Sunday, December 31, 2006
3,000th DEATH CONFIRMED IN BAGHDAD
BAGHDAD--The 3,000th American soldier was slain today in the capitol city, said to be in a roadside attack. The tally estimate originates with the AP. This doesn't include the 20,000+ other casualties who are permanently-handicapped or traumatized by their wounds. A large-percentage have lost limbs. This is ending.
HOW IS SENATOR TIM JOHNSON DOING?
WASHINGTON--Senator Tim Johnson is said to be recovering, and will continue to be under-sedation (not like Laura Bush and the President, silly) to allow him to rest. The AP reports he is responsive to his wife, but has yet to speak. Sketchy, eh? Here's to his full-recovery, and a happier new year. There appear to be no real updates after December 29th. A Happy New Year to all, time for a drinkie!
AP:
http://www.ktiv.com/News/index.php?ID=8477
AP:
http://www.ktiv.com/News/index.php?ID=8477
The Dead Zone (1983) review
Greg Stillson: "The missiles are flying. Hallelujah, Hallelujah!"
1983 was still a pretty good year for horror and genre fans, and a bad one for ordinary people. Director David Cronenberg did this film back-to-back with his other political film, Videodrome, and they both compliment each other in their statements on the rightist and authoritarian threat to liberty in North America.
The Reagan revolution's effects were being felt by Latin Americans, the urban poor, small farmers, minorities, women, deinstitutionalized inmates of state asylums, the working-class, and the Cold War was heating-up again with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. As the GOP were in-power, the rich got much richer. However, the corruption of the Reagan years has been handily eclipsed by the administration of George W. Bush.
Reagan was never truly popular, but managed to sneak into office due to voter apathy. The rest is bunting and chest-beating by his backers, and he was elected by a slim majority of eligible voters. The arms race (reignited by Carter) was being accelerated by Reagan to a frightening degree, and we were funding death squads in El Salvador, Guatemala, Asia, Africa, and Nicaragua. Those who noticed the insanity were watching the skies again, just as they did during the Cuban Missile Crisis (which was the fault of the GOP and Kennedy, making Sheen a proper choice). Things were pretty grim, and there was a recession. In this context, The Dead Zone did well at the box-office, and is still remembered fondly as one of the best King movies.
Politician Greg Stillson (Martin Sheen) is a progressive, seemingly "Populist" politician, but in-appearance only. In reality, Stillson is a ruthless criminal who uses intimidation, blackmail, and any means he can use to achieve power. This is a very grim portrait of North American politics, and at a time when Reaganism was sweeping-through the culture; all of it still resonates strongly today. We may never know how close America has brushed-up with a "Stillson scenario," though Boam and Cronenberg seem to be suggesting that this is commonplace.
King's and Boam's allusions to Washington Irving and Edgar Allan Poe are powerful and fitting for such a fateful and psychological tale, which gives the film a wider sense of scope. It has something important to say about North American culture that defies any simple explanations--I could write an entire book on this film, and still be left with more to explain, it is that rich a tale. Above everything, however, it is a tale of loss and of what could have been. Americans know the tragedy of this all too well.
Jeffrey Boam and David Cronenberg took Stephen King's "Rip Van Winkle" retelling, and made it much-much more--a parable of 1983, but also of our common era. Like most good-literature, nothing-is-as-it-seems in the "Dead Zone", but entering into this is the character Johnny (played beautifully by Christopher Walken). Without any supernatural-explanations, Cronenberg gives us a character who is somehow able to penetrate the deceptions in life and what is hidden in the lives of the people he encounters (and touches). Basically, Johnny is an instrument of fate. His role is to stop a local murderer, as well as to stop Greg Stillson from attaining power, and here, all of the authors suggest that destiny and fate limit the structure of our lives. It has been remarked (apocryphally, by Steven Spielberg, a director who fears Cronenberg's depth) that the film's storyline supports the notion of assassination--it absolutely does, and unapolegetically. It also posits--like King's book--that not all people who appear insane or eccentric are wrong in their different take on reality.
For many Americans--and one can suppose, Canadians too--someone like Stillson reaching the pillars of power and authority is impossible, unthinkable. It shouldn't seem "impossible" after George W. Bush, a phony Populist if there ever was one. His resemblance to the character Greg Stillson is eerie, and he is not alone. Boam, King and Cronenberg insisted in 1983 that "this is possible", and that only an ordinary man, poised by providence, can affect the course of this path to destruction. Will the evil end entirely? Cronenberg and Boam don't answer this, but Stillson's and Johnny's journeys and destinies have. This is because they were intertwined. Evil and destruction never truly end, and neither does the resistance to it.
This movie was a "hire" job for David Cronenberg, and yet it so resembles the political and social-implications of all of his work from his early period, a strange fact. Often, the "adversaries" in his films are faceless, or murky, only showing themselves at the right moment to strike. His adversaries are often social forces, and trends, often disembodied and invisible. The 1980s were simply an ugly and vulgar era, with a lot of submerged politics--like Iran-Contra, where even drug-running was alleged in funding Reagan allies in Nicauragua. Reagan said, "We don't negotiate with terrorists," and did just-that! Today, it is safe-to-assume that much-worse is being done in our names, and only needs uncovering by the bravest amongst-us. Johnny shows that there is a price in this ability; he dies-a-piece with every revelation he is privy to, and he's almost like a missionary or a Civil Rights worker, or a saint.
Most of the philosophical arguments and implications are dealt-with in the dialog between Johnny and his rehabilitation counselor (Herbert Lom, in one of his greatest performances). What would you do if you knew who the next Hitler was, and could do something about it? Lom has the perfect answer: "I am a doctor...I love people...but, I would have to kill the son-of-a-bitch." The politics of the film are very clear, but so are the consequences of the sacrifice.This is why so few people ever "rise-to-the-occasion" to fight an encroaching evil. It is simply easier not to. Even nonviolence is basically a cop-out when you're facing an enemy who proves we're in a universe without morality. Johnny Smith is a messianic figure, and a revolutionary one who must eschew an ordinary life (this is where some of the "loss" figures-in).
The subtext of covert political activity is always there, waiting to be discovered, and fought, by ordinary people. And so, the horror of this film is a political horror, our political nightmare. It is the revelation that flies-in-the-face of homespun, North American values of fair-play and hard work--that many of those who wish to govern us do not wish us well, but quite-the-opposite: they wish us death, ultimately, the logical conclusion of the will to power.
This was a post-Watergate lesson we have conveniently forgotten, but are now reawakening to, and that is the horror we all face. Cronenberg made a classic that will continue to affect caring people profoundly, it speaks-to our hopes and our fears. The Dead Zone also speaks to our regrets in this vale-of-tears, an oddly "Puritan" message, but it fits the story's locale. The late Michael Kamen's score is both moving and warm, and the film would be very cold indeed without it. The TV series is worthless. It has nothing to say.
HAPPY NEW YEAR (WITH SOME PREDICTIONS)
EARTH--Same shit, different year, I know. But there are going to be changes, oh yes. Beginning January 4th, the new Democratic majority will begin "draining the swamp." This means investigations and a rollback of key-parts of the Bush administration's agenda. Virtually everything he's "accomplished" basically. In an AP-AOL poll, it's said that a majority of Americans think wars with Iran and North Korea won't occur during 2007. This is foolhardy, though it's going to be one incredible-trick if the neocons (aka " the Legion of Doom", headed by Lex Luthor) can pull-it-off. Somehow, I think Israel will hit Iran, primarily based on their own security concerns--but prodded by the Bush administration, lest you're silly enough to think the tail wags-the-dog. Have a better year, I know I will. Somehow, some way, we survived another year without annihilating-ourselves. Enjoy.
Predictions:
--Congressional investigations galore of the Bush administration will begin.
--A showdown with the Bush administration and Congress, and the public over illegal surveillance. The Bush administration will lose this battle resoundingly.
--Hillary Clinton will withdraw her bid for the White House (wise move).
--The Libby trial will result in a conviction.
--Guantanamo Bay's detention facilities will be closed.
--A new 9/11 Commission will be convened by the Democratic majority. The GOP and the White House will fight this, and lose.
--A massive escalation in violence in Iraq that result in a fixed-timetable for withdrawal. Bush will fight this, but Congress will defund the war in a bipartisan move.
--Aid to Katrina victims will finally begin reaching-them as emergency provisions of bills introduced by Democrats. President Bush will fight this, and lose.
--Vice President Dick Cheney and Karl Rove will resign before May of 2007, accelerating the disintegration of the Bush administration.
--The CIA will attempt an assassination on Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. The attempt will fail.
--The price of gas will top $3 dollars-a-gallon USD in the United States on-average.
--There will be a bipartisan showdown with the Bush administration over Iraq in January. President Bush will veto all legislation attempting to end the war, and will fail in-doing-so. He will have fewer-and-fewer press conferences, becoming isolated.
--It will be revealed that a constellation of state and private security organizations are behind the Litvinenko-hit. The world public will come to understand several-nations were involved.
Iraq will begin to be carved-up:
--Iran will intervene into Iraq.
--In-reaction, Saudi Arabia will intervene into Iraq.
--Turkey will invade the Kurdish sectors, but will meet stiff-resistance.
This will cause internal instability within Turkey itself.
--Jordan will send troops into Iraq.
--Lebanon will begin a new civil war, with some Lebanese joining the fight in Iraq.
And...
--In-reaction to all this, the Taliban will retake most of Afghanistan.
--The UK will begin withdrawing her troops from Afghanistan and
Iraq by mid-year.
--Russia will mobilize her troops along her borders with the Caspian sea, Kazakhstan and Georgia over security concerns. A number of break-away Republics will increase aid to respective factions in Iraq.
--Revolts in the Northern provinces of China will continue, as will fighting in Chechnya.
--The potential for a Middle Eastern conflagration will increase
the longer American troops are there...
Predictions:
--Congressional investigations galore of the Bush administration will begin.
--A showdown with the Bush administration and Congress, and the public over illegal surveillance. The Bush administration will lose this battle resoundingly.
--Hillary Clinton will withdraw her bid for the White House (wise move).
--The Libby trial will result in a conviction.
--Guantanamo Bay's detention facilities will be closed.
--A new 9/11 Commission will be convened by the Democratic majority. The GOP and the White House will fight this, and lose.
--A massive escalation in violence in Iraq that result in a fixed-timetable for withdrawal. Bush will fight this, but Congress will defund the war in a bipartisan move.
