May 17, 2008
Please wait, your request is processed...
rwe2late
Recent comments by this user
Oil sets record near $128; pump price at high, too
The Clashes in Beirut: Is the Bush Administration Stirring the Pot?
David Welch was just recently in Lebanon, pressuring the government to take forceful action (i.e., stirring the pot).
I hope it is not the first step in Cheney's planned war against Syria and Iran.
A likely scenario is for Isreal to become embroiled in Lebanon, blaming Syria/Iran for "provocations, and the US stepping in to support.
Sadly, virtually every Congressperson, including Obama, has pledged "unwavering" and basically unqualified support for whatever Israel's military-dominated government does (always recently with Bush/Cheney's covert and not-so-covert encouragement). posted 05/09/2008 at 09:17:29
I hope it is not the first step in Cheney's planned war against Syria and Iran.
A likely scenario is for Isreal to become embroiled in Lebanon, blaming Syria/Iran for "provocations, and the US stepping in to support.
Sadly, virtually every Congressperson, including Obama, has pledged "unwavering" and basically unqualified support for whatever Israel's military-dominated government does (always recently with Bush/Cheney's covert and not-so-covert encouragement). posted 05/09/2008 at 09:17:29
Washington's Great "No Inflation" Hoax
Concealed inflation is used to help conceal the greatest rip-off scam in history, one which makes past
robber barons look like penny-ante pickpockets.
The US no longer manufactures anything of consequence other than weapons (our chief
export). The social and physical infrastructure have been allowed to deteriorate. Our
assets are being sold off, and we become more indebted every day.
The Soviet Union, at least partly due to wasteful military spending, collapsed to end the
Cold War. But our leaders decided to continue our extravagant military spending, to
militarily "secure" power and wealth. Whether due to the influence of the
"military-industrial complex", or national cold war jingoism, we allowed miltarism to
become dominant in our policies and economy.
Now we are being led down a road toward our own ruin and collapse, as we unthinkingly
sacrifice our political rights and economic well-being.
The ONLY way our militarized economy can stagger along is by the creation of ever
more credit, debt, and increasingly worthless fiat money. We can never repay, because we
must borrow more just to buy what we need, and can offer only weapons in exchange. We
are reduced to "creating wealth" by the "shock doctrine" and pillage of other countries.
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8813 posted 05/09/2008 at 09:04:03
robber barons look like penny-ante pickpockets.
The US no longer manufactures anything of consequence other than weapons (our chief
export). The social and physical infrastructure have been allowed to deteriorate. Our
assets are being sold off, and we become more indebted every day.
The Soviet Union, at least partly due to wasteful military spending, collapsed to end the
Cold War. But our leaders decided to continue our extravagant military spending, to
militarily "secure" power and wealth. Whether due to the influence of the
"military-industrial complex", or national cold war jingoism, we allowed miltarism to
become dominant in our policies and economy.
Now we are being led down a road toward our own ruin and collapse, as we unthinkingly
sacrifice our political rights and economic well-being.
The ONLY way our militarized economy can stagger along is by the creation of ever
more credit, debt, and increasingly worthless fiat money. We can never repay, because we
must borrow more just to buy what we need, and can offer only weapons in exchange. We
are reduced to "creating wealth" by the "shock doctrine" and pillage of other countries.
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8813 posted 05/09/2008 at 09:04:03
Iraq Backs Off Allegations That Iran Is Behind Violence
If not Iran, then who?
Could it be the Iraqis? Maybe they really don't want their nation to be permanently occupied, with US military bases, and a superfortress embassy? Maybe they don't want to turn over their oil rights to the control of US corporations? Nah, we're making their lives better, just ask us.
Could it be the Bush/Cheney neoCON cabal, invading Iraq on a flimsy pretext, continuing a military occupation in order to fight "insurgents"? Nah, we're doing them a favor, we know what's best for them.
It must then be the "liberals". Yes, that's what's behind our conquest troubles, "liberals". posted 05/05/2008 at 09:02:31
Could it be the Iraqis? Maybe they really don't want their nation to be permanently occupied, with US military bases, and a superfortress embassy? Maybe they don't want to turn over their oil rights to the control of US corporations? Nah, we're making their lives better, just ask us.
Could it be the Bush/Cheney neoCON cabal, invading Iraq on a flimsy pretext, continuing a military occupation in order to fight "insurgents"? Nah, we're doing them a favor, we know what's best for them.
It must then be the "liberals". Yes, that's what's behind our conquest troubles, "liberals". posted 05/05/2008 at 09:02:31
Clinton Gas Tax Holiday: Hillary Attacks Economists
drheelin,
the subtle strategy is even more impressive:
Because a windfall tax will never get past a Bush veto, we don't have to worry about the oil companies passing on added cost!
The real benefit of the gas tax repeal will kick in when the roads and bridges start falling apart. Few will dare to drive any more, and nation-wide gas consumption will go down!
Problem solved ! (Once we learn to grow our own food locally) posted 05/04/2008 at 11:41:20
the subtle strategy is even more impressive:
Because a windfall tax will never get past a Bush veto, we don't have to worry about the oil companies passing on added cost!
The real benefit of the gas tax repeal will kick in when the roads and bridges start falling apart. Few will dare to drive any more, and nation-wide gas consumption will go down!
Problem solved ! (Once we learn to grow our own food locally) posted 05/04/2008 at 11:41:20
Let's see:
McCain proposes
a) a retail gas tax-free subsidy that solves nothing, and may counter-productively increase demand and price.
Hillary, Instead of joining with every economist to berate McCain's idea as Bush league folly and pandering ,
jumps in with Mccain and "proposes"
(b) an oil corporation tax to make for lost revenue that CURRENTLY has ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE of passage given a Bush veto and the Congressional Republicans.
And when it is pointed out that her political pandering only winds up supporting bad policy and Republican misdirection,
she lashes out with an ad hominem attack ---
that every economist who disagrees with her is "elitist". posted 05/04/2008 at 11:13:45
McCain proposes
a) a retail gas tax-free subsidy that solves nothing, and may counter-productively increase demand and price.
Hillary, Instead of joining with every economist to berate McCain's idea as Bush league folly and pandering ,
jumps in with Mccain and "proposes"
(b) an oil corporation tax to make for lost revenue that CURRENTLY has ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE of passage given a Bush veto and the Congressional Republicans.
And when it is pointed out that her political pandering only winds up supporting bad policy and Republican misdirection,
she lashes out with an ad hominem attack ---
that every economist who disagrees with her is "elitist". posted 05/04/2008 at 11:13:45
The View from Haiti
Rev. Jackson,
Are you really oblivious to the destructive policies of the US in Haiti and elsewhere??
"Rice has been grown in Haiti for centuries, and until twenty years ago
Haitian farmers produced about 170,000 tonnes of rice a year, enough
to cover 95% of domestic consumption. Rice farmers received no
government subsidies, but, as in every other rice-producing country at
the time, their access to local markets was protected by import tariffs.
In 1995, as a condition of providing a desperately needed loan, the
International Monetary Fund required Haiti to cut its tariff on imported
rice from 35% to 3%, the lowest in the Caribbean. The result was a
massive influx of U.S. rice that sold for half the price of Haitian-grown
rice. Thousands of rice farmers lost their lands and livelihoods, and
today three-quarters of the rice eaten in Haiti comes from the U.S."
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8836 posted 05/04/2008 at 20:57:10
Are you really oblivious to the destructive policies of the US in Haiti and elsewhere??
"Rice has been grown in Haiti for centuries, and until twenty years ago
Haitian farmers produced about 170,000 tonnes of rice a year, enough
to cover 95% of domestic consumption. Rice farmers received no
government subsidies, but, as in every other rice-producing country at
the time, their access to local markets was protected by import tariffs.
In 1995, as a condition of providing a desperately needed loan, the
International Monetary Fund required Haiti to cut its tariff on imported
rice from 35% to 3%, the lowest in the Caribbean. The result was a
massive influx of U.S. rice that sold for half the price of Haitian-grown
rice. Thousands of rice farmers lost their lands and livelihoods, and
today three-quarters of the rice eaten in Haiti comes from the U.S."
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8836 posted 05/04/2008 at 20:57:10
The Dummies' Guide to Stupid Leaders and Misleading Numbers
The "POLLYANNA CREEP" in government economic reports --------
It"s much worse than most realize, as the following quotes indicate:
Indeed, it may already be showing up there; the seasonally unadjusted consumer price
index for March was up 0.9% (an annual rate of around 11%) and only a heroic seasonal
adjustment of 0.6%, DOUBLE THE NEXT-LARGEST SEASONAL ADJUSTMENT for
any month in the last 10 years, brought the figure down to an acceptable 0.3%.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/JE07Dj02.html
The article goes into such frauds as "imputed income" (such as the "value" you receive
from living in your own home, or the "value" of your free checking account), the total of
which Mr Williams calculates was 15% of total GDP in 2007! Wow! "Imputed income"
was 15% of GDP?
...
Then, finally, we get to how magically to reduce inflation with "product substitution" in
the consumer's shopping basket ("if flank steak gets too expensive, people are assumed to
shift to hamburger, ..., the inflation-reducing scam of "geometric weighting" of the items
still in the shopping basket ("goods and services in which costs are rising most rapidly get
a lower weighting for a presumed reduction in consumption"), and concluding with the
infamous "hedonic adjustment", (which even the author says is "an unusual computation
by which additional quality is attributed to a product or service").
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/JE07Dj01.html posted 05/06/2008 at 09:57:33
It"s much worse than most realize, as the following quotes indicate:
Indeed, it may already be showing up there; the seasonally unadjusted consumer price
index for March was up 0.9% (an annual rate of around 11%) and only a heroic seasonal
adjustment of 0.6%, DOUBLE THE NEXT-LARGEST SEASONAL ADJUSTMENT for
any month in the last 10 years, brought the figure down to an acceptable 0.3%.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/JE07Dj02.html
The article goes into such frauds as "imputed income" (such as the "value" you receive
from living in your own home, or the "value" of your free checking account), the total of
which Mr Williams calculates was 15% of total GDP in 2007! Wow! "Imputed income"
was 15% of GDP?
...
Then, finally, we get to how magically to reduce inflation with "product substitution" in
the consumer's shopping basket ("if flank steak gets too expensive, people are assumed to
shift to hamburger, ..., the inflation-reducing scam of "geometric weighting" of the items
still in the shopping basket ("goods and services in which costs are rising most rapidly get
a lower weighting for a presumed reduction in consumption"), and concluding with the
infamous "hedonic adjustment", (which even the author says is "an unusual computation
by which additional quality is attributed to a product or service").
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/JE07Dj01.html posted 05/06/2008 at 09:57:33
McCain Implies Iraq War Is For Oil: Watch Video
Well said ProfessorDuh,
Too bad all three presidential candidates pledge to prosecute the fake "war on terror" , even more aggressively than Bush has done ( but with more supposed "finesse").
And all three pledge to continue funding and further "strengthen" the already bloated military.
Militarism and jingoism are greater threats to our democracy, economically and politically, than AlQaeda (or the newly invented enemies, "extremists" and "insurgents") will ever be. posted 05/03/2008 at 09:32:50
Too bad all three presidential candidates pledge to prosecute the fake "war on terror" , even more aggressively than Bush has done ( but with more supposed "finesse").
And all three pledge to continue funding and further "strengthen" the already bloated military.
Militarism and jingoism are greater threats to our democracy, economically and politically, than AlQaeda (or the newly invented enemies, "extremists" and "insurgents") will ever be. posted 05/03/2008 at 09:32:50
Olbermann: Clinton's O'Reilly Appearance "Pathetic And Revelatory"
Being stupefied is a common characteristic of those who support war and torture. posted 05/03/2008 at 11:56:47
continued ...
----------------------------------------------
O'REILLY: The weakness of your argument [for troop withdrawal from Iraq] is twofold. No. 1, any withdrawal of American troops will be seen as weakness by Iran and Al Qaeda. No. 2, if Iran decides it wants to dominate Iraq, which I believe it will " and I could be wrong " you can't stop them if you draw our troops out, and Iraq can't stop them.
Then you've got a problem with Saudi Arabia. If Iran decides to dominate Iraq, oil prices will double from now. So you're looking at $7, $8 a gallon for Americans, OK? That's what's going to happen. The speculators will drive them up.
[ Does Hillary reply keeping our oil prices down should not be a reason for military occupation, that it does not keep the cost down, that the money would be better spent developing alternative energy use? No, instead ...]
CLINTON: Well, the speculators are driving them up now. posted 05/03/2008 at 10:45:54
----------------------------------------------
O'REILLY: The weakness of your argument [for troop withdrawal from Iraq] is twofold. No. 1, any withdrawal of American troops will be seen as weakness by Iran and Al Qaeda. No. 2, if Iran decides it wants to dominate Iraq, which I believe it will " and I could be wrong " you can't stop them if you draw our troops out, and Iraq can't stop them.
Then you've got a problem with Saudi Arabia. If Iran decides to dominate Iraq, oil prices will double from now. So you're looking at $7, $8 a gallon for Americans, OK? That's what's going to happen. The speculators will drive them up.
[ Does Hillary reply keeping our oil prices down should not be a reason for military occupation, that it does not keep the cost down, that the money would be better spent developing alternative energy use? No, instead ...]
