Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Washington D.C.--C'mon, Mr. President, we all know that you--like--totally believe in dragons. While wearing a cruddy green-tie, you told the press at your first conference in two-months this bizarre statement. You've been lying low, and we know why: you look like the used car salesman you always were.
This will be the most manic-depressive administration in American history. Herbert Hoover did the same thing when the economy exploded in everyone's face. He hid. We know that there's plenty the president can do, but that he won't, not ever.
OK, not that that's anything new. You and your party--the GOP--have been living under all kinds of delusions that could never be mistaken for a real ideology. Wanton greed, ineptness, and criminality don't constitute anything but what they are. Being propped-up by the money of rich criminals isn't exactly an honorable profession. A pimp who beats his stable is more deserving of respect.
You claim that you cannot do anything about the current oil-crisis without help from Congress, yet with all of the questionable executive orders and signing statements you've authorized, you won't sign one that puts a temporary-cap on energy prices...do I have to spell-it-out? We know high energy prices were all part of the plan, formulated well before your unfortunate seizure of the White House in late-2000. That's why the minutes to your administration's energy policy meetings from 2001 are still classified, and why you're fighting tooth-and-nail to keep it that way until you're safely out of office.
You're right, Mr. President, there is no "magic wand" that's going to change the fact that you and your administration are just compromised employees of Big Oil. Now you're pushing to drill in the ANWAR in Alaska again, and other domestic locations that can only--key word in all of this--compromise our already fragile ecological system. Doing these explorations merely benefits the same selfish interests you serve, essentially giving-away public lands to be despoiled in yet another case of corporate welfare. It also keeps us "addicted" to petroleum, and does nothing to fix the situation. Again, all unsurprising coming from such an obvious den of criminals. The obvious byproducts of corruption are poisonous ones.
This writer learned a long time ago that listening to and reading what you and members of your administration say doesn't matter: it's your actions that count, but most Americans are afraid of confronting you and your illegitimate regime. They shouldn't be, we outnumber you, and there's no force on earth that's going to stop a popular groundswell against you. Not even your "non-lethal" technologies that will be quickly trumped by a newer, cheaper counter-technology that can be fielded faster.
But Americans are lazy, apathetic...or are they? This is the usual shortcut-to-thinking that many of us engage in to avoid responsibility for the state of things. It allows us not to act. With many of their backs now to-the-wall, and a lot of time to figure things out, Americans are getting angry, active, and very-very vocal. The example of the truckers protesting is truly a marvel to behold. Soon, they're going to be on-strike, and if energy prices get high enough, general strikes in major American cities become a likelihood.
The only "magic wand" is the public making you bend to their will, Mr. President, but that's not good enough. The real "magic" would be the impeachment of an entire administration. The Democrats are doing their best to disenchant us all with their inaction. As a result of this, there will be horrible new precedents set for future presidents to act on. They'll be able to discard the law when it suits them too. The Democratic Party wants that power too.
No magic there, it was all openly-enabled by both parties, and every branch of government. The magic will be pacifying and containing the Populist uprisings that will inevitably come from the crash that is upon us. If an order cannot provide, that order is generally finished. This has been in the minds of the planners of the last eight-years for a very long time: how do you pacify the public when you cannot or will not provide essentials anymore? Ultimately, you can't. That spells "curtains" for the current order without the traditional cycle of excess-then-reform.
You can't beat the laws of history, as Vietnam should have taught us, but being drunk on power has a tendency to cloud the senses. Again, there's no magic there, and several wrecked regimes like those of the Hapsburgs, the Romanovs, the Ottoman Turks, and the Hollenzollerns, attest to this fact. Nobody ever thought they would fall after centuries of rule, but fall they did, and virtually overnight.
Washington D.C.--But they can't come back. No air? No food? Listen pal, you need to pull yourself up by your own bootstraps. Return-trips are off the table. A modest proposal indeed. It even trumps eating Irish babies, but the president and Congress and working on that one. Iraqi and Afghani babies will have to do for now, Moloch is hungry.
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
You Don't Have to Fear a President Obama: Why the conservative corporate media is the problem between Rev. Wright and Senator Barack Obama
The Campaign Trail of Tears--There's a great deal of disappointment in all of this, and while much of this rests with Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr., the majority of the responsibility for this pseudo-controversy resides squarely with the mainstream American press. Wright shouldn't have accepted the invitation to speak before the National Press Club--this was not only ill-advised, it was unethical.
It's likely that Rev. Wright felt spurned by earlier comments from candidate Obama, he's still rising to the bait they're offering him, and the whole debacle has taken on a very personal quality between the minister and the senator. This was never inevitable, and it's a manufactured event by the media and known and unknown elements on the far-right.
The questions posed to Rev. Wright at the National Press Club were insulting and incredibly loaded, and he played into it. The man truly was in his element on Monday. Falling for this was a mistake and it was undignified of him. It really had many of the elements of grandstanding, and Senator Obama's obvious sense of being personally hurt by it all rings true. The presidential candidate's comments today were very dignified and clear. They were fair. That's a far cry from the media's torrent of abuse and exaggeration we're going to continue to see until at least May 6th. The stoking of this non-story right before the Indiana primaries can only be seen as part of an overarching plan on-the-part of many.
Nonetheless, there was nothing in the comments of the now former-pastor that this writer could find to be untrue or distorted. America isn't perfect by any stretch, and our foreign policy is not looked upon kindly throughout the world. The reasons aren't a mystery to the victims of America, only to a certain kind of American that either doesn't want to know or approves of the crimes committed in our name by violent statists. This writer found this exchange from the National Press Club to be very insightful on Rev. Wright's part:
MODERATOR: Can you elaborate on your comparison of the Roman soldiers who killed Jesus to the U.S. Marine Corps? Do you still believe that is an appropriate comparison and why?
WRIGHT: One of the things that will be covered at the symposium over the next two days is biblical history, which many of the working press are unfamiliar with.
In biblical history, there’s not one word written in the Bible between Genesis and Revelations that was not written under one of six different kinds of oppression, Egyptian oppression, Assyrian oppression, Persian oppression, Greek oppression, Roman oppression, Babylonian oppression.
The Roman oppression is the period in which Jesus is born. And comparing imperialism that was going on in Luke, imperialism was going on when Caesar Augustus sent out a decree that the whole world should be taxed. They weren’t in charge of the world. It sounds like some other governments I know.