--Aid to Katrina victims will finally begin reaching-them as emergency provisions of bills introduced by Democrats. President Bush will fight this, and lose.
--Vice President Dick Cheney and Karl Rove will resign before May of 2007, accelerating the disintegration of the Bush administration.
--The CIA will attempt an assassination on Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. The attempt will fail.
--The price of gas will top $3 dollars-a-gallon USD in the United States on-average.
--There will be a bipartisan showdown with the Bush administration over Iraq in January. President Bush will veto all legislation attempting to end the war, and will fail in-doing-so. He will have fewer-and-fewer press conferences, becoming isolated.
--It will be revealed that a constellation of state and private security organizations are behind the Litvinenko-hit. The world public will come to understand several-nations were involved.
Iraq will begin to be carved-up:
--Iran will intervene into Iraq.
--In-reaction, Saudi Arabia will intervene into Iraq.
--Turkey will invade the Kurdish sectors, but will meet stiff-resistance.
This will cause internal instability within Turkey itself.
--Jordan will send troops into Iraq.
--Lebanon will begin a new civil war, with some Lebanese joining the fight in Iraq.
And...
--In-reaction to all this, the Taliban will retake most of Afghanistan.
--The UK will begin withdrawing her troops from Afghanistan and
Iraq by mid-year.
--Russia will mobilize her troops along her borders with the Caspian sea, Kazakhstan and Georgia over security concerns. A number of break-away Republics will increase aid to respective factions in Iraq.
--Revolts in the Northern provinces of China will continue, as will fighting in Chechnya.
--The potential for a Middle Eastern conflagration will increase
the longer American troops are there...
Saturday, December 30, 2006
That Time Again: What's on the Old CD-Player?
1. Eurythmics-Sweet Dreams (Are Made of This) (1983: I really love the arrangements on this album, and Annie Lennox's voice is still incredible. Proof that white people have soul too.)
2. The Kinks--Greatest Hits (1964-1966, the Pye singles: While some of these are their best-songs, the Kinks had tons-more later. Ray and Dave Davies have plenty to be proud-of, just not the fist-fights onstage.)
3. David Lynch and John Neff--BlueBob (2001: Some of the songs on here are a little hokey, but Lynch and Neff play all the drums, keyboards, electronics, guitars and processing. Most of BlueBob is very unsettling, but I like music that scares me when the mood strikes. Some tracks were used as cues in Lynch's films. Very ambient in some places, unique.)
4. Tom Waits-Swordfishtrombones (1983: My step-father gave me a copy of this on-cassette in 1985--I hated it at first, but it grew on me. Nobody I knew had any idea who he was, and hated it when I played it for them. In a short-time, I began to love it, and have ever-since. This was the first LP Waits did with his new-direction into the history of American music. It's definitely a classic.)
5. Klaus Nomi-Klaus Nomi (1981: I remember this guy from the early-80s, and then I forgot about him for a long-time. Recently, a documentary called "The Nomi Song" reminded me of him, and how excellent his voice was! And man, was he weird. Nomi was one of the first celebrities to die of AIDS. This is his best of two-LPs. "The Cold Song" and "Keys of Life" are my favorites. Opera and pop, what a combination, but he pulled-it-off! Some of it is hilarious.)
6. Bebop Deluxe-Drastic Plastic (1977: These guys weren't necessarily punk, or straight-ahead rock. Bill Nelson used guitars and synthesizers together in a way that was pretty different for 77'. It's almost like Steve Miller if he was actually interesting, and Nelson and Bebop even used tape-loops and drum machines on such classics as "Electrical Language"when it was a rarity. Many rock fans of that period hated synths, and some still do, so this was a risky-venture. It just melds the best of electronics with the best of hard rock, and even with some rockabilly thrown-in. Post punk before punk, weird.)
7. Shuggie Otis--Inspiration Information (1971-1974/2001: David Byrne complied this from Shuggie's two albums, 'Freedom Flight' & 'Inspiration Information', and it's pretty good, but where are the rest of the tracks that were left-off? How about a new album Shuggie? Otis is a genius, and these songs prove it. He used drum machines and all kinds of studio-wizardry on these R&B classics, he plays everything on it. There are a few cuts that sound dead-on as the beginnings of drum-n-bass. Some of his guitar-playing here rivals Jimi. Small wonder that the Stones asked him to replace Mick Taylor. He wisely-declined, and naturally, both of his albums flopped. My favorite is "Aht Uh Mi Hed", "Inspiration Information" and "Strawberry Letter 23." All of it is a generation ahead of its time.)
8. Martin Denny-Primitiva (1958: A really good one, though I love most everything Denny ever did. Great exotica, lounge music from the king of it.)
9. Blood, Sweat & Tears--Blood, Sweat & Tears (1969-"Spinning Wheel" is the GOP's and George W. Bush's song right-now. Ride the painted-pony, schmucks.)
10. Miles Davis-Bitches Brew (1969-70: My favorite of the electric-period, it still scares-me. Some of the best music ever written, and James Brown was an obvious influence on it. Classy.)
11. MC5-High Time (1971: the final studio-album of the MC5, it has some variety to it and some good rockers. A few songs I could do-without, but not bad for a band that was imploding and being harrassed by the FBI!)
12. Gary Numan-The Pleasure Principle (1979: I remember hearing "Cars" as a kid while playing in the street in-front of our house. I had already heard "Autobahn" when it was in the American Top-40, but this song jump-started my obession with electronic music. This is a great album because it's so deeply-cynical in its viewpoint. Most of it is about isolation, and society has finally caught-up with it. PKD post punk. I talked to Gary in 1998 in Chicago--about Philip K. Dick and the Gnostics [he didn't know who the Gnostics were]! His lyrics resemble the Gnostic-cosmology these days. Great guy, very friendly and gracious. His new album is also excellent.)
2. The Kinks--Greatest Hits (1964-1966, the Pye singles: While some of these are their best-songs, the Kinks had tons-more later. Ray and Dave Davies have plenty to be proud-of, just not the fist-fights onstage.)
3. David Lynch and John Neff--BlueBob (2001: Some of the songs on here are a little hokey, but Lynch and Neff play all the drums, keyboards, electronics, guitars and processing. Most of BlueBob is very unsettling, but I like music that scares me when the mood strikes. Some tracks were used as cues in Lynch's films. Very ambient in some places, unique.)
4. Tom Waits-Swordfishtrombones (1983: My step-father gave me a copy of this on-cassette in 1985--I hated it at first, but it grew on me. Nobody I knew had any idea who he was, and hated it when I played it for them. In a short-time, I began to love it, and have ever-since. This was the first LP Waits did with his new-direction into the history of American music. It's definitely a classic.)
5. Klaus Nomi-Klaus Nomi (1981: I remember this guy from the early-80s, and then I forgot about him for a long-time. Recently, a documentary called "The Nomi Song" reminded me of him, and how excellent his voice was! And man, was he weird. Nomi was one of the first celebrities to die of AIDS. This is his best of two-LPs. "The Cold Song" and "Keys of Life" are my favorites. Opera and pop, what a combination, but he pulled-it-off! Some of it is hilarious.)
6. Bebop Deluxe-Drastic Plastic (1977: These guys weren't necessarily punk, or straight-ahead rock. Bill Nelson used guitars and synthesizers together in a way that was pretty different for 77'. It's almost like Steve Miller if he was actually interesting, and Nelson and Bebop even used tape-loops and drum machines on such classics as "Electrical Language"when it was a rarity. Many rock fans of that period hated synths, and some still do, so this was a risky-venture. It just melds the best of electronics with the best of hard rock, and even with some rockabilly thrown-in. Post punk before punk, weird.)
7. Shuggie Otis--Inspiration Information (1971-1974/2001: David Byrne complied this from Shuggie's two albums, 'Freedom Flight' & 'Inspiration Information', and it's pretty good, but where are the rest of the tracks that were left-off? How about a new album Shuggie? Otis is a genius, and these songs prove it. He used drum machines and all kinds of studio-wizardry on these R&B classics, he plays everything on it. There are a few cuts that sound dead-on as the beginnings of drum-n-bass. Some of his guitar-playing here rivals Jimi. Small wonder that the Stones asked him to replace Mick Taylor. He wisely-declined, and naturally, both of his albums flopped. My favorite is "Aht Uh Mi Hed", "Inspiration Information" and "Strawberry Letter 23." All of it is a generation ahead of its time.)
8. Martin Denny-Primitiva (1958: A really good one, though I love most everything Denny ever did. Great exotica, lounge music from the king of it.)
9. Blood, Sweat & Tears--Blood, Sweat & Tears (1969-"Spinning Wheel" is the GOP's and George W. Bush's song right-now. Ride the painted-pony, schmucks.)
10. Miles Davis-Bitches Brew (1969-70: My favorite of the electric-period, it still scares-me. Some of the best music ever written, and James Brown was an obvious influence on it. Classy.)
11. MC5-High Time (1971: the final studio-album of the MC5, it has some variety to it and some good rockers. A few songs I could do-without, but not bad for a band that was imploding and being harrassed by the FBI!)
12. Gary Numan-The Pleasure Principle (1979: I remember hearing "Cars" as a kid while playing in the street in-front of our house. I had already heard "Autobahn" when it was in the American Top-40, but this song jump-started my obession with electronic music. This is a great album because it's so deeply-cynical in its viewpoint. Most of it is about isolation, and society has finally caught-up with it. PKD post punk. I talked to Gary in 1998 in Chicago--about Philip K. Dick and the Gnostics [he didn't know who the Gnostics were]! His lyrics resemble the Gnostic-cosmology these days. Great guy, very friendly and gracious. His new album is also excellent.)
GERALD FORD'S LAST GAFFE
wARshInTuHN-They're all gonna Sunday-go-ta'-meetin' tomorrow in the Capitol building, to see Gerald Ford's vacated-body. OK, we know it was virtually no-occupancy most of his life, but he liked Richard Nixon, which is why he pardoned him (not just for flatuence). The late-President's soul, however, will be in-attendance within the husk of sitting-President George W. Bush/Richard Cheney. The transmigration is complete, so keep your hands-and-feet away from the President, please--dear God, please. I mean it. They're not taking-any-chances with Jerry this-time, the catafalque will be surrounded by those thick concrete-barriers used to thwart terrorists in-front of the White House. The military guard are expecting anything, the coffin could levitate, and slam through a barrier, so anti-missile missiles will be on-standby-standby. All attendees are required to wear steel-toed boots and body armor.