CLINTON: Well, the speculators are driving them up now. posted 05/03/2008 at 10:45:54
Hillary"s performance was "PATHETIC".
Some examples:
O'REILLY: You believe we're in the middle of a shooting War on Terror. You believe that?
[She could have at least pointed out that vague and ill-defined "enemies" result in vague, ill-defined, and self-defeating policies. But, instead...]
CLINTON: Yes, absolutely.
------------------------------------
O'REILLY: You won't, I will [torture]. Why am I wrong?
[She could have stated that torture is illegal, unconstitutional, and immoral.
She could have stated that practicing torture puts us on the wrong side of history, with dictators, tyrants, gulags, and concentration camps.
She could have stated that the historical use of torture by governments has ALWAYS been intimidation, to get people to shut up, not to talk.
She could have stated that torture depraves the torturer as well as dehumanizes the tortured.
She could have stated that practicing torture does not produce respect, but produces enmity.
Perhaps the least salutory argument against torture is that it isn"t efficent. The obvious rebuttal is that one should then support torture if it may extract "actionable intelligence". Well, the argument of torturers is ALWAYS that torture ALWAYS MAY THEORETICALLY produce some "useful" intelligence.
So, what does Hillary stumble and repeat over and again?]
CLINTON: ...to go after them. I do not think torture works.
CLINTON ... you do not get the high quality...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,354028,00.html
continued posted 05/03/2008 at 10:43:44
Some examples:
O'REILLY: You believe we're in the middle of a shooting War on Terror. You believe that?
[She could have at least pointed out that vague and ill-defined "enemies" result in vague, ill-defined, and self-defeating policies. But, instead...]
CLINTON: Yes, absolutely.
------------------------------------
O'REILLY: You won't, I will [torture]. Why am I wrong?
[She could have stated that torture is illegal, unconstitutional, and immoral.
She could have stated that practicing torture puts us on the wrong side of history, with dictators, tyrants, gulags, and concentration camps.
She could have stated that the historical use of torture by governments has ALWAYS been intimidation, to get people to shut up, not to talk.
She could have stated that torture depraves the torturer as well as dehumanizes the tortured.
She could have stated that practicing torture does not produce respect, but produces enmity.
Perhaps the least salutory argument against torture is that it isn"t efficent. The obvious rebuttal is that one should then support torture if it may extract "actionable intelligence". Well, the argument of torturers is ALWAYS that torture ALWAYS MAY THEORETICALLY produce some "useful" intelligence.
So, what does Hillary stumble and repeat over and again?]
CLINTON: ...to go after them. I do not think torture works.
CLINTON ... you do not get the high quality...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,354028,00.html
continued posted 05/03/2008 at 10:43:44
Stocks rise and Dow crosses 13,000 as dollar advances
Hmmm
The stock market bubble.
There's still a lot of increasingly worthless dollars available for domestic and foreign speculation, thanks to: inflation, the sinking dollar exchange, the Fed's buyout of bad derivative loans, and a Fed interest rate lower than inflation.
Isn't the P/E ratio significantly worse now than in 1929?
Doesn't the top elite control more wealth than in 1929? posted 05/01/2008 at 17:04:02
The stock market bubble.
There's still a lot of increasingly worthless dollars available for domestic and foreign speculation, thanks to: inflation, the sinking dollar exchange, the Fed's buyout of bad derivative loans, and a Fed interest rate lower than inflation.
Isn't the P/E ratio significantly worse now than in 1929?
Doesn't the top elite control more wealth than in 1929? posted 05/01/2008 at 17:04:02
5 Years Later, We Have a New Mission
sorry typo
should read
Many oppose the Iraq war because we are NOT "winning". posted 05/01/2008 at 15:44:41
should read
Many oppose the Iraq war because we are NOT "winning". posted 05/01/2008 at 15:44:41
At the end of the cold war, the US became the sole superpower. The Soviet Union had collapsed, at least partly due to unsustainable military expenditures. The US also suffered economically because of its diversion of resources to the military, tellingly shown by a comparison with economic advances in Germany and Japan.
US leaders had become accustomed to power and wealth, and wanted to preserve it, in what they would call the New American Century. They had a choice, opt for the "peace dividend", and begin spending it to improve the social and physical infrastructure of the US and world. Or take the option to militarily "secure" their favored position.
The "peace dividend" option seemed unlikely to maintain their privileges.
Besides, the "military-industrial complex, and a jingoist and military mindset had become too embedded. Thus, to the detriment of us all, they chose the military option. They chose to continue and expand the military extravagance, military occupations and bases, and military alliances with "reliable" allies, however unsavory.
The trillions wasted in unnecessary wars and weapons has starved our economic infrastructure, buried us in debt, and compromised our liberties in the name of "military security".
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8813
Many oppose the Iraq war because we are "winning". Until such popular jingoist beliefs are rejected, our leaders appear to have no limit to the blood they will spill, and destruction they will cause, in order to hold on to their abused power and ill-gotten riches. posted 05/01/2008 at 15:28:59
US leaders had become accustomed to power and wealth, and wanted to preserve it, in what they would call the New American Century. They had a choice, opt for the "peace dividend", and begin spending it to improve the social and physical infrastructure of the US and world. Or take the option to militarily "secure" their favored position.
The "peace dividend" option seemed unlikely to maintain their privileges.
Besides, the "military-industrial complex, and a jingoist and military mindset had become too embedded. Thus, to the detriment of us all, they chose the military option. They chose to continue and expand the military extravagance, military occupations and bases, and military alliances with "reliable" allies, however unsavory.
The trillions wasted in unnecessary wars and weapons has starved our economic infrastructure, buried us in debt, and compromised our liberties in the name of "military security".
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8813
Many oppose the Iraq war because we are "winning". Until such popular jingoist beliefs are rejected, our leaders appear to have no limit to the blood they will spill, and destruction they will cause, in order to hold on to their abused power and ill-gotten riches. posted 05/01/2008 at 15:28:59
Exxon Mobil Earnings Disappoint -- Pity Poor Exxon
Over 50% of the price of oil is due to a combination of oligopoly control, and unregulated financial speculation.
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8878 posted 05/04/2008 at 09:29:28
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8878 posted 05/04/2008 at 09:29:28
GDP Grew Last Quarter? Only If You Believe In Santa Claus
Hooray Mr. Blodget !
I have been posting for some time that the fake and under-reported official inflation figure makes the official GDP growth appear greater than it is. posted 05/01/2008 at 16:39:46
I have been posting for some time that the fake and under-reported official inflation figure makes the official GDP growth appear greater than it is. posted 05/01/2008 at 16:39:46
Clinton's Gas Tax Plan Called 'Ineffective', 'Shortsighted'
Both Hillary and Obama have "comprehensive" plans.
Unfortunately, both have bought into Bush's bio-fuel scheme, which is beginning to look more and more like a "final solution" to the population of the Third World. posted 05/01/2008 at 10:05:58
Unfortunately, both have bought into Bush's bio-fuel scheme, which is beginning to look more and more like a "final solution" to the population of the Third World. posted 05/01/2008 at 10:05:58
Bobby
But then we would have to discuss real issues.
The Pentagon Strangles Our Economy: Why the US Has Gone Broke
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8813
Food Crisis: "The greatest demonstration of the historical failure of the capitalist model"
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8836 posted 05/01/2008 at 10:01:13
But then we would have to discuss real issues.
The Pentagon Strangles Our Economy: Why the US Has Gone Broke
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8813
Food Crisis: "The greatest demonstration of the historical failure of the capitalist model"
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8836 posted 05/01/2008 at 10:01:13
jdenham
So true!
We are witness to the biggest rip-off and transfer of wealth upward in world history.
Hopefully, the strategic reserve will only be used to dazzle voters in November, and not as part of Cheney's planned attack on Iran. posted 05/01/2008 at 09:46:33
So true!
We are witness to the biggest rip-off and transfer of wealth upward in world history.
Hopefully, the strategic reserve will only be used to dazzle voters in November, and not as part of Cheney's planned attack on Iran. posted 05/01/2008 at 09:46:33
How exactly do either Hillary or Obama expect to "reach across the aisle" and work with Republicans?? Bush and the Republicans oppose every meaningful solution to every problem, from energy to Iraq, and only seek to further enrich their elite constituency.
You can"t have it both ways. When are Hillary and Obama going to cut the crap about the imaginary problem of stubborn politicians that can"t work "together"?
McCain/Bush and Hillary all support a retail gas tax "holiday" that nearly all experts agree is most likely counter-productive, or at best accomplishes nothing meaningful.
McCain/Bush OPPOSE raising any tax on oil corporations, or submitting them to government control.
So, Hillary falls into the trap, and now the debate is no longer about what the oil companies are doing, but about whether to give a $50 tax break to car drivers and truck companies.
A while back Bush proposed an energy "plan" which had as its linchpin the promotion of bio-fuel, which nearly every expert now agrees, just as many predicted, is now driving up the world price of food. Again, it accomplishes nothing significantly worthwhile.
Both Obama and Clinton have supported Bush"s bio-fuel "final solution".
http://obama.senate.gov/podcast/060511-a_real_solution/
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/speech/view/?id=4059
Do they still think it is such a good idea to "work with Republicans" and settle for half-baked solutions that only preserve the status quo? posted 05/01/2008 at 09:30:17
You can"t have it both ways. When are Hillary and Obama going to cut the crap about the imaginary problem of stubborn politicians that can"t work "together"?
McCain/Bush and Hillary all support a retail gas tax "holiday" that nearly all experts agree is most likely counter-productive, or at best accomplishes nothing meaningful.
McCain/Bush OPPOSE raising any tax on oil corporations, or submitting them to government control.
So, Hillary falls into the trap, and now the debate is no longer about what the oil companies are doing, but about whether to give a $50 tax break to car drivers and truck companies.
A while back Bush proposed an energy "plan" which had as its linchpin the promotion of bio-fuel, which nearly every expert now agrees, just as many predicted, is now driving up the world price of food. Again, it accomplishes nothing significantly worthwhile.
Both Obama and Clinton have supported Bush"s bio-fuel "final solution".
http://obama.senate.gov/podcast/060511-a_real_solution/
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/speech/view/?id=4059
Do they still think it is such a good idea to "work with Republicans" and settle for half-baked solutions that only preserve the status quo? posted 05/01/2008 at 09:30:17
Reading The Pictures: American Bombing Of Sadr City: Like Qana, But Without The Attention?
Sadly, Bush/Cheney have ordered a war of annihilation against "insurgents" as the only way to accomplish their plan of conquest to "secure" Mideast oil.
Most Iraqis OPPOSE giving away their country"s oil rights, and OPPOSE the Bush/Maliki covenant which would allow PERMANENT US bases and occupation.
The US military is being used to try to BEAT THE MAJORITY OF THE IRAQI POPULATION INTO SUBMISSION.
It is not just Baghdad that is being bombarded:
"US forces backed by British artillery and American aircraft have attacked the Hayaniya district of Iraqi city of Basra, witnesses say.
...
Loud explosions were heard in the area which was bombed during the operation on Saturday, DPA reported.
...
Hayaniyah, a stronghold of supporters of anti-American cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, has seen
firefights since March 25 when Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki ordered a crackdown on
them in the southern port city.
...
Since then US warplanes have carried out several air strikes in the district targeting what
they call extremists. Scores of people including women and children have been killed. "
- 04-19-08
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=52265§ionid=351020201 posted 05/01/2008 at 12:06:31
Most Iraqis OPPOSE giving away their country"s oil rights, and OPPOSE the Bush/Maliki covenant which would allow PERMANENT US bases and occupation.
The US military is being used to try to BEAT THE MAJORITY OF THE IRAQI POPULATION INTO SUBMISSION.
It is not just Baghdad that is being bombarded:
"US forces backed by British artillery and American aircraft have attacked the Hayaniya district of Iraqi city of Basra, witnesses say.
...
Loud explosions were heard in the area which was bombed during the operation on Saturday, DPA reported.
...
Hayaniyah, a stronghold of supporters of anti-American cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, has seen
firefights since March 25 when Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki ordered a crackdown on
them in the southern port city.
...
Since then US warplanes have carried out several air strikes in the district targeting what
they call extremists. Scores of people including women and children have been killed. "
- 04-19-08
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=52265§ionid=351020201 posted 05/01/2008 at 12:06:31
Hillary Clinton And Bill O'Reilly Square Off On The Factor: Watch Video
Hillary's statements about torture were most despicable and troubling.
The chief and ONLY reason she said she opposed torture is because it produces unreliable information. The obvious inference is that she does support torture if it may extract "actionable intelligence". Well, the argument of torturers is ALWAYS that torture MAY THEORETICALLY produce some "useful" intelligence.
She did NOT state that torture is illegal, unconstitutional, and immoral.
She did NOT state that the historical use of torture by governments has ALWAYS been intimidation, to get people to shut up, not to talk.
She did NOT state that torture depraves the torturer as well as dehumanizes the tortured.
She did NOT state how the tortured will say anything, including false accusations against neighbors, which produces victimization of the innocent.
She did NOT state that practicing torture does not produce respect, but produces enmity.
She did NOT state that practicing torture puts us on the wrong side of history, with dictators, tyrants, gulags, and concentration camps. posted 05/02/2008 at 09:30:49
The chief and ONLY reason she said she opposed torture is because it produces unreliable information. The obvious inference is that she does support torture if it may extract "actionable intelligence". Well, the argument of torturers is ALWAYS that torture MAY THEORETICALLY produce some "useful" intelligence.
