Bush's War Comes Home

Bush's war comes home

His dream of dominating every government institution in tatters, the US president is already plotting his revenge
Sidney Blumenthal
Thursday May 26, 2005
The Guardian

President Bush's drive for absolute power has momentarily stalled. In a single coup, he planned to take over all the institutions of government. By crushing the traditions of the Senate he would pack the courts, especially the supreme court, with lockstep ideologues. Sheer force would prevail. But just as his blitzkrieg reached the outskirts of his objective, he was struck by a mutiny. Within the span of 24 hours he lost control not only of the Senate but temporarily of the House of Representatives, which was supposed to be regimented by unquestioned loyalty. Now he prepares to launch a counterattack - against the dissident elements of his own party.

Bush's wonder weapon for total victory was a device called the "nuclear option". Once it was triggered, it would obliterate a 200-year-old tradition of the Senate. The threat of a Democratic filibuster in the Senate of his appointments to the federal bench would set the doomsday sequence in motion. The Senate Republican majority leader, Bill Frist of Tennessee, would call for a change in the rule, and a simple majority would vote to abolish the filibuster. Bush's nominees would sail through.

Unlike the House, the Senate was constructed by the constitutional framers as an unrepresentative body, with each state, regardless of population, allotted two senators. Currently, the Republicans have 55 senators who represent only 45% of the country. The Senate creates its own rules, and the filibuster can only be stopped by a super-majority of 60 votes. Historically, it was used by southern senators to block civil rights legislation. In the first two years of the Clinton presidency, the Republicans deployed 48 filibusters, more than in the entire previous history of the Senate, to make the new Democratic chief executive appear feckless. The strategy was instrumental in the Republican capture of the Congress in 1994. By depriving the Democrats of the filibuster, Bush intended to transform the Senate into his rubber stamp.

For many senators the fate of the filibuster was only superficially about an arcane rule change. And shameless hypocrisy was the least of the problem. (Frist, like most Republicans in favour of the nuclear option, had enthusiastically filibustered against Clinton's court nominees, 65 of which were blocked from 1995-2000.) If Bush succeeded he would have effectively removed the Senate's "advice and consent" on executive appointments, drastically reducing its power.

Over the weekend, two elders, Senator Robert Byrd, Democrat of West Virginia, and Senator John Warner, Republican of Virginia, pored over the federalist papers, written by the constitutional framers, to refresh their thinking about the inviolability of the Senate. On Monday, seven Republicans and seven Democrats signed a pact that preserved the filibuster under "extraordinary" circumstances and allowed several of Bush's appointments to be voted on.

The mutiny is broader than is apparent. More than the seven Republican signatories supported the accord, but they let the others take a public stance without revealing themselves. Bush's radicalism offended their conservatism. Eisenhower would be their preferred model for a Republican president. These Republican senators are the equivalent of the Republicans on the supreme court, Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony Kennedy, who are conservative but operate without ideology, and hold the balance against the aggressive rightwing justices.

The day after Bush was frustrated by Republicans in the Senate, 50 Republicans in the House deserted him on the issue of stem cell research. His policy limiting scientific work is a sop to the religious right that views the stem cell question as an extension of abortion. Debate in the House was marshalled by Republican majority leader Tom DeLay, who argued that Bush's policy must be supported because "Jesus of Nazareth" began life as an embryo. Bush promised to veto the stem cell bill passed with massive Republican defections, the irony of his opposition to the filibuster unmentioned.

The compromise pact in the Senate on the filibuster hardly postpones the coming storms. The White House intends to push judicial nominees that the Democrats are almost certain to filibuster. With the elimination of the nuclear option, the filibuster may also be used against Bush's supreme court appointments. Evangelical religious right leaders denounce Republican senators as sell-outs. One of the most influential, James Dobson, has cursed one of the silent compromise supporters, Senator Trent Lott, the former Republican majority leader from Mississippi, as a Judas, and Lott has called Dobson "quite unChristian".

Meanwhile, the conflict has focused attention on the Republican presidential succession of 2008, pitting Bill Frist - positioning himself as the darling of the right - against cantankerous John McCain, one of the Republican magnificent seven. Within the party, metal is scraping on metal. But the more the resistance, the more Bush presses forward. His unilateralism abroad has been brought home, with a vengeance, to his partisan wars.

In federalist paper number 69 (perhaps re-read by Byrd and Warner), Alexander Hamilton concludes his examination of the differences between the "qualified" powers of the US presidency and the "absolute" powers of the king of Great Britain: "The one has no particle of spiritual jurisdiction; the other is the supreme head and governor of the national church! What answer shall we give to those who would persuade us that things so unlike resemble each other? The same that ought to be given to those who tell us that a government, the whole power of which would be in the hands of the elective and periodical servants of the people, is an aristocracy, a monarchy, and a despotism."

Comment: It has been clear for years that the GOP was being overtaken by so-called Conservatives who had little in common ideologically with the historical meaning of the political term. Of course, they called themselves neo-conservatives to draw the distinction. The neocons are radicals out to change government, not to "conserve" it.

As the articles above describe, it looks as if the old guard of the party have had enough. The troops are revolting. The "moderate" Republicans and the Democrats may be able to form a centrist coalition against the crazies of the Bush Reich.

And then what?

If the fundamentalists who feel themselves on the verge of long-term power and the establishment of an American theocracy see their dream taken away, how will they react? Does their piety include a recognition that their political opponents have the right to rule?