That, yes, I can compare that. We have troops stationed all over the world, just like Rome had troops stationed all over the world, because we run the world. That notion of imperialism is not the message of the gospel of the prince of peace, nor of God, who loves the world. ("Transcript: Rev. Wright at the National Press Club, FoxNews.com, 04.28.2008)
Why else would Jesus have been crucified by the Romans? Sorry, the Jews didn't crucify people for heresy, they stoned them to death. Jesus was seen as a political threat to an imperial order, and he was executed for challenging the power of Rome. The Jesus movement posed a serious threat to the Romans--they were used to countering violence with violence, but the basically non-violent actions of this lowly carpenter and his movement were something dangerous and new. Sound familiar?
Aren't we doing what the Romans once did by occupying Iraq, slaughtering tens-of-thousands for economic-gain? The mass graves have returned to Iraq, and we're responsible for all of them. Our clients in the puppet Iraqi government are expediting much of this for us. The methods of imperialism haven't changed much since the time or the Romans. Resistance to occupation is also eternal, and there are only so many ways of going about it.
In genuine Christianity, there is an acceptance of the struggle against tyranny. It should be remembered that the Founding Fathers were quite obsessed with and fond of Roman culture, politics, and civilization, a culture whose economy was based on conquest and slavery. Another fact is that most of them weren't Christians, but "deists," individuals who believe in a higher spiritual power, but not in the divinity of Christ. A significant number of elements of our system of government are patterned after the Roman model.
All that aside, if we're honest with ourselves, we can admit that we know this is a settler state whose economy was built on genocide, human slavery, then wage slavery, which is our current anthropological crisis that began and was finalized in the wake of the Civil War. Perhaps one of the things that most Americans don't understand is that Wright is merely acknowledging that struggle is eternal. He's simply calling it as he sees it, and has been appropriately vocal about the war in Iraq as being imperialism. That's because it is.
This country began as a renegade nation, and while much of this is admirable, we defiantly assert that our law trumps international law and treaties. This refrain is echoed from the so-called "liberal left" of the Democrats in Congress, to the wackiest of GOP incumbents and the Libertarian right. Our own laws have had disastrous effects on ethnic and cultural minorities over much of our history, notably national drug sentencing legislation that results in markedly different sentences between those of white offenders and black offenders.
Right here in Indiana, the first eugenics laws sterilizing minorities, the poor, the mentally handicapped, and prison inmates, began 101 years ago. This is said by scholars to have in-part inspired the eugenics policies of the National Socialist state under Hitler. The Nazis also admired our Indian reservations, and modeled certain features of their concentration camps after our own. Then there are the thousands of lynchings from the end of the Civil War until the 1930s. The last publicly-held lynching occurred right here in Indiana in August of 1930 in Marion, a town that Senator Obama has spoken at.
America's racialist record against Black Americans goes without saying, and it's still a poor one. The recent verdict exonerating the police in the shooting of unarmed groom Sean Bell in Brooklyn should be viewed as the opening-shots of a second phase civil rights movement, it's here. The reactions to these events tends to be catalyzing, it brings people together in common cause, as it should. Then there's the ongoing mistreatment and exploitation of Native Americans (Canada's record is no better). No, years after the fall of Apartheid in South Africa, America doesn't look particularly progressive, and is more of an embarrassment throughout the developed world. This is a very simple fact that shouldn't be ignored, and we do so at our peril.
None of this is exactly Barack Obama's fault, nor is it the fault of Rev. Wright for making what this writer considers to be very subdued statements on where America really has been, and what it has done to the lives of millions across the globe for a century. A time will come when the world has had enough of the misbehavior of the United States, and the results are likely to be catastrophic for everyone. That's the tragedy: we're blowing it by allowing the media to tell us the real nature of Rev. Wright's statements, and dishonoring the victims of America. They are many. America should also be ashamed that she imprisons so many for so little.
In the context of this very short list of our nation's shortcomings, it's wrong that Barack Obama has been forced into a corner in all of this. He did not make the statements, and the musings of the Reverend aren't factually incorrect. The media will continue this story into heavy-rotation, and it's role is to serve the other two candidates. The public needs to begin openly asking why this is so, and the onus is on media spokespeople and ownership. They have a lot of explaining to do.
Why is this story being covered so heavily? Decide for yourselves, but the effect is obvious and calculated to aid Hillary Clinton, then John McCain, who she's going to lose to if she wins the nomination. Neither Clinton or John McCain are reasonable alternatives to George W. Bush's mismanagement of government, and are likely to bring more of the same to the common good--a death-blow. Again: what is this campaign against Barack Obama? We've heard it before--it's the Republican echo-chamber that downed Howard Dean, John Kerry. So why would Hillary Clinton want to put her own interests above those of her party? Yes, it's personal ambition, but Senator Clinton's voting record and her public statements on public policy frequently echo those of GOP incumbents.
If Clinton was any more establishment, her last name would be Rockefeller. Likewise for McCain, that privileged lily-white admiral's son who bombed women and children from the air like a videogame over North Vietnam. At least he didn't dodge the draft like the current sitting president and vice president. Somehow, the GOP is "stronger on national security," even after failing to properly protect New York City and Washington D.C. on September 11th, 2001. They couldn't have done it without the help of a heavily-concentrated corporate media. They say you become a Republican when you become rich. There are no liberal media outlets, and scarcely ever were.
The goal in all of this manufactured controversy is to detach traditionally conservative white voters in states like Indiana, causing them to become afraid of Barack Obama and to shift their votes back to Hillary Clinton, John McCain, and the GOP in general. The media will have been instrumental in this if they are successful, and their role has been an inappropriate one. Rev. Wright is probably just doing what he thinks is right in all of this, and he is speaking the truth.
He just needs to pick the time and the place for it a little better.The best thing Rev. Wright can do now is to apologize to Senator Obama for the timing of his comments at the National Press Club, and to keep a low-profile until the elections are over. Please. Go have a good vacation somewhere quiet Reverend, away from the right-wing partisan press. Obama has to render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. The rest is between him, Rev. Wright, and his God, not the media or the public. This is just another lynching, turning two Black men against one another. Welcome, to the United States of America. It's a mess, isn't it?
