’re surrounded by guys with automatic weapons as you’re standing there, talking to the mayor. And you realize there’s a dusty old car next to you and you’re saying, ‘God, I hope that doesn’t blow up.’ ”
The Congressional Iraq tours rarely include chats with ordinary Iraqis. “You don’t have the mobility for that,” Mr. Kingston said. And Iraqis are a tad suspicious of the marketplace scenes. When faced with an American in a business suit and a flak jacket, they tend to react warily, unsure of who the visitor might be, or what role he plays in Iraq policy.
Iraqi officials view the Congressional visits — quick in-and-out trips — with a blend of appreciation and scorn. Most wish the Americans would stay longer.
“They need to get out of the circle, to meet some new people, to understand, to hear some new ideas,” said Shatha al-Musawi, a Shiite lawmaker who founded a well-known women’s group soon after the American invasion. She said several women in Parliament asked to meet the speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, during her recent visit. But the speaker did not have time.
Some lawmakers were frustrated too. “I call it the embassy P.R. tour,” Ms. Schakowsky said.
For members of Congress, visiting Iraq is a badge of honor, a license to stand on the House or Senate floor and begin a speech by saying, “When I was in Iraq ... .” Some keep going back; Representative Christopher Shays, the Connecticut Republican, just ended his 18th visit.
The trips also confer a certain credibility at home. Representative Peter Roskam, a freshman Republican from Illinois, held a conference call with his constituents from his dormitory room in Baghdad this summer; 6,000 people listened in. He had just come from dinner with General Petraeus at Ambassador Crocker’s house and, like others, said that the phrase “tactical momentum” stuck in his mind.
That is not entirely surprising; after a while, a kind of “how I spent my summer vacation” sameness emerges from the lawmakers’ accounts.
There is the helicopter ride out of the Green Zone to an open-air market, maybe in Anbar Province, a staple of Congressional tours now that local tribal leaders are cooperating with Americans in the fight against the insurgent group Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia. A meeting with sheiks, a local mayor, or perhaps the Kurdish deputy prime minister, Barham Saleh, whose name some cannot seem to remember. (“If you told me who it was,” Mr. Roskam said, “I’d believe you.”)
Mr. Saleh is a regular on lawmakers’ itineraries; he said he has met with about two dozen this summer at the request of the American embassy, including Mr. Moran and two others on Saturday. His message — that Iraqis need more time and that Congress has put too much emphasis on forcing the Maliki government to meet benchmarks — dovetails with the Bush administration’s.
“He painted a very direct picture for us,” Mr. Kingston said. “He said: ‘You need to understand how far we have come. We’re in a culture where just to get a Sunni and a Shiite just talking about talking is a huge step.’ ”
For his part, Mr. Saleh, who welcomed Mr. Moran and two other members of Congress to his spacious home in the Green Zone on Saturday evening, says he has just one goal: to impress on his steady parade of American summer visitors just how complex, difficult and nuanced Iraq can be.
“I tell them not to expect any miracles,” he said.
Sheryl Gay Stolberg reported from Washington, and Damien Cave from Baghdad. James Glanz contributed reporting from Baghdad.
Read more!!
The unspeakable speaks so eloquently that there is truly nothing to add.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The New York Times
Hear a General, Hug a Sheik: Congress Does the Iraq Circuit
August 26, 2007
http://select.nytimes.com/mem/tnt.html?emc=tnt&tntget=2007/08/26/world/middleeast/26visits.html&tntemail0=y
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG and DAMIEN CAVE
WASHINGTON, Aug. 25 — On a Sunday morning in early August, just hours after Congress had recessed for the summer, Representative Jan Schakowsky and five of her colleagues boarded a military jet at Andrews Air Force Base. Three flights and a Black Hawk helicopter ride later, they were lunching on asparagus soup and lobster tortellini at the home of Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker in Baghdad.
“It was a lovely lunch, a nice-napkin lunch,” said Ms. Schakowsky, a liberal Democrat and ardent war critic from Chicago. But it was also, she said, a lunch with a message.
The featured guest was Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top American military commander in Iraq. With an array of charts and maps behind him, he told the lawmakers President Bush’s troop buildup had produced “tactical momentum,” a phrase that he would use repeatedly in Congressional briefings and that lawmakers are now beginning to use as well.
The meal was just one stop in a jam-packed tour that included visits with Sunni and Shiite tribal leaders (“a sheik engagement,” the Pentagon itinerary said), a chat with the Kurdish deputy prime minister and the all-important photographs with hometown soldiers to show constituents at election time. Just another day in Baghdad in August, high season for Congressional travel to Iraq.
The trips, highly choreographed affairs known as codels, for Congressional delegations, are an annual rite of summer for lawmakers, but they have taken on fresh urgency. With Democrats running Congress and Mr. Bush’s troop increase due for an intense re-evaluation in September, roughly 50 lawmakers have tromped through Iraq this summer, and their impressions are having a profound effect on the debate.
Last week, Senator Carl Levin, Democrat of Michigan and chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said after visiting Iraq that Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki should be ousted for making such poor progress in bridging his country’s sectarian differences. Then Mr. Levin’s Republican counterpart and Iraq travel partner, Senator John W. Warner of Virginia, dropped his own bombshell, calling on the president to begin bringing troops home by Christmas.
Congress has had notoriously testy relations with the Pentagon over the war. But with a new defense secretary, Robert M. Gates, in charge, this summer’s trips have amounted to a kind of Pentagon charm offensive. Lawmakers say Mr. Gates seems especially encouraging of their visits; six freshmen traveled to Iraq recently at his invitation.
Inside the Pentagon, some were concerned about how the top generals in Baghdad could fight the war and accommodate so many lawmakers, with all their briefings, travel and security needs. The Pentagon press secretary, Geoff Morrell, said Mr. Gates and General Petraeus were determined to do both.
“You can’t fight the war in a vacuum,” Mr. Morrell said. “The reality is that there’s an audience in Washington that you need to be attentive to.”
The trips have clearly set the story line for the September debate, cementing the perception that the military is making progress, even if Mr. Maliki is not. For the White House, which sold the troop buildup as a way to create “political breathing space” for the Iraqis to form a unity government, it’s a glass-half-empty, half-full situation.
Ms. Schakowsky, for example, came away from the Petraeus lunch convinced more than ever that “the surge is a failure.” Representative Jack Kingston, a Georgia Republican, took the opposite view; he’s now “leaning in the direction” of giving the buildup more time.
In Baghdad on Saturday, just hours after his own meeting with General Petraeus, James P. Moran, a Virginia Democrat and senior member of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, also said he was impressed with the presentation. “Based on the outline,” Mr. Moran said, “I just don’t see Congress pulling up stakes.”
The Pentagon is pleased and a senior White House official called the trips “a net plus.” And at least one Democrat, Representative Brian Baird of Washington, an early opponent of the war, has changed his mind.
Mr. Baird was especially struck by his trip to Yusufiya, a farm town about 15 miles south of Baghdad in an area long dominated by Sunni insurgents. He met the mayor, visited a market and chatted with two sheiks, a Sunni and a Shiite, who “embraced us in front of everybody out on the street,” he said.
“That’s real progress,” Mr. Baird said, though he confessed he did not tell his wife about the region’s nickname, the triangle of death, and said the whole scene was a little surreal. “You have your flak jacket on, and your Kevlar helmet and you’re surrounded by guys with automatic weapons as you’re standing there, talking to the mayor. And you realize there’s a dusty old car next to you and you’re saying, ‘God, I hope that doesn’t blow up.’ ”
The Congressional Iraq tours rarely include chats with ordinary Iraqis. “You don’t have the mobility for that,” Mr. Kingston said. And Iraqis are a tad suspicious of the marketplace scenes. When faced with an American in a business suit and a flak jacket, they tend to react warily, unsure of who the visitor might be, or what role he plays in Iraq policy.
Iraqi officials view the Congressional visits — quick in-and-out trips — with a blend of appreciation and scorn. Most wish the Americans would stay longer.
“They need to get out of the circle, to meet some new people, to understand, to hear some new ideas,” said Shatha al-Musawi, a Shiite lawmaker who founded a well-known women’s group soon after the American invasion. She said several women in Parliament asked to meet the speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, during her recent visit. But the speaker did not have time.
Some lawmakers were frustrated too. “I call it the embassy P.R. tour,” Ms. Schakowsky said.
For members of Congress, visiting Iraq is a badge of honor, a license to stand on the House or Senate floor and begin a speech by saying, “When I was in Iraq ... .” Some keep going back; Representative Christopher Shays, the Connecticut Republican, just ended his 18th visit.
The trips also confer a certain credibility at home. Representative Peter Roskam, a freshman Republican from Illinois, held a conference call with his constituents from his dormitory room in Baghdad this summer; 6,000 people listened in. He had just come from dinner with General Petraeus at Ambassador Crocker’s house and, like others, said that the phrase “tactical momentum” stuck in his mind.
That is not entirely surprising; after a while, a kind of “how I spent my summer vacation” sameness emerges from the lawmakers’ accounts.
There is the helicopter ride out of the Green Zone to an open-air market, maybe in Anbar Province, a staple of Congressional tours now that local tribal leaders are cooperating with Americans in the fight against the insurgent group Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia. A meeting with sheiks, a local mayor, or perhaps the Kurdish deputy prime minister, Barham Saleh, whose name some cannot seem to remember. (“If you told me who it was,” Mr. Roskam said, “I’d believe you.”)
Mr. Saleh is a regular on lawmakers’ itineraries; he said he has met with about two dozen this summer at the request of the American embassy, including Mr. Moran and two others on Saturday. His message — that Iraqis need more time and that Congress has put too much emphasis on forcing the Maliki government to meet benchmarks — dovetails with the Bush administration’s.
“He painted a very direct picture for us,” Mr. Kingston said. “He said: ‘You need to understand how far we have come. We’re in a culture where just to get a Sunni and a Shiite just talking about talking is a huge step.’ ”
For his part, Mr. Saleh, who welcomed Mr. Moran and two other members of Congress to his spacious home in the Green Zone on Saturday evening, says he has just one goal: to impress on his steady parade of American summer visitors just how complex, difficult and nuanced Iraq can be.
“I tell them not to expect any miracles,” he said.
Sheryl Gay Stolberg reported from Washington, and Damien Cave from Baghdad. James Glanz contributed reporting from Baghdad.
Read more!!
Friday, August 24, 2007
DRANT #248: DEMOCRACY CAN BE FATAL
They are ALL in it together.
Google, ATT, Verizon, Yahoo, all of them.
One big happy family.
The very definition of Little Eichmanns.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The New York Times
http://select.nytimes.com/mem/tnt.html?emc=tnt&tntget=2007/08/24/washington/24nsa.html&tntemail1=y
August 24, 2007
Role of Telecom Firms in Wiretaps Is Confirmed
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
WASHINGTON, Aug. 23 — The Bush administration has confirmed for the first time that American telecommunications companies played a crucial role in the National Security Agency’s domestic eavesdropping program after asserting for more than a year that any role played by them was a “state secret.”
The acknowledgment was in an unusual interview that Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence, gave last week to The El Paso Times in which he disclosed details on classified intelligence issues that the administration has long insisted would harm national security if discussed publicly.