She did NOT state that torture is illegal, unconstitutional, and immoral.
She did NOT state that the historical use of torture by governments has ALWAYS been intimidation, to get people to shut up, not to talk.
She did NOT state that torture depraves the torturer as well as dehumanizes the tortured.
She did NOT state how the tortured will say anything, including false accusations against neighbors, which produces victimization of the innocent.
She did NOT state that practicing torture does not produce respect, but produces enmity.
She did NOT state that practicing torture puts us on the wrong side of history, with dictators, tyrants, gulags, and concentration camps. posted 05/02/2008 at 09:30:49
Shameful Days: Why Won't The Media Pursue the Pentagon Propaganda Scandal?
The mass media response is both shameful and very predictable. But fixing it will require
more than appeals to civic duty.
Media executives have been successful in the authoritarian and secretive corporate world.
Their jobs are to protect the interests of a multi-million dollar corporation.We should not
be surprised if they dislike public debate and criticism of the establishment.
The media organization has the primary goal of making profit, primarily by entertaining,
not educating or informing. Controversy, which might irritate some viewers, and lose
advertising as well, is not desired. There is a built in bias against anything that might
contradict conventional wisdom or beliefs.
It is good we finally notice and object to government paid-for Pentagon "analysts" and
"specialists".
But we should not continue turning a blind eye to corporate paid-for privately-funded,
supposedly expert, talking heads and shills. Large corporations, with plenty of cash, are
able to fund private "think tanks", which unsurprisingly promote the viewpoint and
interests of those corporations. The playing field is unequal. Few organizations have the
resources to compete with large corporations on issues from health care, to the
environment, to military spending. And coming back to my first point, corporate
advertising alone heavily influences the media executives who decide what is the "best" programming. posted 04/30/2008 at 22:03:34
more than appeals to civic duty.
Media executives have been successful in the authoritarian and secretive corporate world.
Their jobs are to protect the interests of a multi-million dollar corporation.We should not
be surprised if they dislike public debate and criticism of the establishment.
The media organization has the primary goal of making profit, primarily by entertaining,
not educating or informing. Controversy, which might irritate some viewers, and lose
advertising as well, is not desired. There is a built in bias against anything that might
contradict conventional wisdom or beliefs.
It is good we finally notice and object to government paid-for Pentagon "analysts" and
"specialists".
But we should not continue turning a blind eye to corporate paid-for privately-funded,
supposedly expert, talking heads and shills. Large corporations, with plenty of cash, are
able to fund private "think tanks", which unsurprisingly promote the viewpoint and
interests of those corporations. The playing field is unequal. Few organizations have the
resources to compete with large corporations on issues from health care, to the
environment, to military spending. And coming back to my first point, corporate
advertising alone heavily influences the media executives who decide what is the "best" programming. posted 04/30/2008 at 22:03:34
US troop deaths hit 7-month high in Iraq
JoeBlough
"we" have to kill so many civilians because MOST IRAQIS want us to leave.!
They do not want the Bush-Maliki covenant for permanent bases and occupation. They do not want to turn their oil rights over to US corporations.
The military "mission" is to beat them into submission. posted 04/30/2008 at 11:42:52
"we" have to kill so many civilians because MOST IRAQIS want us to leave.!
They do not want the Bush-Maliki covenant for permanent bases and occupation. They do not want to turn their oil rights over to US corporations.
The military "mission" is to beat them into submission. posted 04/30/2008 at 11:42:52
The "mess" is being caused because most Iraqis do not want their oil rights turned over to US corporations, nor do they want permanent US bases and occupation.
It will not be "fixed" by crushing Iraqi resistance in order to impose neoCON plans.
The mess will only end by ending neoCON dreams of permanent US military occupation, and "securing" access to Iraqi oil profits.
Our troops must leave. posted 04/30/2008 at 11:34:50
It will not be "fixed" by crushing Iraqi resistance in order to impose neoCON plans.
The mess will only end by ending neoCON dreams of permanent US military occupation, and "securing" access to Iraqi oil profits.
Our troops must leave. posted 04/30/2008 at 11:34:50
We may expect casualties to increase as Bush/Petreaus attempt to CRUSH the most popular organization in Iraq.
That popular organization under AlSadr OPPOSES the Bush military covenant which would allow PERMANENT military bases in Iraq, and OPPOSES the giveaway of oil rights to US corporate control.
That is why US troops and the puppet Maliki have walled off sections of Baghdad, and attack heavily populated sealed off areas of Baghdad and Basra with helicopter gunships, drones, and artillery - all miraculously done, according to the Pentagon, with minimal civilian losses. posted 04/30/2008 at 10:25:51
That popular organization under AlSadr OPPOSES the Bush military covenant which would allow PERMANENT military bases in Iraq, and OPPOSES the giveaway of oil rights to US corporate control.
That is why US troops and the puppet Maliki have walled off sections of Baghdad, and attack heavily populated sealed off areas of Baghdad and Basra with helicopter gunships, drones, and artillery - all miraculously done, according to the Pentagon, with minimal civilian losses. posted 04/30/2008 at 10:25:51
Gas Tax Holiday Splits Clinton And Obama: Who's Right?
Subsidizing retail gasoline by making it tax-exempt for a few months before the November election is a political stunt that accomplishes nothing useful. posted 04/29/2008 at 19:59:20
War Profiteers: The Bush Baghdad Bubble
Much of this thievery and pillage is elaborated upon in Kleins' book "THE SHOCK DOCTRINE".
She first wrote about it in September 2004 in the following article:
Baghdad Year Zero
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/09/0080197 posted 05/01/2008 at 21:54:36
She first wrote about it in September 2004 in the following article:
Baghdad Year Zero
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/09/0080197 posted 05/01/2008 at 21:54:36
Have You Left No Sense Of Decency?
Have you heard?
Obama"s pastor said we "should love our enemies", "turn the other cheek", and that it is as difficult for "a rich man to get into heaven as a camel through the eye of a needle".
His pastor is obviously a terrorist loving communist who wants to surrender America!
How could a patriotic Christian suggest that bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki was anything like "terrorism".
Fortunately, Obama has stepped up to the plate and denounced such un-American thoughts.
Now all he has to do is start talking about pre-emptively obliterating some suspected enemies, to prove for sure that he is no Islamofascist. posted 04/29/2008 at 21:45:32
Obama"s pastor said we "should love our enemies", "turn the other cheek", and that it is as difficult for "a rich man to get into heaven as a camel through the eye of a needle".
His pastor is obviously a terrorist loving communist who wants to surrender America!
How could a patriotic Christian suggest that bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki was anything like "terrorism".
Fortunately, Obama has stepped up to the plate and denounced such un-American thoughts.
Now all he has to do is start talking about pre-emptively obliterating some suspected enemies, to prove for sure that he is no Islamofascist. posted 04/29/2008 at 21:45:32
The New Security
At the end of WW2, the US was the predominant world economic and military power,
challenged only by the Soviet Union. At the end of the cold war, the US became the sole
superpower. The Soviet Union had collapsed, at least partly due to unsustainable military
expenditures. The US had also suffered economically because of its own military
expenditures, tellingly shown by a comparison with the economic advances of Germany
and Japan.
US leaders had become accustomed to power and wealth, and wanted to preserve it, in
what they would deem the New American Century. They had a choice, opt for the "peace
dividend", and begin spending the trillions of dollars improving the social and physical
infrastructure of the US and world. Or take the military option, and aim to "secure" their
private world militarily.
The "peace dividend" way seemed too uncertain for maintaining their privileges.
Besides, the "military-industrial complex, and a jingoist and military mindset had become
too embedded. Thus, to the detriment of us all, they chose the military option. They chose
to continue and expand the military extravagance, military occupations and bases, and
military alliances with "reliable" allies, however unsavory they may be.
As becomes ever more evident, the trillions wasted in unnecessary wars and weapons has
emasculated our economic infrastructure, buried us in debt, and compromised our
liberties in the name of "military security". posted 04/30/2008 at 09:58:59
challenged only by the Soviet Union. At the end of the cold war, the US became the sole
superpower. The Soviet Union had collapsed, at least partly due to unsustainable military
expenditures. The US had also suffered economically because of its own military
expenditures, tellingly shown by a comparison with the economic advances of Germany
and Japan.
US leaders had become accustomed to power and wealth, and wanted to preserve it, in
what they would deem the New American Century. They had a choice, opt for the "peace
dividend", and begin spending the trillions of dollars improving the social and physical
infrastructure of the US and world. Or take the military option, and aim to "secure" their
private world militarily.
The "peace dividend" way seemed too uncertain for maintaining their privileges.
Besides, the "military-industrial complex, and a jingoist and military mindset had become
too embedded. Thus, to the detriment of us all, they chose the military option. They chose
to continue and expand the military extravagance, military occupations and bases, and
military alliances with "reliable" allies, however unsavory they may be.
As becomes ever more evident, the trillions wasted in unnecessary wars and weapons has
emasculated our economic infrastructure, buried us in debt, and compromised our
liberties in the name of "military security". posted 04/30/2008 at 09:58:59
Obama's Reverend Wright Press Conference (VIDEO)
heathehren
Venezuela, probably same as Iran, accused of causing "instability" by spreading "extremism". posted 04/29/2008 at 21:02:47
Venezuela, probably same as Iran, accused of causing "instability" by spreading "extremism". posted 04/29/2008 at 21:02:47
Thanks,
Though I hope you realize I am not praising Obama's response, or Hillary, or the general pandering to jingoism on this topic. posted 04/29/2008 at 20:51:57
Though I hope you realize I am not praising Obama's response, or Hillary, or the general pandering to jingoism on this topic. posted 04/29/2008 at 20:51:57
I am unsure whether it is that you are unfamiliar with sarcasm, or unfamiliar with Biblical quotes. posted 04/29/2008 at 20:42:12
Have you heard?
Obama"s pastor said we "should love our enemies", "turn the other cheek", and that it
was near impossible for "a rich man to get into heaven".
His pastor is a terrorist loving communist who hates capitalism and wants to surrender America!
How dare a supposed Christian should suggest that bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki
was "terrorism".
Fortunately, Obama has stepped up to the plate and denounced such thoughts.
Now all he has to do is start talking about pre-emptively obliterating some suspected
enemies, to prove he is no Islamofascist. posted 04/29/2008 at 20:23:46
Obama"s pastor said we "should love our enemies", "turn the other cheek", and that it
was near impossible for "a rich man to get into heaven".
His pastor is a terrorist loving communist who hates capitalism and wants to surrender America!
How dare a supposed Christian should suggest that bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki
was "terrorism".
Fortunately, Obama has stepped up to the plate and denounced such thoughts.
Now all he has to do is start talking about pre-emptively obliterating some suspected
enemies, to prove he is no Islamofascist. posted 04/29/2008 at 20:23:46
Bush Press Conference: It's A "Tough Time For Our Economy"
"It's a tough time for our economy," Bush said at a Rose Garden news conference. "Across our country, many Americans are understandably anxious...
TRUE, BUT
there is no reason to believe he is sincere when he states he is open to any idea in terms of energy.
His policies, from trading food for gas, to the Iraq war, to EXXON-Halliburton enrichment, to deregulation of financial cartels have created the mess we are in. He is not about to change any of that.
In fact, he continues to pay inflated prices for oil reserves, doubtless planning to release some just before the election, or possibly in preparation for Cheney's atttack on Iran and Syria. posted 04/29/2008 at 11:17:13
TRUE, BUT
there is no reason to believe he is sincere when he states he is open to any idea in terms of energy.
His policies, from trading food for gas, to the Iraq war, to EXXON-Halliburton enrichment, to deregulation of financial cartels have created the mess we are in. He is not about to change any of that.
In fact, he continues to pay inflated prices for oil reserves, doubtless planning to release some just before the election, or possibly in preparation for Cheney's atttack on Iran and Syria. posted 04/29/2008 at 11:17:13
Probing a Political Paradox: Why the Discredited Right Still Sets the Agenda and Dominates the Debate
Take another look at Jeff Cohen's current Huffpost article about how he and others were frozen out of the Iraq debate by media executive decision. posted 04/29/2008 at 10:07:51
I do not think the primary cause of mass media disinformation is the "two-sided
balanced discussion debate platform". That is just a possible means, not a cause.
Instead, one should point to the way media is itself organized.
1) Executives, having successfully climbed up in the authoritarian and secretive corporate world, tend to be conservative, and not particularly in favor of public debate.
2) The media organization has the primary goal of making profit, not educating or informing. Controversy, which might irritate some viewers, and lose advertising as well, is not desired. There is a built in bias against anything that might contradict conventional wisdom or beliefs.
3)Paid-for Pentagon and government psy-ops "analysts" and "specialists".
4)Paid-for privately-funded, supposedly expert, talking heads and shills. Large corporations, with plenty of cash, are able to fund private "think tanks", which unsurprisingly promote the viewpoint and interests of those corporations.
5)The domination by a few news outlets. For example, even Huffpost habitually uses misleading AP reports (aka Pentagon feeds) about the war in Iraq. posted 04/29/2008 at 10:01:44
balanced discussion debate platform". That is just a possible means, not a cause.
Instead, one should point to the way media is itself organized.