THE SECOND MAJOR WAR CRIME: SADDAM HUSSEIN EXECUTED
BAGHDAD--Iraq is no more, it died this early-morning with Saddam Hussein. Contrary to President Bush's statements that Iraq can now move on as a democracy, we can expect the opposite. With a national symbol--regardless of how reviled--gone, so too is national identity. Into this vacuum will emerge a new Middle Eastern order, and one that isn't democratic (except perhaps because of an historical-accident). A casual observer might note that Iraq will become ungovernable, but this has been apparent for over a year. A car bomb exploded in a Shia-district shortly-after the execution--it's unknown if it's related to it. This is just one more notch on George W. Bush's list of executions, it's his M.O. . From executing Black people, to pardoning serial-killer Henry Lee Lucas (he was terminally-ill), to allowing the execution of a retarded-person, you cannot say George W. Bush has no sense-of-humor. It's just that it's sick and nihilistic.
If he's sent a message to the world, it's this: this administration is more-than-willing to kidnap, torture, and murder foreign leaders and nationals, and will continue to completely-ignore international law. This is what makes him so very-dangerous to the American public. By creating a world that is hostile to the United States, he's gone a long-way towards making us more vulnerable than we were before the events of September 11th, 2001. Even the Foreign Office in London has substantially condemned the use of the death penalty here. This will also have the added-effect of isolating the United States diplomatically further, at a time when the Bush administration needs it most. It's unlikely anything good will come of this, except that it will probably embolden the insurgency to more spectacular-actions against American troops. We've now created a martyr.
The Reaction in Brussels:
http://asia.news.yahoo.com/061230/3/2v3dn.html
If he's sent a message to the world, it's this: this administration is more-than-willing to kidnap, torture, and murder foreign leaders and nationals, and will continue to completely-ignore international law. This is what makes him so very-dangerous to the American public. By creating a world that is hostile to the United States, he's gone a long-way towards making us more vulnerable than we were before the events of September 11th, 2001. Even the Foreign Office in London has substantially condemned the use of the death penalty here. This will also have the added-effect of isolating the United States diplomatically further, at a time when the Bush administration needs it most. It's unlikely anything good will come of this, except that it will probably embolden the insurgency to more spectacular-actions against American troops. We've now created a martyr.
The Reaction in Brussels:
http://asia.news.yahoo.com/061230/3/2v3dn.html
Friday, December 29, 2006
SCUFFLE OVER CUSTODY OF SADDAM HUSSEIN?
BAGHDAD--This is getting interesting. Someone is the Iraqi government is getting cold-feet, which is good. As of this writing, AP was reporting Saddam was in custody at a US Military prison in Iraq. Just moments ago, however, I noticed Reuters is reporting the opposite. You have three-stories: the American authorities saying the execution is still a month-away, Iraqi justice authorities saying it was to be moved-up before a month, and Hussein's lawyers are saying it was within a week. Now they're saying Hussein is in Iraqi-custody, and may be executed within hours.
The confusion is likely covering a scuffle over who has custody of Hussein and when, with international law issues being considered by all-parties. I think there was a physical-scuffle where Iraqi justice-authorities refused to take-custody of Saddam Hussein earlier than was publicly-stated. They might even be reconsidering doing the execution under their authority, demurring, and handing-it-back to American military authorities. They have every reason not to want to do it, it could mean their own lives and legacies--and region-wide.
Reuters:
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=newsOne&storyID=2006-12-29T132840Z_01_IBO034602_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAQ.xml&WTmodLoc=Home-C1-TopStories-newsOne-2
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-12-29T165412Z_01_L29722269_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAQ-SADDAM-HANDOVER.xml
AP:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061229/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq
The confusion is likely covering a scuffle over who has custody of Hussein and when, with international law issues being considered by all-parties. I think there was a physical-scuffle where Iraqi justice-authorities refused to take-custody of Saddam Hussein earlier than was publicly-stated. They might even be reconsidering doing the execution under their authority, demurring, and handing-it-back to American military authorities. They have every reason not to want to do it, it could mean their own lives and legacies--and region-wide.
Reuters:
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=newsOne&storyID=2006-12-29T132840Z_01_IBO034602_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAQ.xml&WTmodLoc=Home-C1-TopStories-newsOne-2
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-12-29T165412Z_01_L29722269_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAQ-SADDAM-HANDOVER.xml
AP:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061229/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq
Thursday, December 28, 2006
Some Final Words on Mel Gibson's Apocalypto
So, the attacks continue from the peanut-gallery of the Left--so what? I'm Left, and I'm not with you on this one. The same things were said about director Stanley Kubrick--he and Malcolm MacDowell were viciously-attacked for their contributions to "A Clockwork Orange" (1971-72). It got ugly for them, just take a look at the literature produced on the film, it's sprawling. I don't enjoy either film as entertainment, and I'm not necessarily comparing them on the level of importance. But, the themes against violence are similar, and therefore have a social-value the critics are wilfully-ignoring. If others are being "entertained", I would like to know how we could even reach them in their misunderstanding/misreading of both films anyway. It's elitist to think you can truly affect what people get out of movies, it really is. It's an authoritarian- impulse that I find disturbing.
Perhaps both gorehounds and the critics are jaded from the accumulative-effects of violence as it is portrayed in our culture, generally sans-consequences. Neither "A Clockwork Orange" nor "Apocalypto" glamorize violence, and it's a lie to say otherwise. Nearly every character we see victimized has a history, and an established personality. The consequences of violence are amply-depicted in both films. This is in-keeping with director Sam Peckinpah's approach, showing audiences the genuine hollowness and ugliness of violence--the senselessness of it all. That aspects of his style--and even Kubrick's--in portraying violence were hijacked by exploitation-filmmakers is immaterial to this approach, and a separate debate. There is a lot of intellectual dishonesty surrounding the criticism of both films, and essentially reactionary. It's ironic that the movies which portray the consequences of violence often get hard-R ratings or even "X" or NC-17 ratings...or is it?
However, it was clear from watching Apocalypto that Gibson's message is meant to be universal, and cautionary on several-points, including the need for environmental-conservation. I didn't find any of the deaths to be portrayed as "small events", not-at-all, they were very personal. It was all horrible, and reflects the feelings of the director towards violence--Gibson is deeply-disturbed by war and its depredations (and by Jews, sadly, though not present in the film). This was clear at the theater, and it makes me wonder if many of the film's critics know how to watch a movie, frankly. What has gotten-lost is this: the film is an allegory for the war in Iraq, and the current decline in American power. I would say Gibson welcomes a decline in American power to project itself internationally, and eschews the warrior-culture mentality that would describe John Milius (Red Dawn, 1985), Steven Seagal, or Sylvester Stallone better. Gibson has compared the death on both-sides in Iraq to the human-sacrifices in his film. This should be a clue, and the film should be judged on its own merits. There is a strange argument against showing the consequences of violence within the barrage of criticism surrounding Apocalypto--it should be met with suspicion. People have their "reasons." Just keep-repeating: It's only a movie, it's only a movie, it's only a movie.
Perhaps both gorehounds and the critics are jaded from the accumulative-effects of violence as it is portrayed in our culture, generally sans-consequences. Neither "A Clockwork Orange" nor "Apocalypto" glamorize violence, and it's a lie to say otherwise. Nearly every character we see victimized has a history, and an established personality. The consequences of violence are amply-depicted in both films. This is in-keeping with director Sam Peckinpah's approach, showing audiences the genuine hollowness and ugliness of violence--the senselessness of it all. That aspects of his style--and even Kubrick's--in portraying violence were hijacked by exploitation-filmmakers is immaterial to this approach, and a separate debate. There is a lot of intellectual dishonesty surrounding the criticism of both films, and essentially reactionary. It's ironic that the movies which portray the consequences of violence often get hard-R ratings or even "X" or NC-17 ratings...or is it?
However, it was clear from watching Apocalypto that Gibson's message is meant to be universal, and cautionary on several-points, including the need for environmental-conservation. I didn't find any of the deaths to be portrayed as "small events", not-at-all, they were very personal. It was all horrible, and reflects the feelings of the director towards violence--Gibson is deeply-disturbed by war and its depredations (and by Jews, sadly, though not present in the film). This was clear at the theater, and it makes me wonder if many of the film's critics know how to watch a movie, frankly. What has gotten-lost is this: the film is an allegory for the war in Iraq, and the current decline in American power. I would say Gibson welcomes a decline in American power to project itself internationally, and eschews the warrior-culture mentality that would describe John Milius (Red Dawn, 1985), Steven Seagal, or Sylvester Stallone better. Gibson has compared the death on both-sides in Iraq to the human-sacrifices in his film. This should be a clue, and the film should be judged on its own merits. There is a strange argument against showing the consequences of violence within the barrage of criticism surrounding Apocalypto--it should be met with suspicion. People have their "reasons." Just keep-repeating: It's only a movie, it's only a movie, it's only a movie.
SADDAM HUSSEIN'S LAWYER URGES INTERNATIONAL BLOCKING OF HANDOVER TO IRAQI AUTHORITIES
"According to the international conventions, it is forbidden to hand a prisoner of war to his adversary." --Khalil al-Dulaimi, attorney for Saddam Hussein, 12.27.2006.
"What's clear is that the Iraqi government won't be able to protect the Sunnis from Iranian-backed militias if American troops leave. Its army and police cannot be relied on to do so, as tens of thousands of Shiite militiamen have infiltrated their ranks. ...There is reason to believe that the Bush administration, despite domestic pressure [Ed.-The American midterm-elections have only increased this pressure.], will heed Saudi Arabia's advice [demands]. "
--Nawaf Obaid, security advisor to the House of Saud, 09.27.2006, writing in the Washington Post.
Baghdad--It appears the Bush administration's desperation for any kind of break in Iraq has put them on a course towards the execution of their former client, Saddam Hussein. ' "I urge all the international and legal organizations, the United Nations' Secretary General, the Arab League and all the leaders of the world to rapidly prevent the American administration from handing the president to the Iraqi authorities," he [Khalil al-Dulaimi, Hussein's attorney] told The Associated Press.' Well, that's fine, but did they prevent the still illegal invasion of Iraq? Yes, things have definitely changed, but Hussein's execution (and the inevitable upsurge in social chaos and violence) seems assured.