Transcript of Rev. Wright's comments at the National Press Club on Monday: http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/04/28/transcript-rev-wright-at-the-national-press-club/
06/09/2008 Postscript: Besides, he's likely to be just as much of a sellout as anyone. All the more reason to watch him and to pressure him to do what we--the people--want them to do. Nothing much, just meeting basic human needs, promoting stability, the common good--boring shit from civics class, I know, but still important to all of us having a future.
Indiana's 2nd District--Expect much more on this individual, Tony Zirkle. Who is Mr. Zirkle? You could not make someone like Tony Zirkle up, only the human condition could. It would be too polite to refer to him as a confirmed whack-o, or that he's decidedly racist. Zirkle's law office (one of five he purportedly owns and runs) is located in Crown Point, Indiana, a place that would be essentially unknown were it not for John Dillinger's clever escape from the County Jail with a wooden-gun.
Zirkle compromises the worst that Indiana has to offer the rest of humanity, forget the rest of America. On Sunday, The South Bend Tribune--our one newspaper--asked all of the runners for seats in and representing Indiana, some interesting questions on current issues.
Each of the runners' political affiliation, educational background, political experience, and even age, were laid-out nicely. First, we got a lot of hot air from soon-to-be former Republican Governor Mitch Daniels (aka "Scarface," Bush's economics adviser in the first term, hint-hint), and some interesting answers from Jill Long Thompson, and James Schellinger, both Democrats running against the incumbent governor. Not a bad piece, and all done from questionnaires sent to each candidate.
Democratic Representative Joe Donnelly's answers about Iraq--and nearly everything else-- were disappointing as usual, and there appears to be no viable Democratic candidate to replace him in this district...but that's where the GOP's runners come in, at the tail-end of the piece.
Of all of the candidates for the 2nd District of Indiana's representative seat, Joseph Alan Roush wins the award for the most human and progressive platform on every issue he was questioned on, including Iraq--he wants a full-withdrawal. Immigration? he wants an end to NAFTA, and doesn't blame migratory workers and illegal immigrants. If Roush actually makes it further, it will be because of a progressive platform, and not because he's a Republican. It's doubtful Indiana's GOP will be giving him much support.
But this makes Roush a more reasonable candidate than the boorish Joe Donnelly, a man who won't be getting my vote anytime soon. The rest is fine-print, see for yourself. But then...then (brace yourselves), there's Tony Zirkle:
Tony Hvfvgpd ZirkleAnd there it is, Tony Zirkle. He has a presence on the Internet, making a real spectacle of himself regularly there (and in courtrooms). Google his name sometime. You're bound to be offended, but always entertained.
Address: Homeless [Ed.-?!]
Political affiliation: Republican -- Original Intent [Ed.-?!]
Education: U.S. Naval Academy; Georgetown University, B.S.F.S. International Economics; Andrews University, B.A. religion & economics; Indiana University Bloomington School of Law, J.D.; Andrews University Theological Seminary, master's in divinity candidate (two tests remain to completion)
Political Experience: 1988-1989 -- Indiana state president, Future Business Leaders of America; 1989, 1990, 1992 -- class president, U.S. Naval Academy.
Ran as a Republican for the following offices [Ed.--And blessedly failed...]:
2000 -- Indiana House, District 8
2002 & 2006 -- St. Joseph Co. Prosecutor
2004, 2006, & 2008 -- U.S. House of Representatives, Indiana 2nd District
What's the best solution to the conflict in Iraq?
The best solution? Stop glorifying adultery by enshrining neo-Baal porn worship in the heart of the First Amendment. Porn-adultery appoints "terror" to us. Lev. 26:16. Remember, slave-raping extended the Civil War. [Ed.--The meaning of this answer escapes me entirely, but perhaps Mr. Zirkle should try his hand at writing science fiction some time in the near-future, he's got a wild imagination. At-minimum, the candidate appears to be sexually-obsessed. One has to wonder if he's ever seen a prostitute or a mistress...]
Describe your position on illegal immigration.
If we want immigration fixed, the absolute critical issue is to secure local concurrent jurisdiction to enforce immigration laws with no bond holds. I would compromise on almost all for that. [Ed.--It should be noted here that Mr. Zirkle represents illegal immigrants. One might ask him how many clients he has achieved exoneration for.]
Explain your position on the rising price of oil.
We need a LaPorte County U.S. Civil Service Academy where the master's and doctorate students and researchers will have an unobstructed key to the patent office for energy technological development. [Ed.-?!] ("Candidates Seek to Challenge Donnelly," The South Bend Tribune, 04.27.2008)
Yet the fear will remain that there are creatures bearing his name: race-baiter, religious nut, and all-around opportunist and grouser, Tony Zirkle. Dr. Seuss could never had made you up. He didn't do nightmares (much). And here I didn't even mention that Tony wants to bring back the guillotine, and a segregated United States that closely resembles the version the Aryan Nations would prefer. Then, there's the birthday party for Hitler that he attended recently with some armband wearing friends. Tony Zirkle: how the other 1% lives.
Tony's Scary, and he keeps scarier company...I think: http://wonkette.com/politics/tony-zirkle/tony-zirkle-keepin-it-scarily-real-168906.php
Tony at a birthday party for Adolph Hitler: http://nwitimes.com/articles/2008/04/23/news/top_news/docf6a35b9d5a72e89d8625743300832e52.txt
"Worst Campaign Idea Ever?": http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=12532
Monday, April 28, 2008
spokespeople that SWAT teams are amassing right now on the Deseronto
and Slash Roads, bordering the Tyendinaga quarry reclamation site.
Community spokesperson Jason Maracle has just been told by the OPP to
pull people out of the quarry because they are going in.
please call the premier's office immediately and urge them to:
-Honour Mohawk land, call off the OPP: Do not risk people's lives
for a gravel pit the government has already acknowledged is on Mohawk
-Release all First Nations political prisoners! If they don't well will be seeing plenty more in the next few weeks here in Canada!!
Sunday, April 27, 2008
All eyes are on Indiana: A little knock at the door from the Clinton campaign...quoting Ralph Nader's Public Citizen
"No, we're voting Obama." I said. The Clinton-volunteer was very well-mannered, but sounded genuinely disappointed and made the call painless and brief. What can I say? There's no force on earth that would compel me to lose my mind and vote for Hillary Clinton. Admittedly, there are many times I feel it's not worth it to vote for Obama either. That's where the usefulness of the third party and "third-way" come in. Victory comes in successfully pressuring office-holders while constructing a solid political base. Change comes slowly, over generations.