And even if the fundamentalists and neocons retire gracefully, are there any members of this coalition who will look into the truth of 9/11? Are there any members of this coalition who will look at the role played by the US in the world? Or will they simply try and remove some of the sharp edges from America's image abroad? Start consulting more with their allies? Be a little more friendly at the UN? Give the appearance that things have changed, the radical crazies have been removed, the American democracy works, etc., etc., blah, blah, blah?

George H.W. Bush is himself among the supposed old-style, Ivy League, Eastern elite.
Technorati categories: News, Blog, Politics,Current Affairs, Media,

More Secrets

Senate Committee to Review Controversial Patriot Act Legislation in Secret; Draft Legislation Hidden from Public

WASHINGTON – The Senate Intelligence Committee announced today that it is rushing forward with a markup of Patriot Act reauthorization legislation Thursday, but that the session will be behind closed doors.

Some of the most extreme parts of the Patriot Act are set to sunset, or expire, at the end of this year unless Congress reauthorizes them. When lawmakers passed the Patriot Act just 45 days after 9/11, they included these sunsets because they knew that some provisions shouldn’t be made permanent. The committee will be reviewing legislation involving the sunsets and other key parts of the Patriot Act that impact civil liberties.

Members of Congress have until the end of the year to review and modify the Patriot Act, but some lawmakers hope to steamroll the entire process through Congress in the next few weeks. This closed-door markup is an indication that some in Congress are trying to rush through legislation, and keep the public in the dark.

The following can be attributed to Anthony D. Romero, ACLU Executive Director:

"One reason that people across the political spectrum are concerned about the Patriot Act is that so much of it is shrouded in secrecy. Many provisions are implemented secretly, and the government has kept secret key information on how it is being used. Now, lawmakers are trying to keep legislation to reauthorize the Patriot Act secret as well.

"Nearly 400 communities, included seven states, have passed resolutions calling on lawmakers to bring the Patriot Act in line with the Constitution. Instead of addressing these legitimate concerns, and reviewing the act in daylight, some in Congress would rather hide behind closed doors away from public scrutiny. The Patriot Act has been the subject of heated debates in recent months—in Congress, in the media, and in households around the country. There is no good reason for the mark-up and vote on this public law to be kept secret from the public."

Comment: Ask yourself why these proceedings are being kept secret. If the Patriot Act really was in the best interests of the American people this would be clear from the details of the act and it would enjoy wide support as a result. Clearly this is not the case, and the only way to get this piece of Draconian legislation passed is to circumvent the Democratic process and force it through, in much the same way as a dictatorship works.
Technorati categories: News, Blog, Politics,, Current Affairs, Media,

Heil Hitler!

Spy vs. Spy

By Bill Piper, AlterNet. Posted May 18, 2005.

Proposed legislation would compel people to spy on their family members and neighbors, forcing all Americans to become foot soldiers in the war on drugs.

Neighbors spying on neighbors? Mothers forced to turn in their sons or daughters? These are images straight out of George Orwell's 1984, or a remote totalitarian state. We don't associate them with the land of the free and the home of the brave, but that doesn't mean they couldn't happen here. A senior congressman, James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), is working quietly but efficiently to turn the entire United States population into informants--by force.

Sensenbrenner, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee Chairman, has introduced legislation that would essentially draft every American into the war on drugs. H.R. 1528, cynically named "Safe Access to Drug Treatment and Child Protection Act," would compel people to spy on their family members and neighbors, and even go undercover and wear a wire if needed. If a person resisted, he or she would face mandatory incarceration.

Here's how the "spy" section of the legislation works: If you "witness" certain drug offenses taking place or "learn" about them, you must report the offenses to law enforcement within 24 hours and provide "full assistance in the investigation, apprehension and prosecution" of the people involved. Failure to do so would be a crime punishable by a mandatory minimum two-year prison sentence, and a maximum sentence of 10 years.

Here are some examples of offenses you would have to report to police within 24 hours:

* You find out that your brother, who has children, recently bought a small amount of marijuana to share with his wife;
* You discover that your son gave his college roommate a marijuana joint;
* You learn that your daughter asked her boyfriend to find her some drugs, even though they're both in treatment.

In each of these cases you would have to report the relative to the police within 24 hours. Taking time to talk to your relative about treatment instead of calling the police immediately could land you in jail.

In addition to turning family member against family member, the legislation could also put many Americans in danger by forcing them to go undercover to gain evidence against strangers.

Even if the language that forces every American to become a de facto law enforcement agent is taken out, the bill would still impose draconian sentences on college students, mothers, people in drug treatment and others with substance abuse problems. If enacted, this bill will destroy lives, break up families, and waste millions of taxpayer dollars.

Despite growing opposition to mandatory minimum sentences from civil rights groups to U.S. Supreme Court Justices, the bill eliminates federal judges' ability to give sentences below the minimum recommended by federal sentencing guidelines. This creates a mandatory minimum sentence for all federal offenses, drug-related or not.

H.R. 1528 also establishes new draconian penalties for a variety of non-violent drug offenses, including:

* Five years for anyone who passes a marijuana joint at a party to someone who, at some point in his or her life, has been in drug treatment;
* Ten years for mothers with substance abuse problems who commit certain drug offenses at home (even if their children are not at home at the time);
* Five years for any person with substance abuse problems who begs a friend in drug treatment to find them some drugs.

These sentences would put non-violent drug offenders behind bars for as long as rapists, and they include none of the drug treatment touted in the bill's name.