1) Executives, having successfully climbed up in the authoritarian and secretive corporate world, tend to be conservative, and not particularly in favor of public debate.
2) The media organization has the primary goal of making profit, not educating or informing. Controversy, which might irritate some viewers, and lose advertising as well, is not desired. There is a built in bias against anything that might contradict conventional wisdom or beliefs.
3)Paid-for Pentagon and government psy-ops "analysts" and "specialists".
4)Paid-for privately-funded, supposedly expert, talking heads and shills. Large corporations, with plenty of cash, are able to fund private "think tanks", which unsurprisingly promote the viewpoint and interests of those corporations.
5)The domination by a few news outlets. For example, even Huffpost habitually uses misleading AP reports (aka Pentagon feeds) about the war in Iraq. posted 04/29/2008 at 10:01:44
4 US soldiers killed; militants shell Green Zone
Maybe if you first learned what fascism is, then you might know who is supporting it.
http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm posted 04/28/2008 at 15:25:15
http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm posted 04/28/2008 at 15:25:15
The article misleadingly portrays the problem as defiant "militants" who won't follow the instructions from their own leader.
The actual problem is that the US military is attacking the most popular Iraqi organization by air strikes and artillery into a densely population urban area.
Why?
CNN report:
"When we threatened to declare an open war until the liberation, we meant war against
the occupier," al-Sadr said in his letter. "There is no war between us and our Iraqi
brothers -- no matter what their nationality, race or sect. The blood of Iraqis are forbidden
on you."
On Saturday, al-Sadr issued what he called a "last warning" and told his followers in Sadr
City to fight the "occupier" there.
Al-Sadr said he would not accept the long-term agreement which the U.S. and Iraqi
governments are crafting to replace the current U.N. mandate for multi-national forces in
Iraq. The U.N. mandate expires in December.
"There should be no long-term security agreement between the government and occupier,
no matter how hard they fight us and no matter how much of our blood is spilled," he
said. "We will not accept to divide Iraq and to steal its wealth."
Al-Sadr's message came after at least 11 people were killed and 36 others were wounded
in overnight battles in northern Baghdad's Sadr City
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/04/25/iraq.main/index.html?section=cnn_lates posted 04/28/2008 at 15:21:52
The actual problem is that the US military is attacking the most popular Iraqi organization by air strikes and artillery into a densely population urban area.
Why?
CNN report:
"When we threatened to declare an open war until the liberation, we meant war against
the occupier," al-Sadr said in his letter. "There is no war between us and our Iraqi
brothers -- no matter what their nationality, race or sect. The blood of Iraqis are forbidden
on you."
On Saturday, al-Sadr issued what he called a "last warning" and told his followers in Sadr
City to fight the "occupier" there.
Al-Sadr said he would not accept the long-term agreement which the U.S. and Iraqi
governments are crafting to replace the current U.N. mandate for multi-national forces in
Iraq. The U.N. mandate expires in December.
"There should be no long-term security agreement between the government and occupier,
no matter how hard they fight us and no matter how much of our blood is spilled," he
said. "We will not accept to divide Iraq and to steal its wealth."
Al-Sadr's message came after at least 11 people were killed and 36 others were wounded
in overnight battles in northern Baghdad's Sadr City
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/04/25/iraq.main/index.html?section=cnn_lates posted 04/28/2008 at 15:21:52
Leave to Ammobob et al
to come up with such simple and unprejudiced explanations.
The Iraqis do not resist because of the US military occupation, even though that"s why they say they resist.
The Iraqis do not fight because they oppose the pillage of their country, and theft of their oil rights, even though they claim those are reasons.
The Iraqis do not attack US troops because they have been jailed, tortured, walled off in ghettoes, deprived of jobs, deprived of schools for their children, lacking medical care, or driven from their homes by helicopter gunships and drones. No, even if they say that is why they fight, they are wrong.
Ammobob knows they only want 27 virgins, and to convert us to Islam.
Therefore, they are heathen, sub-human dupes of a false religion.
That"s what gives us the right to kill them if they won"t submit to the kind of government and economy we want them to have.
They should just do what Ammobob says. He knows what"s best for them. He"s not the least bit chauvinist, arrogant, prejudiced, or duped. posted 04/28/2008 at 15:15:15
to come up with such simple and unprejudiced explanations.
The Iraqis do not resist because of the US military occupation, even though that"s why they say they resist.
The Iraqis do not fight because they oppose the pillage of their country, and theft of their oil rights, even though they claim those are reasons.
The Iraqis do not attack US troops because they have been jailed, tortured, walled off in ghettoes, deprived of jobs, deprived of schools for their children, lacking medical care, or driven from their homes by helicopter gunships and drones. No, even if they say that is why they fight, they are wrong.
Ammobob knows they only want 27 virgins, and to convert us to Islam.
Therefore, they are heathen, sub-human dupes of a false religion.
That"s what gives us the right to kill them if they won"t submit to the kind of government and economy we want them to have.
They should just do what Ammobob says. He knows what"s best for them. He"s not the least bit chauvinist, arrogant, prejudiced, or duped. posted 04/28/2008 at 15:15:15
What the AP article omits:
1) US forces continue to bombard densely population sections of Baghdad and Basra with artillery, helicopter gunships, and drones. The Sadr City neighborhood in Baghdad is sealed off, and there are shortages of food. Schools are closed.
2) The "crackdown" beginning in March was ordered because Al Sadr"s organization is the most popular in Iraq and OPPOSES the pending oil rights giveaway and Bush"s proposed agreement for permanent military bases and occupation. The quisling Maliki, of course, supports both.
Petreaus and Maliki hoped to undercut Al Sadr"s organization in the upcoming Iraqi elections.
3) Finally, it was hoped to falsely pin the blame for any resistance on to Iran. That would further the groundwork needed for the planned US "pre-emptive" attack on Iran. posted 04/28/2008 at 11:44:51
1) US forces continue to bombard densely population sections of Baghdad and Basra with artillery, helicopter gunships, and drones. The Sadr City neighborhood in Baghdad is sealed off, and there are shortages of food. Schools are closed.
2) The "crackdown" beginning in March was ordered because Al Sadr"s organization is the most popular in Iraq and OPPOSES the pending oil rights giveaway and Bush"s proposed agreement for permanent military bases and occupation. The quisling Maliki, of course, supports both.
Petreaus and Maliki hoped to undercut Al Sadr"s organization in the upcoming Iraqi elections.
3) Finally, it was hoped to falsely pin the blame for any resistance on to Iran. That would further the groundwork needed for the planned US "pre-emptive" attack on Iran. posted 04/28/2008 at 11:44:51
Military Propaganda Pushed Me Off TV
As I understand the article, it was not military propaganda pre se that pushed Jeff Cohen off the air.
Instead, it was media executives. Why?
1) Executives, having successfully climbed up in the authoritarian and secretive corporate world, tend to be conservative, and not particularly in favor of public debate.
2) The media organization has the primary goal of making profit, not educating or informing. Controversy, which might irritate some viewers, and lose advertising as well, is not desired. There is a built in bias against anything that might contradict conventional wisdom or beliefs. posted 04/28/2008 at 12:14:08
Instead, it was media executives. Why?
1) Executives, having successfully climbed up in the authoritarian and secretive corporate world, tend to be conservative, and not particularly in favor of public debate.
2) The media organization has the primary goal of making profit, not educating or informing. Controversy, which might irritate some viewers, and lose advertising as well, is not desired. There is a built in bias against anything that might contradict conventional wisdom or beliefs. posted 04/28/2008 at 12:14:08
Howard Dean: Obama Or Clinton Must Drop Out In June
I am more worried by how we all may lose, than by which Democrat will win the Presidency.
I would expect McCain to continue the push toward fascism, curtailing liberty, expanding warfare, bloating the military, and misdirecting our economy for benefit of a few.
Both HRC and Obama have stated they will at least "review" the civil rights laws and Bush"s Presidential directives. But neither has a been particularly outspoken leader, neither about the Patriot Act, or the military Commissions Act.
Both HRC and Obama support the fake "war on terror", and both have made arrogant and jingoist statements about Iran, or about attacking suspected terrorists any where. Both indicate they intend to continue our military presence, though with more supposed finesse.
Both HRC and Obama made statements that they intend to strengthen our already extravagant military. By ignoring the war elephant in the room, the embedded militarism in our economy, the hundreds of overseas bases, any pledges about "fixing" the economy must be spurious.
So, I do not enthusiastically support Obama over Clinton, or Clinton over Obama.
Nonetheless, I would "enthusiastically" support either over McCain and the neofascists.
As an aside:
had Edwards not curiously dropped out of the race, he could have swung his support one way or the other, with some decisive clout. posted 04/28/2008 at 10:16:21
I would expect McCain to continue the push toward fascism, curtailing liberty, expanding warfare, bloating the military, and misdirecting our economy for benefit of a few.
Both HRC and Obama have stated they will at least "review" the civil rights laws and Bush"s Presidential directives. But neither has a been particularly outspoken leader, neither about the Patriot Act, or the military Commissions Act.
Both HRC and Obama support the fake "war on terror", and both have made arrogant and jingoist statements about Iran, or about attacking suspected terrorists any where. Both indicate they intend to continue our military presence, though with more supposed finesse.
Both HRC and Obama made statements that they intend to strengthen our already extravagant military. By ignoring the war elephant in the room, the embedded militarism in our economy, the hundreds of overseas bases, any pledges about "fixing" the economy must be spurious.
So, I do not enthusiastically support Obama over Clinton, or Clinton over Obama.
Nonetheless, I would "enthusiastically" support either over McCain and the neofascists.
As an aside:
had Edwards not curiously dropped out of the race, he could have swung his support one way or the other, with some decisive clout. posted 04/28/2008 at 10:16:21
How National Debt Is Contributing to Public Disenchantment with Government
The Federal military budget is closer to one trillion dollars!
The Pentagon Strangles Our Economy: Why the U.S. Has Gone Broke
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8813
And our state and local governments are also going bankrupt.
http://finance.yahoo.com/real-estate/article/104940/Rising-Property-Taxes-Fill-Gaps,-Pin
ch-Homeowners
We are in an awful mess that is steadily getting worse (except for the elite few who now control more of the nation's wealth than the robber barons of the Gilded Age.) posted 04/28/2008 at 13:55:54
The Pentagon Strangles Our Economy: Why the U.S. Has Gone Broke
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8813
And our state and local governments are also going bankrupt.
http://finance.yahoo.com/real-estate/article/104940/Rising-Property-Taxes-Fill-Gaps,-Pin
ch-Homeowners
We are in an awful mess that is steadily getting worse (except for the elite few who now control more of the nation's wealth than the robber barons of the Gilded Age.) posted 04/28/2008 at 13:55:54
Baghdad Green Zone Bombarded With Rockets
Timothe,
"reimbursement" to an occupying military power is called extortion and pillage
the only "rebuilding" happening is the super embassy-fortress and military bases posted 04/27/2008 at 20:50:44
"reimbursement" to an occupying military power is called extortion and pillage
the only "rebuilding" happening is the super embassy-fortress and military bases posted 04/27/2008 at 20:50:44
It reminds me of Pizarro going after the heathen Inca's gold.
Except now it's heathen muslim oil. posted 04/27/2008 at 20:44:33
Except now it's heathen muslim oil. posted 04/27/2008 at 20:44:33
timothe,
, I guess I"m too bigoted to understand the moral imperative to military occupy a foreign
country until we have killed off all the "bigots" who oppose our altruistic military
occupation. I did not realize the insurgents were also bigots. That changes everything!
It"s good you and others are not handicapped by parochialism, and know what"s best for
them. Ah yes, we"re not after their oil, we"re bringing "democracy". posted 04/27/2008 at 20:40:11
, I guess I"m too bigoted to understand the moral imperative to military occupy a foreign
country until we have killed off all the "bigots" who oppose our altruistic military
occupation. I did not realize the insurgents were also bigots. That changes everything!
It"s good you and others are not handicapped by parochialism, and know what"s best for
them. Ah yes, we"re not after their oil, we"re bringing "democracy". posted 04/27/2008 at 20:40:11
The article misleadingly portrays the problem as defiant "militants" who won't follow the instructions from their own leader.
The actual problem is that the US military is attacking the most popular Iraqi organization by air strikes and artillery into a densely population urban area.
Why?
CNN report:
"When we threatened to declare an open war until the liberation, we meant war against
the occupier," al-Sadr said in his letter. "There is no war between us and our Iraqi
brothers -- no matter what their nationality, race or sect. The blood of Iraqis are forbidden
on you."
On Saturday, al-Sadr issued what he called a "last warning" and told his followers in Sadr
City to fight the "occupier" there.
Al-Sadr said he would not accept the long-term agreement which the U.S. and Iraqi
governments are crafting to replace the current U.N. mandate for multi-national forces in
Iraq. The U.N. mandate expires in December.
"There should be no long-term security agreement between the government and occupier,
no matter how hard they fight us and no matter how much of our blood is spilled," he
said. "We will not accept to divide Iraq and to steal its wealth."
Al-Sadr's message came after at least 11 people were killed and 36 others were wounded
in overnight battles in northern Baghdad's Sadr City
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/04/25/iraq.main/index.html?section=cnn_lates
t posted 04/27/2008 at 19:11:09
The actual problem is that the US military is attacking the most popular Iraqi organization by air strikes and artillery into a densely population urban area.
Why?