(http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20061228.wsaddam1228/BNStory/Front/home)
Nonetheless, the UN, the Hague and a constellation of Human Rights groups have chimed in, though it's unclear what would actually induce the Bush administration from altering their course regarding Hussein, let alone a phased withdrawal of American troops. It should be remarked, however, that UN and global opposition made the run up to war very-difficult for the Bush administration at a time when their powers were at their zenith. It's still mind-boggling to think that the Bush administration had approval ratings in the 90s, but this was only possible due to the attacks of September 11th, 2001. Strident opposition to Bush administration aims could still work, particularly in light of the November 7th midterms that were essentially a plebiscite on the war (and the GOP scandals in general). In an October 30th LA Times article, Al-Dulaimi warned that a full-blown civil war would erupt in reaction to Hussein's execution, so his point on this factor has been ongoing for months. It's likely Hussein will be executed anyway. (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-saddam30oct30,1,7585188.story?coll=la-headlines-world)
How many days will the execution buy the Bush administration? Probably just the ones leading-up to the execution, though the insurgency already seems emboldened by the news. When you're a hydra-headed national liberation front, and you're capable of kidnapping over 100 people in broad daylight, one can assume order has collapsed. Remaining elements of the Baathist Party have vowed a full-fledged uprising upon the execution, but maybe they know something the Bush administration doesn't (not a stretch here): Iraq ends as a nation state with the death of Saddam Hussein, and the grab for power will accelerate. Again, something even a casual observer could notice. But, why wouldn't the Bush administration notice? Bald ignorance, and frequently the wilful variety.
Most of the gaffes spring from this because Iraq was never a real country, and was created after WWI by the British as a conglomeration of various religious and ethnic groups (capped with an unsuccessful occupation during the late 1930s). Like Afghanistan, there was little concern by British planners for the subtleties of these geopolitical creations. In this sense, Iraq and Afghanistan are very similar to the former Yugoslavia. Marshall Tito knew full well that only a dictatorship could maintain order within such a conglomeration, proving as much by his decades-long rule (as did Hussein). Is Baghdad the next Sarajevo? Possibly. It seems fragmentation is becoming a fact, the "reality on the ground." Didn't British intelligence and members of their diplomatic circles warn the Bush administration of these "subtleties"? In fact, they did on several occasions and were rebuffed. This is well-known.
Because of the aforementioned subtleties, Saudi Arabia is vowing they will support Iraqi Sunnis if there is a "phased withdrawal of [American] troops". The fear is more Iranian influence in Iraq, and in the region. All of this would be by "proxy forces", yet we know that Saudi-nationals are already streaming into Iraq for similar aims, so the statement's thrust is a little peculiar (if not Janus-faced, which is how Middle Eastern politics work). Many of them are simply supporting the general insurgency, and one has to wonder how many of them are there on deep cover missions for the House of Saud, or other elements of the ruling clans. Saudi Arabia rarely ever states issues of security openly, so we don't know the details. It's likely Mossad has a better picture than the public. One can imagine other Muslim states like Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey (over the Kurds), various Gulf states, and even Pakistan following suit. Russia could also exhibit valid security concerns, making for a toxic mix at best, with economic ties to Iran being very deep.
Kuwait might also turn on her American allies in the State Department on this one for similar reasons, mostly concerning the security and stability of the current regime (along with sectarian loyalties). Security will be the prime-motivator of any Arab nation intervening into Iraq, with the factor of sectarianism and tribalism thrown in. Add Israel with potential aerial attacks on Iran, and we have a major war developing into a region-wide conflagration where everyone is reacting based on security and religious concerns. This is shockingly similar to the context that brought the Great War, and evokes images of timetables and trains. Voicing these kinds of security concerns in an interesting echo of the US immigration debacle, the Saudis announced in late September they were building a fence along the 560-mile border between Saudi Arabia and Iraq to keep out insurgents and immigrants (Shiite refugees? They're the minority in Saudi Arabia at 15%).
Like its counterpart in the Americas, the fence will also take "5-6 years" to construct. One has to wonder whether the same contractors will be used. Ironically, one proposal by the Saudis is to increase oil production to hurt Iran with rock bottom prices.
The impact of this would be a global one to other producers, who would likely decrease their production to continue reaping the profits of the last few years. Venezuela's Bolivarist regime would certainly consider this option, as would numerous other producers and refiners. The irony of all this? Prolix, I know: ..."the current malaise in Iraq is simply vindication of King Abdullah’s warning that invading to topple Saddam would cause more problems than it would solve." This has come to pass, after repeated warnings before the March, 2003 invasion, from all quarters. Executing Saddam Hussein will only accelerate the disintegration of the existing order in the region. For even the most casual observer, this is incredibly dangerous, possibly making the unthinkable thinkable. It is just another wrong path.
Much of this quagmire is based on the ignorance of tribal clan networks in the Middle East, and Hussein is tied to them. These networks know no border and extend throughout the Middle East--the execution will amount to a rallying cry for many of them. When he is executed, those clans will respond, and violently. It seems the White House feels it must take orders from Mecca, rather than from the American public. This is treason. Still want to be President? This is the cost of "winning", and ample proof that the aims for Iraq were incoherent from the beginning.
King Abdullah, TEAR DOWN THIS WALL (you haven't built yet):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/27/AR2006092701214.html
The Recent Threat of Saudi Intervention into Iraq (by proxy):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/28/AR2006112801277.html
A Great Overview by Tony Karon:
http://tonykaron.com/2006/12/01/rehabilitating-osama-and-other-iraq-remedies/
Wednesday, December 27, 2006
GERALD FORD DEAD AT 93, TRANSMIGRATION INTO PRESIDENT BUSH COMPLETE
"My fellow Americans, our long national nightmare is over. Our Constitution works; our great Republic is a government of laws and not of men. Here the people rule. But there is a higher Power, by whatever name we honor Him, who ordains not only righteousness but love, not only justice but mercy."--Gerald Ford, promising things he didn't want to in his oath of office, August 9th, 1974. God was angry being mentioned, trust me.
HENRY FORD MUSEUM, DEARBORN, MICHIGAN--The late-President who was never-elected to the post, who pardoned Nixon, who told NYC to "drop-dead" during their bankruptcy-crisis during the mid-1970s, the man who was the last person to believe Arlen Specter's "single-bullet-theory", the last living-member of the Warren Commission who believed it, is dead. How? Hey, he was 93, everything hurts at that age, Jesus. We can only hope so. Other than Coolidge or Harding, he was our first non-President President before George Bush I & II. This and last-year brought a few pratfalls in President Bush, but with the transmigration complete, we'll see him falling the full-length down the stairs of Airforce One. Chevy Chase will be thankful he's in-retirement. He lived a long-time: longer than Martin Luther King jr., Medgar Evers, Malcolm X, Bobby Kennedy, Fred Hampton, John Kennedy, Nixon--probably because he wasn't worth killing, or taking-down.
The late-President's body and seersucker will be coated in shellac, and placed next to the Edsel at the Henry Ford Museum. There they'll be, the two failures from Michigan. Robert McNamara will also be shellacked next-to the others. Maybe they can stick some wires up-his-ass and make him an animatronic, but he'd probably still fall-down onto somebody. We're talking liabilities here, people. He pardoned Nixon, which allowed Iran-Contra and the Bush II administration to occur. His peculiar act of allowing Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney into his administration just continued the threat to our democracy from their origins in the Nixon administration. By allowing these guys from CREEP into his administration, we literally got a continuity from the Nixon one! History has proven Ford an ass ever since he took that oath (and violated it again-and-again). Nothing to mourn here, move-along.
Our era's Warren G. Harding is dead, yet never made-up any words like "bloviate" or "normalcy." It was a life unlived, devoid of meaning or heroics. When you looked into-the-eyes of Gerald Ford, you saw the unfeeling, uncaring-qualities of nature. The void. In a few-decades, they can put some of that nanotech up-his-ass. He'll finally be a real person, then. Pardon me, Jerry. What a wrong-headed moron, a constitutional home-wrecker. Plenty of his kind in Michigan, they'll dig-up another one, you'll see. Some golf-playing turd with an alligator on his tit. All Ford's death should remind us of is that Watergate wasn't dealt-with properly--America shouldn't be "spared" a trial of George W. Bush and his administration. We can take it this-time, the future of American democracy depends-on-it. We insisted in the last-election.
Tuesday, December 26, 2006
"WE'RE NOT WINNING, AND WE'RE NOT LOSING."
wArShINTuhn--Where to begin? In a strange sense, he's right. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: "winning" has been redefined in the American-lexicon, it has become meaningless. True, it never really meant anything but a pile of B.S., but nobody noticed when it really died. It died with the 2004 Presidential elections, when everyone in the GOP-camp thought they had somehow "won." We now know this was a faulty-perception. Does the GOP look like a group of winners today? Does the President? Perhaps if you're demented or over-medicated, then yes! But, when a national liberation movement is able to kidnap dozens of people in broad-daylight without getting-caught, the end is bum-rushing you. Losing is looming on your horizon.
George W. Bush knows he's screwed-himself into a corner he can't escape from. The whole-gambit in the Middle East was based on the classic "all-or-none" mentality of high-stakes Americana. They sincerely thought it would be easy, imagine that. Never mind that the British got tied-down there in the late-1930s and had to leave, a bunch of neophytes thought they could beat history again.Yes, the sports-analogies apply here, and they aren't pretty. I'd say it was how he played-the-game, but he loses there too. Yes, he sucked at it, not even a wing-player.
That President Cheney, he's a mother, and he's got to rein-in that VP of his. The comment, "We're not winning, and we're not losing," does betray a knowledge that winning has been redefined by its cautiousness, and by its abstract-quality. It could be a sign of things-to-come as George W. Bush goes into meltdown. This man is dangerous, and we have to get him out, away from the nuclear football. When 600 American historians state it's safe-to-say he's one of the worst, you can bet he is. Now that he can't do any more bait-and-switch with Rummy, its' clear whose war it was all-along: Dick Cheney's.
BIG MISTAKE: EXECUTION OF SADDAM HUSSEIN IN 30 DAYS
BAGHDAD--They're done with the sentencing, and finished with a kangaroo court trial that even his enemies know was rigged. This is going to be a huge-mistake for America, and Iraq. After his execution, Iraq is no-more, it will never be governable as the geopolitical entity it was. The splintering-effect will cause many-more deaths, and who knows what the region will look like afterwards. One other thing is certain: an Islamist Republic will emerge from one of the pieces Iraq splinters-into, where a mostly-secular one had previously existed. Prepare for a massive-escalation in the fighting in Iraq. Bring em' home now.