Still, I think Obama's capable of listening to the American public if we pressure him enough, rather than achieving nothing-at-all with the Republicans. There's a reason why the remnants of our national unions don't contribute to the GOP--they should begin reconsidering their financial support of the DNC, it hasn't worked-out for them. Nonetheless, we should be asking ourselves why we have to pressure politicians who talk the talk, but refuse to walk the walk. We should be asking them directly why they vote the way they do, and quit ignoring the warning signs.
Frankly, Obama's a mixed-bag and he's being coy about a lot of his voting behavior in the Senate. Senators Obama and Clinton skipped the vote on the renewal of FISA with the constitutionally questionable Protect America Act (PAA) provisions that could grant the telecommunications companies legal immunity from prosecution for cooperating with illegal warrantless surveillance program initiated by the Bush administration in 2002.
This was very cagey behavior, and it raises very serious questions about their commitment to upholding the right of the American public to privacy. This is just one example, there are many others. Importantly, candidates Obama, Clinton, and McCain need to explain why they keep funding the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and why there haven't been serious moves towards impeachment of the current administration.
Saturday, we received the mailer below (pictured with its reverse-side). What's interesting is that it makes a case that is just another half-truth about candidate Obama. While it's true that Senator Clinton voted against HR 6 in the summer of 2005, and Obama voted for it, her campaign's math is wrong in the subsides to big oil and other dirty energy industries, and there are other problems in the mailer.
Is Barack Obama hiding his light underneath a bushel? Perhaps, but note the language in the mailer: "THE TRUTH: Energy company employees donated over $650,000 to Barack Obama and got what they wanted." Note that the key word is "employees." That could be anyone. It could be a CEO, or it could be an engineer. It could be a janitor or even a secretary, maybe even a couple of warehouse workers. The mailer doesn't go into that kind of detail, but it should when it makes such scathing accusations. Looking directly at its source--the Center for Responsive Politics's website opensecrets.org--oil companies aren't anywhere near the top donors to Obama, but sketchy lenders like JP Morgan Chase and Citigroup are. The mailer has its origins in a campaign strategy that appears to have been unleashed as early as late-February, early-March of this year in other states.
Frankly, candidate Clinton has no room to criticize. The last few weeks have shown that the Senator from New York is willing to stoop very low indeed to win, and is willing to win at any cost. Her donors represent the Fortune 500 in as many areas as Obama's do, if not more. That should tell you something about how forthcoming she'll be as a president. Not even race-baiting has been low enough, and that suggests a tendency towards ruthlessness. This should be no surprise.
Clinton's campaign quoting of Public Citizen's article "The Best Bill Corporations Could Buy: Summary of Industry Giveaways in the 2005 Energy Bill" is particularly galling considering Ralph Nader and his campaign aren't impressed with either candidate, and likely less so with Clinton. "Indiana families can't afford Barack Obama"? That's a presumptuous comment considering that the Senator and her husband granted China most favored nation trading status to China in the early-1990s, as well as the passage of NAFTA, running roughshod over the unions and everyone else standing in the way.
The Clintons were hardly alone in this anti-labor charge. The reason that the GOP hates the Clintons so much is because they simply stole their fire. It's a personal enmity, not a doctrinal one. They've got the Republicans beat at being anti-labor, and they're working on being more hawk-like when it comes to war. That's why Senator Clinton won't apologize for her "yea" vote that gave full-authorization for aggression against Iraq in 2002. She's hardly sorry about it at all. Why should she be? Actions speak louder than words. She might find-out how John Kerry felt in 2004, possibly the first political casualty of the war in Iraq. So be it.
Candidate Obama appears to have his own problems in these areas as well, but admittedly has a considerably shorter voting record on social issues, and generally, everything else. He wasn't in the Senate in 2002, and so we can only speculate how he would have voted. It's the opinion of this writer than he would have given it a "yea" vote had he been in office at the time. None of this speaks well of him.
What we do know is sometimes troubling, and Senator Obama should be able to answer direct questions regarding the reasoning behind how and why he voted the way he did on particular issues. However, a much greater onus is on Senator Clinton since we have a clearer picture of where she's coming-from, and it's not the left. There is more hope with Obama, but it should be tempered with a stark pragmatism and suspicion. Shaking babies (for loose-change), and kissing hands (of the rich) isn't going to cut it anymore.
The St. Petersburg Times on the accuracy of the Clinton campaign's claims against Obama and energy company donations: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/443/
Senate Rollcall for HR6, Summer of 2005: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00213
Exactly how Ralph Nader feels about Hillary Clinton's track record:
Contributions to Senator Barack Obama's campaigns from 1989-2006, Center for Responsive Politics, as of March 31st, 2008: http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/allcontrib.asp?CID=n00009638
Saturday, April 26, 2008
MNN: April 25, 2008. Aserakowa 613-243-4993 still at the quarry.
Shawn Brant was doing a media interview with APTN News in Tyendinaga on Deseronto Boundary Road. Ontario Provincial Police came along with an outstanding assault charge. They arrested Shawn. They hauled him off to jail. Then the OPP closed both ends of Deseronto Road. The Aserakowa came down to see what was going on.
Steve Flynn of Aboriginal Response Team ART of the OPP showed up. We talked. Flynn told the Aserakowa about Shawn. By then we had men at both ends of the road. He talked about opening the road. Flynn said, “You walk away and we’ll walk away. Okay?” Both Flynn and the Aserkowa agreed.
“We will get in our cars and you’ll get in yours”, said Flynn. It turned out to be a set up. The Rotiskenreketeh started moving off the road. Suddenly about 10 OPP jumped about 5 of our guys, threw them in the ditch, beat them up and arrested them. They hauled them off to jail. No reasons were given for the arrests or assaults. The OPP is certain not operating on an honorable nation to nation model. It is not even offering the kind of fiduciary protection for indigenous rights as it is supposed to, according to the supreme Court of Canada.
Since when have the colonial institutions ever acted to protect Indigenous people?