CNN report:
"When we threatened to declare an open war until the liberation, we meant war against
the occupier," al-Sadr said in his letter. "There is no war between us and our Iraqi
brothers -- no matter what their nationality, race or sect. The blood of Iraqis are forbidden
on you."
On Saturday, al-Sadr issued what he called a "last warning" and told his followers in Sadr
City to fight the "occupier" there.
Al-Sadr said he would not accept the long-term agreement which the U.S. and Iraqi
governments are crafting to replace the current U.N. mandate for multi-national forces in
Iraq. The U.N. mandate expires in December.
"There should be no long-term security agreement between the government and occupier,
no matter how hard they fight us and no matter how much of our blood is spilled," he
said. "We will not accept to divide Iraq and to steal its wealth."
Al-Sadr's message came after at least 11 people were killed and 36 others were wounded
in overnight battles in northern Baghdad's Sadr City
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/04/25/iraq.main/index.html?section=cnn_lates
t posted 04/27/2008 at 19:11:09
Iraq Militants Bombard US Green Zone With Rockets, Defy al-Sadr's Call For Cease-Fire
It is misleading to report the minor violence against the Greeen Zone as though it were
without cause, and was the work of a few unruly Sadrists.
CNN
"When we threatened to declare an open war until the liberation, we meant war against
the occupier," al-Sadr said in his letter. "There is no war between us and our Iraqi
brothers -- no matter what their nationality, race or sect. The blood of Iraqis are forbidden
on you."
On Saturday, al-Sadr issued what he called a "last warning" and told his followers in Sadr
City to fight the "occupier" there.
Al-Sadr said he would not accept the long-term agreement which the U.S. and Iraqi
governments are crafting to replace the current U.N. mandate for multi-national forces in
Iraq. The U.N. mandate expires in December.
"There should be no long-term security agreement between the government and occupier,
no matter how hard they fight us and no matter how much of our blood is spilled," he
said. "We will not accept to divide Iraq and to steal its wealth."
Al-Sadr's message came after at least 11 people were killed and 36 others were wounded
in overnight battles in northern Baghdad's Sadr City
The U.S. military launched overnight airstrikes on Sadr City, the official said. [note-Sadr City is densely populated -3 million]
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/04/25/iraq.main/index.html?section=cnn_lates
t posted 04/27/2008 at 13:30:43
without cause, and was the work of a few unruly Sadrists.
CNN
"When we threatened to declare an open war until the liberation, we meant war against
the occupier," al-Sadr said in his letter. "There is no war between us and our Iraqi
brothers -- no matter what their nationality, race or sect. The blood of Iraqis are forbidden
on you."
On Saturday, al-Sadr issued what he called a "last warning" and told his followers in Sadr
City to fight the "occupier" there.
Al-Sadr said he would not accept the long-term agreement which the U.S. and Iraqi
governments are crafting to replace the current U.N. mandate for multi-national forces in
Iraq. The U.N. mandate expires in December.
"There should be no long-term security agreement between the government and occupier,
no matter how hard they fight us and no matter how much of our blood is spilled," he
said. "We will not accept to divide Iraq and to steal its wealth."
Al-Sadr's message came after at least 11 people were killed and 36 others were wounded
in overnight battles in northern Baghdad's Sadr City
The U.S. military launched overnight airstrikes on Sadr City, the official said. [note-Sadr City is densely populated -3 million]
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/04/25/iraq.main/index.html?section=cnn_lates
t posted 04/27/2008 at 13:30:43
DNC Iraq McCain Ad Sparks Controversy: Watch Video
It was just reported that Obama will support the Petreaus "promotion".
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080427/pl_nm/usa_politics_obama_iraq_dc
Both Obama and HRC intend to continue the fake "war on terror" and have promised to "strengthen" our alraedy too powerful military. posted 04/27/2008 at 21:37:50
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080427/pl_nm/usa_politics_obama_iraq_dc
Both Obama and HRC intend to continue the fake "war on terror" and have promised to "strengthen" our alraedy too powerful military. posted 04/27/2008 at 21:37:50
Two anarchists, who both believed government to be a band of armed thieves, were
discussing what to do in an upcoming election. One argued that to vote for either
candidate would be to sanction their actions. The other stated that he would defend
himself by all available means. So long as he perceived any difference between the
candidates, he would vote for the one less likely to cause harm.
Both HRC and Obama have made arrogant and jingoist statements about Iran, Palestine,
and the supposed "need" to "strengthen" the military, despite the fact it is already
strangling our economy and our freedoms. We ought not delude ourselves about either.
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8813
Neither candidate offers much realistic promise of making real change soon.
But ending the Republican fascist rule would at least hopefully be a half step in a better
direction. posted 04/27/2008 at 12:59:25
discussing what to do in an upcoming election. One argued that to vote for either
candidate would be to sanction their actions. The other stated that he would defend
himself by all available means. So long as he perceived any difference between the
candidates, he would vote for the one less likely to cause harm.
Both HRC and Obama have made arrogant and jingoist statements about Iran, Palestine,
and the supposed "need" to "strengthen" the military, despite the fact it is already
strangling our economy and our freedoms. We ought not delude ourselves about either.
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8813
Neither candidate offers much realistic promise of making real change soon.
But ending the Republican fascist rule would at least hopefully be a half step in a better
direction. posted 04/27/2008 at 12:59:25
Rollingdivision
Your point about Obama and Clinton is well taken.
However, it does NOT "prove" McCain right.
It merely shows how much militarism and corporate greed are embedded in politics, to the detriment of us all.
I also reference my 10:20am comment posted posted 04/27/2008 at 12:13:15
Your point about Obama and Clinton is well taken.
However, it does NOT "prove" McCain right.
It merely shows how much militarism and corporate greed are embedded in politics, to the detriment of us all.
I also reference my 10:20am comment posted posted 04/27/2008 at 12:13:15
How much political skill is shown by recommending US military bases in every "volatile" place in the world? That surely places the US in the position of OPPOSING every revolutionary attempt to overthrow dictatorial and abusive governments throughout the world.
Fighting AlQaeda??? A transparent fabrication. In case you haven't noticed, the only real
"enemy" in Iraq has been "insurgents" and so-called "extremists".
It is ridiculous to ignore the fact we create "insurgents" where ever we occupy, and where
ever our government supports unpopular and dictatorial foreign governments.
It is also absurd to ignore how the flag is directed to follow the money.
How muc political skill is shown by basing our economy on military extravagance and warfare?
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8813 posted 04/27/2008 at 11:14:41
Fighting AlQaeda??? A transparent fabrication. In case you haven't noticed, the only real
"enemy" in Iraq has been "insurgents" and so-called "extremists".
It is ridiculous to ignore the fact we create "insurgents" where ever we occupy, and where
ever our government supports unpopular and dictatorial foreign governments.
It is also absurd to ignore how the flag is directed to follow the money.
How muc political skill is shown by basing our economy on military extravagance and warfare?
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8813 posted 04/27/2008 at 11:14:41
rollingdivision
Think it through. Occupation by US troops in every "volatile" place in the world places
the US in the position of OPPOSING every revolutionary attempt to overthrow dictatorial
and abusive governments throughout the world.
Fighting AlQaeda??? A transparent fabrication. In case you haven't noticed, the main
"enemy" in Iraq has been "insurgents" and so-called "extremists".
It is ridiculous to ignore the fact we create "insurgents" where ever we occupy, and where
ever our government supports autocratic sheiks and other dictators.
It is also absurd to ignore how the flag is directed to follow the money.
Consider the words of a former commander of the USMC, Major General Smedley
Butler.
"War is just a racket. ... conducted for the benefit of the very few ...I helped make
Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti
and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped
in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street.
The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking
house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912 ...I brought light to the Dominican Republic for
American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its
way unmolested."
Try reading Naomi Klein"s SHOCK DOCTRINE. posted 04/27/2008 at 10:44:59
Think it through. Occupation by US troops in every "volatile" place in the world places
the US in the position of OPPOSING every revolutionary attempt to overthrow dictatorial
and abusive governments throughout the world.
Fighting AlQaeda??? A transparent fabrication. In case you haven't noticed, the main
"enemy" in Iraq has been "insurgents" and so-called "extremists".
It is ridiculous to ignore the fact we create "insurgents" where ever we occupy, and where
ever our government supports autocratic sheiks and other dictators.
It is also absurd to ignore how the flag is directed to follow the money.
Consider the words of a former commander of the USMC, Major General Smedley
Butler.
"War is just a racket. ... conducted for the benefit of the very few ...I helped make
Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti
and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped
in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street.
The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking
house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912 ...I brought light to the Dominican Republic for
American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its
way unmolested."
Try reading Naomi Klein"s SHOCK DOCTRINE. posted 04/27/2008 at 10:44:59
McCain is the unabashed front man for the military-corporate syndicate that is destroying our country and the world.
Military and corporate institutions neither support democracy, nor practice it. They both thrive in secrecy and authoritarianism. The both dehumanize, and both seek goals of power and control.
There was a time when it was recognized that too-powerful military institutions and and militarist ideology are always THREATS to democracy and freedom. There was a time when robber barons and corporate monopolies were known to be inhumane. It used to be common knowledge that "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely".
The US economy is faltering because it is based on militarism, and trillion dollar expenditures. Our society is faltering because the general good has been sacrificed to enrich a few.
Neither of the Democratic front-runners speaks of the war elephant in the room, unless it is to promise to keep feeding it.
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8813
We are entering a Brave New World nightmare, even worse than Huxley or Orwell imagined. posted 04/27/2008 at 10:20:42
Military and corporate institutions neither support democracy, nor practice it. They both thrive in secrecy and authoritarianism. The both dehumanize, and both seek goals of power and control.
There was a time when it was recognized that too-powerful military institutions and and militarist ideology are always THREATS to democracy and freedom. There was a time when robber barons and corporate monopolies were known to be inhumane. It used to be common knowledge that "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely".
The US economy is faltering because it is based on militarism, and trillion dollar expenditures. Our society is faltering because the general good has been sacrificed to enrich a few.
Neither of the Democratic front-runners speaks of the war elephant in the room, unless it is to promise to keep feeding it.
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8813
We are entering a Brave New World nightmare, even worse than Huxley or Orwell imagined. posted 04/27/2008 at 10:20:42
US Weighing Readiness For Military Action Against Iran
In the full article, Petreaus blames Iran, instead of native Iraqi national resistance, for the
troubles in the US military occupation of Iraq.
Petreaus" explanation is patently false.
Al-Sadr heads the most popular organization in Iraq and OPPOSES the oil rights
giveaway that the quisling Maliki supports.
Per CNN:
"When we threatened to declare an open war until the liberation, we meant war against
the occupier," al-Sadr said in his letter. "There is no war between us and our Iraqi
brothers -- no matter what their nationality, race or sect. The blood of Iraqis are forbidden
on you."
"I direct my speech to all government security forces and others, and all the religious and
political forces, if this open war is between us and the occupier, you should not interfere
in the favor of the occupier," the letter said. "We want to liberate you and your lands from
the occupiers, so our government would be a full sovereign government."
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/04/25/iraq.main/index.html?section=cnn_lates
t
Meanwhile US and British forces have pounded heavily populated areas of Baghdad and
Basra, with artillery and airstrikes (fortunately without civilian casualties according to the
Pentagon). Not suprisingly, though there was no "smoking gun", but there is alleged
Iranian "influence" according to the Admiral Mullen. Apparently, too much "influence" is now a reason to attack another nation. posted 04/26/2008 at 10:35:41
troubles in the US military occupation of Iraq.
Petreaus" explanation is patently false.
Al-Sadr heads the most popular organization in Iraq and OPPOSES the oil rights
giveaway that the quisling Maliki supports.
Per CNN:
"When we threatened to declare an open war until the liberation, we meant war against
the occupier," al-Sadr said in his letter. "There is no war between us and our Iraqi
brothers -- no matter what their nationality, race or sect. The blood of Iraqis are forbidden
on you."
"I direct my speech to all government security forces and others, and all the religious and
political forces, if this open war is between us and the occupier, you should not interfere
in the favor of the occupier," the letter said. "We want to liberate you and your lands from
the occupiers, so our government would be a full sovereign government."
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/04/25/iraq.main/index.html?section=cnn_lates
t
Meanwhile US and British forces have pounded heavily populated areas of Baghdad and
Basra, with artillery and airstrikes (fortunately without civilian casualties according to the
Pentagon). Not suprisingly, though there was no "smoking gun", but there is alleged
Iranian "influence" according to the Admiral Mullen. Apparently, too much "influence" is now a reason to attack another nation. posted 04/26/2008 at 10:35:41
McCain On Obama: "Clear Who Hamas Wants to be the Next President"
McCain is reported as having collaborated with his captors. If so,his obvious willingness to collaborate with those in power may just be indicative of his basic character.
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn04192008.html posted 04/25/2008 at 17:13:03
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn04192008.html posted 04/25/2008 at 17:13:03
Pelosi On The Dream Ticket: "No, I Don't Think It's A Good Idea"
So Pelosi thinks the most important factor should be "compatibility".
Otherwise, we must suppose, the candidates would not be professional enough to work together toward supposedly shared Democratic Party goals.
Traditionally, the most important factor for the VP pick was whether he/she added to the electability of the ticket. But, that's a "secondary" consideration for Pelosi.