Monday, December 25, 2006
LITVINENKO'S ITALIAN CONTACT SCARAMELLA ARRESTED BY NAPLES POLICE YESTERDAY
Naples, Italy/London, the United Kingdom--We know why:Scaramella is involved in numerous illegal-activities. This site is happy to be right about suspicions surrounding this shadowy man, and the arrest confirms that he's a man with a lot to hide (and not just regarding Mr. Litvinenko).
He has changed his story several times, though I think this blog could be one of the earliest to note it. It struck me as odd how easily he was going back-and-forth between the UK and Italy, so he was either being protected or allowed-to incriminate himself by Scotland Yard.
The Yard isn't claiming no-involvement in the Naples arrest of Scaramella, but are asserting there is no connection with the Litvinenko affair.
Whatever the case-may-be, he's definitely part of the global intelligence community contracting for someone--likely a double-agent with Italy's intelligence-community and the FSB (or other unknown elements). Don't be surprised if he suddenly dies in custody, as people like Mario Scaramella have a tendency to do this. Jack Ruby always claimed he was poisoned with radioactive-materials from his jail cell in Texas, and he died in-custody of cancer in 1967. Sit on that one for awhile. An exhumation of Rubenstein would probably reveal traces of some sort of radioactive-isotope, but one that had degraded for 40 years. Imagine the implications of that one.
Whatever the case, Scaramella's cover is blown. Ironically, Scotland Yard says that the arrest yesterday in Naples is "not connected to the Litvinenko case." There is a strong-possibility that the polonium-210 came from Italy, or was ferried-through the country. This would be yet-another violation of the sovereignty of a European state. Search this site for earlier-posts on Mr. Scaramella, he's a cagey man, and he's in a lot of trouble right-now. Even worse, he's also been contaminated with polonium-210.
This site on Mario Scaramella:
http://chickasawpicklesmell.blogspot.com/search?q=Scaramella
The Telegraph on the Arrest:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/12/24/uspy124.xml
A November 15th Russian allegation that Scaramella is FSB:
http://www.kavkazcenter.com/eng/content/2006/11/15/6425.shtml
An Excellent Eurotrib Piece on Many of the Strange Facts Surrounding the case:
http://www.eurotrib.com/?op=displaystory;sid=2006/11/19/20439/209
Ohmy News just four-days before Scaramella's arrest:
http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?article_class=3&no=335755&rel_no=1
Itar-Tass on Today's Developments:
http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.html?NewsID=11115117&PageNum=0
UK Mail 11.26.2006:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2006/261106Sushi.htm
http://chickasawpicklesmell.blogspot.com/search?q=Scaramella
The Telegraph on the Arrest:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/12/24/uspy124.xml
A November 15th Russian allegation that Scaramella is FSB:
http://www.kavkazcenter.com/eng/content/2006/11/15/6425.shtml
An Excellent Eurotrib Piece on Many of the Strange Facts Surrounding the case:
http://www.eurotrib.com/?op=displaystory;sid=2006/11/19/20439/209
Ohmy News just four-days before Scaramella's arrest:
http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?article_class=3&no=335755&rel_no=1
Itar-Tass on Today's Developments:
http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.html?NewsID=11115117&PageNum=0
UK Mail 11.26.2006:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2006/261106Sushi.htm
Postscript, 09.12.2008: Try doing an American google search on "Mario Scaramella." Good luck getting anything recent to come up. However, try google.au, google.it, and some others, and you'll find significantly more. Curious, that.
JAMES BROWN, DEAD AT 73
It had to happen eventually, we just didn't know when or exactly how: James Brown is dead from complications related-to pneumonia, a heart-attack. Now you can finally rest, Godfather of Soul. My favorites: Lickin' Stick (1968), Stay in School (1967), Say it Loud (I'm Black and I'm Proud) (1969), Get Up I Feel Like Being a Sex Machine (1970), Pass the Peas (1972), and nearly everything from 1956-1976. From 1966-1969, James invented a new form of music: funk. He'd already done it with Soul. How many artists invent two-genres? There is almost nobody alive who is as influential as James Brown was to music, he's global baby. That's a pretty good epitaph for any musician and composer. There will always be funk, and James Brown (and his bands, especially Jabo Starks & Phelps "Catfish" Collins) invented it. I know, we all thought it would be from drugs, but these things happen. He beat the odds his whole-life. Sleep well.
Saturday, December 23, 2006
GRACE JONES
What happened to this incredible woman? She needs to do some more sessions with Sly & Robbie, grab Wally Badarou, and Nigel Rogers has to produce the sessions. I remember seeing her photo in a photo digest as a kid--she was naked, caged and oiled. Wow. Hot. Commanding. My kind of woman, no bullshitting-around, the real-deal. The new woman. A woman to admire, and a voice that kills. Her best work is available on the 2cd set: Private Life: The Compass Point Sessions, from 1998, a knockout collection of 12"s that are legendary.
The original sessions are from 1979-through-1981 and haven't aged a jot. Here, you have Sly & Robbie, the greatest rhythm-section reggae ever produced (and they did some of the best dub-sides too) with one of the greatest voices pop has had since Billie Holiday or the best of the Weimar-singers. You gotta check this material on the internet, it's possibly the best dance music ever written. It has class in an era where there is almost none. Grace, come back, we need you. Will a real chanteuse come-forward?
The original sessions are from 1979-through-1981 and haven't aged a jot. Here, you have Sly & Robbie, the greatest rhythm-section reggae ever produced (and they did some of the best dub-sides too) with one of the greatest voices pop has had since Billie Holiday or the best of the Weimar-singers. You gotta check this material on the internet, it's possibly the best dance music ever written. It has class in an era where there is almost none. Grace, come back, we need you. Will a real chanteuse come-forward?
In case you're wondering...
"I would never join a club that would have me as a member."
--Groucho Marx
I'm unaffiliated with anyone. No unions (I'd definitely take it), no businesses, no corporations (I'd take it, less-money for their PACs). No. Even though my week beats your year, I don't take-money from people with any strings-attached. If ads eventually appear here, it's not going to change the content in any respect. C'mon, do I look like a professional editor or journo? I am not a whore, thank-you. Neither are actual-prostitutes. The real whoras are wearing suits in corporate suites, ruining our lives as I write this. They are the Dick Cheneys and John Rockefellers, the John Jacob Astors of our time. The faceless dictatorship of pervs and freaks; the cops, the crooks, and the twisted-rich, taking a page from Dashielle Hammett (who took a page from life).
If someone wants to advertise, they get no say in editorial-content, zilcho. I'm actually exploring the possibility of having registered-brothels in Germany, Denmark, South America, Vegas, and Canada advertise here. Hey, do they pollute the environment like a multinational? I think-not. Just cut the pimps out entirely, they're unnecessary middle-management, and you know what we think of that type here. Pimp-slap the pimps, they can go be busboys. Women--not rich ones--should control prostitution, period.
Not only would it be a hoot, raising-eyebrows of the low-brows, but the irony would be almost Brechtian. The funds of Venus, yes, and why not? Most of them want what I want anyway--a better world, a less-restrictive one. A place that's safe for the babies. This isn't very complicated. Besides, I should be paid for this shit, it's a great site that's fighting the good fight. We can make a better world, it's been proven possible many-times. If the 20th Century proved anything, it's that we hold our fate in our own hands. The best-revenge is making revolution pleasurable. The day of the secret college is here, existentialists and true hidden-Christians unite! Am I kidding? You figure-it-out.
PS: I work best alone. However, reasonable submissions are reviewed and accepted on-the-basis of what I deem fit for the site. I reserve the right to refuse or accept a piece for whatever reason.
--Groucho Marx
I'm unaffiliated with anyone. No unions (I'd definitely take it), no businesses, no corporations (I'd take it, less-money for their PACs). No. Even though my week beats your year, I don't take-money from people with any strings-attached. If ads eventually appear here, it's not going to change the content in any respect. C'mon, do I look like a professional editor or journo? I am not a whore, thank-you. Neither are actual-prostitutes. The real whoras are wearing suits in corporate suites, ruining our lives as I write this. They are the Dick Cheneys and John Rockefellers, the John Jacob Astors of our time. The faceless dictatorship of pervs and freaks; the cops, the crooks, and the twisted-rich, taking a page from Dashielle Hammett (who took a page from life).
If someone wants to advertise, they get no say in editorial-content, zilcho. I'm actually exploring the possibility of having registered-brothels in Germany, Denmark, South America, Vegas, and Canada advertise here. Hey, do they pollute the environment like a multinational? I think-not. Just cut the pimps out entirely, they're unnecessary middle-management, and you know what we think of that type here. Pimp-slap the pimps, they can go be busboys. Women--not rich ones--should control prostitution, period.
Not only would it be a hoot, raising-eyebrows of the low-brows, but the irony would be almost Brechtian. The funds of Venus, yes, and why not? Most of them want what I want anyway--a better world, a less-restrictive one. A place that's safe for the babies. This isn't very complicated. Besides, I should be paid for this shit, it's a great site that's fighting the good fight. We can make a better world, it's been proven possible many-times. If the 20th Century proved anything, it's that we hold our fate in our own hands. The best-revenge is making revolution pleasurable. The day of the secret college is here, existentialists and true hidden-Christians unite! Am I kidding? You figure-it-out.
PS: I work best alone. However, reasonable submissions are reviewed and accepted on-the-basis of what I deem fit for the site. I reserve the right to refuse or accept a piece for whatever reason.
STILL UNANSWERED: HOW DID THE TROOPS VOTE?
WARSHINTUHN--Anyone? And can anyone tell me what terror alert color we're at (no, not "salmon")? Who cares? Live in fear, die in fear. Good-luck in your search, Sir Galahad, the grail awaits...ewige Blumenkraft!
"TENTATIVE DEAL" REACHED IN GOODYEAR STRIKE
"The door of Scrooge’s counting-house was open that he might keep his eye upon his clerk, who in a dismal little cell beyond, a sort of tank, was copying letters. Scrooge had a very small fire, but the clerk’s fire was so very much smaller that it looked like one coal. But he couldn’t replenish it, for Scrooge kept the coal-box in his own room; and so surely as the clerk came in with the shovel, the master predicted that it would be necessary for them to part. Wherefore the clerk put on his white comforter, and tried to warm himself at the candle; in which effort, not being a man of a strong imagination, he failed."--Charles Dickens, "A CHRISTMAS CAROL IN PROSE, BEING A Ghost Story of Christmas", 1843.