After behaving like thugs and beating up our guys, the OPP pulled out their weapons and pointed them at us. For our safety, we retreated back to the quarry. We didn’t want to get shot.
Once we got there cops swarmed us from every direction. They were everywhere as far as we could see, armed to the teeth with their guns pointed directly at us all the time.
Then they came over with loud speakers, told us to come away from the quarry, down the hill, with our hands up in the air “where we can see them”.
We told them, “Fuck you. This is Mohawk land. We’re not leaving”. They raised their weapons and aimed at us again.
“You’re going to have to shoot us”, we told them.
Then there was more build up. They told us they are coming in at dark to take us out. They are moving Mohawk people off Mohawk lands at the end of a gun barrel.
The Mohawks are unarmed.
The OPP have SWAT Teams, ambulances, dogs and we can’t see if they ships in the water.
Arrested are Clint Brant, Steve Hill, Dan Doreen, Shawn Brant and Mac Kunkel. We don’t know where they’ve been taken.
Six Nations people have closed down three roads. Akwesasne guys are on the International Bridge. In Kahnawake there will be closures.
They will be coming after us at about 8:30 pm EDT, as soon as it gets dark.
We’re not moving. We know that.
We don’t know what’s going to happen. This is Ipperwash, 1990, Gustafsen Lake, Six Nations, the list goes on. If they harm any of those guys at Tyendinaga, there’s no saying what will happen.
The message from the men is that we will defend the land. That’s our duty according to the Kaianerekowa, Great Law of Peace, the law of Turtle Island.
SEND URGENT OBJECTIONS TO PREMIER MCGUINTY OF ONTARIO; PRIME MINISTER STEVEN HARPER; JULIAN FANTINO COMMISSIONER OF THE OPP: tell them to call off their thugs and stop breaking the peace. They have a obligations under international law to resolve any disagreements peacefully. They have an obligation to keep the peace, not to break it.
LIVES ARE AT STAKE.
MNN Mohawk Nation News
Subject: Stop attack on Mohawks
The whole world is watching. Stop your attack on the Mohawks now. The land is theirs and the world supports them. They are right and you are wrong.
World Temperate Rainforest Network
PO Box 154 Peshastin, WA 98847
Subject: RED ALERT IN CALEDONIA !!!!!!!!! FORWARD OUT ASAP!
Just got a phone call from Jacqueline House at Six Nations. In protest to what the Canadian govt. and OPP armed officers are doing at Tyendinaga, the Six Nations have now BLOCKED the By-Pass road at Caledonia!!!!! 3 Men have been arrested and have been jailed at Tyendinaga.
Jacqueline House stated that all relatives with connections to people at these Reserves, PLEASE CALL and try to mobilize help to the area ASAP.
Thanks everyone, please, PLEASE keep our relatives in your prayers, Bluejay
I've contacted the OPP to let them know that badge or no badge, they are not absolved in the eyes of our Creator for that which they do.
This activity will be monitored by the world.
Dieter of Germany
FOR INFORMATION CALL:
Jan Hill 613-961-8515 613-827-1547
Rotiskenrekete 613-849-1314 613-827-4991
OPP Easter Headquarters 613-284-4500 L.G. Beechey Chief Supt. Commander Eastern Region
R. Don Maracle 613-396-3089 Cell 613-391-9249
GENOCIDE IS HAPPENING AT THIS HOUR AT TYENDINAGA.
THEIR POSITION IS THEY ARE NOT MOVING. THEY ARE GOING DOWN. THEY WILL DEFEND THEMSELVES. THEY ARE NOT GIVING UP THE LAND.
MNN Mohawk Nation News
Friday, April 25, 2008
Ed.--I got this today from Ralph Nader's campaign, possibly the only group of citizens who are 100% sincere about changing America for the better. Nobody will ever convince me voting for him in 2000 was a mistake--I didn't vote for Gore or Bush, so my soul feels safe, and I don't possess a sports mentality when it comes to elections. The Gore and Bush campaigns lost the election for Ralph Nader, as did the public. Blame yourselves for the last eight years. It appears that many in the so-called "progressive movement" are drinking the Flavor-Aide™ from Jonestown.
From the Nader campaign:
If you believe that the Democratic Party is the answer to what ails us as a nation, then please, be our guest -- give them some more money.
If on the other hand, you believe that the Democratic Party is part of the system of corporate control and domination, then there is a clear choice:
Earlier this month, we wrote that it was "shameful" that progressives like Medea Benjamin were supporting the Democratic Party over Nader/Gonzalez.
Medea posted a response on one of our blogs, saying she was offended by the accusation, and said we should "respect" each other's choices.
Medea used the word "respect" three times in one paragraph.
One person who was on the receiving end of Medea's "respect" in 2004 was Peter Camejo, Ralph's running mate in 2004.
We asked Peter to respond to Medea.
Please read Peter's essay carefully.
Pass it around.
If you agree with Peter -- then please help fund our growing alternative voice to the corporate two-party duopoly.
Have a safe weekend.
The Nader Team
By Peter Camejo
I was stunned to see Medea Benjamin complaining to the Nader/Gonzalez campaign because the campaign had used the word "shameful" in referring to "progressive" Democrats who had supported the pro-war, pro-Patriot Act, anti-labor, and anti-environmental candidate John Kerry in 2004.
I have great personal admiration for Medea Benjamin for many of the stands and actions she has taken through the years. But her capitulation to the Democratic Party has been truly disappointing.
Medea Benjamin eventually joined the "progressive" Democrats and has become an active supporter of the Democratic Party.
Without the Democratic Party's support, Bush's war policies could never have been implemented. The Democrats voted in Congress a resolution that included the phrase, "unequivocal support for George Bush's conduct of the war in Iraq."
They have voted for all the funding requests for the war in Iraq. In 2005 at the State of Union address, the entire Congress, with few if any exceptions, gave George Bush 39 standing ovations in one hour. They rose to their feet and applauded every time Bush used the word Iraq even before he finished his sentence.
Of course this is nothing new for the Democratic Party. This is the Party of human slavery, of the Jim Crow of 5,000 lynchings, of fighting the right of women to vote, and of imprisoning Japanese Americans in camps.