And intra-party democracy? Well, party Democrats are pretty evenly split over who should serve as POTUS. But I guess they don't get any voice in choosing who should run as VP, and perhaps become President.
Hillary and Obama both say they "work well" with Lieberman on most issues. Maybe Pelosi could convince him to rejoin the Democratic Party and run for VP again. He meets Pelosi's criteria perfectly. posted 04/25/2008 at 17:50:09
Otherwise, we must suppose, the candidates would not be professional enough to work together toward supposedly shared Democratic Party goals.
Traditionally, the most important factor for the VP pick was whether he/she added to the electability of the ticket. But, that's a "secondary" consideration for Pelosi.
And intra-party democracy? Well, party Democrats are pretty evenly split over who should serve as POTUS. But I guess they don't get any voice in choosing who should run as VP, and perhaps become President.
Hillary and Obama both say they "work well" with Lieberman on most issues. Maybe Pelosi could convince him to rejoin the Democratic Party and run for VP again. He meets Pelosi's criteria perfectly. posted 04/25/2008 at 17:50:09
Many States Appear To Be In A Recession
The government GDP figures are as fake as the inflation figure.
1) If measured GDP growth is 4%, and measured inflation is 3%, then
government-measured GDP growth is 1%.
If measured GDP growth is 4%, and ACTUAL inflation is 5%, then ACTUAL GDP
growth is worse than minus 1%.
2) statisticians use politically inspired "imputed" values to push the inflation figure down
3) the GDP includes over-priced military spending, environmental ripoffs, and imaginary
profits from imaginary financial services
We are in a recession, and have been for some time.
State and local governments have been part of the derivative scam with their pension and
bond investments. They will all be soon laying off teachers and others.
Even though inflation will raise our taxes by driving most of us into higher tax brackets
(if we get a cost-of-living raise), the really rich can continue to be exempt thanks to the
Bush tax breaks for the wealthy. We would not want to change that, because that would
mean "raising" taxes.
Ha, ha, ha.
The biggest scam ever in world history is going on, transferring ever more wealth and
power upward, while pushing more and more into poverty, starvation, low benefit
employment, lack of health care, degraded environment, poorer schools, and with an ever
more out of control and secretive government. posted 04/25/2008 at 11:32:51
1) If measured GDP growth is 4%, and measured inflation is 3%, then
government-measured GDP growth is 1%.
If measured GDP growth is 4%, and ACTUAL inflation is 5%, then ACTUAL GDP
growth is worse than minus 1%.
2) statisticians use politically inspired "imputed" values to push the inflation figure down
3) the GDP includes over-priced military spending, environmental ripoffs, and imaginary
profits from imaginary financial services
We are in a recession, and have been for some time.
State and local governments have been part of the derivative scam with their pension and
bond investments. They will all be soon laying off teachers and others.
Even though inflation will raise our taxes by driving most of us into higher tax brackets
(if we get a cost-of-living raise), the really rich can continue to be exempt thanks to the
Bush tax breaks for the wealthy. We would not want to change that, because that would
mean "raising" taxes.
Ha, ha, ha.
The biggest scam ever in world history is going on, transferring ever more wealth and
power upward, while pushing more and more into poverty, starvation, low benefit
employment, lack of health care, degraded environment, poorer schools, and with an ever
more out of control and secretive government. posted 04/25/2008 at 11:32:51
Foreclosures Hitting Even Connecticut's Wealthy
Stevelagain,
Do you also believe the Great Depression was not so bad, after all, the unemployment
rate was less than 50%, so the majority of people had jobs?
And the majority of people did not drown during Katrina, and the majority of our youth
are not killed or wounded in Iraq.
Even though we are the only industrialized nation without universal health care, the
majority has some health insurance.
Even though we incarcerate a larger percentage of our population than any other country,
the majority is not in jail.
Even though one-third of our youth do not finish high school, the majority do finish.
The majority won"t be hurt by the massive shift of wealth and power to the EXXONs and
Halliburtons, by runaway inflation, endless wars, the shredding of the Constitution, or the
destruction of the environment. The majority aren"t losing their homes, only their country,
only their morality. posted 04/25/2008 at 09:34:14
Do you also believe the Great Depression was not so bad, after all, the unemployment
rate was less than 50%, so the majority of people had jobs?
And the majority of people did not drown during Katrina, and the majority of our youth
are not killed or wounded in Iraq.
Even though we are the only industrialized nation without universal health care, the
majority has some health insurance.
Even though we incarcerate a larger percentage of our population than any other country,
the majority is not in jail.
Even though one-third of our youth do not finish high school, the majority do finish.
The majority won"t be hurt by the massive shift of wealth and power to the EXXONs and
Halliburtons, by runaway inflation, endless wars, the shredding of the Constitution, or the
destruction of the environment. The majority aren"t losing their homes, only their country,
only their morality. posted 04/25/2008 at 09:34:14
Organized Crime Targeting Energy And Financial Markets
Time for a few "bad apples" to "take the fall" in order to protect to robber barons at the top. posted 04/25/2008 at 09:42:27
Al-Sadr Considers Restarting Full-Scale Fight Against US-Led Forces
Minniehot, the psy-ops officers are misleading you, before you enlist for the third tour to kill the supposed sub-humans,
you should consider the words of a former commander of the USMC, Major General Smedley Butler.
"War is just a racket. ... conducted for the benefit of the very few ...I helped make
Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti
and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped
in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street.
The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking
house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912 (where have I heard that name before?). I brought
light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped
to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested."
http://www.fas.org/man/smedley.htm
Try reading Naomi Klein"s SHOCK DOCTRINE to better understand who you are really
fighting for. posted 04/24/2008 at 20:57:23
you should consider the words of a former commander of the USMC, Major General Smedley Butler.
"War is just a racket. ... conducted for the benefit of the very few ...I helped make
Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti
and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped
in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street.
The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking
house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912 (where have I heard that name before?). I brought
light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped
to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested."
http://www.fas.org/man/smedley.htm
Try reading Naomi Klein"s SHOCK DOCTRINE to better understand who you are really
fighting for. posted 04/24/2008 at 20:57:23
Most Iraqis do not want their country run by the Cheney/Crocker/Petreaus team.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JD18Ak02.html posted 04/24/2008 at 20:27:55
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JD18Ak02.html posted 04/24/2008 at 20:27:55
This article parrots the mass media line.
Al-Sadr is NOT restarting the fight, and Iran is NOT behind, or the cause of, Iraqi resistance to foreign US occupation.
Al_Sadr declared and abided by a cease-fire. BUT US troops have been invading and bombing the bases of his support in the slums of Sadr City and Basra. His deputy commander was recently assassinated.
Al-Sadr OPPOSES the oil rights giveaway to US oil companies (something Maliki supports).
It is becoming all too clear what is really going on.
Bushco wants to provoke and escalate the fighting in order to:
(1) weaken opposition to the oil rights giveaway law in the upcoming scheduled Iraqi election.
(2) blame Iran for troubles in Iraq because Al-Sadr is Shiite and has been to Iran (as have most all Shiite leaders). posted 04/24/2008 at 19:44:27
Al-Sadr is NOT restarting the fight, and Iran is NOT behind, or the cause of, Iraqi resistance to foreign US occupation.
Al_Sadr declared and abided by a cease-fire. BUT US troops have been invading and bombing the bases of his support in the slums of Sadr City and Basra. His deputy commander was recently assassinated.
Al-Sadr OPPOSES the oil rights giveaway to US oil companies (something Maliki supports).
It is becoming all too clear what is really going on.
Bushco wants to provoke and escalate the fighting in order to:
(1) weaken opposition to the oil rights giveaway law in the upcoming scheduled Iraqi election.
(2) blame Iran for troubles in Iraq because Al-Sadr is Shiite and has been to Iran (as have most all Shiite leaders). posted 04/24/2008 at 19:44:27
What Does the Petraeus Appointment Mean?
HUFFPOST apparently chooses to promote a limited and bland interpretation of the reason for the Petreaus promotion. Namely, that the primary motive behind the promotion is to help assure Bush"s "place in history" during his "bucolic retirement". That view too casually ignores the likelihood that the Petreaus promotion may have a much more ominous significance.
Neither the Huffpost Goldenberg article, nor the "Huffpost pick" comment mentions Petreaus" unflagging support for the phoney neoCON argument that problems in Iraq are not caused by resistance to foreign US occupation, but instead by "meddling" of Iran.
The greater likelihood of the cause for the promotion is that Petreaus is replacing Fallon in order to facilitate aggression against Iran.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JD25Ak01.html posted 04/24/2008 at 15:51:09
Neither the Huffpost Goldenberg article, nor the "Huffpost pick" comment mentions Petreaus" unflagging support for the phoney neoCON argument that problems in Iraq are not caused by resistance to foreign US occupation, but instead by "meddling" of Iran.
The greater likelihood of the cause for the promotion is that Petreaus is replacing Fallon in order to facilitate aggression against Iran.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JD25Ak01.html posted 04/24/2008 at 15:51:09
David Petraeus, Central Command Chief: General Tapped For New Position
Iraq is unraveled:
http://www.counterpunch.org/patrick04192008.html
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JD19Ak01.html
Afghanistan remains in disarray.
But Petreaus tells us that it"s not resistance to foreign US occupiers that causes problems,
it"s Iranian meddling.
Cheney and Bush are just getting their military ducks arranged in order (Fallon, etc.),
before they launch a planned and sought-after attack on Iran.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JD10Ak04.html
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8698 posted 04/23/2008 at 13:26:56
http://www.counterpunch.org/patrick04192008.html
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JD19Ak01.html
Afghanistan remains in disarray.
But Petreaus tells us that it"s not resistance to foreign US occupiers that causes problems,
it"s Iranian meddling.
Cheney and Bush are just getting their military ducks arranged in order (Fallon, etc.),
before they launch a planned and sought-after attack on Iran.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JD10Ak04.html
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8698 posted 04/23/2008 at 13:26:56
Olympics Brass Ignore China's Role in Ongoing Darfur Genocide
3) Given the current nature of US government policies, one must expect that any critique of other nations will invariably be twisted and misused. As mentioned, anti-Chinese and other xenophobia will be used to misdirect a proper analysis of our own economy and empire. As for "humanitarian" military interventions like in Iraq, Kosovo, and Haiti, expect Klein"s "shock" doctrine to apply. Perhaps some are unaware that Sudan is on the neoCON invasion list, if only Iraq/Iran could be subdued. A failure to account for the big picture winds up as arrogant jingoism.
Surely it is better to remove the splinter in your own eye before judging the speck in someone else"s. posted 04/22/2008 at 12:19:26
Surely it is better to remove the splinter in your own eye before judging the speck in someone else"s. posted 04/22/2008 at 12:19:26
Perhaps Ms. Farrow opposes the genocide in Iraq and in Palestine, opposes US war crimes and torture ... and perhaps not. Judging by the listing of her Huffposts, Darfur is her single-minded concern.
It is not her opposition to Darfur genocide that is the problem, it is rather her simplistic and shoddy analysis of what should best be done about genocide.
You contend that as "citizens of the world", both you and she are free to oppose whatever you dislike. While true in the abstract, you superficially dismiss any consideration of priority or responsibility when selecting your "causes".
As others have pointed out:
1) As a citizen of the US, you and she are firstly "responsible" for the actions of the US government, and presumably in the best position (with limited time and energy) to do something about it.
2) As long as our own US government violates human rights on such a grand scale, it is, in fact, hypocritical for us to expect others to do better with their government than we have been able to do with our own.
continued ... posted 04/22/2008 at 12:13:04
It is not her opposition to Darfur genocide that is the problem, it is rather her simplistic and shoddy analysis of what should best be done about genocide.
You contend that as "citizens of the world", both you and she are free to oppose whatever you dislike. While true in the abstract, you superficially dismiss any consideration of priority or responsibility when selecting your "causes".
As others have pointed out:
1) As a citizen of the US, you and she are firstly "responsible" for the actions of the US government, and presumably in the best position (with limited time and energy) to do something about it.
2) As long as our own US government violates human rights on such a grand scale, it is, in fact, hypocritical for us to expect others to do better with their government than we have been able to do with our own.
continued ... posted 04/22/2008 at 12:13:04
Your "logic" is illogical.
Your "analogy" is misleading.
Anyone from Pakistan SHOULD be critical of the US, especially for its role in supporting the military dictatorship.
However, anyone from Pakistan whose main cause is the presumed human rights violation of some other country half-way round the world, say Cuba, for argument's sake ... well, that "protestor" should be regarded as merely a distraction from more pressing and pertinent issues at home.
Interestingly, at this time, whipping up anti-Chinese sentiment is all too conveniently supported by establishment figures who would like to falsely blame the Chinese for much of the current economic malaise in the US, as well as hypocritically portray the US government as a current champion of human rights. posted 04/22/2008 at 09:40:22
Your "analogy" is misleading.
Anyone from Pakistan SHOULD be critical of the US, especially for its role in supporting the military dictatorship.
However, anyone from Pakistan whose main cause is the presumed human rights violation of some other country half-way round the world, say Cuba, for argument's sake ... well, that "protestor" should be regarded as merely a distraction from more pressing and pertinent issues at home.
Interestingly, at this time, whipping up anti-Chinese sentiment is all too conveniently supported by establishment figures who would like to falsely blame the Chinese for much of the current economic malaise in the US, as well as hypocritically portray the US government as a current champion of human rights. posted 04/22/2008 at 09:40:22
Apparently Farrow discounts the genocide happening in Iraq.