NORTH AMERICA--A "tentative deal" (Meaning not finalized, or not validated or agreed-upon) has been reached between the United Steel Workers union and Goodyear, states Reuters in a piece from this early-morning. Getting a smooth-transition seems hardly a "good-deal" at all, and the article seems to be more a matter of wishful-thinking on-the-part of the corporate sector, the owners of the mainstream media. What does it mean? No lump-of-coal for Bob Cratchit's stove, naturally. Ho-ho-ho. Reuters reports:
The agreement calls for the largest U.S. tire maker to give a one-year period of transition for workers instead of an immediate closure of a Tyler, Texas plant. The closure of that plant had been one of the principle obstacles to an agreement. Goodyear is in the process of exiting unprofitable private label tire production in a bid to boost profits. (Reuters, 12.22.2006)
The "agreement" doesn't offer much, and is admittedly being done simply to "boost-profits", a raw-deal-at-best. If I was an intelligent union leader, I'd tell them to shove their deal up-their-ass, and look to the long-term consequences of said "deals." Goodyear also wants to make all new-hires non-union, at non-union pay. This is also unacceptable, and should be roundly-rejected with further walkouts, and should be echoed in Canada as well. Don't buy Goodyear, I won't until there is some reasonable solution to this, meaning keeping the plant and future-hires union.
This is hardly over, and should be viewed as a highly-suspicious news release that favors ownership/major-shareholders. Also curious are the numbers quoted for strikers--one release says 12,500 (excluding Canadian strikers?), 15,000 in today's, and 16,000 in others. This is reminiscent of public opinion-polls for President Bush, as well as on social concerns, exit polls, and election-results. Watch the counters, and watch them well.
It would behoove currently unionized workers to go wildcat on their national unions and the NLRB (http://www.nlrb.gov/) when they aren't watching-out for their interests and the long-term picture. They should also be working-hard to get Hispanic workers naturalized and unionized, something only the daft would oppose. What do they have to lose? Their future? That's already being decided by the company and union hacks. Unannounced work-slowdowns are also a powerful-tool in driving-down the stock of companies that view workers as disposable. The only rule in this game is winning, and losing means social-chaos that would make a General strike seem tame in-comparison.
The agreement calls for the largest U.S. tire maker to give a one-year period of transition for workers instead of an immediate closure of a Tyler, Texas plant. The closure of that plant had been one of the principle obstacles to an agreement. Goodyear is in the process of exiting unprofitable private label tire production in a bid to boost profits. (Reuters, 12.22.2006)
The "agreement" doesn't offer much, and is admittedly being done simply to "boost-profits", a raw-deal-at-best. If I was an intelligent union leader, I'd tell them to shove their deal up-their-ass, and look to the long-term consequences of said "deals." Goodyear also wants to make all new-hires non-union, at non-union pay. This is also unacceptable, and should be roundly-rejected with further walkouts, and should be echoed in Canada as well. Don't buy Goodyear, I won't until there is some reasonable solution to this, meaning keeping the plant and future-hires union.
This is hardly over, and should be viewed as a highly-suspicious news release that favors ownership/major-shareholders. Also curious are the numbers quoted for strikers--one release says 12,500 (excluding Canadian strikers?), 15,000 in today's, and 16,000 in others. This is reminiscent of public opinion-polls for President Bush, as well as on social concerns, exit polls, and election-results. Watch the counters, and watch them well.
It would behoove currently unionized workers to go wildcat on their national unions and the NLRB (http://www.nlrb.gov/) when they aren't watching-out for their interests and the long-term picture. They should also be working-hard to get Hispanic workers naturalized and unionized, something only the daft would oppose. What do they have to lose? Their future? That's already being decided by the company and union hacks. Unannounced work-slowdowns are also a powerful-tool in driving-down the stock of companies that view workers as disposable. The only rule in this game is winning, and losing means social-chaos that would make a General strike seem tame in-comparison.
Tons of United Steel Workers Stories You Aren't Seeing:
http://news.google.com/news?q=United+Steelworkers+union+update&hl=en&lr=&sa=X&oi=news&ct=title
http://news.google.com/news?q=United+Steelworkers+union+update&hl=en&lr=&sa=X&oi=news&ct=title
A CHRISTMAS CAROL IN PROSE, BEING A Ghost Story of Christmas:
The UN Security Council on Iran: We Want Your Oil and Energy Dependence
"Arabs may have the oil, but we have the matches."
--Ariel Sharon, to Robert Friedman, early-1990s.
NEW YORK CITY--So, the UN has been pressured by the US State Department into beginning a new-round of sanctions against Iran because of their uranium-enrichment program. No wanting to look like anything other than a hypocrite, President Bush authorizes the a nuclear-cooperation program with India. This alone will surely enrage the political-hierarchy in Pakistan (concentrated in their intelligence community), and numerous other Arab states who also have nuclear club aspirations. Then, there's Israel, who likely possess a minimum of 50 nuclear warheads. This toleration will only embolden additional-players on the world stage, and it is an irritation that speaks more of power-relationships than actual diplomatic pragmatism.
It's a strange idea that the Bush administration could even field more troops, so Israel must fit-in here somewhere. Still, the call for a surge in troops into Iraq has to be seen within this context. But what of Russia? What of Turkey or Pakistan? How will they react to either an invasion or an attack on Iran? Russian economic-ties to Iran are well-known, and her neighbors will surely be alarmed by any open-provocations from the West. But, while the resolution bars any interventions, this wouldn't stop the United States and her allies from military-actions: it didn't in the case of Afghanistan or Iraq, so why would the UN be able to stop them now? However, Russia has chimed-in:
Russia's U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin, who was successful in watering down parts of the resolution, emphasized that the resolution did not permit any use of force. Moscow's earlier hesitation over supporting the resolution prompted a phone call on Saturday from President George W. Bush [Ed.-an architect of all of this.] to Russian President Vladimir Putin, who had reviewed the resolution until the last minute following two months of tough negotiations. Russia is building an $800 million light-water reactor for Tehran that is exempted in the resolution. (Reuters, 12.23.2006)
The vote was unanimous, 15-0--a margin the US is used-to, just in-reverse. This is the usual source of anti-UN sentiment in the United States, including in the far-right peanut gallery: if the US doesn't get it way, it's a threat of world-domination by the UN, a sentiment without any credibility. On one-end of this pseudo-argument, the UN is omnipotent, on the other it's "useless." The adherents to this argument aren't worthy of any recognition, and can be viewed as ultranationalist and on the margins of reasonable-debate. Kooks. The sanctions are a ban on basic imports, especially of materials that could be used in a nuclear program. What is strange is the emphasis on even civilian-use of uranium-enrichment. Certainly, some fissile-materials could be misused and conveyed to questionable-elements, and the State Department knows this all-too-well.
America is the Pandora's box of proliferation, particularly in the case of Israel, though espionage between allies is another factor. If the American message on proliferation is anything, it's this: don't get-caught while you're developing you nuclear programs. After a successful-completion, we cannot control you or your ability to develop further. The problem is, this gives any future military-strikes by the US and Israel a sheen of legitimacy, a problem for those who wish for stability in the region. It seems China wants that oil too, and so do a lot of other consumer nations. The catch (-22) is that American troops will probably be the proxy-forces for all of these economic interests:
The Selective Service System is planning a comprehensive test of the military draft machinery, which hasn't been run since 1998. The agency is not gearing up for a draft, an agency official said Thursday. The test itself would not likely [Ed.-barring an urgent need to.] occur until 2009. Meanwhile, the secretary for Veterans Affairs said that "society would benefit" if the U.S. were to bring back the draft and that it shouldn't have any loopholes for anyone who is called to serve. (AP, 12.22.2006)
Why was the Secretary of Veterans Affairs told to recant his previous-statement? Because perceptions have to be molded by Karl Rove and others who support PNAC war-aims in Congress and elsewhere. Merry Christmas early! Moloch wants your kids. Will you hand them over? I wouldn't for the upcoming-conflagration all the global elites have planned for us. At least the rich-kids will be going too; time to hammer-shut those deferments. Still want war? OK, you and your kids can go. Ah, I see you aren't so gung-ho now. You can go to the daily hour-of-hate meeting now.
Israel's WMDs:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/STE203A.html
The BBC's Take on "the death of the neo-con dream" (I'm skeptical):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6189793.stm
Selective Service (Happy Talk!):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/21/AR2006122101327_pf.html
The UN Votes to Sanction Iran:
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-iran-nuclear.html?hp&ex=1166936400&en=6d6796bc114418c9&ei=5094&partner=homepage
--Ariel Sharon, to Robert Friedman, early-1990s.
NEW YORK CITY--So, the UN has been pressured by the US State Department into beginning a new-round of sanctions against Iran because of their uranium-enrichment program. No wanting to look like anything other than a hypocrite, President Bush authorizes the a nuclear-cooperation program with India. This alone will surely enrage the political-hierarchy in Pakistan (concentrated in their intelligence community), and numerous other Arab states who also have nuclear club aspirations. Then, there's Israel, who likely possess a minimum of 50 nuclear warheads. This toleration will only embolden additional-players on the world stage, and it is an irritation that speaks more of power-relationships than actual diplomatic pragmatism.
It's a strange idea that the Bush administration could even field more troops, so Israel must fit-in here somewhere. Still, the call for a surge in troops into Iraq has to be seen within this context. But what of Russia? What of Turkey or Pakistan? How will they react to either an invasion or an attack on Iran? Russian economic-ties to Iran are well-known, and her neighbors will surely be alarmed by any open-provocations from the West. But, while the resolution bars any interventions, this wouldn't stop the United States and her allies from military-actions: it didn't in the case of Afghanistan or Iraq, so why would the UN be able to stop them now? However, Russia has chimed-in:
Russia's U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin, who was successful in watering down parts of the resolution, emphasized that the resolution did not permit any use of force. Moscow's earlier hesitation over supporting the resolution prompted a phone call on Saturday from President George W. Bush [Ed.-an architect of all of this.] to Russian President Vladimir Putin, who had reviewed the resolution until the last minute following two months of tough negotiations. Russia is building an $800 million light-water reactor for Tehran that is exempted in the resolution. (Reuters, 12.23.2006)
The vote was unanimous, 15-0--a margin the US is used-to, just in-reverse. This is the usual source of anti-UN sentiment in the United States, including in the far-right peanut gallery: if the US doesn't get it way, it's a threat of world-domination by the UN, a sentiment without any credibility. On one-end of this pseudo-argument, the UN is omnipotent, on the other it's "useless." The adherents to this argument aren't worthy of any recognition, and can be viewed as ultranationalist and on the margins of reasonable-debate. Kooks. The sanctions are a ban on basic imports, especially of materials that could be used in a nuclear program. What is strange is the emphasis on even civilian-use of uranium-enrichment. Certainly, some fissile-materials could be misused and conveyed to questionable-elements, and the State Department knows this all-too-well.