This is the Party that launched a war of mass murder killing two million Vietnamese as the "peace" party in the 1960s. It is the party that has supported the destruction of the trade unions, lowered taxes for the rich -- while raising them for the poor. The Democrats voted 98% in favor of the Patriot Act in the Senate without reading it.
Earlier, 100 percent of Senate Democrats voted to confirm the right-winger Antonin Scalia for the Supreme Court.
In 2004 the Democrats ran John Kerry for President -- the same John Kerry who said he could implement Bush's war policies better than Bush especially in increasing militarization in America and promoting the war in Iraq.
What confuses so many progressively inclined people is they do not really understand that our society is controlled by the corporate power of concentrated money.
The corporations and the super rich -- through their domination of the government, the media, and educational institutions and of course the two parties -- run our society.
The totalitarian rule of money is a self correcting mechanism. It has flexibility which is part of why it is so powerful.
The two-party system allows the appearance of differences and adjustments to public sentiment. It has become the single most successful political form for the rule of a minority over a majority in the history of the world. How this system of control developed, consolidated, and has survived through the years will be studied for years to come.
The front line in this denial of democracy is the Democratic Party because it is the instrument that controls, channels and co-opts the forces that otherwise could challenge the rule of concentrated money.
It is precisely the "differences" between the two major parties that makes the system effective.
And the front line in the battle for the control of money over people are the so-called "progressive" Democrats who talk the talk. They confuse people, prevent free elections, and fight hardest to undermine a Nader/Camejo candidacy or a Nader/Gonzalez candidacy or any other candidacy whose voice for democracy begins to be heard.
They may think they are helping move the country toward a more progressive agenda. But in fact, they are deepening the illusion that answers can be found through the Democratic Party. In turn, this reinforces the two-party domination over the United States, making possible the horrendous policies we have seen over the last eight years.
You--Medea Benjamin--are now one of those on the front lines defending the two-party domination, and as a direct result, defending the rule of concentrated money and other illegalities and injustices of our present system.
You can't have it both ways.
In 2004, the Democrats went further than just supporting Bush's policies.
They led a massive campaign to silence the only well known candidacy that opposed Bush's policies. They did this by manipulation.
They sent representatives into the Nader/Camejo campaign to disrupt it, to seek to prevent his supporters from getting Nader/Camejo on the ballot. They actively sought to prevent those who disagreed -- and favored peace, social justice and democracy -- to have a voice.
They harassed people trying to petition for Nader/Camejo. They brought at one time over twenty lawsuits to try to block Nader/Camejo's campaign from state ballots. They spent tens of millions of dollars in their battle against free elections and against voter choice.
Even today they are trying to "fine" Nader/Camejo tens of thousands of dollars for merely seeking ballot access in the State of Pennsylvania.
I personally had to pay them $20,000 not to have a lien put on my home for having been Ralph Nader's Vice Presidential candidate.
The Democrats, especially the people you, Media Benjamin, call "progressives," were the most vicious in their endless diatribes against Nader calling him "crazy," "ego maniacal," "stupid," and "agent of Bush."
Media Benjamin you are now shocked that the Nader/Gonzalez campaign used the term "shameful."
Where was Medea Benjamin during the Democrats hate campaign against democracy in 2004? You were campaigning for a pro-war candidate and supporting the vicious anti-Nader/Camejo campaign.
Medea Benjamin in her effort to support John Kerry helped successfully to manipulate within the Green Party support for David Cobb, the anti-Nader pro-voting Democrat candidate who favored US occupation of Iraq in two public debates with me.
She worked to get the Green Party convention to prevent Nader/Camejo from being endorsed after Nader/Camejo representatives won a number of Green Party primaries and state conventions, including California.
During the 2004 campaign, there was a letter on David Cobb's web site titled "Vote Kerry and Cobb." And it was signed by Medea Benjamin, among others.
If you are going to seek fairness and oppose "trashing," why don't you start with all your friends whose extreme public attacks on Nader/Camejo you never protested?
Why not promote among your Democratic friends the publishing of ads apologizing to Nader and the American people for the twenty-four harassing lawsuits in twelve weeks filed by Republican corporate law firms like Reed Smith and Kirkland & Ellis and abuses they committed in 2004 against the rights of the American people to have free elections and voter choice?
Yes Medea Benjamin you have the right -- like so many before you -- to seek to reform the Democratic Party. The truth is, however, that what you actually achieve is to give cover for this pro-war anti-labor political organization. Millions upon millions have tried to reform the Democratic Party for decades.
The AFL-CIO went in to reform the Democrats with millions upon millions of supporters only to be reduced from 33% of the work force to 12% -- a submissively controlled force ineffective in defending even their own existence -- unable to even get the Democratic Party to repeal the notorious anti-labor Taft Hartley law of 1947.
The generation of progressive "leaders" that capitulate in 2004 will have to be replaced by a new generation that will stand by principles like the early abolitionists of the Liberty Party, the Populists who led the uprising of 1890s, the Debsian socialists and Women's Party activists of the early twentieth century -- and yes like Ralph Nader who refuses to capitulate to a Democratic Party that has and is selling out the American people.
Making personal attacks on Ralph Nader is starting to get a little old. Maybe it's time for your Democratic Party friends to end their political bigotry against Nader/Gonzalez.
Yes we should all work together on issues we agree on. Yes we should try to get people regardless of what party they are registered with to support specific objectives.
That is how the most massive peace demonstrations ever were organized in the 1960s and 1970s or the millions who marched together for immigrant rights just a couple of years ago. Of course none of those actions were ever supported by your Party, the Democrats.
The ranks of the Democratic Party are desperately seeking change. In time they will see that the Democratic Party cannot be and will not be the agency through which peace, social justice and saving our environment will come. On this issue you and I remain divided. On the debate about this issue Nader and those supporting him have been saints in their language in comparison to your friends in the Democratic Party.
The Nader/Gonzalez campaign has nothing to apologize for. Nader has been one of the most beautiful examples of showing respect for all including those who disagree with him.
It is time for you and your Democratic Party associates to show respect and apologize to Ralph Nader.
The Land of Hoosiers (laborers who do shoddy-work)--This is very possible. The GOP and Hillary Clinton's campaign (the GOP) are very concerned about how traditionally conservative voters (farmers) are flocking to candidate Barack Obama. They should be, and they should change their platforms radically towards what the public wants and needs: fundamental change. Frankly, Obama has yet to do this on several points.