Mr. McConnell made the remarks apparently in an effort to bolster support for the broadened wiretapping authority that Congress approved this month, even as Democrats are threatening to rework the legislation because they say it gives the executive branch too much power. It is vital, he said, for Congress to give retroactive legal immunity to the companies that assisted in the program to help prevent them from facing bankruptcy because of lawsuits over it.
“Under the president’s program, the terrorist surveillance program, the private sector had assisted us, because if you’re going to get access, you’ve got to have a partner,” Mr. McConnell said in the interview, a transcript of which was posted by The El Paso Times on Wednesday.
AT&T and several other major carriers are being sued over their reported role in the program, which permitted eavesdropping without warrants on the international communications of Americans suspected of terrorism ties. The administration has sought to shut down the lawsuits by invoking the state-secrets privilege, refusing even to confirm whether the companies helped conduct the wiretaps.
Cindy Cohn, legal director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which is heading up the lawsuit against AT&T, said her group might ask the appeals court to consider Mr. McConnell’s comments in deciding whether the state-secrets argument should be thrown out.
“They’ve really undermined their own case,” Ms. Cohn said.
Mr. McConnell said those suits were a driving force in the administration’s efforts to include in this month’s wiretapping legislation immunity for telecommunications partners. “If you play out the suits at the value they’re claimed,” he said, “it would bankrupt these companies.”
Congress agreed to give immunity to telecommunications partners in the measure , but refused to make it retroactive.
Mr. McConnell, who took over as the country’s top intelligence official in February, warned that the public discussion generated by the Congressional debate over the wiretapping bill threatened national security because it would alert terrorists to American surveillance methods.
“Now part of this is a classified world,” he said in the interview. “The fact we’re doing it this way means that some Americans are going to die.”.
Asked whether he was saying the news media coverage and the public debate in Congress meant that “some Americans are going to die,” he replied: “That’s what I mean. Because we have made it so public.”
Mr. McConnell, though, put new information on the public record in the interview, on Aug. 14 while in Texas for a border conference.
Mr. McConnell said, for instance, that the number of people inside the United States who were wiretapped through court-approved warrants totaled “100 or less” but on the “foreign side, it’s in the thousands.” The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which approves national security wiretaps, told Congress it approved 2,181 eavesdropping warrants last year. The court and the administration have not been willing to break out how many Americans were in those orders.
Mr. McConnell did not make clear the time frame for his estimate, nor was it clear whether he was referring to the security agency’s program of eavesdropping without warrants, which was brought under the oversight of the intelligence court in January. Officials in his office refused to clarify what he meant.
Mr. McConnell also offered the administration’s first public discussion about a classified series of rulings by the intelligence court that he said had restricted the agency’s ability to collect foreign intelligence.
He said one judge this year gave broad approval for the agency’s eavesdropping program. But another judge, he said, ruled in the spring that the administration would have to obtain a warrant for any “foreign to foreign” communications that passed through an American telecommunications center.
The administration obtained a stay of that ruling until May 31, he disclosed, but after that date he intelligence officials had “significantly less capability” to track foreign communications. The ruling sent the administration “in the wrong direction,” he added.
The American Civil Liberties Union, which has petitioned the intelligence court to make public its secret wiretapping rulings, expressed frustration on Thursday with the timing of Mr. McConnell’s comments.
“If this ostensibly sensitive information can be released now, why could it not be released two months ago, when the public and Congress desperately needed it?” asked Jameel Jaffer, director of the group’s national security project.
Steven Aftergood, director of the Project on Government Secrecy for the Federation of American Scientists, said the interview “was quite striking because he was disclosing more detail than has appeared anywhere in the public domain.”
“If we’re to believe that Americans will die from discussing these things,” Mr. Aftergood said, “then he is complicit in that. It’s an unseemly argument. He’s basically saying that democracy is going to kill Americans.”
Read more!!
Google, ATT, Verizon, Yahoo, all of them.
One big happy family.
The very definition of Little Eichmanns.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The New York Times
http://select.nytimes.com/mem/tnt.html?emc=tnt&tntget=2007/08/24/washington/24nsa.html&tntemail1=y
August 24, 2007
Role of Telecom Firms in Wiretaps Is Confirmed
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
WASHINGTON, Aug. 23 — The Bush administration has confirmed for the first time that American telecommunications companies played a crucial role in the National Security Agency’s domestic eavesdropping program after asserting for more than a year that any role played by them was a “state secret.”
The acknowledgment was in an unusual interview that Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence, gave last week to The El Paso Times in which he disclosed details on classified intelligence issues that the administration has long insisted would harm national security if discussed publicly.
Mr. McConnell made the remarks apparently in an effort to bolster support for the broadened wiretapping authority that Congress approved this month, even as Democrats are threatening to rework the legislation because they say it gives the executive branch too much power. It is vital, he said, for Congress to give retroactive legal immunity to the companies that assisted in the program to help prevent them from facing bankruptcy because of lawsuits over it.
“Under the president’s program, the terrorist surveillance program, the private sector had assisted us, because if you’re going to get access, you’ve got to have a partner,” Mr. McConnell said in the interview, a transcript of which was posted by The El Paso Times on Wednesday.
AT&T and several other major carriers are being sued over their reported role in the program, which permitted eavesdropping without warrants on the international communications of Americans suspected of terrorism ties. The administration has sought to shut down the lawsuits by invoking the state-secrets privilege, refusing even to confirm whether the companies helped conduct the wiretaps.
Cindy Cohn, legal director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which is heading up the lawsuit against AT&T, said her group might ask the appeals court to consider Mr. McConnell’s comments in deciding whether the state-secrets argument should be thrown out.
“They’ve really undermined their own case,” Ms. Cohn said.
Mr. McConnell said those suits were a driving force in the administration’s efforts to include in this month’s wiretapping legislation immunity for telecommunications partners. “If you play out the suits at the value they’re claimed,” he said, “it would bankrupt these companies.”
Congress agreed to give immunity to telecommunications partners in the measure , but refused to make it retroactive.
Mr. McConnell, who took over as the country’s top intelligence official in February, warned that the public discussion generated by the Congressional debate over the wiretapping bill threatened national security because it would alert terrorists to American surveillance methods.
“Now part of this is a classified world,” he said in the interview. “The fact we’re doing it this way means that some Americans are going to die.”.
Asked whether he was saying the news media coverage and the public debate in Congress meant that “some Americans are going to die,” he replied: “That’s what I mean. Because we have made it so public.”
Mr. McConnell, though, put new information on the public record in the interview, on Aug. 14 while in Texas for a border conference.
Mr. McConnell said, for instance, that the number of people inside the United States who were wiretapped through court-approved warrants totaled “100 or less” but on the “foreign side, it’s in the thousands.” The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which approves national security wiretaps, told Congress it approved 2,181 eavesdropping warrants last year. The court and the administration have not been willing to break out how many Americans were in those orders.
Mr. McConnell did not make clear the time frame for his estimate, nor was it clear whether he was referring to the security agency’s program of eavesdropping without warrants, which was brought under the oversight of the intelligence court in January. Officials in his office refused to clarify what he meant.
Mr. McConnell also offered the administration’s first public discussion about a classified series of rulings by the intelligence court that he said had restricted the agency’s ability to collect foreign intelligence.
He said one judge this year gave broad approval for the agency’s eavesdropping program. But another judge, he said, ruled in the spring that the administration would have to obtain a warrant for any “foreign to foreign” communications that passed through an American telecommunications center.
The administration obtained a stay of that ruling until May 31, he disclosed, but after that date he intelligence officials had “significantly less capability” to track foreign communications. The ruling sent the administration “in the wrong direction,” he added.
The American Civil Liberties Union, which has petitioned the intelligence court to make public its secret wiretapping rulings, expressed frustration on Thursday with the timing of Mr. McConnell’s comments.
“If this ostensibly sensitive information can be released now, why could it not be released two months ago, when the public and Congress desperately needed it?” asked Jameel Jaffer, director of the group’s national security project.
Steven Aftergood, director of the Project on Government Secrecy for the Federation of American Scientists, said the interview “was quite striking because he was disclosing more detail than has appeared anywhere in the public domain.”
“If we’re to believe that Americans will die from discussing these things,” Mr. Aftergood said, “then he is complicit in that. It’s an unseemly argument. He’s basically saying that democracy is going to kill Americans.”
Read more!!
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
DRANT #247: WARD AND THE LITTLE EICHMANNS
One of an ever-increasing number of American academics hounded,vilified, and forcibly removed from their positions, and after years of enduring persecution and grandstanding self-righteous slander by The University of Colorado and the Board of Regents, Ward Churchill was finally fired last week.
Here is an excerpt from DRANT # 121: Ward in the Water, May 27, 2005. It was true then, and its truer now.
=============
In an irony totally lost on the Inquisitors- but blatantly real and obvious to those of us with still-functioning cerebra much less working memory cells, Ward Churchill is being Foxed and persecuted by the University, The State of Colorado, The US Government, and major media, in a vicious and perfect replication of classic Nazi technique. For what ? For calling some Americans “little Eichmanns."
The Nazis are outraged because Ward called them Nazis. So the Amero-Eichmanns have Bunded together to get his ass. Nazi-style.
These are people who still can’t begin to answer the famous question : “Why Do They Hate Us?”
But there’s no question why They hate Him.
The REAL reason they hate Ward Churchill, and the REAL reason they are doing everything they can to Himmler him to silence, is –
He told the truth. And he ain’t stopping.
WHAT DID HE SAY ?
1- 9-11 was basically "chickens coming home to roost"-- The inevitable repercussions of the ongoing US genocide against Iraq and 100s of 1000s of its children, most recently and murderously by George the Elder, Bill Clinton and of course George The Lesser and his faithful ofay companion Rumto.
2- The attack of 9-11 was an act of War; retaliation in self-defense to wars of aggression and murder historically inflicted by countless generations of white Christians on Arabs, Muslims and various other brown and red and yellow and black humans, most currently and most viciously by The US and Israel, Desert Shield,The Clinton sanctions, and now George’s Crusadocide.
3- Adolf Eichmann was an very very ordinary minor functionary, who never pulled a trigger, never fired a shot. An unmemorable putz who just did his anal little job every day to feed his lovely wife and cute little kids, a barely noticeable little speck on a pimple on the little ass of Hitler’s little dog, who paid the bills, and got along, and never made trouble. An ordinary little man who always made the trains run on time, realllly on time, all the time. Of course, the fact that the trains were punctually going to Auschwitz and Dachau and Bergen Belsen has nothing to do with it. He made them run on time, which was his job, and then he went home and put his feet up, and had some wurst, and played mit der kinder, and fell asleep in front of the radio listening to Strauss. That’s Eichmann.
4- On 9-11, the World Trade Center was filled with thousands of “Little Eichmanns,” doing their little jobs, making sure that the wheels of capitalism and profit and global hegemony turned exceeding swift, and that all the puts got putted, and all the options opted, the right taxes evaded, and the right inside information passed along to the right people, and basically, that the trains run on time. As Churchill said:
“ They formed a technocratic corps at the very heart of America's global financial empire – the 'mighty engine of profit' to which the military dimension of U.S. policy has always been enslaved ..."