She also chooses to disregard the "financial, military, political and strategic" reasons for the tragedy occurring in Somalia.
But that would entail having to consider her own country, her own government, her own responsibility.
Much better to rant about China's policies, than try to do something about the dismal human rights record of the US government, US military, and US corporations. posted 04/21/2008 at 17:23:44
She also chooses to disregard the "financial, military, political and strategic" reasons for the tragedy occurring in Somalia.
But that would entail having to consider her own country, her own government, her own responsibility.
Much better to rant about China's policies, than try to do something about the dismal human rights record of the US government, US military, and US corporations. posted 04/21/2008 at 17:23:44
Gas prices push closer to $3.50 a gallon, oil hits $117
The financial institutions can no longer easily make profits off bundled mortgage scams.
Now, with the help of the Federal Reserve (low interest rates and buy-outs of tainted securities), the finance brokers still have plenty of bucks (credit) to drive up commodity prices and inflate the stock market. No wonder their CEOs are saying the worst is over (for them).
Meanwhile, the rest of us, both at home and abroad, can start learning to eat dirt, like they are already forced to do in Haiti. posted 04/18/2008 at 17:40:54
Now, with the help of the Federal Reserve (low interest rates and buy-outs of tainted securities), the finance brokers still have plenty of bucks (credit) to drive up commodity prices and inflate the stock market. No wonder their CEOs are saying the worst is over (for them).
Meanwhile, the rest of us, both at home and abroad, can start learning to eat dirt, like they are already forced to do in Haiti. posted 04/18/2008 at 17:40:54
Carter's Hamas Hallucination
Mr. Ginsberg, I could urge you a deeper appreciation of the resentment you engender
when your advocacy seems to be at Palestine's expense and to make more of an effort to
take into account the terrorism that Israelis have inflicted on Palestinians.
But it is not really about who is more victimized or terrorized. It is not even really about
Palestine.
The US does not support the Israeli government because it is "democratic" any more
than the US gives unqualified support to Saudi Arabia because it is "democratic".
What needs to be considered are the reasons why the US government supports an
expansionist and militarist government in Israel. Otherwise, the discussion remains as
superficial as the belief that the US occupation of Iraq is to counter "terrorism".
There are other possible motives for the US Israel policy:
Israel has opposed radical nationalist movements in Lebanon and Jordan
Israel has kept Syria in check.
Israel's air force dominates the region.
Israel's wars test American arms
Israel serves as a conduit for U.S. arms to regimes too unpopular in the
United States for open military assistance.
Israel's intelligence service assists the US
Israel has missiles and a nuclear arsenal, and cooperates with research and development for new weapons
http://www.fpif.org/papers/usisrael.html
http://www.greenleft.org.au/2006/677/8176 posted 04/18/2008 at 12:02:24
when your advocacy seems to be at Palestine's expense and to make more of an effort to
take into account the terrorism that Israelis have inflicted on Palestinians.
But it is not really about who is more victimized or terrorized. It is not even really about
Palestine.
The US does not support the Israeli government because it is "democratic" any more
than the US gives unqualified support to Saudi Arabia because it is "democratic".
What needs to be considered are the reasons why the US government supports an
expansionist and militarist government in Israel. Otherwise, the discussion remains as
superficial as the belief that the US occupation of Iraq is to counter "terrorism".
There are other possible motives for the US Israel policy:
Israel has opposed radical nationalist movements in Lebanon and Jordan
Israel has kept Syria in check.
Israel's air force dominates the region.
Israel's wars test American arms
Israel serves as a conduit for U.S. arms to regimes too unpopular in the
United States for open military assistance.
Israel's intelligence service assists the US
Israel has missiles and a nuclear arsenal, and cooperates with research and development for new weapons
http://www.fpif.org/papers/usisrael.html
http://www.greenleft.org.au/2006/677/8176 posted 04/18/2008 at 12:02:24
90% Give US Economy Poor Rating... 56% Want Out Of Iraq
Many believe since we "broke" Iraq, we are honor-bound to remain until we "fix" it.
That is the last remaining jingoist ploy that needs more refutation. posted 04/18/2008 at 12:44:58
That is the last remaining jingoist ploy that needs more refutation. posted 04/18/2008 at 12:44:58
Shrinking Hours, Cut Overtime Are Stealth Forces Driving Down Economy
The financial institutions can no longer easily make profits off bundled mortgage scams.
Now, with the help of the Federal Reserve (low interest rates and buy-outs of tainted securities), the finance brokers still have plenty of bucks (credit) to drive up commodity prices and inflate the stock market. No wonder their CEOs are saying the worst is over (for them).
Meanwhile, the rest of us, both at home and abroad, can start learning to eat dirt, like they are already forced to do in Haiti. posted 04/18/2008 at 17:45:04
Now, with the help of the Federal Reserve (low interest rates and buy-outs of tainted securities), the finance brokers still have plenty of bucks (credit) to drive up commodity prices and inflate the stock market. No wonder their CEOs are saying the worst is over (for them).
Meanwhile, the rest of us, both at home and abroad, can start learning to eat dirt, like they are already forced to do in Haiti. posted 04/18/2008 at 17:45:04
Buchanan On McLaughlin: Fifty-Fifty Chance We Bomb Iran By Fall
But how do AWOL Bush and PRESIDENT Cheney justify this war? - Boboday555
Pelosi has already scuttled a bill that would have required Congressional approval for an attack upon Iran. Congress also overwhelmingly approved a resolution labeling Iran's military as a "terrorist" organization, giving Bush a green light for an attack.
One likely scenario:
US media/Petraeus/Cheney/Bush continually complain about Iran "attacks" on US soldiers undermining our "progress" in Iraq.
Israel invades Lebanon again, claiming they were "attacked" by Hamas aka Syria/Iran. This time round, Israel bombs Syria also. Any response or resistance by Syria is labeled as further Iranian/Syrian "aggression".
US rushes to defend Israel, "reluctantly" entering fray after further Iranian "provocations" such as threatening speedboats.
Intensive bombing may or may not be immediately followed up by occupation of Iranian oil fields near Iraq border. Nations other than the US are now dependent on Iranian oil. Military occupation may wait until oil prices skyrocket, and other nations clamor for restoration of their oil supply. The US may then invade and occupy "altruistically" to "avoid" world-wide economic collapse. posted 04/14/2008 at 11:41:34
Pelosi has already scuttled a bill that would have required Congressional approval for an attack upon Iran. Congress also overwhelmingly approved a resolution labeling Iran's military as a "terrorist" organization, giving Bush a green light for an attack.
One likely scenario:
US media/Petraeus/Cheney/Bush continually complain about Iran "attacks" on US soldiers undermining our "progress" in Iraq.
Israel invades Lebanon again, claiming they were "attacked" by Hamas aka Syria/Iran. This time round, Israel bombs Syria also. Any response or resistance by Syria is labeled as further Iranian/Syrian "aggression".
US rushes to defend Israel, "reluctantly" entering fray after further Iranian "provocations" such as threatening speedboats.
Intensive bombing may or may not be immediately followed up by occupation of Iranian oil fields near Iraq border. Nations other than the US are now dependent on Iranian oil. Military occupation may wait until oil prices skyrocket, and other nations clamor for restoration of their oil supply. The US may then invade and occupy "altruistically" to "avoid" world-wide economic collapse. posted 04/14/2008 at 11:41:34
1differentdrummer,
The "headcount" is of Dem(Clinton, Pelosi et al) and allegedly Dem (Lieberman) Congresspersons who repeated cast their votes in support of war and militarism, or continually avoid having to vote on tsuch issues at all.
I stand by my comment that there are too many Dems who support neoCON empire policies, whether by Congressional votes, or by votes to elect and re-elect such Congresspersons. posted 04/14/2008 at 11:14:21
The "headcount" is of Dem(Clinton, Pelosi et al) and allegedly Dem (Lieberman) Congresspersons who repeated cast their votes in support of war and militarism, or continually avoid having to vote on tsuch issues at all.
I stand by my comment that there are too many Dems who support neoCON empire policies, whether by Congressional votes, or by votes to elect and re-elect such Congresspersons. posted 04/14/2008 at 11:14:21
Sorry Mr. Boboday555 but, you're 100% wrong!
Too many Dems support neoCON war policies.
The stage has been set. The odds for expanded war increase daily.
Pelosi scuttled a resolution that would have required Congressional approval for an attack on Iran.
Both Houses overwhelmingly approved labeling Iran's military as a "terrorist" organization, implicitly giving Bush a green light to attack.
Petreaus now blames Iran for any difficulties the US has occupying Iraq.
Fallon, who reportedly opposed launching a war against Iran, has been removed.
Israel is actively preparing for what it's leaders call an inevitable and necessary war.
A likely scenario will begin with Israel attacking Lebanon/Syria.
Both Houses of Congress have passed resolutions giving unqualified support for Israel. The US has often vetoed any UN resolutions or actions against Israel. Israel's recent invasion of Lebanon did not go as planned, and fortunately did not escalate.
But with the US economy going south, and Cheney chomping at the bit for war, the next round in Lebanon may well find "aggressive" Iranian speedboats a a sufficient pretext for a US attack. posted 04/14/2008 at 09:12:33
Too many Dems support neoCON war policies.
The stage has been set. The odds for expanded war increase daily.
Pelosi scuttled a resolution that would have required Congressional approval for an attack on Iran.
Both Houses overwhelmingly approved labeling Iran's military as a "terrorist" organization, implicitly giving Bush a green light to attack.
Petreaus now blames Iran for any difficulties the US has occupying Iraq.
Fallon, who reportedly opposed launching a war against Iran, has been removed.
Israel is actively preparing for what it's leaders call an inevitable and necessary war.
A likely scenario will begin with Israel attacking Lebanon/Syria.
Both Houses of Congress have passed resolutions giving unqualified support for Israel. The US has often vetoed any UN resolutions or actions against Israel. Israel's recent invasion of Lebanon did not go as planned, and fortunately did not escalate.
But with the US economy going south, and Cheney chomping at the bit for war, the next round in Lebanon may well find "aggressive" Iranian speedboats a a sufficient pretext for a US attack. posted 04/14/2008 at 09:12:33
Clinton Becomes A Gun Lover
2nurselady
The day is long past when hunting was part of survival.
Nearly all modern day "hunters" do not kill animals because they need the food any more than house cats kill birds because they need the food.
They "hunt" because they believe it is fun, and killing the animal is part of the "fun".
Some people work in slaughterhouses as a job, not a "sport". We might well have questions about anyone who wanted to work in a slaughterhouse for free, because he or she thought it would be "fun". posted 04/13/2008 at 11:15:47
The day is long past when hunting was part of survival.
Nearly all modern day "hunters" do not kill animals because they need the food any more than house cats kill birds because they need the food.
They "hunt" because they believe it is fun, and killing the animal is part of the "fun".
Some people work in slaughterhouses as a job, not a "sport". We might well have questions about anyone who wanted to work in a slaughterhouse for free, because he or she thought it would be "fun". posted 04/13/2008 at 11:15:47
Maybe Hillary and Cheney should team up to go "hunting".
They both apparently think it is fun to kill animals, and think doing so reflects positively on one's character. posted 04/13/2008 at 10:47:54
They both apparently think it is fun to kill animals, and think doing so reflects positively on one's character. posted 04/13/2008 at 10:47:54
Iran Top Threat To Iraq, U.S. Says
I'm not so sure it makes much difference whether the election is "swayed" or not.
Too many Dems support war policies.
Nonetheless, history shows a tendency for governments to launch wars as a distraction from economic or political difficulties at home.
The stage has been set. The odds for war increase daily.
Pelosi scuttled a resolution that would have required Congressional approval for an attack on Iran.
Both Houses overwhelmingly approved labeling Iran's military as a "terrorist" organization, implicitly giving Bush a green light to attack.
Petreaus now blames Iran for any difficulties the US has occupying Iraq.
Fallon, who reportedly opposed launching a war against Iran, has been removed.
Israel actively prepares for what it's leaders call inevitable and necessary war.
Navy gunboats now are claiming they are "threatened" by Iranian vessels. posted 04/12/2008 at 11:38:20
Too many Dems support war policies.
Nonetheless, history shows a tendency for governments to launch wars as a distraction from economic or political difficulties at home.
The stage has been set. The odds for war increase daily.
Pelosi scuttled a resolution that would have required Congressional approval for an attack on Iran.
Both Houses overwhelmingly approved labeling Iran's military as a "terrorist" organization, implicitly giving Bush a green light to attack.
Petreaus now blames Iran for any difficulties the US has occupying Iraq.
Fallon, who reportedly opposed launching a war against Iran, has been removed.
Israel actively prepares for what it's leaders call inevitable and necessary war.
Navy gunboats now are claiming they are "threatened" by Iranian vessels. posted 04/12/2008 at 11:38:20
Most Iraqis believe the US is the top threat threat to Iraq. posted 04/12/2008 at 11:22:04
Dick Cheney: Ahmadinejad Won't Respond To Nuclear Deterrence
impeached mamacat ? hmmm...not likely. Too many Democrats actually support the policies of Bush-Cheney.
Pelosi scuttled a resolution that would have required Congressional approval for an attack on Iran.