In the 2006 midterms, voting-patterns shifted in a way that hadn't occurred since 1968, the year I was born. This was especially true in Indiana--so much so that the English press took-note of it. That's a change from forty years of reaction. Again, some of this shift is from the attrition-rate of the WWII generation, but a losing war and economic woes have fueled the fires of discontent in Indiana and throughout the nation.
My hopes are that Obama will clinch it here in a very big way, and from my own observations, he has more than a fighting chance. Do I think he's going to be some Black messiah who saves this country from itself? No: only a unified nation is capable of this, not one man, or one person.
The end of the cult of personality is badly-needed, as well as more political parties. Yes, you read that one correctly. Barack Obama isn't the solution to everything. The time for viable Third Parties has come. When Obama fails us on nearly all of the fundamental issues (thanks to your inaction), the action in this direction will come.
Yes, as crazy as it appears in-print, even the rednecks are considering voting for a Black American for the the first time in their storied lives. Indiana is showing that peculiar ability...to change. I salute them if they do, and call on a new day in America in-the-aftermath of such momentous change. They will have earned a lot of praise, a lot of back-slapping. There is such a thing as a "good-old-boy," you know, and they're beginning to understand how money runs things in our political system.
Even if Obama doesn't sweep Indiana, Kurt Vonnegut and Eugene Debs might rest a little easier in their graves. If Ralph Nader somehow won, it would be assured. Amen. Change is only possible when we, the people, get active and participate in the political process. But it cannot stop there: you have to watch and hold-accountable these politicians you elect, and you have to dog them until they've left office.
We have to remove money from politics, which is going to be one of the biggest challenges we will ever face as a nation. You have to force politicians to do your bidding. You, the voter--a citizen--are that missing-ingredient in American democracy.
You can do something: contact the ICC (International Criminal Court) in the Hague. Recognizing international law is crucial in the current period we're living in, and could prevent further catastrophes like the ones we saw during the 20th century with WWI and WWII, Stalinism, the rise of fascism, and numerous other examples that could have been avoided.
It's simple--we owe it to the children, and to ourselves. Want a more peaceful world? Contact the ICC now and complain about torture, the illegal invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, and everywhere else the American State is meddling in. It takes a groundswell of global citizens to keep hammering-away on these things. It takes patience. Nothing happens overnight. Time's wasting.
Congress isn't going to do anything substantial before January 21st, 2009. This is irrelevant: there is no statute of limitations on war crimes. It's not just about Bush and Cheney, or even Rumsfeld. It's about tying-the-hands of future administrations from running amok across the globe against our wishes, and the wishes of the rest of the human race. You don't need Amnesty International or Moveon.org, or anyone else--take it to the Court.
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Ok so which is it??? Apparently these guys can't pull their collective heads out of their collective arses. (just one example)
Red Cross: Change Needed at US Prison
KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — The Red Cross criticized the way the US handles prisoners at the highly secretive Bagram military base, urging reforms Monday that ...
ABC Online, Australia - Apr 14, 2008
Jacob Kellenberger cites video contact between inmates held for suspected militant ties at Bagram Air Base and their families, plus the establishment of a ...
The "Nays" Have Had it: President George W. Bush's Disapproval Rating Higher Than Hugo Chavez, Saudis, and Communist Cuba, States Historic Gallup Poll
Washington D.C./The Mainstream Media--As most of the public has been told, approval ratings for American presidents began 70-years-ago, meaning in 1938. At that time, the Democratic Franklin Delano Roosevelt was in office, and the New Deal was coming under fire, primarily from the Republicans and the rest of the business community.
Roosevelt had also attempted packing the Supreme Court, a move he was appropriately criticized for and stopped from doing. Yes, the good-old-days of accountability, it makes the heart swell, just like a Sousa march.
But it should be reflected on that if there had been polls in 1932-33, it's likely that Herbert Hoover would have won the lowest approval rating of any American president, not Harry Truman or George W. Bush. Who cares? The Republicans were the minority party for five decades. There is no better indicator than that, and this was a time when people still voted in reasonable numbers.
For five decades, the American public knew full-well that allowing a Republican majority into government would spell another economic disaster borne out of the GOP's inherent tendencies towards wanton excess and their desire for a lack of oversight in the economy (something they and the Libertarians share in their respective doctrines). Welcome to that disaster. We've collectively forgotten the lessons of the Great Depression, the down-side of losing the WWII generation to the attrition of mortality. The wheel turns.
Truman's push into the Korean peninsula during the early-1950s would never have happened without the 1949 elections that swept Republicans into Congress; representatives like, red-baiting alcoholic Joe McCarthy, segregationist Strom Thurmond, and the demagogue Richard M. Nixon whose "unpopularity" record the current president has broken, flooded into the House and the Senate. Their aim was to wreck the New Deal, which didn't work, but they scored significant victories by pushing us into unnecessary wars. Then came the repression of McCarthyism and the stagnation of the Eisenhower years. Democrats shared the blame in most all of this then, just as they do now.
Yet, without Republicans pushing the postwar Red Scare, starting with affairs like the Alger Hiss/Whittaker Chambers scandal, the Rosenbergs, and accusing anyone who didn't tow their aggressive foreign policy line as being "soft on communism," there would have been no Korean War (1950-1953), Cuban Missile Crisis, or even a Vietnam War. Imagine the social spending that would have been possible had these conflicts never occurred. We can't.
Iraq is part of an old game: divert the potential for meeting social needs with out-of-control military spending, all thanks to the same whipping-up of fear we've seen today. These same tactics still apply, which is why we're often "treated" to the GOP's flimsy-argument that they're somehow "stronger on national security," a notion that doesn't deserve serious comment or analysis.
Dramatically, the current president of the United States enjoys less popularity than Socialist President of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez. This is because Americans are understanding the the source of the majority of their current problems--the price of gasoline, rampant unemployment, an illegal war costing hundreds-of-millions every day, runaway foreclosures, no reasonably socialized medicine, etc.--originate from the extra-legal policies of the Bush administration and the GOP.
The ultimate source, however, is the economic sector, the big-big rich who both parties truly serve. The majority of the public understands this, and doesn't care for it. Action and participation in the democratic process have been the only real remedies. The public appears to finally be grasping this fact after 30+ years of being politically comatose. While it's rarely reported, the anger is most strongly directed at Congress, for her inaction.