Churchill made it extremely clear that he was not referring to the workpeople, mostly illegal immigrants, washing the dishes or delivering the Danish and coffee or taking care of the kids of the Little Eichmanns. They were innocent victims. "Collateral damage," actually.
5- We are ALL complicit “little Eichmanns.” Just ordinary little people who make the trains run on time, and go home and play with the kids, and would never shoot anyone. Little technocrats or obscure worker bees just trying to make a living, but this time the trains run right on time to destinations Fallujah and Mosul and Baghdad and Abu Ghraib. You know, us little Eichmanns.
6- And what of “Us” who have so diligently protested and demonstrated and written angry blogs and petitions and even been arrested or worse in the fight against the crimes committed in our names, with our money ? Too little too late. And obviously- too totally ineffective. And too many so-called leftists saying that they “disagree with his ideas, but will fight to the death for Churchill's right to express them.”
Disagree with what ? Where is there a grain of untruth in what he has said?
If we ever are to change the course of this, if we are ever to make amends for what we have done, and if all this death and murder and waste is ever to be infinitesimally redeeming - then we must begin by taking full responsibility for what we have done, accepting all of it, each last one of us, and begin again from a place of deep humility, service to the other above all else, profound respect for ourselves and every other being on the earth, and embrace the great truth that there are no chosen people, no hierarchy of human souls, and that every single one of us is responsible for every single other one of us, and for what all the rest of us do.
There are no exemptions, no innocent, no bystanders.
We cannot be the equivalent of B-51 bomber pilots, killing featureless specks miles from our view. We cannot ever say we didn't know, for we must be as morally responsible for what we don’t know as what we do.
As Joseph Welch said to Joe McCarthy, so I say to all of you, to myself, and all of us:
Have you no SHAME ?
What the hell is it going to take for US to get up off our sofas and out of our complicit somnolence, and DO something ?
Exactly how many crimes will WE commit – or allow to be committed -against ourselves, against the world and its various beings, and against our own children before WE reach a threshold of pain or shame sufficiently unbearable to impel US to take real action ?
I mean, whatzit gonna take ?
We worked (for Enron or World.com, or United, and lordknowsitscoming Ford and GM for years. Showed up everyday, and now we’re being told that our pension is gone? And we sit ?
We work for Morgan Stanley, or some Sub-prime predator, or Goldman Sachs, and we know full well that every day we are doing business with some of the lowest scum on this earth, and we sit ?
We watched our son or daughter go off to fight for Democracy, and if they come back at all, it’s missing a leg or eye or their sanity, or they have cancer or lesions from the DU ? And we sit ?
We told our kids that if they worked real hard, they could move up the ladder in this great country of opportunity, and now they can't afford to go to school, their kids have no health care, and their jobs are being done for pennies by Sri Lankans ? And we sit ?
We are paying everyday for the murder, imprisonment, and torture of people by the thousands in Iraq and Afghanistan and in the USA and elsewhere ? And we sit ?
We have watched our real earnings drop to less than they were five years ago, while filling the tank costs twice what it did back then, ENRON and SHELL and CHEVRON make more billions than have ever been counted before --- And we sit ?
We work (if we still have a full time job) for a company that has cut our health care coverage, pension contributions, real wages, and union rights, while the CEO and his pals in the boardroom are making tens of millions ? And we sit ?
Our kids go to school through metal detectors, have no crayons or computers, and have armed Homeland Security Guards and Military Recruiters all over the school everyday, and we sit ?
What the hell is it gonna take ?
“Such issues must be faced straightforwardly, without dissembling, if Americans are ever to hold rightful title to the “good conscience” they've so long laid claim to owning. How they are to respond to what stares back at them from the proverbial mirror is an altogether different question however.
Transformation from beastliness to beauty can be neither instantaneous nor, in terms of its retroactive undoing, complete.
There is no painless, privilege-preserving pill that can be taken to effect a quick fix of what ails the US, no petition no manifesto, no song nor candle light vigil that will suffice.
The terms of change must and will be harsh, inevitably so, given the propensity of those who seek to prevent it to gauge their success by the rotting corpses of toddlers. This truth, no matter its inconvenience to those snugly situated within the comfort zone of political pretense, is all that defines the substance of meaningful struggle.”
Ward Churchill
On The Justice of Roosting Chickens
1- It should be emphasized that I applied the "little Eichmanns" characterization only to those described as "technicians". Thus, it was obviously not directed to the children, janitors, food service workers, firemen and random passers-by killed in the 9-1-1 attack. According to Pentagon logic, were simply part of the collateral damage. Ugly? Yes. Hurtful? Yes. And that's my point. It's no less ugly, painful or dehumanizing a description when applied to Iraqis, Palestinians, or anyone else. If we ourselves do not want to be treated in this fashion, we must refuse to allow others to be similarly devalued and dehumanized in our name.
2- The bottom line of my argument is that the best and perhaps only way to prevent 9-1-1-style attacks on the U.S. is for American citizens to compel their government to comply with the rule of law. The lesson of Nuremberg is that this is not only our right, but our obligation. To the extent we shirk this responsibility, we, like the "Good Germans" of the 1930s and '40s, are complicit in its actions and have no legitimate basis for complaint when we suffer the consequences. This, of course, includes me, personally, as well as my family, no less than anyone else.
3- There is simply no argument to be made that the Pentagon personnel killed on September 11 fill that bill. The building and those inside comprised military targets, pure and simple. As to those in the World Trade Center . . . Well, really. Let's get a grip here, shall we? True enough, they were civilians of a sort. But innocent? Gimme a break. They formed a technocratic corps at the very heart of America's global financial empire – the "mighty engine of profit" to which the military dimension of U.S. policy has always been enslaved – and they did so both willingly and knowingly. Recourse to a derivative, after all, of the word "ignore"– counts as less than an excuse among this relatively well-educated elite. To the extent that any of them were unaware of the costs and consequences to others of what they were involved in – and in many cases excelling at – it was because of their absolute refusal to see. More likely, it was because they were too busy braying, incessantly and self-importantly, into their cell phones, arranging power lunches and stock transactions, each of which translated, conveniently out of sight, mind and smelling distance, into the starved and rotting flesh of infants. If there was a better, more effective, or in fact any other way of visiting some penalty befitting their participation upon the little Eichmanns inhabiting the sterile sanctuary of the twin towers, I'd really be interested in hearing about it.
From Some People Push Back-- On the Justice of Roosting Chickens
written by Ward Churchill 9-11-2001 . Updated Ward Churchill
Boulder, Colorado January 31, 2005
Read more!!
Friday, August 10, 2007
DRANT #246: ANOTHER FINE MESS YOU'VE GOTTEN US INTO
There was an election in Lebanon yesterday.
What do you care ?
I'll tellya.
Once again, the USA poured money and effort and support into a candidate. Uh oh.
Once again, the American support was the kiss of death. Amin Gemayel the former President of Lebanon (!) and father of the recently martyred Pierre Gemayel - running for his son's vacant seat in his home town, against a total unknown, was defeated for the position, basically, of
local dog - catcher. The election was complex, but one thing was clear: The US LOST.
George Bush and the Stars and Stripes have become the Typhoid Mary of global politics.
Right now Musharraf is practicing eight ways to say "Never HOID of da guy, I swear" in every known Pashtuni and Punjabi dialect.
Wait til 08. A Bushheimers epidemic will blaze through the Republicans like Mad Cow disease at a Burger King Convention.javascript:void(0)
That's IF they let the election happen ob curse. Which I can getya 8-5 at Caesar's Palace AGAINST.
So who cares ?
You care.
Now is the time for the pandemic of disgust to reach our shores, dontya think ?
Now is the time for us idiot Americans - like the 55 MILLION of US schmucks who voted for Bush in 04 for example-
Or the millions of US bamboozlnicks who voted for the Democrats in 06 expecting CHANGE--
to get what the whole world has known for years- annnnnnnnnnnnnnnd ---
Throw them ALL OUT -
Every single one who voted to:
1- Give Bush the money to kill more Iraqis
2- Spy on all of us with no warrants
Gettem ALL outta there. This includes you, Nancy Pelosi.
And here's how-
Run for something.
Or find someone to run for something.
Not as a Democrat, or a Republican or as an ANYTHING.
Run as a person, not a party.
Run to stand up for the people who believe like you do- that our Single Party System has failed us.
That the Democrats are not only not an opposition party, but COMPLICIT with Bush and the Republicans in the destruction of our constitution, prosecution of genocide, and destruction of our planet.
RUN.
Like Cindy Sheehan is running.
To give a voice to US, The unheard MAJORITY, who want the priorities of our Nation and our World to be reversed-- to abandon the Endless War, and turn our vast resources to saving our children and our planet if there is still time.
To give a voice to US, The unrepresented MAJORITY, who want the killing stopped, the troops withdrawn not just from Iraq and Afghanistan, but from 100s of American bases all over the world, and profound long term reparations made to ALL the victims, including our own decimated troops and their families.
To US, The MAJORITY, who want spying stopped, and our fundamental freedoms restored.
To US, who want an end to the economic rape of US, The MAJORITY, by a narrow cartel of weasels who have grabbed more of the pie than ever imagined.
To US, The Majority, who demand universal single payer high quality health care.
We are not being heard, there are very few people speaking for us, and we must take this on OURSELVES.
OR, you can do the same thing you have done before- go for the lesser of two evils, the best available, the only choice you have.
But just know, if you take the same path, you will get the same result.
No whining when it happens. No lying to your kids or grandkids when their lives are ruined by filthy water, unbreathable air, poisoned food, no health care, or they are killed or maimed or their brains destroyed fighting is another Endless War.
No bitching when your pension disappears, or they repossess your only nest egg, or your credit card falls behind and you start paying 20% through a very painful orifice.
No no pal.
You know what has been done to you- you know because you have LET it happen.
Here's your chance. Stand up.
Stand up like Cindy Sheehan, and DO something.
Or do nothing. They are counting on it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"An electorate disgusted with the policies of the Bush
regime put the Democrats in the majority in Congress
in November ‘06. We voted for change, however,
Congress, under the Speakership of Ms. Pelosi has done
nothing but protect the status quo of the corporate
elite and, in fact, since she has been the Speaker,
the situation in the Middle East has grown far worse,
with Congress’ help, and recently more of our
essential freedoms were given to BushCo by Congress..."
Me for Congress!
Cindy Sheehan
My statement to the press when I announced my
candidacy at the Presidio on August 9th
Two years ago this week, I started my first vigil in
Crawford, Tx, at what became Camp Casey I near
George’s vacation ranch. I never thought that my path
would lead me here today. Nothing before Casey was
killed in the illegal and immoral war in Iraq prepared
me for this new direction, but looking back on my life
since April 04. 2004, I believe this is the next
natural step to bringing the occupations of Iraq and
Afghanistan to a swifter conclusion and those
responsible accountable for the mess our world is in.
An electorate disgusted with the policies of the Bush
regime put the Democrats in the majority in Congress
in November ‘06. We voted for change, however,
Congress, under the Speakership of Ms. Pelosi has done
nothing but protect the status quo of the corporate
elite and, in fact, since she has been the Speaker,
the situation in the Middle East has grown far worse,
with Congress’ help, and recently more of our
essential freedoms were given to BushCo by Congress.
That is not what we elected them to do!