America is the Pandora's box of proliferation, particularly in the case of Israel, though espionage between allies is another factor. If the American message on proliferation is anything, it's this: don't get-caught while you're developing you nuclear programs. After a successful-completion, we cannot control you or your ability to develop further. The problem is, this gives any future military-strikes by the US and Israel a sheen of legitimacy, a problem for those who wish for stability in the region. It seems China wants that oil too, and so do a lot of other consumer nations. The catch (-22) is that American troops will probably be the proxy-forces for all of these economic interests:
The Selective Service System is planning a comprehensive test of the military draft machinery, which hasn't been run since 1998. The agency is not gearing up for a draft, an agency official said Thursday. The test itself would not likely [Ed.-barring an urgent need to.] occur until 2009. Meanwhile, the secretary for Veterans Affairs said that "society would benefit" if the U.S. were to bring back the draft and that it shouldn't have any loopholes for anyone who is called to serve. (AP, 12.22.2006)
Why was the Secretary of Veterans Affairs told to recant his previous-statement? Because perceptions have to be molded by Karl Rove and others who support PNAC war-aims in Congress and elsewhere. Merry Christmas early! Moloch wants your kids. Will you hand them over? I wouldn't for the upcoming-conflagration all the global elites have planned for us. At least the rich-kids will be going too; time to hammer-shut those deferments. Still want war? OK, you and your kids can go. Ah, I see you aren't so gung-ho now. You can go to the daily hour-of-hate meeting now.
Israel's WMDs:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/STE203A.html
The BBC's Take on "the death of the neo-con dream" (I'm skeptical):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6189793.stm
Selective Service (Happy Talk!):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/21/AR2006122101327_pf.html
The UN Votes to Sanction Iran:
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-iran-nuclear.html?hp&ex=1166936400&en=6d6796bc114418c9&ei=5094&partner=homepage
Thursday, December 21, 2006
SAMIZDAT
THE BLOGOSPHERE--Under Soviet domination, a lot of the dissident groups in occupied-countries (and within the Soviet Union) would publish little circulars to pass-on information and ideas. They just got passed, hand-to-hand, being hidden-away from the secret police. If you got caught with them, you could go to the gulags, maybe work in a coal or a uranium-mine. In Cold War Czechoslovakia, this was even done with the plays of Vaclav Havel; people would copy them by-hand and disseminate them to as many other "cells" as-possible. Havel's plays were usually performed in living-rooms! The blogs serve the same function. They create networks of information between concerned citizens, a social-patchwork where many other networks have fallen. Welcome to the American Velvet Revolution, this is bigger than the invention of movable-type in Middle Ages Europe. The blogs are samizdat. And did you hear? South America is considering creating their own-version of a continental-wide union like the EU.
Eric Filipkowski's "Hollywood Phony" Site
Fellows/guys/broads: You gotta check this site out. Eric is a really funny comedian and actor in Hollywood. If you need a humor-break from the post-9/11 world, if you CRAVE goofy stories that defy logic, yet show some incredible comic-insight---Eric's blog is your oasis. I found it strongly-recommended by Bob Odenkirk (Mr. Show, Ben Stiller Show, Tom Goes to the Mayor) at http://www.bobanddavid.com/, another site you should check-out for yucks. Genius, just pure-genius, Eric.
Da' Man:
http://hollywoodphony.wordpress.com/
Da' Man:
http://hollywoodphony.wordpress.com/
NYT: GOVERNMENT DECLASSIFYING NEARLY ALL 25-YEAR-OLD DOCUMENTS (WITH EXCEPTIONS)
WASHINGTON--After a three-year extension by the Bush administration, we're finally seeing the very first automatic release under the FOIA of our internal- history, says the New York Times yesterday. It takes an enormous staff to search and review the endless-array of internal memos and directives, and they couldn't make it in 2003. Of course, none of this will exempt other key-ones that are still being classified for "reasons of national security" (because there would be criminal-convictions or a public groundswell over what's in them?). For some documents, this is understandable and realistic. Also, you want to respect the privacy of agents and shady informants who have violated people's rights, this is important. In declassification cases, you'll never find a more staunch defender of the 4th Amendment than the Executive--regardless of who's in office at that historical-moment.
Yes, you don't want to advertise your techniques to your enemies (the public being one), but looking at the final 10-pages of John Lennon's FBI-files, we know this is a frequently abused excuse to hide criminality. It's also just a good technique to keep people waiting on files that are of no-importance, causing various archives and researchers to waste precious resources fighting for what is basically worthless-information. And they have to do it in the courts, which is pretty expensive. This is by-design, from both congressional legislation and Executive orders. The NYT article discusses how the Carter years will be illuminated, but how about the Reagan years?
Yes, over the next-few-years, we're going to be seeing some long-overdue revisions by American historians about the "great communicator". You can be assured that the timing of the Hussein trial was figured-into some of that era's declassification, because the files concerning our aid to Saddam Hussein are looming. It might even be a sub-motive for the invasion of Iraq. So are parts of the Iran-Contra records, as some of the Bush administration were part of Reagan's cabinet: "Secret documents 25 years old or older will lose their classified status without so much as the stroke of a pen, unless agencies have sought exemptions on the ground that the material remains secret." Is it time to rename those airports and mountains, before it's too-late? Too-late. The importance of declassification is that we know our history, and so that we can hold office-abusers like Donald Rumsfeld or Dick Cheney accountable. They probably broke-laws then, and are fearful of us finding-out now. Considering the current political climate, they should be.
The New York Times article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/21/washington/21declassify.html?ex=1324357200&en=282fb72dc92fd0d4&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
Yes, you don't want to advertise your techniques to your enemies (the public being one), but looking at the final 10-pages of John Lennon's FBI-files, we know this is a frequently abused excuse to hide criminality. It's also just a good technique to keep people waiting on files that are of no-importance, causing various archives and researchers to waste precious resources fighting for what is basically worthless-information. And they have to do it in the courts, which is pretty expensive. This is by-design, from both congressional legislation and Executive orders. The NYT article discusses how the Carter years will be illuminated, but how about the Reagan years?
Yes, over the next-few-years, we're going to be seeing some long-overdue revisions by American historians about the "great communicator". You can be assured that the timing of the Hussein trial was figured-into some of that era's declassification, because the files concerning our aid to Saddam Hussein are looming. It might even be a sub-motive for the invasion of Iraq. So are parts of the Iran-Contra records, as some of the Bush administration were part of Reagan's cabinet: "Secret documents 25 years old or older will lose their classified status without so much as the stroke of a pen, unless agencies have sought exemptions on the ground that the material remains secret." Is it time to rename those airports and mountains, before it's too-late? Too-late. The importance of declassification is that we know our history, and so that we can hold office-abusers like Donald Rumsfeld or Dick Cheney accountable. They probably broke-laws then, and are fearful of us finding-out now. Considering the current political climate, they should be.
The New York Times article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/21/washington/21declassify.html?ex=1324357200&en=282fb72dc92fd0d4&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Gingrinch
"I also want to mention a very difficult subject before you here, completely openly. It should be discussed amongst us, and yet, nevertheless, we will never speak about it in public. Just as we did not hesitate on June 30 [1934, the execution of Brown shirt leader, Ernst Rohm] to carry out our duty, as ordered, and stand comrades who had failed against the wall and shoot them. "
--Heinrich Himmler, at Posen, 1943.
Radical conservative ideology that posits government cannot provide for the common good is dead, it died with Katrina and this war. It's over. Over. Reasonable conservatives, the Populist Left is here for you, we agree on more than you might think. We can better this nation, we can be proud of her again. Gingrich knows the GOP-version of conservatism was a sham. He knows that it's over. Sadly, this is why he pathetically-clings to it anyway: '"If there was no FEMA, New Orleans would have recovered faster," Mr. Gingrich said.'
Wrong. What he's saying is if there was no FEMA, nobody would be helped, and that's fine. How is this different from what Bush has done? It just shows the obvious-limitations of their type of conservative-ideology. Fortunately, the laws of physics have held-up and routed them with objective-defeats. An astute commenter at Huffpo noted that the Bush administration simply did what Gingrich would have wanted--only the did it too-quickly, and I would again add, incompetently. Newt Gingrich wilfully-ignores what we all know anyway. That it's the Bush administration's incompetence and vindictiveness towards Louisiana politicians, and the blame-game between both elements. FEMA did a much-better job before Katrina, we all know this. Does FEMA seem so dangerous and invincible now? Gingrich's comments recently confirm his continued allegiance to a dead-ideology, making him resemble Vladimir Putin.
If the Bush administration hadn't misruled, FEMA would have worked. For those who disagree, here's to nobody bailing-you-out either when a natural disaster strikes, you're simply not in-touch with reality. The sham is over, commissars, shills, fixers, and hacks. We either have a society, or we don't. We either have a social contract, or we don't. If we have to jail some of you, we will, if you've broken the existing-laws. This applies to the President and his administration. On Iraq, on Katrina, on basically everything, Gingrich offers exactly what the Bush administration has--incompetence and disaster from misrule. Their version of conservatism isn't conservative at all, it's radical and dangerous. It is un-American, and barbaric, a threat to all of human civilization, and it is losing.