At a time when everyone from the conservative American Enterprise Institute to the liberal Sentencing Project is slamming the war on drugs as an abject failure, Sensenbrenner is trying to escalate it, and to force all Americans to become its foot soldiers. Instead of enacting new mandatory minimums, federal policymakers should look toward the states. A growing number have reformed their drug sentencing laws, including Arizona, California, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, New Mexico, New York and Texas, and they have proved it is possible to both save money and improve public safety.

Simply put, there is no way H.R. 1528 can be fixed. The only policy proposal in recent years that comes close to being as totalitarian as this bill is Operations TIPS, the Ashcroft initiative that would have encouraged -- but not required -- citizens to spy on one another. Congress rightfully rejected that initiative and they should do the same with H.R. 1528. Big Brother has no business here in America.

Comment: While this legislation is reminisent of George Orwell's 1984, there is another more appropriate and real life analogy -Nazi Germany.
Technorati categories: News, Blog, Politics, Life, Current Affairs, Media,

Pick Your Cell Now!

House committee approves funding restoration of WWII Camps
Associated Press
Wed, May. 18, 2005

WASHINGTON - The House Resources Committee on Wednesday approved spending $38 million to restore and preserve internment camps used to hold Japanese-Americans during World War II.

The legislation by Rep. Bill Thomas, R-Bakersfield, was approved on a voice vote and now goes to the full House. It faces opposition from the Bush administration, which objects to the expenditures because the National Park Service faces a tight budget and maintenance backlogs at parks.

Thomas' bill would authorize spending for the 10 internment camps that were established throughout the country, including two in California, Tule Lake and Manzanar. The money could also go for other sites where people were assembled.

The internment happened after President Franklin Roosevelt signed an executive order in 1942 authorizing removal of over 120,000 Japanese-Americans and others of Japanese ancestry, including many living in California, to "assembly centers" and then to the camps.

The camps were closed in 1945 and 1946, and President Ronald Reagan and Congress formally apologized in 1988 for the treatment of the people held there.

"The clock is ticking," Thomas said in a statement. "As we move further in time from the period in which over 120,000 Japanese-Americans were forced from their homes to internment camps, we are increasingly losing not only the infrastructure of the camps, but more importantly, those people who were detained."

Thomas' support for the measure stems in part from a longtime friendship with former Democratic state legislator Fred Mori, past president of the Japanese American Citizens League based in San Francisco.

Comment: Coming at this particular time, as America descends ever further into a totalitarian regime, this report is more than a little unsettling in its symbolism.
Technorati categories: News, Blog, Politics, Life, Current Affairs, Media

Blame it on China

Toughening Its Line, U.S. Warns China About Currency
By EDMUND L. ANDREWS
The New York Times
May 18, 2005
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration warned China on Tuesday that its currency policies were distorting world trade, and it brandished the threat of retaliation against the country's exports if Chinese leaders did not change course in the next year.

In language far harsher than it has used before, the Treasury Department declared that China's fixed exchange rate between its currency, the yuan, and the dollar posed a risk to its economy and the economies of much of the rest of the world.

The administration stopped short of accusing China of outright currency manipulation, a move demanded by American manufacturers who complain that the Chinese have artificially undervalued their currency to make exports cheaper in the United States.

But the new language marked a change in relations, which the administration has until now handled with painstaking delicacy.

"Current Chinese policies," the Treasury Department said in a report to Congress on Tuesday, "are highly distortionary and pose a risk to China's economy, its trading partners and global economic growth." [...]

Comment: Yup, it's all China's fault! We are meant to believe that the outsourcing and offshoring committed by American companies is irrelevant. We are supposed to forget all about the massive US trade deficit and the sky-high personal debt levels in the US. Above all, we must never even consider that the Bush administration's war on terror has done nothing but harm the US economy and the average US consumer as mountains of cash are dumped onto the military and arms manufacturers, even as ordinary Americans can't find jobs, must pay exorbitant medical insurance premiums, and watch helplessly as their financial nest eggs are obliterated by psychopathic corporations and their psychopathic pals in government.
Technorati categories: News, Blog, Politics, Life, Current Affairs, Rants, Media,

Freedom of the Press....NOT!!

Where's All the News That's Fit to Print?
TvNewsLIES.org
May 2005
To the Editors of the NY Times:

On the front page of every issue of your publication you proclaim that we will find "All the News That's Fit to Print." Unfortunately you have not lived up to that proclamation for quite some time.

I have a serious question for you people at the NY Times. Where the hell have these headlines been? (See below). Why have we had to cherry pick our news? Why to we have to read buried stories or international publications in order to know what is going on in our own country?

Here are some of the news HEADLINES that have been fit to print, only to be printed by the independent journalist, the blogger and various international publications. While on occasion these blockbuster stories end up buried somewhere in your 5 pound Sunday edition, they should be splattered all over the headlines until the issues that face our nation get addressed.

* NOVAK HIDES WHITE HOUSE TREASON! - REFUSES TO EXPOSE TRAITOR WHO OUTED US AGENT!

* CHALABI PAID MILLIONS FOR LIES ABOUT SADDAM! CIA KNEW ABOUT QUESTIONABLE INTEL! ADMINISTRATION RUMSFELD'S SPECIAL GROUP MASSAGED INTEL!

* RICE AND POWELL: "SADDAM IS NO THREAT!" RICE AND POWELL: "SADDAM IS NO THREAT!" RICE AND POWELL WERE BOTH FILMED DECLARING THAT IRAQ WAS CONTAINED, WAS NOT A THREAT TO ITS NEIGHBORS AND DID NOT HAVE A FUNCTIONING CONVENTIONAL ARMY. DID THEY THEN OR ARE THEY LYING NOW?