A great majority of citizens in California’s 8th
Congressional district want the Bush regime impeached
and want our troops home from the Middle East. I
believe Ms. Pelosi has lost touch with the people of
this district and America and it’s time for our reps
that aren’t doing their jobs by upholding their sworn
oaths to the Constitution to receive a wakeup call!
I agree that with over 45 million American uninsured,
we need universal health care. I agree that with many
of our young people joining the military to receive
college credit (which very few take full advantage
of), it’s time to make college affordable. I agree
that the people in the administrative branch are
corrupt, as are many members of Congress, and ethics
need to be reformed. None of these worthy goals can be
accomplished while we’re spending 12 million of our
tax dollars an hour in Iraq and while the foxes run
the henhouse. In this once great nation of ours, the
rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer
and the middle class is rapidly disappearing along
with the “American dream” of home ownership. The time
is now to bring our tax dollars home from the Middle
East to help the people of California’s 8th and to
make our communities safer and more prosperous.
Incredibly, even before the November elections, Ms
Pelosi took part of the Constitution off the table and
it’s time to put it back on! Mss. Pelosi colluded with
BushCo to take away our 4th Amendment protection
against unreasonable search and seizure. Congress
needs to make that body relevant again as a co-equal
branch of government that has a responsibility to put
checks and balances on the executive branch not be
conspirators in its crimes and murder.
The Patriot Act and Military Commissions Act need to
be repealed and Habeas Corpus needs to be restored.
These things can only happen with fearless leadership,
not fearful capitulation to a lying President.
I am running unaffiliated with any political party
because I believe the corporately controlled “two”
party system is responsible for keeping our country in
a state of cold and hot wars for decades and it’s time
to rein in the military industrial war complex that
President Eisenhower warned us of almost 50 years ago.
My candidacy and service will put people before
profits and people before political expediency. This
country is ripe for a change and it is going to start
right here and right now!
I dedicate my candidacy to the people of Iraq and
Afghanistan that have been tragically harmed by BushCo
with the complicity of Congress, Inc.
I dedicate my candidacy to my children and unborn
grandchildren. All the children of the world deserve
long lives lived in peace, prosperity and
environmental sustainability.
Last of all, I dedicate my candidacy to my hero, Casey
who always stood up for what he believed in, even if
it wasn't popular. He is my role model and I always
strive to make him proud.
Thank you.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
US support deadly for Gemayel
Fri, 10 Aug 2007 02:42:22
Source: The Int'l Herald Tribune
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=19024§ionid=351020203
Political analysts believe that Lebanon's former president Amin Gemayel's support by the US administration helped doom him.
Political spin masters in Lebanon have been trying in recent days to explain the results of a pivotal special election last Sunday, which saw a relative unknown from the opposition narrowly beat Gemayel, the International Herald Tribune wrote in a political commentary on Thursday.
There has been talk of the Christian vote and the Armenian vote, of history and betrayal. One explanation, however, that all agree on proved crucial in this race: Gemayel's support by the White House and the implied agendas behind such support, seem to have inflicted a narrow but heavy defeat on Gemayel.
Turki al- Rasheed, a Saudi reformer who watched Sunday's elections closely, said "The minute you are counted on or backed by the Americans, kiss it goodbye, you will never win."
The paradox of American policy in the Middle East - promoting democracy on the assumption it will bring countries closer to the West - is that almost everywhere there are free elections, the American-backed side tends to lose.
In part, regional analysts say, candidates are tainted by the baggage of American foreign policy - from support for Tel-Aviv to the violence in Iraq.
But more important, US support is often applied to one faction instead of institutions, causing further division rather than bringing about stability.
"Last Sunday we saw that even if you are a former president running for a seat in parliament, in a small area where everybody knows you, you can't make it with American support," Rasheed said.
Alain Aoun, a political adviser to the opposition Free Patriotic Movement led by his uncle, General Michel Aoun, said, "We call on the US to learn from this experience; they should not take part in any internal conflict or take sides, they should support all Lebanese."
"The Americans think that supporting democracy should create positive reactions," said Nicola Nassif, a columnist for the left-leaning Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar. "No one can be against democracy, sovereignty, independence and freedom. But not if it upsets the internal power balance, not if it empowers one party against the other, especially in a country where supporting one group can lead to violence and even civil wars."
The problem is not necessarily the support itself, Nassif said, but that it invariably skews conflicts, worsening rather than easing sectarian and ethnic tensions.
"When the US interferes in favor of one party, their interference leads to an explosion," Nassif said. "The US openly says it supports the Siniora government; but it should say we support the Lebanese government."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The New York Times
August 10, 2007
Memo From Dubai
U.S. Backs Free Elections, Only to See Allies Lose
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/10/world/middleeast/10arab.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
By HASSAN M. FATTAH
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates Aug. 9 — Lebanon’s political spin masters have been trying in recent days to explain the results of last Sunday’s pivotal by-election, which saw a relatively unknown candidate from the opposition narrowly beat a former president, Amin Gemayel.
There has been talk of the Christian vote and the Armenian vote, of history and betrayal, as each side sought to claim victory. There is one explanation, however, that has become common wisdom in the region: Mr. Gemayel’s doom seems to have been sealed by his support from the Bush administration and the implied agendas behind its backing.
“It’s the kiss of death,” said Turki al-Rasheed, a Saudi reformer who watched last Sunday’s elections closely. “The minute you are counted on or backed by the Americans, kiss it goodbye, you will never win.”
The paradox of American policy in the Middle East — promoting democracy on the assumption it will bring countries closer to the West — is that almost everywhere there are free elections, the American-backed side tends to lose.
Lebanon’s voters in the Metn district, in other words, appeared to have joined the Palestinians, who voted for Hamas; the Iraqis, who voted for a government sympathetic to Iran; and the Egyptians, who have voted in growing numbers in recent elections for the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood. “No politician can afford to identify with the West because poll after poll shows people don’t believe in the U.S. agenda,” said Mustafa Hamarneh, until recently the director of the Center for Strategic Studies at the University of Jordan. Mr. Hamarneh is running for a seat in Jordan’s Parliament in November, but he says he has made a point of keeping his campaign focused locally, and on bread-and-butter issues. “If somebody goes after you as pro-American he can hurt you,” he said.
In part, regional analysts say, candidates are tainted by the baggage of American foreign policy — from its backing of Israel to the violence in Iraq. But more important, they say, American support is often applied to one faction instead of to institutions, causing further division rather than bringing stability.
“The Americans think that supporting democracy should create positive reactions,” said Nicola Nassif, a columnist with the left-leaning Lebanese daily Al Akhbar. “No one can be against democracy, sovereignty, independence and freedom. But not if it upsets the internal power balance, not if it empowers one party against the other, especially in a country where supporting one group can lead to violence and even civil wars.”
Arab liberals who have embraced America continue to see their influence fade in the region, as more conservative and Islamist forces continue to rise, Mr. Rasheed said. Voters invariably frown on strength coming from abroad, he said; the only legitimate sources of strength any Arab politician can turn to is based on either tribal power or religious ties.
“Last Sunday we saw that even if you are a former president running for a seat in Parliament, in a small area where everybody knows you, you can’t make it either with American support,” Mr. Rasheed said.
For much of the past year, Lebanon has been caught in a major confrontation between the American-backed March 14th movement, which helped force Syria out of Lebanon in 2005 and won a parliamentary majority that year, and the Iranian- and Syrian-backed opposition movement led by Hezbollah and Gen. Michel Aoun’s Free Patriotic Movement.
Sunday’s vote was widely seen as a bellwether for the country’s political leanings in that confrontation.
Lebanon’s Christians are generally more sympathetic to the United States than are other Arabs. But the tension between Prime Minister Fouad Siniora’s American-backed faction against an Iranian-backed one was palpable in last Sunday’s election.
And despite an expected sympathy vote — Mr. Gemayel was running to fill the seat vacated by the assassination of his son Pierre — and the former president’s name recognition, Lebanese Christians in the mountainous Metn region, along with a smattering of Shiites and others who live there, voted for the more unlikely team: one allied to Hezbollah, seemingly sympathetic to Iran and Syria, and most of all, in opposition to America.
“Our problem with March 14th is not that they are aligned with the U.S., but it is their policies,” says Alain Aoun, a nephew of General Aoun, who says American support has magnified tensions while emboldening the ruling majority to resist compromises. “We call on the U.S. to learn from this experience; they should not take part in any internal conflict or take sides. They should support all Lebanese.”
The problem is not necessarily the support itself, Mr. Nassif said, but that it invariably skews conflicts, worsening rather than easing sectarian and ethnic tensions.
“When the U.S. interferes in favor of one party, their interference leads to an explosion,” he said. “The U.S. openly says it supports the Siniora government, but it should say we support the Lebanese government.”
There was, however, one American intervention that did work in Lebanon, Mr. Nassif notes.
“In 1958 when the U.S. interfered militarily in Lebanon, it said it was to help Lebanon regain stability,” he said, speaking of President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s decision to deploy 14,000 men to shore up the government of President Camille Chamoun and open the way for his successor, Gen. Fuad Chehab. The intervention is credited with preventing the Syrian and Egyptian governments from destabilizing the country.
“Chehab was soon after elected, and no one protested their presence here; a few months later they withdrew,” Mr. Nassif said of the American forces. “In 1982, they interfered militarily again and it ended in a disaster. They supported Israel and Gemayel against the Palestinians, who were supported by Lebanese parties.”
Mr. Nassif added, “Since then, every time the Americans interfere, it ends in a war or in their expulsion.”
Nada Bakri contributed reporting from Beirut, Lebanon.
Read more!!
What do you care ?
I'll tellya.
Once again, the USA poured money and effort and support into a candidate. Uh oh.
Once again, the American support was the kiss of death. Amin Gemayel the former President of Lebanon (!) and father of the recently martyred Pierre Gemayel - running for his son's vacant seat in his home town, against a total unknown, was defeated for the position, basically, of
local dog - catcher. The election was complex, but one thing was clear: The US LOST.
George Bush and the Stars and Stripes have become the Typhoid Mary of global politics.
Right now Musharraf is practicing eight ways to say "Never HOID of da guy, I swear" in every known Pashtuni and Punjabi dialect.
Wait til 08. A Bushheimers epidemic will blaze through the Republicans like Mad Cow disease at a Burger King Convention.javascript:void(0)
That's IF they let the election happen ob curse. Which I can getya 8-5 at Caesar's Palace AGAINST.
So who cares ?
You care.
Now is the time for the pandemic of disgust to reach our shores, dontya think ?
Now is the time for us idiot Americans - like the 55 MILLION of US schmucks who voted for Bush in 04 for example-
Or the millions of US bamboozlnicks who voted for the Democrats in 06 expecting CHANGE--
to get what the whole world has known for years- annnnnnnnnnnnnnnd ---
Throw them ALL OUT -
Every single one who voted to:
1- Give Bush the money to kill more Iraqis
2- Spy on all of us with no warrants
Gettem ALL outta there. This includes you, Nancy Pelosi.
And here's how-
Run for something.
Or find someone to run for something.
Not as a Democrat, or a Republican or as an ANYTHING.
Run as a person, not a party.
Run to stand up for the people who believe like you do- that our Single Party System has failed us.