To all the nut job neocons, I ask you this: what is a society for, then? Government is always, always better than misrule by corporations. The GOP is over. Done, like Soviet-style communism. All they achieved was more intrusive-government into all of our lives, an obvious violation of Habeus Corpus, and an ongoing rollback of the 4th Amendment. Does that sound like conservative ideology? This week, Gingrich is attacking Karl Rove, but he's just as guilty of the mess we're in today. They all are, the incumbents in the GOP. Gingrich is smart enough to know the public doesn't want him in 2008, or possibly ever again. It's good to know when you're whipped, but why the secret, Himmler-like (Himmler's October 4th, 1943 speech at Posen) meeting on November 30th? Why are we only finding-out about this now from Insight and the rest of the mainstream press? Yes, there were blurbs about it, but no quotes. Why?Himmler's Secret 2006 Speech in Virginia:
http://www.insightmag.com/Media/MediaManager/Gingrich3.htm
Himmler's Secret 1943 Speech at Posen:
http://www.holocaust-history.org/himmler-poznan/
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
GASSING OF KURDS VIDEO SHOWN AT SADDAM TRAIL
BAGHDAD--Question: Where did he get them from? We might want to ask Donald Rumsfeld, since he was responsible for arming the Iraqi military with chemical weapons from the United States. Why isn't he testifying? Why isn't this fact being brought-to-light? The questions are the answers. As bad as Hussein was, we made him, it's a simple-fact: "Al-Faroon did not reveal the source of the grainy videos with distorted sound. A timecode under the images showed the clips were made at various times in 1987 and 1988 [Ed.-We provided chemical WMDs to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war of 1982-1988. The Reagan years]." (AP,12.19.2006) Sounds like a fair trial, doesn't it? The money is on the source being the CIA. They had a team of animators at Hanna-Barbera (in Thailand) photoshop "Made in the USA" off of the images. Jane, stop this crazy war.
Online Music-Posting: Suggestions? Bueller?
SMOLA--I don't have a high-speed connection, we're out in redneck heaven here. If anyone has suggestions as to how I can post my upcoming EP and album, please let me know. Yes, I am aware of i-Tunes, but there are some obvious logistical-problems with my connection. It would take mailing someone a CDr of my selections (already pre-sequenced and EQ'd), then they would have to post it. Since I don't trust anyone around here in Michiana to do it, I'm doing this shoutout, yo. There's a link already to one cut from this-month, but it's not representative of my work, just a sliver. My idea is to post the EP for free-downloading, with the possibility of the same for the album. I might even post the cover-art here, we'll see. The material I wanna release would make great bar music in Bladerunner, it's pretty decadent electronic music. A little brown, a little blue, something old, something new. But not techno, it's electronic music (sometimes with a smidgen of Martin Denny, postpunk, some atonal hip-hop & motion picture scores).
Monday, December 18, 2006
ARMY CONSIDERING FORCING STRIKING GOODYEAR WORKERS BACK TO THEIR JOBS: STOP BUYING GOODYEAR NOW
TOPEKA, KANSAS--The Financial Times is reporting--finally, after the ELECTIONS--that "[a] strike involving 17,000 members of the United Steelworkers union has crippled 16 Goodyear plants in the US and Canada since October 5." Wow, where's this story been? No reporting on a strike of this size? Where's the press? Indeed. This is bigger than the General Motors strike of 1937 (in Flint, Michigan), one that literally galvanized the labor movement around the world. It appears the military is considering intervention, but they have a problem, Houston: an army already overextended, with new call ups for the Reserves and the National Guard coming down-the-pipe.
I know, it's so unfair for these guys to strike in-solidarity because Goodyear is closing a unionized plant in Texas (where else?), so unfair. Now those stupid Hummers that are manufactured here in Michiana won't have tires for 35% of the Army's fielded-vehicles. But hey, yeah, let's send more troops to Iraq so they cannot quell a domestic labor-uprising. This isn't the American South in 1934, you morons, you cannot hide this forever. The public won't have it, and the news-gap is narrowing. Bring-it-on.
Let's send those troops that we don't even have now. The strikers have videos at Youtube, go check em' for me, I can't, we's not highfalutin' bawss! I'm wondering how they'll make them work once they've dragged them from their homes, and how good a P.R. move that's going to be for a public that's already extremely-angry over the war in Iraq and the corruption of the GOP. Yes, you order those troops, President Cheney. You do that. Support these men and women. I just did. We're finally seeing the birth of a genuine international labor movement, it's long-overdue. It's good to hear middle-management is having to do all the work of the striking-employees, what suckers. They always are.
Unionize!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16226231/
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/local/16262176.htm
http://labornotes.org/node/351/print
http://www.enjoyfrance.com/content/view/580/31/
http://canadianlabour.ca/index.php/media/1046
http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?guid=%7B3F7FFE63-22EA-4FAF-8241-D7E9AD88F406%7D&siteid=mktw
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aB3kVwme7OM8&refer=news
http://cjonline.com/stories/100506/bre_goodyear.shtml
The United Steelworkers:
http://www.uswa.org/uswa/program/content/index.php
I know, it's so unfair for these guys to strike in-solidarity because Goodyear is closing a unionized plant in Texas (where else?), so unfair. Now those stupid Hummers that are manufactured here in Michiana won't have tires for 35% of the Army's fielded-vehicles. But hey, yeah, let's send more troops to Iraq so they cannot quell a domestic labor-uprising. This isn't the American South in 1934, you morons, you cannot hide this forever. The public won't have it, and the news-gap is narrowing. Bring-it-on.
Let's send those troops that we don't even have now. The strikers have videos at Youtube, go check em' for me, I can't, we's not highfalutin' bawss! I'm wondering how they'll make them work once they've dragged them from their homes, and how good a P.R. move that's going to be for a public that's already extremely-angry over the war in Iraq and the corruption of the GOP. Yes, you order those troops, President Cheney. You do that. Support these men and women. I just did. We're finally seeing the birth of a genuine international labor movement, it's long-overdue. It's good to hear middle-management is having to do all the work of the striking-employees, what suckers. They always are.
Unionize!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16226231/
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/local/16262176.htm
http://labornotes.org/node/351/print
http://www.enjoyfrance.com/content/view/580/31/
http://canadianlabour.ca/index.php/media/1046
http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?guid=%7B3F7FFE63-22EA-4FAF-8241-D7E9AD88F406%7D&siteid=mktw
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aB3kVwme7OM8&refer=news
http://cjonline.com/stories/100506/bre_goodyear.shtml
The United Steelworkers:
http://www.uswa.org/uswa/program/content/index.php
LAURA BUSH REMOVED FROM SHIN-TUMOR
WARSHINTUHN--In a bold-move, the White House admitted today that First Lady Laura Bush had a malignant-tumor removed from her shin, according to the AP. The sex of the shin was not disclosed: "Explaining why the procedure was not disclosed until now, the first lady's press secretary Susan Whitson said, "This medical procedure was a private matter for Mrs. Bush, but when asked by the media today, we answered the question," states the article. So, I know Senator Johnson had his medical problem while speaking to journalists, but why not respect his privacy just a bit more? Hmmmm?
I think we all know why. It's a matter of political-capital, and Mrs. Bush doesn't amount to much. Vice President George W. Bush had lesions removed from his face in 2001--they'll be running-for-office in a few years. Madame Curie is smiling somewhere, right-now, but she's glowing. It was the Polonium, getcha every time. Now, you kids go and play nice (or not). Queries: why lie about this and hide it? Are they pathological-liars? Should we bother even asking? The tumor is reported to be well, and resting. I was worried for it.
I think we all know why. It's a matter of political-capital, and Mrs. Bush doesn't amount to much. Vice President George W. Bush had lesions removed from his face in 2001--they'll be running-for-office in a few years. Madame Curie is smiling somewhere, right-now, but she's glowing. It was the Polonium, getcha every time. Now, you kids go and play nice (or not). Queries: why lie about this and hide it? Are they pathological-liars? Should we bother even asking? The tumor is reported to be well, and resting. I was worried for it.
JOE BARBERA, DEAD AT 95
The Ranger really isn't gonna like this one: Yes, Hann
a-Barbera are no-more. Joe died this-week at the incredibly old-age of 95. ZOINKS!!! At 95, I think your toenails must hurt too. Who's going to bankroll all the crappy animation?! It wasn't entirely their fault. After the 1940s, people like the Fleischers were gone, American animation being nearly-dead by the early 1960s. It just cost too-much--or at least that's how the story goes. Meanwhile, the Soviets were kicking-our-asses with Sputnik...and animation. In fact, if you look at animation worldwide from the 1950s to the present, we have sucked at it for half-a-century. Cartoon Network is great, but most of the stuff I like just slags how bad Hanna-Barbera were for over 40-years. It's like a celebrity-roast. The best we have right-now is Linklater's "A Scanner Darkly", but that's really just rotoscoping, like tracing. Still, it's impressive, and you should see it. It's going to change how movies are made in a number of ways, and it only cost $8 million.
I know, I know, there are a few great examples, like some of Ralph Bakshi's work. But overall, it's clear we'll never make something like the quality of the Looney Tunes, early-Disney, or the Fleischers (Popeye, Superman, Betty Boop, etc.). So, why not have a fund for it? I'm not saying we should stop doing commercial animation, but why not fund it so we have something that doesn't look like poorly-articulated dog shit? You know, characters with three-finger (easier and cheaper to animate), "movement" that make Clutch Cargo look like Fantasia, crap. Sure, those Saturday morning cartoons in the 70s were hilarious because they were so cheesy, but let's have some pride here. Even CANADA is better at it, Jesus Christ. State-funded art? Yep, an uphill-battle, we're cretinous. Zoinks indeed.
a-Barbera are no-more. Joe died this-week at the incredibly old-age of 95. ZOINKS!!! At 95, I think your toenails must hurt too. Who's going to bankroll all the crappy animation?! It wasn't entirely their fault. After the 1940s, people like the Fleischers were gone, American animation being nearly-dead by the early 1960s. It just cost too-much--or at least that's how the story goes. Meanwhile, the Soviets were kicking-our-asses with Sputnik...and animation. In fact, if you look at animation worldwide from the 1950s to the present, we have sucked at it for half-a-century. Cartoon Network is great, but most of the stuff I like just slags how bad Hanna-Barbera were for over 40-years. It's like a celebrity-roast. The best we have right-now is Linklater's "A Scanner Darkly", but that's really just rotoscoping, like tracing. Still, it's impressive, and you should see it. It's going to change how movies are made in a number of ways, and it only cost $8 million.I know, I know, there are a few great examples, like some of Ralph Bakshi's work. But overall, it's clear we'll never make something like the quality of the Looney Tunes, early-Disney, or the Fleischers (Popeye, Superman, Betty Boop, etc.). So, why not have a fund for it? I'm not saying we should stop doing commercial animation, but why not fund it so we have something that doesn't look like poorly-articulated dog shit? You know, characters with three-finger (easier and cheaper to animate), "movement" that make Clutch Cargo look like Fantasia, crap. Sure, those Saturday morning cartoons in the 70s were hilarious because they were so cheesy, but let's have some pride here. Even CANADA is better at it, Jesus Christ. State-funded art? Yep, an uphill-battle, we're cretinous. Zoinks indeed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)