* P.N.A.C. EXPOSE! A GROUP OF RADICALS COMPRISE THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION. WHO ARE THESE MEN? WHAT IS THEIR AGENDA? DID THEY SET UP THEIR "NEW PEARL HARBOR" ON SEPTEMBER 11TH?

* SADDAM STATUE TOPPLING STAGED! BUSH/PENTAGON STEP UP PROPAGANDA!

* DIEBOLD EXEC PROMISES TO DELIVER OHIO TO BUSH! CAN WE TRUST THE VOTE COUNTERS?

* JESSICA LYNCH STORY A FAKE! BUSH/PENTAGON CONTINUE PROPAGANDA!

* PHOTOS SHOW BOXES UNDER BUSH'S JACKETS! WAS BUSH GETTING HELP DURING THE DEBATE?

* CHENEY HOLDS HIGHJACK DRILLS ON MORNING OF 9/11! WHY WERE WE NOT TOLD!

* BUSH REFUSES TO INVESTIGATE CAUSES OF 9/11! IS HE HIDING SOMETHING

* BUSH FAMILY HAS CLOSE TIES TO BIN LADEN CLAN! JUST HOW CLOSE ARE THEY?

* DOZENS OF BIN LADEN KIN FLOWN OUT OF US AFTER 9/11 DESPITE BAN ON FLIGHTS! MICHAEL MOORE WAS RIGHT!

* TOWER 7 COLLAPSES WITHOUT BEING HIT! SILVERSTEIN ADMITS BUILDING WAS ‘PULLED' WHAT DID HE MEAN?

* PENTAGON ATTACK FILMED – WHITE HOUSE WON'T RELEASE TAPES!

* NO PLANE DEBRIS FOUND AT PENTAGON CRASH! OPENING TOO SMALL FOR AIRLINER WINGS! FILMS FROM SECURITY CAMERAS CONFISCATED!

* 9/11 CRIME SCENE EVIDENCE ELIMINATED! WHITE HOUSE VIOLATES LAW BY DESTROYING EVIDENCE!

* BUSH APPOINTS FELONS – IRAN CONTRA CRIMINALS FIND HOME IN BUSH WHITE HOUSE

* SMOKING GUN DOCUMENT! – BUSH FIXED INTEL TO FORCE WAR

* IT'S OFFICIAL: BUSH LIED! SMOKING GUN! DOC PROVES BUSH FIXED INTEL TO FORCE WAR ON IRAQ!

* NY TIMES APOLOGIZES TO RITTER AND BLIX & EL BARADI! YOU WERE RIGHT!

* 9/11 REPORT DOES NOT ADD UP – CONTAINS HUNDREDS OF DISTORTIONS & OMISSIONS!

* IT'S OFFICIAL: US MEDIA GUILTY BETRAY AMERICA - DEMOCRACY THREATENED BY GREEDY LIARS!

Our nation is in deep trouble. Our democracy is being decimated by the Bush administration. We are virtually living under a coup. Evidence exists that supports the allegation that the past 3 elections including the midterm elections were tampered with. There is overwhelming evidence that our President lied to Congress and to the world for the purpose of starting a war. The Patriot Act, or more accurately the Anti-Constitution act is in essence transforming this nation into a police state, and our news media, the NY Times included, have not only shirked their responsibility to preserve democracy, but have empowered the eradicators of our democracy.

All this while we have as our leaders a group of individuals who had planned this radical agenda years before 9/11/2001. They had openly stated that their agenda would not be accepted by the American people unless there was a "catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor!" These men were responsible for preventing such an event when one took place. As journalists, do you not see the need to look into this? Do you not understand that at the very least, if we take the official story as truth, the events of 9/11 were very preventable. VERY preventable! As journalists can you not identify motive when you see it?

Your failure to act as our guardian has resulted in the creation of a new breed of journalists. Some are called bloggers, others consolidate news from alternative sources. These people have had to assemble the truth from multiple sources because our nation no longer has a single reliable news organization that is either capable or willing to carry the torch of the journalist, our guardian of democracy. For over 5 years you have lied to the American public by intentionally leaving a false impression with them. While you have thrown us bits and pieces of information, we have had to rely for truth on the international journalist and the few dedicated independent journalists scattered around the globe.

The rest of the world should take notice. The American journalism cancer is now spreading to the UK. The BBC has just had their budget slashed by the very people whom they are supposed to hold to account. At the same time, the mind melting FOX News brainwash machine is moving in. Soon, there will be nobody to save us. Soon, only the lone blogger, who has been wrongfully maligned by the uninformed masses with the help of the deceptive and betraying news media, will be the only hope for our future.

And so, I am appealing to the editors of the NY Times to remember Watergate, Daniel Ellsberg, Edward R. Murrow, Walter Cronkite and the real journalists who protected the freedoms and democracy that you are so willingly helping to destroy.

You have the power. Look up the word journalism, reach back to the reasons you became journalists and start practicing journalism once again. Save the world. It's your responsibility.

Comment: While the US media is certainly filtering the news presented to Americans, each of us individually also has the power and the responsibility to become "journalists" and seek the truth behind world events. As the author mentions, many bloggers have picked up the ball and become a refreshing alternative to publications like the New York Times. While we at Signs of the Times really don't think it's very likely that we are going to save the world, we do think it is important to shine the light of truth upon a world that has fallen under the shadow of lies and deception.
Technorati categories: News, Blog, Politics, Life, Current Affairs, Media,

Just Kidding...