Both Houses overwhelmingly approved labeling Iran's military as a "terrorist" organization.
Petreaus now blames Iran for any difficulties the US has occupying Iraq.
Fallon, who reportedly opposed launching a war against Iran, has been removed.
Navy gunboats now are claiming they are "threatened" by Iranian vessels.
Unfortunately, there is little standing in the way of an expanded war. posted 04/12/2008 at 09:42:35
Pelosi scuttled a resolution that would have required Congressional approval for an attack on Iran.
Both Houses overwhelmingly approved labeling Iran's military as a "terrorist" organization.
Petreaus now blames Iran for any difficulties the US has occupying Iraq.
Fallon, who reportedly opposed launching a war against Iran, has been removed.
Navy gunboats now are claiming they are "threatened" by Iranian vessels.
Unfortunately, there is little standing in the way of an expanded war. posted 04/12/2008 at 09:42:35
Colombia and Bill: The Unanswerable Question for Hillary Clinton
"I can't think of a better cheerleader for America than Bill Clinton, can you?" the
Democratic senator from New York asked a crowd jammed into a junior high school
gymnasium. "He has said he would do anything I asked him to do. I would put him to
work."
---HRC 4-21-07
http://www4.vindy.com/content/local_regional/296189488555455.php posted 04/11/2008 at 12:15:17
Democratic senator from New York asked a crowd jammed into a junior high school
gymnasium. "He has said he would do anything I asked him to do. I would put him to
work."
---HRC 4-21-07
http://www4.vindy.com/content/local_regional/296189488555455.php posted 04/11/2008 at 12:15:17
Cheney, Others OK'd Harsh Interrogations
Violated our Constitution, violated Human Rights treaties, and given excuse for the spread and use of torture throughout the world, especially by servile and often undemocratic allies.
For some apparently, such things are neither high crimes nor misdemeanors. posted 04/11/2008 at 12:59:07
For some apparently, such things are neither high crimes nor misdemeanors. posted 04/11/2008 at 12:59:07
Iraq Was Not A Preemptive War
The entire "war on terror" is a preventative war supposedly undertaken to prevent "extremists" from having the capability to attack US interests. McCain accurately presented the neoCON view.
Such a course of preventative war in search of ultimate military security can logically only be accomplished by world conquest and domination (a la "enhanced" 1984). In such an endless conquest, human and legal rights will predictably be subordinated and abolished.
Perhaps the first question to ask is whether such a plan is really meant to make us all "secure", or is it meant to secure certain other interests of a few? posted 04/10/2008 at 12:01:42
Such a course of preventative war in search of ultimate military security can logically only be accomplished by world conquest and domination (a la "enhanced" 1984). In such an endless conquest, human and legal rights will predictably be subordinated and abolished.
Perhaps the first question to ask is whether such a plan is really meant to make us all "secure", or is it meant to secure certain other interests of a few? posted 04/10/2008 at 12:01:42
The Two Central Myths of the Iraq War
Maliki and his fellow collaborators and followers can be said to constitute a "faction". posted 04/11/2008 at 10:35:30
Meanwhile, Iraqis march in protest to US occupation:
http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=100281 posted 04/10/2008 at 12:23:20
http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=100281 posted 04/10/2008 at 12:23:20
To be precise, the faction the US backs is "unprepared to take over".
The reason is that faction does not have the popular support of Iraqis.
Most Iraqis view them as corrupt quislings who survive only by foreign US military support. Furthermore, except for those quislings, most Iraqis do NOT want to yield their oil reserves to the control of US corporations.
Thus, they are "unprepared", and can be expected to remain "unprepared" despite being showered with US arms and training. posted 04/10/2008 at 11:42:19
The reason is that faction does not have the popular support of Iraqis.
Most Iraqis view them as corrupt quislings who survive only by foreign US military support. Furthermore, except for those quislings, most Iraqis do NOT want to yield their oil reserves to the control of US corporations.
Thus, they are "unprepared", and can be expected to remain "unprepared" despite being showered with US arms and training. posted 04/10/2008 at 11:42:19
Inflation Is Getting Worse
Iran is IMPORTING gas. - dolphy
If you are attempting to argue that the US is NOT actively preventing
Iranian energy exports from reaching the market, - then you are incorrect.
The US has been blocking proposed pipelines between India and Iran. The US also actively blocks equipment and finances necessary for resource extraction.
For more on the US economic war against Iran:
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8637 posted 04/11/2008 at 10:45:26
If you are attempting to argue that the US is NOT actively preventing
Iranian energy exports from reaching the market, - then you are incorrect.
The US has been blocking proposed pipelines between India and Iran. The US also actively blocks equipment and finances necessary for resource extraction.
For more on the US economic war against Iran:
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8637 posted 04/11/2008 at 10:45:26
The current financial crises (falling dollar,etc.) is intertwined with other factors.
Consider the military and economic war being waged against Iran and Iraq. That PREVENTS Iraqi and Iranian oil from entering the market, much to the delight of Bush's cronies in Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, EXXON, Halliburton, et al.
Consider also how there has been no real effort to develop mass transit, bike paths, etc (like Copenhagen or in Portland, OR). Couple that with how the auto industry and land developers have allied to promote auto-dependent urban sprawl. posted 04/10/2008 at 11:30:31
Consider the military and economic war being waged against Iran and Iraq. That PREVENTS Iraqi and Iranian oil from entering the market, much to the delight of Bush's cronies in Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, EXXON, Halliburton, et al.
Consider also how there has been no real effort to develop mass transit, bike paths, etc (like Copenhagen or in Portland, OR). Couple that with how the auto industry and land developers have allied to promote auto-dependent urban sprawl. posted 04/10/2008 at 11:30:31
White House And Pentagon Agree That Iraqi Forces Remain Unprepared To Take Over Security Mission
To be precise, the faction the US backs is "unprepared to take over".
The reason is that faction does not have the popular support of Iraqis.
Most Iraqis view them as corrupt quislings who survive only by foreign US military support. Furthermore, except for those quislings, most Iraqis do NOT want to yield their oil reserves to the control of US corporations.
Thus, they are "unprepared", and can be expected to remain "unprepared" despite being showered with US arms and training. posted 04/10/2008 at 08:26:24
The reason is that faction does not have the popular support of Iraqis.
Most Iraqis view them as corrupt quislings who survive only by foreign US military support. Furthermore, except for those quislings, most Iraqis do NOT want to yield their oil reserves to the control of US corporations.
Thus, they are "unprepared", and can be expected to remain "unprepared" despite being showered with US arms and training. posted 04/10/2008 at 08:26:24
Katie Couric Likely To Leave CBS, Says Report; CBS Denies
This story certainly rates Huffpost Headline status .....
NOT!! posted 04/10/2008 at 08:51:57
NOT!! posted 04/10/2008 at 08:51:57
As Oil Touches All-Time Highs, Our Deparment of Energy Takes Us For Fools
The mess we are in is almost unfathomable.
A now bankrupt government that has never wanted to adequately fund mass transit and bike paths (like in Copenhagen or Portland, OR ).
An alliance of auto manufacturers and land developers that promotes auto-dependent urban sprawl.
Religions, frozen in time, that encourage formerly acceptable, but now self-destructive, high birth rates.
Agri-businesses that are all too happy to switch to the more profitable bio-fuel production regardless of the impact on world food prices and water conservation.
Extractive industries that increase their profits whenever they can avoid accountability for the costs of their pillage of natural resources, whether oil, lumber, or fisheries.
A trilllion dollar military-industrial complex that has brainwashed a jingoist public into believing that it is better to be feared than respected.
And the solution is to develop alternative energy to support that wanton lifestyle?? posted 04/10/2008 at 11:04:08
A now bankrupt government that has never wanted to adequately fund mass transit and bike paths (like in Copenhagen or Portland, OR ).
An alliance of auto manufacturers and land developers that promotes auto-dependent urban sprawl.
Religions, frozen in time, that encourage formerly acceptable, but now self-destructive, high birth rates.
Agri-businesses that are all too happy to switch to the more profitable bio-fuel production regardless of the impact on world food prices and water conservation.
Extractive industries that increase their profits whenever they can avoid accountability for the costs of their pillage of natural resources, whether oil, lumber, or fisheries.
A trilllion dollar military-industrial complex that has brainwashed a jingoist public into believing that it is better to be feared than respected.
And the solution is to develop alternative energy to support that wanton lifestyle?? posted 04/10/2008 at 11:04:08
Petraeus Says No New Buildup for Iraq
Many claim we cannot withdraw from Iraq because of the feared "consequences".
What many ignore are the consequences of remaining in Iraq.
Briefly put, the prolonged occupation creates more and more antagonism toward the US
in Iraq and elsewhere. It should be no surprise if the Iraqis are ungrateful for our
destruction of their nation. Prolonging the occupation will not make them more favorably
disposed.
Economically, we cannot practically continue to put aside needed improvements to our
own social (education etc.) and physical (electrical, sewage, mass transit, rail, etc.)
infrastructure.
The continued war also exacts a price on our own political freedoms and moral
credibility. It also deforms our society by transferring wealth upwards, and to wasteful
military expenditures which further threatens our democracy.
Hollowing out our own freedoms and economy in order to create more enemies by an unjustified occupation is our own self-defeating and extremist policy. posted 04/09/2008 at 10:45:20
What many ignore are the consequences of remaining in Iraq.
Briefly put, the prolonged occupation creates more and more antagonism toward the US
in Iraq and elsewhere. It should be no surprise if the Iraqis are ungrateful for our
destruction of their nation. Prolonging the occupation will not make them more favorably
disposed.
Economically, we cannot practically continue to put aside needed improvements to our
own social (education etc.) and physical (electrical, sewage, mass transit, rail, etc.)
infrastructure.
The continued war also exacts a price on our own political freedoms and moral
credibility. It also deforms our society by transferring wealth upwards, and to wasteful
military expenditures which further threatens our democracy.
Hollowing out our own freedoms and economy in order to create more enemies by an unjustified occupation is our own self-defeating and extremist policy. posted 04/09/2008 at 10:45:20
Bagwan Petraeus Returns
The key reason for the invasion and permanent occupation, namely control of Iraqi oil reserves, remains a forbidden topic.
Nonetheless, a few pertinent "military" questions still could, but probably won't be, asked:
1) How many Iraqi civilians have been killed or injured (collateral damage) by direct US military actions?
2) What is state of Iraqi food, water, jobs, electricity, school system?
3) Do Iraqis join resistance organizations BECAUSE of the US occupation?
4) Won't continued occupation mean continued resistance to occupation?
5) Maliki is considered by some to be a US puppet, dependent on the US military. If the US withdrew now, how long could we expect Maliki to remain in power? posted 04/08/2008 at 09:15:24
Nonetheless, a few pertinent "military" questions still could, but probably won't be, asked:
1) How many Iraqi civilians have been killed or injured (collateral damage) by direct US military actions?
2) What is state of Iraqi food, water, jobs, electricity, school system?
3) Do Iraqis join resistance organizations BECAUSE of the US occupation?
4) Won't continued occupation mean continued resistance to occupation?
5) Maliki is considered by some to be a US puppet, dependent on the US military. If the US withdrew now, how long could we expect Maliki to remain in power? posted 04/08/2008 at 09:15:24
Closing the Message Gap on Iraq: A Responsible Plan to End the War
Unfortunately, any plan to "end the war" will likely be trumped by a plan to "expand the war."
The ruling powers feel under increased pressure to do something about the sinking economy, or at least divert attention away from it. Basra has exposed the falsity of the claim that the surge is working.
There may believe there is only one card left to play to avoid a populist backlash.
Petreaus and Crocker will be meeting with Congress and beating the drums for war with Iran next week.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/05/wiran105.xml
The imminence of the war's end is all too exaggerated. posted 04/05/2008 at 17:52:55
The ruling powers feel under increased pressure to do something about the sinking economy, or at least divert attention away from it. Basra has exposed the falsity of the claim that the surge is working.
There may believe there is only one card left to play to avoid a populist backlash.
Petreaus and Crocker will be meeting with Congress and beating the drums for war with Iran next week.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/05/wiran105.xml
The imminence of the war's end is all too exaggerated. posted 04/05/2008 at 17:52:55
Popular Stories on HuffPost
On Tuesday night's "Colbert Report," Stephen Colbert had fun with...
From the AP: Democrat John Edwards endorsed former rival Barack Obama on Wednesday, a...
*** UPDATED BELOW *** President Bush has said repeatedly that he would not insert himself into the...
As the odds get longer and longer, the obvious question is: Why doesn't Hillary Clinton gracefully concede...
Utterly insane goings-on tonight on...
It's a pretty well known fact that most women - attractive women -...
NEW UPDATE BELOW As violence in Iraq continues -- clashes today left 11 dead and 19 injured -- President...
Just off the House floor today, the Crypt overheard House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers tell two...
Tonight, Keith Olbermann unleashed what may well have been his...
The Democratic Party has finally decided who's going to break it to Hillary that it's time...
George W. Bush is unworthy of the presidency. He is a disgrace to himself,...
You missed the point that rising food prices and shortages are caused by commodity speculators and agro-business monopolies. Add to that World bank policies that have nearly wiped out food production in places such as Haiti which used to be much more self-sufficient. Your apparent smug denial of rising world hunger and famine is, to say the least, deplorable.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8929 posted 05/17/2008 at 12:49:51