That the Democrats are not only not an opposition party, but COMPLICIT with Bush and the Republicans in the destruction of our constitution, prosecution of genocide, and destruction of our planet.
RUN.
Like Cindy Sheehan is running.
To give a voice to US, The unheard MAJORITY, who want the priorities of our Nation and our World to be reversed-- to abandon the Endless War, and turn our vast resources to saving our children and our planet if there is still time.
To give a voice to US, The unrepresented MAJORITY, who want the killing stopped, the troops withdrawn not just from Iraq and Afghanistan, but from 100s of American bases all over the world, and profound long term reparations made to ALL the victims, including our own decimated troops and their families.
To US, The MAJORITY, who want spying stopped, and our fundamental freedoms restored.
To US, who want an end to the economic rape of US, The MAJORITY, by a narrow cartel of weasels who have grabbed more of the pie than ever imagined.
To US, The Majority, who demand universal single payer high quality health care.
We are not being heard, there are very few people speaking for us, and we must take this on OURSELVES.
OR, you can do the same thing you have done before- go for the lesser of two evils, the best available, the only choice you have.
But just know, if you take the same path, you will get the same result.
No whining when it happens. No lying to your kids or grandkids when their lives are ruined by filthy water, unbreathable air, poisoned food, no health care, or they are killed or maimed or their brains destroyed fighting is another Endless War.
No bitching when your pension disappears, or they repossess your only nest egg, or your credit card falls behind and you start paying 20% through a very painful orifice.
No no pal.
You know what has been done to you- you know because you have LET it happen.
Here's your chance. Stand up.
Stand up like Cindy Sheehan, and DO something.
Or do nothing. They are counting on it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"An electorate disgusted with the policies of the Bush
regime put the Democrats in the majority in Congress
in November ‘06. We voted for change, however,
Congress, under the Speakership of Ms. Pelosi has done
nothing but protect the status quo of the corporate
elite and, in fact, since she has been the Speaker,
the situation in the Middle East has grown far worse,
with Congress’ help, and recently more of our
essential freedoms were given to BushCo by Congress..."
Me for Congress!
Cindy Sheehan
My statement to the press when I announced my
candidacy at the Presidio on August 9th
Two years ago this week, I started my first vigil in
Crawford, Tx, at what became Camp Casey I near
George’s vacation ranch. I never thought that my path
would lead me here today. Nothing before Casey was
killed in the illegal and immoral war in Iraq prepared
me for this new direction, but looking back on my life
since April 04. 2004, I believe this is the next
natural step to bringing the occupations of Iraq and
Afghanistan to a swifter conclusion and those
responsible accountable for the mess our world is in.
An electorate disgusted with the policies of the Bush
regime put the Democrats in the majority in Congress
in November ‘06. We voted for change, however,
Congress, under the Speakership of Ms. Pelosi has done
nothing but protect the status quo of the corporate
elite and, in fact, since she has been the Speaker,
the situation in the Middle East has grown far worse,
with Congress’ help, and recently more of our
essential freedoms were given to BushCo by Congress.
That is not what we elected them to do!
A great majority of citizens in California’s 8th
Congressional district want the Bush regime impeached
and want our troops home from the Middle East. I
believe Ms. Pelosi has lost touch with the people of
this district and America and it’s time for our reps
that aren’t doing their jobs by upholding their sworn
oaths to the Constitution to receive a wakeup call!
I agree that with over 45 million American uninsured,
we need universal health care. I agree that with many
of our young people joining the military to receive
college credit (which very few take full advantage
of), it’s time to make college affordable. I agree
that the people in the administrative branch are
corrupt, as are many members of Congress, and ethics
need to be reformed. None of these worthy goals can be
accomplished while we’re spending 12 million of our
tax dollars an hour in Iraq and while the foxes run
the henhouse. In this once great nation of ours, the
rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer
and the middle class is rapidly disappearing along
with the “American dream” of home ownership. The time
is now to bring our tax dollars home from the Middle
East to help the people of California’s 8th and to
make our communities safer and more prosperous.
Incredibly, even before the November elections, Ms
Pelosi took part of the Constitution off the table and
it’s time to put it back on! Mss. Pelosi colluded with
BushCo to take away our 4th Amendment protection
against unreasonable search and seizure. Congress
needs to make that body relevant again as a co-equal
branch of government that has a responsibility to put
checks and balances on the executive branch not be
conspirators in its crimes and murder.
The Patriot Act and Military Commissions Act need to
be repealed and Habeas Corpus needs to be restored.
These things can only happen with fearless leadership,
not fearful capitulation to a lying President.
I am running unaffiliated with any political party
because I believe the corporately controlled “two”
party system is responsible for keeping our country in
a state of cold and hot wars for decades and it’s time
to rein in the military industrial war complex that
President Eisenhower warned us of almost 50 years ago.
My candidacy and service will put people before
profits and people before political expediency. This
country is ripe for a change and it is going to start
right here and right now!
I dedicate my candidacy to the people of Iraq and
Afghanistan that have been tragically harmed by BushCo
with the complicity of Congress, Inc.
I dedicate my candidacy to my children and unborn
grandchildren. All the children of the world deserve
long lives lived in peace, prosperity and
environmental sustainability.
Last of all, I dedicate my candidacy to my hero, Casey
who always stood up for what he believed in, even if
it wasn't popular. He is my role model and I always
strive to make him proud.
Thank you.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
US support deadly for Gemayel
Fri, 10 Aug 2007 02:42:22
Source: The Int'l Herald Tribune
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=19024§ionid=351020203
Political analysts believe that Lebanon's former president Amin Gemayel's support by the US administration helped doom him.
Political spin masters in Lebanon have been trying in recent days to explain the results of a pivotal special election last Sunday, which saw a relative unknown from the opposition narrowly beat Gemayel, the International Herald Tribune wrote in a political commentary on Thursday.
There has been talk of the Christian vote and the Armenian vote, of history and betrayal. One explanation, however, that all agree on proved crucial in this race: Gemayel's support by the White House and the implied agendas behind such support, seem to have inflicted a narrow but heavy defeat on Gemayel.
Turki al- Rasheed, a Saudi reformer who watched Sunday's elections closely, said "The minute you are counted on or backed by the Americans, kiss it goodbye, you will never win."
The paradox of American policy in the Middle East - promoting democracy on the assumption it will bring countries closer to the West - is that almost everywhere there are free elections, the American-backed side tends to lose.
In part, regional analysts say, candidates are tainted by the baggage of American foreign policy - from support for Tel-Aviv to the violence in Iraq.
But more important, US support is often applied to one faction instead of institutions, causing further division rather than bringing about stability.
"Last Sunday we saw that even if you are a former president running for a seat in parliament, in a small area where everybody knows you, you can't make it with American support," Rasheed said.
Alain Aoun, a political adviser to the opposition Free Patriotic Movement led by his uncle, General Michel Aoun, said, "We call on the US to learn from this experience; they should not take part in any internal conflict or take sides, they should support all Lebanese."
"The Americans think that supporting democracy should create positive reactions," said Nicola Nassif, a columnist for the left-leaning Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar. "No one can be against democracy, sovereignty, independence and freedom. But not if it upsets the internal power balance, not if it empowers one party against the other, especially in a country where supporting one group can lead to violence and even civil wars."
The problem is not necessarily the support itself, Nassif said, but that it invariably skews conflicts, worsening rather than easing sectarian and ethnic tensions.
"When the US interferes in favor of one party, their interference leads to an explosion," Nassif said. "The US openly says it supports the Siniora government; but it should say we support the Lebanese government."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The New York Times
August 10, 2007
Memo From Dubai
U.S. Backs Free Elections, Only to See Allies Lose
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/10/world/middleeast/10arab.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
By HASSAN M. FATTAH
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates Aug. 9 — Lebanon’s political spin masters have been trying in recent days to explain the results of last Sunday’s pivotal by-election, which saw a relatively unknown candidate from the opposition narrowly beat a former president, Amin Gemayel.
There has been talk of the Christian vote and the Armenian vote, of history and betrayal, as each side sought to claim victory. There is one explanation, however, that has become common wisdom in the region: Mr. Gemayel’s doom seems to have been sealed by his support from the Bush administration and the implied agendas behind its backing.
“It’s the kiss of death,” said Turki al-Rasheed, a Saudi reformer who watched last Sunday’s elections closely. “The minute you are counted on or backed by the Americans, kiss it goodbye, you will never win.”
The paradox of American policy in the Middle East — promoting democracy on the assumption it will bring countries closer to the West — is that almost everywhere there are free elections, the American-backed side tends to lose.
Lebanon’s voters in the Metn district, in other words, appeared to have joined the Palestinians, who voted for Hamas; the Iraqis, who voted for a government sympathetic to Iran; and the Egyptians, who have voted in growing numbers in recent elections for the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood. “No politician can afford to identify with the West because poll after poll shows people don’t believe in the U.S. agenda,” said Mustafa Hamarneh, until recently the director of the Center for Strategic Studies at the University of Jordan. Mr. Hamarneh is running for a seat in Jordan’s Parliament in November, but he says he has made a point of keeping his campaign focused locally, and on bread-and-butter issues. “If somebody goes after you as pro-American he can hurt you,” he said.
In part, regional analysts say, candidates are tainted by the baggage of American foreign policy — from its backing of Israel to the violence in Iraq. But more important, they say, American support is often applied to one faction instead of to institutions, causing further division rather than bringing stability.
“The Americans think that supporting democracy should create positive reactions,” said Nicola Nassif, a columnist with the left-leaning Lebanese daily Al Akhbar. “No one can be against democracy, sovereignty, independence and freedom. But not if it upsets the internal power balance, not if it empowers one party against the other, especially in a country where supporting one group can lead to violence and even civil wars.”
Arab liberals who have embraced America continue to see their influence fade in the region, as more conservative and Islamist forces continue to rise, Mr. Rasheed said. Voters invariably frown on strength coming from abroad, he said; the only legitimate sources of strength any Arab politician can turn to is based on either tribal power or religious ties.
“Last Sunday we saw that even if you are a former president running for a seat in Parliament, in a small area where everybody knows you, you can’t make it either with American support,” Mr. Rasheed said.
For much of the past year, Lebanon has been caught in a major confrontation between the American-backed March 14th movement, which helped force Syria out of Lebanon in 2005 and won a parliamentary majority that year, and the Iranian- and Syrian-backed opposition movement led by Hezbollah and Gen. Michel Aoun’s Free Patriotic Movement.
Sunday’s vote was widely seen as a bellwether for the country’s political leanings in that confrontation.
Lebanon’s Christians are generally more sympathetic to the United States than are other Arabs. But the tension between Prime Minister Fouad Siniora’s American-backed faction against an Iranian-backed one was palpable in last Sunday’s election.
And despite an expected sympathy vote — Mr. Gemayel was running to fill the seat vacated by the assassination of his son Pierre — and the former president’s name recognition, Lebanese Christians in the mountainous Metn region, along with a smattering of Shiites and others who live there, voted for the more unlikely team: one allied to Hezbollah, seemingly sympathetic to Iran and Syria, and most of all, in opposition to America.