Ridge Says Bush Administration Faked Terror Threat Level
5/10/2005 11:21 PM
By Mimi Hall, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — The Bush administration periodically put the USA on high alert for terrorist attacks even though then-Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge argued there was only flimsy evidence to justify raising the threat level, Ridge now says.

Ridge, who resigned Feb. 1, said Tuesday that he often disagreed with administration officials who wanted to elevate the threat level to orange, or "high" risk of terrorist attack, but was overruled.

His comments at a Washington forum describe spirited debates over terrorist intelligence and provide rare insight into the inner workings of the nation's homeland security apparatus.

Ridge said he wanted to "debunk the myth" that his agency was responsible for repeatedly raising the alert under a color-coded system he unveiled in 2002.

Comment: Ok. So if Ridge and his agency i.e. Homeland (In)Security were not responsible for the decision to announce the unfounded terror alerts, then who was?

"More often than not we were the least inclined to raise it," Ridge told reporters. "Sometimes we disagreed with the intelligence assessment. Sometimes we thought even if the intelligence was good, you don't necessarily put the country on (alert). ... There were times when some people were really aggressive about raising it, and we said, 'For that?' "

Comment: Sound like he is implicating the "intelligence community", but...

The level is raised if a majority on the President's Homeland Security Advisory Council favors it and President Bush concurs. Among those on the council with Ridge were Attorney General John Ashcroft, FBI chief Robert Mueller, CIA director George Tenet, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Colin Powell.

Comment: So other than the head of the CIA and FBI, Rummy, Bush, Powell and Ashcroft were all involved in the decision to 'up' the fear factor. But, other than scaring he bejesus out of (or perhaps into) the citizenry in order to ensure their continuned compliance, what other reasons might Bush and Co have for putting the nation on "alert"?..

The threat level was last raised on a nationwide scale in December 2003, to orange from yellow — or "elevated" risk — where the alert level is now. In most cases, Ridge said Homeland Security officials didn't want to raise the level because they knew local governments and businesses would have to spend money putting temporary security upgrades in place.

Comment: Ah yes! How could we forget! Money of course!

Reported in Signs of the Times

Blog, Politics, Life, , Current Affairs, Media,

Four Dead in Ohio

Vigil Held In Honor Of KSU May 4 Shootings

A silent 12-hour candlelight vigil to remember the Kent State tragedy is being held this morning, NewsChannel5 reported.

Thirty-four years ago, four students were shot and killed by the National Guard at the KSU campus. They were protesting the Vietnam war.

The memorial started Monday night to honor the four students killed and nine others injured May 4, 1970.

The May 4th Task Force, students who are putting the memorial together, said this year’s theme is the Patriot Act.

The kick off to this year’s remembrance began last night. At 11 p.m., students marched with candles to the site where the students were shot.

At noon, students will detail what led up to the shooting along with ringing the victory bell at 12:24 p.m. 15 times in honor of those who lost their lives in Kent State and Jackson State that year.

WEWS reported many students believe this year’s memorial is extra special because of the war on terror and the loss of troops in Iraq. - newsnet5.com

Tin soldiers and Nixon coming,
We’re finally on our own.
This summer I hear the drumming,
Four dead in Ohio.

Gotta get down to it
Soldiers are gunning us down
Should have been done long ago.
What if you knew her
And found her dead on the ground
How can you run when you know?

Gotta get down to it
Soldiers are gunning us down
Should have been done long ago.
What if you knew her
And found her dead on the ground
How can you run when you know?

Tin soldiers and Nixon coming,
We’re finally on our own.
This summer I hear the drumming,
Four dead in Ohio.

- Neil Young
Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young

Editor’s note: There is credible evidence that there was a pre-existing government plan for the National Guard to open fire on the students as a desperate step to put an end to the student movement against the war in Viet Nam. But many believe the public hearings held, were a whitewash and coverup. No person was ever convicted of committing these state-executions at Kent State on May 4, 1970. The U.S. government may be gearing up to reinstate the draft again due to its pending defeat in Iraq and its failure to recruit sufficient numbers of young people into its “volunteer army”. Will we see repeats of the Kent State killings by the government as the “war on terrorism” mirrors the war in Viet Nam? We are already seeing them in the “volunteer army”, aren’t we? There is one lesson we can learn from the Kent State killings and every war the U.S. government has conducted: Noone should have any lingering question about what the U.S. government is capable of doing to its own people. - Les Blough, Editor
————————————————————-

Comment: Vietnam, Kent State, September 11, 2001, Iraq. Killing Americans comes easy to those in power. Although these deaths are always either blamed on someone else or justified because everyone needs to make sacrifices to stay free, the truth is that we are all nothing but cannon fodder for the rulers and an energy source for their controllers. We are the means to their ends.

We can only continue to be fooled as long as we buy into their ends, the values that our materialist society considers so highly while clutching their Bibles and singing the praises of the Lord. As long as we believe the lie that anyone in America can succeed as long as she or he works hard, that there is an equal opportunity for the daughter of a poor Black family in Mississippi as there is for the son of a Bush, or that even if we do not become a celebrity, we are better than everyone else because, at least, we are American, the bullets will remain in the rifles and those rifles will remain pointed at us.

There is no democracy in the United States. There is no real participation of the citizen in the political process. By and large, most people don’t care. They elect a congressman or a president to take care of business for a few years and then either re-elect him or change horses. Decisions are taken behind closed doors, and when Bush makes a public appearance to discuss his policies, he presents his case in front of hand-picked zombies who take his smirk for a show of concern and his psychopathic inability to express empathy as proof that he is “one of us”. Bush is president because of two rigged elections not because he was elected.

Those who attempt to stand up to this wall of contempt for individual rights and the principles upon which their country was founded are hustled out of the audience, thrown into pens for “free speech”, and ridiculed with spiteful glee by right-wing pundits on the airwaves. They are denounced as un-American and suggestions are made that they either be thrown into jail or be killed. Freedom of speech means the freedom to agree with the war president, the former AWOL National Guardsman, now commander-in-chief, with a thing for uniforms and maybe even the men in them or out of them.

Can enough Americans wake up to the truth of what is happening in their country to change the course? We doubt it. Even if they wake up, the fanatics are still in power and a few more dead protestors aren’t going to make them lose any sleep. The alphabet soup agencies are likely scouring the Internet for voices of dissent and compiling the lists of those to be hauled in during the first sweep, and the second, and the third…. The Democrats are as corrupt as the Republicans. What choice do Americans have on the political landscape?

A future crisis provoked by an economic crash or some un-dreamed of natural disaster (by those who aren’t following very closely the news about meteor sightings, or volcano and earthquake threat) could shift the political and natural landscape in the blink of an eye. However, the powers that be are very likely fully aware of the possibility of such dangers and are probably making their plans as you read these lines.

The next time around, four dead in Ohio may seem like nothing.

Zombie

Very interesting Editorial on the Signs of the Times:

Zombie or not Zombie, that is the question Signs of the Times Editorial

In an essay entitled "Eyes wide shut?" published in the April 30, 2005 issue of The New Scientist, Patricia Churchland tackles the ever-thorny problem of consciousness. In brief, she argues that neuroscience will provide the key to understanding consciousness as it elaborates four conditions:

1. We understand how macro events emerge from the properties and organisations of the micro events;
2. novel phenomena can be predicted;
3. the system can be manipulated;
4. and it is clear at what level of brain organisation the phenomenon resides.

In the coded language of neuroscience, the term "macro events" refers to consciousness, which, according to Churchland and many, many others, "emerges" from the "properties and organisations of the micro events, that is, the workings of the brain". In other words, consciousness emerges from evolution when the appropriate level of complexity is reached in the nervous system. It is neither the cause, the foundation, nor the prime mover of that evolution.

Churchland admits that "science is moving forward on the problem, but has not yet nailed down the answers - and no one really knows what the answers will look like." She admits, as well, that "neuroscience is a very young science, still in search of its own exoskeleton - the fundamental principles that explain how nervous systems work. Although an enormous amount is known about the structure and function of individual neurons, how macro effects emerge from populations of neurons remains poorly understood."

Fine so far. She sets out her ideas and her belief that consciousness will ultimately be explained through work on neuroscience: "a theory of consciousness will co-evolve with an understanding of the fundamentals of brain function."

But as she admits, we aren't there yet, so she cannot know this to be the case. It is, one might suggest, an intuition.

The trouble is that Ms Churchland spends a large portion of her essay criticising intuition in the domain of consciousness research, as long as these intuitions do not agree with her own. One in particular receives a severe dose of ridicule:

Among these intuitions is the idea that there could be a zombie like me in all respects - all, save that it lacks qualia. A lack of qualia means it doesn't have the "experience" of redness when it sees a London bus, but like me would say: "Look! There is a red London bus." Incredibly (I'm not making this up) zombie-me would have exactly the same conversations about conscious experience that I do. For example, we both say: "When I dream, I am aware of actions, such as flying, but not aware of how bizarre those actions are." The difference is that zombie-me has neither experiences nor qualia to talk about.

Could there be such a zombie? "Perhaps not," says the purveyor of zombies. "It is a thought-experiment-zombie." Fine. But so what? "Well, the mere imagining of such a thing entails that consciousness cannot be a property of the brain..." Good grief. As a colleague once muttered in despair, this argument is not even wrong.

Dennett is right about most of the philosophically pampered intuitions, especially those bravely predicting that "science can never, ever explain consciousness". These intuitions and the arguments they spawn have been repeatedly exposed as confusions, fallacies, circularities, failures of imagination, arguments from ignorance and just plain bunk.

Ouch! Unfortunately, Ms Churchland's belief that the answers will come from neuroscience is as much an intuition as her zombie example. Moreover, there is an awful lot of evidence that supports the existence of such zombies. It has been gathered through observation, it is repeatable, and it allows one to make predictions. This evidence would also be dismissed without a thought by Ms Churchland because it is not "scientific" according to her unfortunately limited idea of what constitutes, or could constitute, science.

Could her limited view of science be related to the question of the existence of zombies?

First, let us do a thought experiment. Imagine a philosopher and neuroscientist who is herself a zombie. Her standards of what constitutes experience and an inner life would be limited to zombie experiences. When a non-zombie described his or her experiences to her, she would interpret them according to her own experiences. Those aspects that were foreign to her would either be reduced to fit her own experiences or would be rejected as impossible.

Isn't this what we see over and over again in the split between the materialists and the idealists in philosophy, in the split between science and mysticism, in the split between those who believe that there is nothing after death and those who have a deep conviction that there is? One would think that, if we really are all just 'one race', and after thousands of years of argument from both sides, the question would be resolved one way or another. Can we take the lack of resolution as evidence that the question goes to the heart of human experience?