“Our problem with March 14th is not that they are aligned with the U.S., but it is their policies,” says Alain Aoun, a nephew of General Aoun, who says American support has magnified tensions while emboldening the ruling majority to resist compromises. “We call on the U.S. to learn from this experience; they should not take part in any internal conflict or take sides. They should support all Lebanese.”
The problem is not necessarily the support itself, Mr. Nassif said, but that it invariably skews conflicts, worsening rather than easing sectarian and ethnic tensions.
“When the U.S. interferes in favor of one party, their interference leads to an explosion,” he said. “The U.S. openly says it supports the Siniora government, but it should say we support the Lebanese government.”
There was, however, one American intervention that did work in Lebanon, Mr. Nassif notes.
“In 1958 when the U.S. interfered militarily in Lebanon, it said it was to help Lebanon regain stability,” he said, speaking of President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s decision to deploy 14,000 men to shore up the government of President Camille Chamoun and open the way for his successor, Gen. Fuad Chehab. The intervention is credited with preventing the Syrian and Egyptian governments from destabilizing the country.
“Chehab was soon after elected, and no one protested their presence here; a few months later they withdrew,” Mr. Nassif said of the American forces. “In 1982, they interfered militarily again and it ended in a disaster. They supported Israel and Gemayel against the Palestinians, who were supported by Lebanese parties.”
Mr. Nassif added, “Since then, every time the Americans interfere, it ends in a war or in their expulsion.”
Nada Bakri contributed reporting from Beirut, Lebanon.
Read more!!
Monday, August 6, 2007
DRANT #245: DEMOCRATS COP TO COWARDICE TO COVER UP THEIR COMPLICITY
"The Democrats are not spineless or weak. Nobody pushes them to do what they don't want ... They're completely corrupt and fully, volitionally complicit."
From:
Empire Burlesque - Chris Floyd
Danse Macabre: An Apology to Democrats
Posted: 05 Aug 2007 06:59 PM CDT
I would like to apologize to the leaders of the Democratic Party for implying in my previous post that they are political cowards. I confess that I was carried away, rhetorically, in the heat of the moment, and was completely mistaken in ascribing their actions on the recent warrantless wiretapping bill to "spineless acquiescence" to the Bush Administration's authoritarian proclivities.
As one of Empire Burlesque's readers pointed out, that phrase was inconsistent with the rest of the piece, for it implied that the Democratic elite were actually opposed to the essence of Bush's authoritarian/corporatist/militarist agenda, and were somehow acting against their will in surrendering to Bush time and again during the past six years. As the reader noted, drawing on Arthur Silber's analysis (more on this below), the Democrats "are not spineless or weak. Nobody pushes them to do what they don't want (no matter how much the Digbys would like to explain away their actions that way.). They're completely corrupt and fully, volitionally complicit." The reader also pointed me to a comment they'd left on Glenn Greenwald's takedown of the vote: "It doesn't take any courage to do what you want to do. Just the opposite. They WANT all these things, but can hardly reveal that to their often sincere but easy-to-dupe followers, so they hide behind the 'we were threatened, Bush made us do it, we're spineless, and we don't want to look weak,' meme. They cop a plea to the lesser charge but the truth is, tragically, far more dark."
I think that's exactly right. They cop to cowardice to cover up complicity. As I said...
Oh man, is this ab so lute ly 1000% right.
The Democrats cop to cowardice to cover their complicity.
There is no "opposition party." There is no opposition.
(see all the Associated Press/NY Times pimp media reportage - it all refers to "Pressure from President Bush."
What ? Exactly what pressure could he conceivably exert at this point ?
Nahhh. There was no pressure, because the Democrats needed NO CONVINCING.
Nobody involved in this had to be coerced or muscled. No one has been bamboozled, fooled by bad intelligence, whipped by some Party functionary, or whipsawed into going against one sliver of what we used to call conscience.
They are ALL in it together, and the names they have chosen for their respective political parties is as relevant as the limitless plasticity of their vertebratitude.
NONE of this is bungling, or cowardice or inadvertent.
As I have bleated forever- Bush's is idiocy by design.
Bush may be a Dunce, but his bosses sure ain't.
They have achieved everything they set out to achieve-
in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and in the resource-rich areas of Africa.
Chaos, disorder, breakdown of infrastructure, vacuums in which to leap with Blackwaters and Green Zones and Concrete Walls.
Now take a deep breath. This is going to be really painful.
And repeat after me-
slowly- with great feeling:
They
Are
All
In
It
Together.
Once we GET it--
Once we dump the brainwashing about Our Great Country that has been hammered into our poor defenseless brains since we were six, once we LOOK at what the hell is really going on-
The conclusion is as obvious as the Federal Deficit:
They
Are
All
In
It
Together.
And, unless and until WE stop them, WE are all in it with them.
Read more!!
From:
Empire Burlesque - Chris Floyd
Danse Macabre: An Apology to Democrats
Posted: 05 Aug 2007 06:59 PM CDT
I would like to apologize to the leaders of the Democratic Party for implying in my previous post that they are political cowards. I confess that I was carried away, rhetorically, in the heat of the moment, and was completely mistaken in ascribing their actions on the recent warrantless wiretapping bill to "spineless acquiescence" to the Bush Administration's authoritarian proclivities.
As one of Empire Burlesque's readers pointed out, that phrase was inconsistent with the rest of the piece, for it implied that the Democratic elite were actually opposed to the essence of Bush's authoritarian/corporatist/militarist agenda, and were somehow acting against their will in surrendering to Bush time and again during the past six years. As the reader noted, drawing on Arthur Silber's analysis (more on this below), the Democrats "are not spineless or weak. Nobody pushes them to do what they don't want (no matter how much the Digbys would like to explain away their actions that way.). They're completely corrupt and fully, volitionally complicit." The reader also pointed me to a comment they'd left on Glenn Greenwald's takedown of the vote: "It doesn't take any courage to do what you want to do. Just the opposite. They WANT all these things, but can hardly reveal that to their often sincere but easy-to-dupe followers, so they hide behind the 'we were threatened, Bush made us do it, we're spineless, and we don't want to look weak,' meme. They cop a plea to the lesser charge but the truth is, tragically, far more dark."
I think that's exactly right. They cop to cowardice to cover up complicity. As I said...
Oh man, is this ab so lute ly 1000% right.
The Democrats cop to cowardice to cover their complicity.
There is no "opposition party." There is no opposition.
(see all the Associated Press/NY Times pimp media reportage - it all refers to "Pressure from President Bush."
What ? Exactly what pressure could he conceivably exert at this point ?
Nahhh. There was no pressure, because the Democrats needed NO CONVINCING.
Nobody involved in this had to be coerced or muscled. No one has been bamboozled, fooled by bad intelligence, whipped by some Party functionary, or whipsawed into going against one sliver of what we used to call conscience.
They are ALL in it together, and the names they have chosen for their respective political parties is as relevant as the limitless plasticity of their vertebratitude.
NONE of this is bungling, or cowardice or inadvertent.
As I have bleated forever- Bush's is idiocy by design.
Bush may be a Dunce, but his bosses sure ain't.
They have achieved everything they set out to achieve-
in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and in the resource-rich areas of Africa.
Chaos, disorder, breakdown of infrastructure, vacuums in which to leap with Blackwaters and Green Zones and Concrete Walls.
Now take a deep breath. This is going to be really painful.
And repeat after me-
slowly- with great feeling:
They
Are
All
In
It
Together.
Once we GET it--
Once we dump the brainwashing about Our Great Country that has been hammered into our poor defenseless brains since we were six, once we LOOK at what the hell is really going on-
The conclusion is as obvious as the Federal Deficit:
They
Are
All
In
It
Together.
And, unless and until WE stop them, WE are all in it with them.
Read more!!
Sunday, August 5, 2007
DRANT #244: HIROSHIMA AND TEXAS REDUX
Here is a re print, slightly updated, of my DRANT #131, from August 6, 2005.
This was written just before my first visit to Cindy Sheehan's Camp Casey in Crawford Texas.
On Wednesday August 8, Cindy will officially announce her Independent Candidacy for the US Congress, and officially begin her Independent campaign against the egregious, collaborative, genocide-financing, warrantless-wiretap yessing ONE party system in the USA, and in particular, one of its chief perpetrators, Nancy Pelosi.
More about that tomorrow.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DRANT #131 August 6, 2005:
"Two anniversaries to note today, August 6.
Much is being said about the first, little is being noted about the other.
1- the 60th anniversary of the unspeakable atomic bombing of Hiroshima.
2- the sixth anniversary of the presidential daily briefing entitled "Bin Laden determined to strike in US" hand-delivered to Bush August 6, 2001 at his ranch in Texas, warning of continued terrorist attacks on the USA.
Little has changed since either of these events.
The USA committed unpardonable mass murder in 1945, visiting death and disease on 100s of thousands of innocent civilians, justifying the murder with spurious theories of pre-emption. In 1945, the mortally deleterious effects lasted (and continue to last), for generations - children are still being born in Japan with diseases and debilities whose antecedents are traceable to the atomic fallout. In 1945 the American people and the world, were lied to, propagandized, and forcibly restrained from the truth, with actual photos and first person accounts of the real facts on the ground withheld and obstructed in a sinister coalition of government, politicians and the nation's press. And, for 60 years the Americans didn't try to find out too hard at all.
And so it is today. Same as it ever was.
Aug 6, 2001, the FBI, CIA and other Intelligence agencies personally delivered a strong WRITTEN official case to Bush, vacationing in Crawford, that a continuation of the series of violent attacks on the territory of the USA was a very real, imminent possibility.
Organizations and people--variously created, financed, equipped, organized, trained and activated by the CIA and other government operations, were focusing their sights on American targets.
Bush connived a bit with Tony Blair, got on his tractor and shoveled some manure for the photo ops, and turned on the tube over burgers with his lovely wife and charming family.
But this was no idiot's oversight. No booberie.
We needed a new Pearl Harbor, and by George, we were gonna get one.
The urgent alert had to be buried, not ignored, lest the plans of the PNAC be upset.
Whether they actually did it, or just let it happen, makes no difference for the moment.
They got their Pearl Harbor 2001, and as in 1945, the well paid ostriches and ventriloquists' dummies of the nation's press went along, co-conspiring to sell the official story, their sinister coalition operating in fine tuned harmony.
As in 1945, we are constrained from real photos, real truth, the real facts.
As in 1945, we are murdering 100s of thousands of innocent civilians, and the long term effects of the nuclear fallout from our use of Depleted Uranium is incalculable- the only difference being that this time we are dosing our own soldiers, not just worthless rag heads and their families. America never sees the photos of the newest generation of Iraqi children -- with the clear evidence of radiation sickness and horrendous lesions, and various cancers.
But as in 1945, and as always, our ignorance is our own responsibility.
Not knowing is not an excuse.
If CNN and the NY Times won't tell ya, it's on YOU to go find out the truth, not to turn on the tube over burgers and whine something about the media.
The hell with the media.
They are going to lie to you.
The media is THEM.
The truth is out there and available, and it is our responsibility to find it.
No more "I didn't know."
If its more comfortable to hide in your ignorance, if it makes you feel safer to cloak yourself in some flimsy robe of moral invisibility, then go on bro.
But don't tell me ya didn't know.