Interestingly, many of those who would argue there is something more to consciousness than can be explained by neuroscience have the conviction that a scientific answer could be found if science was to open up its horizons, while those who hold the opposing view completely dismiss the need for science to incorporate lessons from other domains. This suggests to us that the experience or consciousness of the hard-science proponents is more restricted than that of those who are more open. The hard-science proponents' experience might be a subset of the experience of the others. This implies that while the "zombie" scientists could never understand the other group, the other group could understand the limits of the zombies.

The distinction between zombies and others is the distinction that we draw between 'organic portals' and 'potentially souled individuals'. What is missing from the scientific and philosophical debate in academia is the understanding that the difference in experience between the two types of people has to do with their ability to perceive what the esoteric Tradition calls the 'A' and 'B' influences, not their different experiences of the colour red. The zombies, or 'organic portals', are only equipped to perceive the 'A' influences. These are the trappings of the material world, the influences that are related to our basic desires for sex, food, and security. Grand and elaborate scientific and philosophical theories can be formulated based only upon those influences. These theories can be complex and accurately describe the world from the point of view of the 'A' influences, but they are missing a part of the world that the organic portal does not experience and therefore does not even recognise is missing. For them, these theories do take in all the available data because the rest of the data is not available to them because the data falls outside of their range of perceptions.

Unfortunately, as we have discussed elsewhere, the very capacities that form the basis for a belief in the afterlife or in the reality of there being "something more" to life can often be hindrances in getting ahead in our world. In this case, those who hold the reigns of power and decision-making, including within the sciences, would tend to be those of one persuasion, the 'zombie' or 'organic portal' persuasion. Their standards would be the standards of society, and therefore those who have a larger experience would be continually forced to reduce their knowledge to conform to the standards of those who set the rules, or who hand out the science grants.

And that is, in fact, what we see around us. Scientists who wish to investigate data that fall outside of the realm of experience of the zombie, or organic portal, are ridiculed, their grants are denied, and if they push hard enough, their careers can be ruined. The dominant scientific paradigm is as entrenched as the belief of Bush's supporters that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and that he was involved in 9/11.

Churchland ends her essay with the following:

But the unglamorous truth is that science will come to understand the components of consciousness in pretty much the same way it has come to understand the nature of life.

And that is precisely what worries us.

In the following round up of recent news with commentary, notice your reaction to the various stories and when you find yourself asking the question: "how can a section of humanity engage so apparently carelessly in such inhuman acts?", realise that this question goes to the very heart of the reality of human life on earth and leads us to perhaps the "secret of secrets" that has been the sole purview of certain secret societies and groups over the millennia.

(continue reading on site)

Technorati categories: News, Blog, Politics, Life, Current Affairs, Media, Religion, Science

Bushzarro Google: the Quality of Omission and Lies

Considering Google’s plan “to build a database that will compare the track record and credibility of all news sources around the world, and adjust the ranking of any search results accordingly” (see Google To Implement Bias Towards Mainstream News), I am reminded of George Creel.

Creel ran the Committee on Public Information (CPI), a warmongering propaganda outfit set up by president Wilson on April 13, 1917. “CPI recruited heavily from business, media, academia, and the art world,” writes Propaganda Critic. “Like modern reporters who participate in Pentagon press pools, journalists grudgingly complied with the [CPI’s]official guidelines in order to stay connected to the information loop. Radical newspapers, such as the socialist Appeal to Reason, were almost completely extinguished by wartime limitations on dissent.”

Of course, nowadays, there is no CPI telling newspapers and web sites what they will publish or post—and there does not need to be because censorship (or propaganda by omission) is a built-in feature of the corporate media and information services, as Google demonstrates. Note Google’s assertion that it is simply adjusting the “credibility” of news sources, as if the New York Times and the Washington Post, two “mainstream” corporate newspapers guilty of telling lies about Saddam Hussein’s illusory weapons of mass destruction and thus cheerleading Bush’s illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq, are more “credible” than other news sources that told the truth about what Bush and his clique of warmongering Strausscons were up to, indisputable facts borne out after the fact (and generally ignored by the corporate media).

In short, after Google installs its “quality” control algorithm, a search of the words “Fallujah” and “war crimes” will return stories by the corporate media (who have basically ignored the war crimes in Fallujah) and sort those stories at the top of the list while stories by Francis A. Boyle posted in Counterpunch or Christopher Bollyn of the American Free Press will sorted at the distant end of a list of 400,000 results.

In order to use Google effectively in the future, it may be necessary to click on the page numbers at the bottom of the page until you reach the end of the list. Remember, in Bushzarro world, everything is backwards, up is down, night is day, mass murder is democracy, etc. Bushzarro Google, as a large corporate leviathan with a strangle hold on the “search market,” will naturally follow these dynamics. In order to find the truth, more work will be required.

Nobody said it would be a rose garden.
Technorati categories: News, Blog, Politics, Life, Current Affairs, Media,

Satellite Image of Fallujah

P I C T U R E O F T H E D A Y

Click here to see Image

From A Reader: I'm trying one more time to send you the satellite image of Fallujah that I got on 03, December, 2003. As you know, the U.S. bombing of the city continued for another 2 or 3 weeks after that, but no additional aerial or satellite images were allowed to escape.
This image was in the BBC's earliest morning web news, which I receive at precisely 1:05 a.m. each and every morning. (The Brits do love to be punctual...) I was following the tiny drops of news from Fallujah very closely, and I went to the BBC site at once when I saw the article's subtitle "Satellite image shows extensive damage to Fallujah as U.S. continues battle with insurgents."

BBC news feature links expire after 30 days, normally, but this one was gone after 30 minutes. An article about Fallujah showing the effects of U.S. bombing "in areas controlled by insurgents" was there instead, and NO image was shown. It got yanked off just that fast.
THE WHOLE WORLD NEEDS TO SEE THIS IMAGE: IT MAY WELL BE A "SMOKING GUN" FOR PRESSING WAR CRIMES CHARGES AGAINST BUSH & CO., as is the attempted assassination of Giuliana Sgrena and all of her companions.
Technorati categories: News, Blog, Politics, Life, Current Affairs, Media,

Signs of the Times

Three Killed, Seven Injured in Two Cairo Attacks
By Tom Perry and Edmund Blair
Sat Apr 30, 2005 02:01 PM ET

CAIRO (Reuters) - A bomber and two veiled women attacked tourists in separate incidents in Cairo on Saturday, targeting people near a popular museum and a bus in the south of the city, official sources said.

An Egyptian man, probably the bomber, and the two women were killed, they said. Seven people were injured near the Egyptian museum, a key tourist attraction for its pharaonic treasures, in what Cairo's security chief said was a suicide attack.

Those injured in the bombing were three Egyptians, an Israeli couple aged 60 and 55, an Italian man aged 26, and a Swedish man aged 28, the Interior Ministry said.

In the bus attack -- the first in living memory by women in Egypt -- the two veiled women opened fire at the back window of a tourist coach, the Interior Ministry said. No one in the bus was hit but shattered glass from a windshield lay on the road.

Two bombings in the last seven months have had little effect on Egypt's tourism industry, which brought in $6.6 billion in 2004, a record year with more than eight million tourists, but economists say a string of attacks could hit Egypt hard.

Health Minister Mohamed Awad Tag el-Din said the injured had superficial wounds caused by nails which witnesses said were in the bomb. He said most of the wounded were in good condition, except for the Swede, whose wounds were "moderate."

"They are in stable condition in hospital," added Tourism Minister Ahmed el-Maghrabi.

The two veiled woman, identified by the Interior Ministry as the bomber's sister Negat Yousri and his girlfriend Iman Ibrahim Khamees, attacked on the Salah Salem highway, one of the main arteries through the south of the city.

The ministry said Negat committed suicide. Khamees died in hospital of her wounds but it was not clear who shot her.

It said the man who blew himself up was Ihab Yousri Yassin, a fugitive member of the group which planned an April 7 bombing which killed three tourists in a Cairo bazaar.

It said he had jumped from the bridge into the square below, where he detonated the bomb. "They found his papers, and the identity card of the perpetrator of the Azhar (bazaar) incident," the ministry said in a statement.

Police have arrested in the last few hours the two other fugitive members of the group, named as Ashraf Said Youssef and Gamal Ahmed Abdel-Aal, the ministry added.

Other security sources said someone had thrown a bomb from a bridge which passes behind the museum.

Two groups -- the Mujahideen of Egypt and the Martyr Abdullah Azzam Brigades -- said on an Islamist Web site that their people carried out the attacks. It was not possible to verify their authenticity and some of the details of their claims did not appear to match witness accounts.

Behind the museum, the body of the dead man lay on its back in a pool of blood under the bridge. His head was blown apart but the rest of his body was apparently intact. He was wearing a light blue shirt and dark trousers, a Reuters journalist said.

Police gathered together pieces of his head and laid a newspaper on the street to soak up the blood.

At the scene of the shooting attack in south Cairo, witnesses saw shattered glass, blood on the street, newspaper to soak it up, a pistol and what appeared to be a pair of black gloves of the type worn by veiled women.

The April 7 bombing was the most serious in the Nile Valley since 1997. But in October last year, a group led by a Palestinian attacked Red Sea resorts frequented by Israelis, killing 34 people.

Diaa Rashwan, an analyst of violent Islamist groups, said: "It seems like we are talking about a small group of family and friends carrying out these attacks ... These people have no real organization. They are motivated by anger. It's difficult for the security people to find out much about them."

Comment: It's difficult for Egyptian security to find out much about these organisations because, in all likelihood, they do not exist as they are portrayed. Putin's recent visit to Egypt and Israel has done much to legitimise the Palestinian cause and, as a result, dealt a blow to Israel and the US' attempts to demonise all Arabs as terrorists in the mind of the world public. Israel has a track record of staging phony Islamic terror attacks at such moments. Egyptian police would therefore be much better advised to look towards Israel for the culprits.

Interestingly, both of the two previous "Islamic terrorist" attacks in Egypt that are mentioned in the above report were probably carried out by by Israeli agents. As we wrote at the time of the Sinai bombing last October:

Since the concept of government deception is a hot topic these days, we would like to highlight a very pertinent recent event. On Thursday night, 3 car bombs exploded at an Egyptian Red Sea resort, less than a mile from the heavily guarded Israeli border. The attack occurred in the same week that Israel was being mildly chastised (for that is the extent of any rapprochement of Israeli actions these days) by Western governments for its child killing spree in Gaza. Coincidence? Clearly not. Not surprisingly, Israel and the US blamed the attacks on the mythical "al-Qaeda"
Technorati categories: News, Blog, Politics, Life, Current Affairs,Media,