You know.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For the actual front page of the NY Times from Aug 6, 1945, please click here:
http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/big/0806.html#article
First Atomic Bomb Dropped on Japan; Missile Is Equal to 20,000 Tons of TNT; Truman Warns Foe of a 'Rain of Ruin'
NEW AGE USHERED
Day of Atomic Energy Hailed by President, Revealing Weapon
HIROSHIMA IS TARGET
'Impenetrable' Cloud of Dust Hides City After Single Bomb Strikes
By SIDNEY SHALETT
Special to THE NEW YORK TIMES
Washington, Aug. 6 -- The White House and War Department announced today that an atomic bomb, possessing more power than 20,000 tons of TNT, a destructive force equal to the load of 2,000 B-29's and more than 2,000 times the blast power of what previously was the world's most devastating bomb, had been dropped on Japan.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Hiroshima Cover-Up
by Amy Goodman and David Goodman
Published on Friday, August 5, 2005 by the Baltimore Sun
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/05/1548255
A story that the U.S. government hoped would never see the light of day finally has been published, 60 years after it was spiked by military censors. The discovery of reporter George Weller's firsthand account of conditions in post-nuclear Nagasaki sheds light on one of the great journalistic betrayals of the last century: the cover-up of the effects of the atomic bombing on Japan.
On Aug. 6, 1945, the U.S. dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima; three days later, Nagasaki was hit. Gen. Douglas MacArthur promptly declared southern Japan off-limits, barring the news media. More than 200,000 people died in the atomic bombings of the cities, but no Western journalist witnessed the aftermath and told the story. Instead, the world's media obediently crowded onto the battleship USS Missouri off the coast of Japan to cover the Japanese surrender.
A month after the bombings, two reporters defied General MacArthur and struck out on their own. Mr. Weller, of the Chicago Daily News, took row boats and trains to reach devastated Nagasaki. Independent journalist Wilfred Burchett rode a train for 30 hours and walked into the charred remains of Hiroshima.
Both men encountered nightmare worlds. Mr. Burchett sat down on a chunk of rubble with his Baby Hermes typewriter. His dispatch began: "In Hiroshima, 30 days after the first atomic bomb destroyed the city and shook the world, people are still dying, mysteriously and horribly - people who were uninjured in the cataclysm from an unknown something which I can only describe as the atomic plague."
He continued, tapping out the words that still haunt to this day: "Hiroshima does not look like a bombed city. It looks as if a monster steamroller has passed over it and squashed it out of existence. I write these facts as dispassionately as I can in the hope that they will act as a warning to the world."
Mr. Burchett's article, headlined "The Atomic Plague," was published Sept. 5, 1945, in the London Daily Express. The story caused a worldwide sensation and was a public relations fiasco for the U.S. military. The official U.S. narrative of the atomic bombings downplayed civilian casualties and categorically dismissed as "Japanese propaganda" reports of the deadly lingering effects of radiation.
So when Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter George Weller's 25,000-word story on the horror that he encountered in Nagasaki was submitted to military censors, General MacArthur ordered the story killed, and the manuscript was never returned. As Mr. Weller later summarized his experience with General MacArthur's censors, "They won."
Recently, Mr. Weller's son, Anthony, discovered a carbon copy of the suppressed dispatches among his father's papers (George Weller died in 2002). Unable to find an interested American publisher, Anthony Weller sold the account to Mainichi Shimbun, a big Japanese newspaper. Now, on the 60th anniversary of the atomic bombings, Mr. Weller's account can finally be read.
"In swaybacked or flattened skeletons of the Mitsubishi arms plants is revealed what the atomic bomb can do to steel and stone, but what the riven atom can do against human flesh and bone lies hidden in two hospitals of downtown Nagasaki," wrote Mr. Weller. A month after the bombs fell, he observed, "The atomic bomb's peculiar 'disease,' uncured because it is untreated and untreated because it is not diagnosed, is still snatching away lives here."
After killing Mr. Weller's reports, U.S. authorities tried to counter Mr. Burchett's articles by attacking the messenger. General MacArthur ordered Mr. Burchett expelled from Japan (the order was later rescinded), his camera mysteriously vanished while he was in a Tokyo hospital and U.S. officials accused him of being influenced by Japanese propaganda.
Then the U.S. military unleashed a secret propaganda weapon: It deployed its own Times man. It turns out that William L. Laurence, the science reporter for The New York Times, was also on the payroll of the War Department.
For four months, while still reporting for the Times, Mr. Laurence had been writing press releases for the military explaining the atomic weapons program; he also wrote statements for President Harry Truman and Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson. He was rewarded by being given a seat on the plane that dropped the bomb on Nagasaki, an experience that he described in the Times with religious awe.
Three days after publication of Mr. Burchett's shocking dispatch, Mr. Laurence had a front-page story in the Times disputing the notion that radiation sickness was killing people. His news story included this remarkable commentary: "The Japanese are still continuing their propaganda aimed at creating the impression that we won the war unfairly, and thus attempting to create sympathy for themselves and milder terms. ... Thus, at the beginning, the Japanese described 'symptoms' that did not ring true."
Mr. Laurence won a Pulitzer Prize for his reporting on the atomic bomb, and his faithful parroting of the government line was crucial in launching a half-century of silence about the deadly lingering effects of the bomb. It is time for the Pulitzer board to strip Hiroshima's apologist and his newspaper of this undeserved prize.
Sixty years late, Mr. Weller's censored account stands as a searing indictment not only of the inhumanity of the atomic bomb but also of the danger of journalists embedding with the government to deceive the world.
Amy Goodman, host of Democracy Now!, and David Goodman, a contributing writer for Mother Jones, are co-authors of The Exception to the Rulers: Exposing Oily Politicians, War Profiteers, and the Media That Love Them.
© 2005 Baltimore Sun
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
* Hiroshima Cover-up: Stripping the War Department's Timesman of His
Pulitzer *
This weekend marks the sixtieth anniversary of the U.S. bombing of
Hiroshima and Nagasaki. William Laurence, the New York Times reporter who
covered the bombings was also on the US government payroll. Journalists
Amy Goodman and David Goodman call for the Pulitzer Board to strip
Laurence and his paper, The New York Times, of the undeserved prize.
Listen/Watch/Read
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/05/1548241
* Film Suppressed: The US Government Hides Hiroshima Nagasaki Footage For
Decades *
Footage of the devastation after the U.S. bombings of Hiroshima and
Nagasaki that was commissioned by the US occupying forces was suppressed
for decades. Erik Barnouw reads the words of the Japanese filmmaker Akira
Iwasaki.
Listen/Watch/Read
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/05/1549202
* From Oak Ridge to Lawrence Livermore to Los Alamos: Hiroshima and
Nagasaki Remembered *
Activists around the nation are commemorating the 60th anniversary of the
U.S. bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Grass-roots organizers speak
about the ongoing nuclear weapons activity and community resistance.
Listen/Watch/Read
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/05/1549211
* Hiroshima Survivor: No More Hiroshimas, No More Nagasakis, No More War *
Sunao Tsuboi survived the bombing of Hiroshima. Speaking at an anti-
nuclear weapons rally in New York, he said, "Even if you luckily survive
you...suffer from psychological and physical disruption...until your life
ends."
Listen/Watch/Read
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/05/1549218
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The fourth anniversary of the August 6, 2001 presidential daily briefing entitled "Bin Laden determined to strike in US" telling Bush of planned terrorist attacks on the USA.
http://www.howardlabs.com/4-04/AP--%20Al-Qaida%20Threat%20Included%20in%20Bush%20Memo.html
http://www.themoderntribune.com/august_6th_2001_memo_to_bush_before_9_11.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The following is available on the Internet at http://www.WantToKnow.info/050723robertmcnamaraapocalypse
"What is shocking is that today, more than a decade after the end of the Cold War, the basic US nuclear policy is unchanged. Of the 8,000 active or operational US warheads, 2,000 are on hair-trigger alert, ready to be launched on 15 minutes' warning. On any given day, as we go about our business, the president is prepared to make a decision within 20 minutes that could launch one of the most devastating weapons in the world. To declare war requires an act of congress, but to launch a nuclear holocaust requires 20 minutes' deliberation by the president and his advisors."
-- Former US Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, May 2005
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=2829 Foreign Policy magazine (Page 1 of 5)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Former US Secretary of Defense (under President John Kennedy) Robert McNamara has written a powerful essay exposing an outdated policy that puts our entire nation and world at risk of annihilation at any moment. After 13 years as the president of the World Bank, McNamara risked his career and reputation by going public with his concerns about the policy giving the president the authority to initiate a nuclear holocaust, even when the threat to the US might be based on faulty information. He claims it is long past time to change this dangerous policy in order to avert a future apocalypse.
For another eye-opening article on how the media has been complicit in concealing the dangers of nuclear weapons ever since WWII, see http://www.WantToKnow.info/atomicbombcoverup And for more powerful information revealing how the military/industrial complex promotes war in order to pad the wallets of the corporate elite, see our War Information Center at http://www.WantToKnow.info/warinformation By educating ourselves and those around us on the risks that are a result of greed and secrecy, we can more effectively work together to build a brighter future for us all.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Quote of The Day:
"...In swaybacked or flattened skeletons of the Mitsubishi arms plants is revealed what the atomic bomb can do to steel and stone, but what the riven atom can do against human flesh and bone lies hidden in two hospitals of downtown Nagasaki...A month after the bombs fell...The atomic bomb's peculiar 'disease,' uncured because it is untreated and untreated because it is not diagnosed, is still snatching away lives here." "
George Weller, Nagasaki, 1945`
Read more!!
This was written just before my first visit to Cindy Sheehan's Camp Casey in Crawford Texas.
On Wednesday August 8, Cindy will officially announce her Independent Candidacy for the US Congress, and officially begin her Independent campaign against the egregious, collaborative, genocide-financing, warrantless-wiretap yessing ONE party system in the USA, and in particular, one of its chief perpetrators, Nancy Pelosi.
More about that tomorrow.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DRANT #131 August 6, 2005:
"Two anniversaries to note today, August 6.
Much is being said about the first, little is being noted about the other.
1- the 60th anniversary of the unspeakable atomic bombing of Hiroshima.
2- the sixth anniversary of the presidential daily briefing entitled "Bin Laden determined to strike in US" hand-delivered to Bush August 6, 2001 at his ranch in Texas, warning of continued terrorist attacks on the USA.
Little has changed since either of these events.
The USA committed unpardonable mass murder in 1945, visiting death and disease on 100s of thousands of innocent civilians, justifying the murder with spurious theories of pre-emption. In 1945, the mortally deleterious effects lasted (and continue to last), for generations - children are still being born in Japan with diseases and debilities whose antecedents are traceable to the atomic fallout. In 1945 the American people and the world, were lied to, propagandized, and forcibly restrained from the truth, with actual photos and first person accounts of the real facts on the ground withheld and obstructed in a sinister coalition of government, politicians and the nation's press. And, for 60 years the Americans didn't try to find out too hard at all.
And so it is today. Same as it ever was.
Aug 6, 2001, the FBI, CIA and other Intelligence agencies personally delivered a strong WRITTEN official case to Bush, vacationing in Crawford, that a continuation of the series of violent attacks on the territory of the USA was a very real, imminent possibility.
Organizations and people--variously created, financed, equipped, organized, trained and activated by the CIA and other government operations, were focusing their sights on American targets.
Bush connived a bit with Tony Blair, got on his tractor and shoveled some manure for the photo ops, and turned on the tube over burgers with his lovely wife and charming family.
But this was no idiot's oversight. No booberie.
We needed a new Pearl Harbor, and by George, we were gonna get one.
The urgent alert had to be buried, not ignored, lest the plans of the PNAC be upset.
Whether they actually did it, or just let it happen, makes no difference for the moment.
They got their Pearl Harbor 2001, and as in 1945, the well paid ostriches and ventriloquists' dummies of the nation's press went along, co-conspiring to sell the official story, their sinister coalition operating in fine tuned harmony.
As in 1945, we are constrained from real photos, real truth, the real facts.
As in 1945, we are murdering 100s of thousands of innocent civilians, and the long term effects of the nuclear fallout from our use of Depleted Uranium is incalculable- the only difference being that this time we are dosing our own soldiers, not just worthless rag heads and their families. America never sees the photos of the newest generation of Iraqi children -- with the clear evidence of radiation sickness and horrendous lesions, and various cancers.
But as in 1945, and as always, our ignorance is our own responsibility.
Not knowing is not an excuse.
If CNN and the NY Times won't tell ya, it's on YOU to go find out the truth, not to turn on the tube over burgers and whine something about the media.
The hell with the media.
They are going to lie to you.
The media is THEM.
The truth is out there and available, and it is our responsibility to find it.
No more "I didn't know."
If its more comfortable to hide in your ignorance, if it makes you feel safer to cloak yourself in some flimsy robe of moral invisibility, then go on bro.
But don't tell me ya didn't know.
You know.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For the actual front page of the NY Times from Aug 6, 1945, please click here:
http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/big/0806.html#article
First Atomic Bomb Dropped on Japan; Missile Is Equal to 20,000 Tons of TNT; Truman Warns Foe of a 'Rain of Ruin'
NEW AGE USHERED
Day of Atomic Energy Hailed by President, Revealing Weapon
HIROSHIMA IS TARGET
'Impenetrable' Cloud of Dust Hides City After Single Bomb Strikes
By SIDNEY SHALETT
Special to THE NEW YORK TIMES
Washington, Aug. 6 -- The White House and War Department announced today that an atomic bomb, possessing more power than 20,000 tons of TNT, a destructive force equal to the load of 2,000 B-29's and more than 2,000 times the blast power of what previously was the world's most devastating bomb, had been dropped on Japan.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Hiroshima Cover-Up
by Amy Goodman and David Goodman
Published on Friday, August 5, 2005 by the Baltimore Sun
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/05/1548255
A story that the U.S. government hoped would never see the light of day finally has been published, 60 years after it was spiked by military censors. The discovery of reporter George Weller's firsthand account of conditions in post-nuclear Nagasaki sheds light on one of the great journalistic betrayals of the last century: the cover-up of the effects of the atomic bombing on Japan.
On Aug. 6, 1945, the U.S. dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima; three days later, Nagasaki was hit. Gen. Douglas MacArthur promptly declared southern Japan off-limits, barring the news media. More than 200,000 people died in the atomic bombings of the cities, but no Western journalist witnessed the aftermath and told the story. Instead, the world's media obediently crowded onto the battleship USS Missouri off the coast of Japan to cover the Japanese surrender.
A month after the bombings, two reporters defied General MacArthur and struck out on their own. Mr. Weller, of the Chicago Daily News, took row boats and trains to reach devastated Nagasaki. Independent journalist Wilfred Burchett rode a train for 30 hours and walked into the charred remains of Hiroshima.
Both men encountered nightmare worlds. Mr. Burchett sat down on a chunk of rubble with his Baby Hermes typewriter. His dispatch began: "In Hiroshima, 30 days after the first atomic bomb destroyed the city and shook the world, people are still dying, mysteriously and horribly - people who were uninjured in the cataclysm from an unknown something which I can only describe as the atomic plague."
He continued, tapping out the words that still haunt to this day: "Hiroshima does not look like a bombed city. It looks as if a monster steamroller has passed over it and squashed it out of existence. I write these facts as dispassionately as I can in the hope that they will act as a warning to the world."
Mr. Burchett's article, headlined "The Atomic Plague," was published Sept. 5, 1945, in the London Daily Express. The story caused a worldwide sensation and was a public relations fiasco for the U.S. military. The official U.S. narrative of the atomic bombings downplayed civilian casualties and categorically dismissed as "Japanese propaganda" reports of the deadly lingering effects of radiation.
So when Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter George Weller's 25,000-word story on the horror that he encountered in Nagasaki was submitted to military censors, General MacArthur ordered the story killed, and the manuscript was never returned. As Mr. Weller later summarized his experience with General MacArthur's censors, "They won."
Recently, Mr. Weller's son, Anthony, discovered a carbon copy of the suppressed dispatches among his father's papers (George Weller died in 2002). Unable to find an interested American publisher, Anthony Weller sold the account to Mainichi Shimbun, a big Japanese newspaper. Now, on the 60th anniversary of the atomic bombings, Mr. Weller's account can finally be read.
"In swaybacked or flattened skeletons of the Mitsubishi arms plants is revealed what the atomic bomb can do to steel and stone, but what the riven atom can do against human flesh and bone lies hidden in two hospitals of downtown Nagasaki," wrote Mr. Weller. A month after the bombs fell, he observed, "The atomic bomb's peculiar 'disease,' uncured because it is untreated and untreated because it is not diagnosed, is still snatching away lives here."
After killing Mr. Weller's reports, U.S. authorities tried to counter Mr. Burchett's articles by attacking the messenger. General MacArthur ordered Mr. Burchett expelled from Japan (the order was later rescinded), his camera mysteriously vanished while he was in a Tokyo hospital and U.S. officials accused him of being influenced by Japanese propaganda.
Then the U.S. military unleashed a secret propaganda weapon: It deployed its own Times man. It turns out that William L. Laurence, the science reporter for The New York Times, was also on the payroll of the War Department.
For four months, while still reporting for the Times, Mr. Laurence had been writing press releases for the military explaining the atomic weapons program; he also wrote statements for President Harry Truman and Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson. He was rewarded by being given a seat on the plane that dropped the bomb on Nagasaki, an experience that he described in the Times with religious awe.
Three days after publication of Mr. Burchett's shocking dispatch, Mr. Laurence had a front-page story in the Times disputing the notion that radiation sickness was killing people. His news story included this remarkable commentary: "The Japanese are still continuing their propaganda aimed at creating the impression that we won the war unfairly, and thus attempting to create sympathy for themselves and milder terms. ... Thus, at the beginning, the Japanese described 'symptoms' that did not ring true."
Mr. Laurence won a Pulitzer Prize for his reporting on the atomic bomb, and his faithful parroting of the government line was crucial in launching a half-century of silence about the deadly lingering effects of the bomb. It is time for the Pulitzer board to strip Hiroshima's apologist and his newspaper of this undeserved prize.
Sixty years late, Mr. Weller's censored account stands as a searing indictment not only of the inhumanity of the atomic bomb but also of the danger of journalists embedding with the government to deceive the world.
Amy Goodman, host of Democracy Now!, and David Goodman, a contributing writer for Mother Jones, are co-authors of The Exception to the Rulers: Exposing Oily Politicians, War Profiteers, and the Media That Love Them.
© 2005 Baltimore Sun
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
* Hiroshima Cover-up: Stripping the War Department's Timesman of His
Pulitzer *
This weekend marks the sixtieth anniversary of the U.S. bombing of
Hiroshima and Nagasaki. William Laurence, the New York Times reporter who
covered the bombings was also on the US government payroll. Journalists
Amy Goodman and David Goodman call for the Pulitzer Board to strip
Laurence and his paper, The New York Times, of the undeserved prize.
Listen/Watch/Read
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/05/1548241
* Film Suppressed: The US Government Hides Hiroshima Nagasaki Footage For
Decades *
Footage of the devastation after the U.S. bombings of Hiroshima and
Nagasaki that was commissioned by the US occupying forces was suppressed
for decades. Erik Barnouw reads the words of the Japanese filmmaker Akira
Iwasaki.
Listen/Watch/Read
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/05/1549202
* From Oak Ridge to Lawrence Livermore to Los Alamos: Hiroshima and
Nagasaki Remembered *
Activists around the nation are commemorating the 60th anniversary of the
U.S. bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Grass-roots organizers speak
about the ongoing nuclear weapons activity and community resistance.
Listen/Watch/Read
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/05/1549211
* Hiroshima Survivor: No More Hiroshimas, No More Nagasakis, No More War *
Sunao Tsuboi survived the bombing of Hiroshima. Speaking at an anti-
nuclear weapons rally in New York, he said, "Even if you luckily survive
you...suffer from psychological and physical disruption...until your life
ends."
Listen/Watch/Read
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/05/1549218
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The fourth anniversary of the August 6, 2001 presidential daily briefing entitled "Bin Laden determined to strike in US" telling Bush of planned terrorist attacks on the USA.
http://www.howardlabs.com/4-04/AP--%20Al-Qaida%20Threat%20Included%20in%20Bush%20Memo.html
http://www.themoderntribune.com/august_6th_2001_memo_to_bush_before_9_11.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The following is available on the Internet at http://www.WantToKnow.info/050723robertmcnamaraapocalypse
"What is shocking is that today, more than a decade after the end of the Cold War, the basic US nuclear policy is unchanged. Of the 8,000 active or operational US warheads, 2,000 are on hair-trigger alert, ready to be launched on 15 minutes' warning. On any given day, as we go about our business, the president is prepared to make a decision within 20 minutes that could launch one of the most devastating weapons in the world. To declare war requires an act of congress, but to launch a nuclear holocaust requires 20 minutes' deliberation by the president and his advisors."
-- Former US Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, May 2005
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=2829 Foreign Policy magazine (Page 1 of 5)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Former US Secretary of Defense (under President John Kennedy) Robert McNamara has written a powerful essay exposing an outdated policy that puts our entire nation and world at risk of annihilation at any moment. After 13 years as the president of the World Bank, McNamara risked his career and reputation by going public with his concerns about the policy giving the president the authority to initiate a nuclear holocaust, even when the threat to the US might be based on faulty information. He claims it is long past time to change this dangerous policy in order to avert a future apocalypse.
For another eye-opening article on how the media has been complicit in concealing the dangers of nuclear weapons ever since WWII, see http://www.WantToKnow.info/atomicbombcoverup And for more powerful information revealing how the military/industrial complex promotes war in order to pad the wallets of the corporate elite, see our War Information Center at http://www.WantToKnow.info/warinformation By educating ourselves and those around us on the risks that are a result of greed and secrecy, we can more effectively work together to build a brighter future for us all.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Quote of The Day:
"...In swaybacked or flattened skeletons of the Mitsubishi arms plants is revealed what the atomic bomb can do to steel and stone, but what the riven atom can do against human flesh and bone lies hidden in two hospitals of downtown Nagasaki...A month after the bombs fell...The atomic bomb's peculiar 'disease,' uncured because it is untreated and untreated because it is not diagnosed, is still snatching away lives here." "
George Weller, Nagasaki, 1945`
Read more!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