Like any mother who allows her children to be beaten by a demented patriarch, Congress is suffering under even lower approval-ratings than the president. The answer as to the "whys" is a simple one: the public wants Congress to rein-in the president and either force a resignation, or move forwards onto full-impeachment, including that of the vice president. It's commonplace for physically-abused children to blame the other parent more than they blame the actual aggressor. Not doing anything to prevent or end abuses when one actually can constitutes aiding and abetting. Not deciding is deciding.
Irregardless of current congressional inaction in our disabled system of checks and balances, Americans are becoming much more vocal about their disapproval of politicians in-general:
There is no single explanation for why the percentage who decline to give an opinion of the president's job performance is lower now than in the past. However, one hypothesis is as follows. When Gallup polled in the Truman and Nixon years, respondents may have been more likely to say they didn't have an opinion in lieu of saying they disapproved of the president. In other words, respondents who did not approve of the president's performance--rather than flat-out saying they disapproved--may have simply told interviewers they didn't have an opinion.
Today, as the percentage of "no opinion" responses to the presidential job approval question has declined, Americans appear to be more willing to give a negative response, resulting in the situation in which Bush's disapproval rating is at a record high while his approval rating is not at a record low. ("Bush's 69% Job Disapproval Rating Highest in Gallup History," Gallup, 04.22.2008)
The president is also less popular than the Saudi regime--amazing considering the fact that the American public is generally aware that 17 of the 19 9/11 hijackers were Saudi nationals. The reality is that people are being affected directly by the rapidly rising costs, a result of the high price of oil.
Most stunning is the fact that a majority of Americans look to Communist Cuba as being more reasonable and supportable than the current administration occupying the White House. This wholly contradicts the mainstream media's portrayal of what Americans think, but only a fool would accept their picture. The majority of Americans are weighing how other systems provide for their citizens, and their attitudes overall are far-left. Most importantly for the present: a whopping 69% now feel that we were all lied to to get us into a war in Iraq. Better late than never. War crimes have no statute of limitations. Not even a presidential pardon can make that go away, never.
The world's a mess--was it really all about the car? Is it ever just about the broken-shoelaces in the morning, when we're running late for work? No. Mr. Falk still shows-up in little cameos in little independent films, and he's even purported to be selling his own artwork from his own registered website. He's always been weird, get over it. And enough of these headlines that "fears grow" over Mr. Falk's freak-out. It sounds newsworthy, but it's misleading and unethical.
Look, the war in Iraq is in its fifth year, and we've been meddling with Afghanistan a lot longer. We're now viewed as a nation that kidnaps, drugs, sexually humiliates, and tortures human beings from other countries (because we do), then denies it. Because of the war in the Middle East, and financial mismanagement by the Republicans (and many Democrats), our economy is crashing.
This world is not the world Peter Falk--or most of us for that matter--are used to. America doesn't seem like America anymore. Many of Peter's old friends are gone, some long-gone, like John Cassavetes. He's been dead since 1989, of cancer. Not that those hungry photogs had any of that in-mind, they just wanted to take advantage of a confused old man. Yes, it does resemble the Edvard Munch piece, "The Scream," and for the same reasons.
What's an elder of the stage going to do when the world has changed so much, and life's become so crazy? He freaked-out, he yelled and muttered to himself, and he waved his arms wildly, just as most of us would like to do right now. Peter Falk's 80. Leave him alone, he doesn't need your help. He's going to be in a new movie with Val Kilmer called "Cowslip." If you ever wondered what Lenny Bruce's life would be like if he'd survived...well, it wouldn't have been like Peter Falk's, he's not as fucked-up as Lenny was.
Monday, April 21, 2008
Would Andy Warhol's "Frankenstein" and "Dracula" be worth watching without Udo Kier? Unthinkable. Even his dubbed-performance in Dario Argento's "Suspiria" is interesting. Kier is one of those actors who could make a turd film more interesting simply because he's in it. Even the parts that he's not in become more interesting. John Waters makes camp, but Udo Kier is camp. He adds so much color to a movie, so much texture.
E. Elias Merhige's pretentious-but-good "Shadow of the Vampire" would be unwatchable without him. He's that one factor that tips a disastrously bad movie into something merely good. None of that matters--if there was no Udo Kier, we would have had to invent him, he's a gas. His presence in Rob Zombie's make-believe "Grindhouse" trailer "Werewolf Women of the SS"was appreciated, if brief.
He's an actor who brings so much to the table. You can tell he's seen a lot in his life, and he brings a presence and an authority to a role that catalyzes just an OK film into something good. He can swing from full camp to a dead seriousness. The statistics don't lie: put Udo Kier into a movie, and it instantly becomes 20% more interesting.
Friday, April 18, 2008
The problem is, we're actually too tolerant of certain religious practices, like the extremely dangerous blackmailing and enslaving Scientologist hierarchy who are fortunately being banned throughout the EU as this is being written. France will be banning them soon, as will Spain.
Germany already has because they know a "dangerous totalitarian cult" when they see one. They kind of have experience in that area, you know. Hint: 1933-1945. Otherwise, it's really just all the aforementioned covering their asses, and another good excuse to not cover a losing war that's costing billions every month.
Postscript: It appears that members of Warren Jeff's religious sect-o'-rama were government contractors for the Pentagon. Polygamy is illegal in the United States:
"During 2003, the amount being sent to the storehouse and the FLDS was around $100,000 per month," John Nielsen said in the October 26, 2005, affidavit. "I have personal knowledge that checks sent to the FLDS Church/Warren Jeffs by [Western Precision] are payable to the FLDS Church and/or Warren Jeffs."
Private investigator Sam Brower, who monitors the sect, said money earned through business dealings with the U.S. government was used to build Jeffs' compounds across the country, including the one recently raided in Eldorado, Texas. ("Pentagon paid $1.7 million to firms of polygamy bosses," CNN, 04.18.2008)
So, even the DoD knew! Add one to the list of everyone who knew this was going on. So much for using the story to white-out the lost war in Iraq and Afghanistan. America's Stalingrad trudges onward to oblivion.
The best-part of all of this: there were several DoD contracts approved after cult leader Warren Jeffs was on the most wanted list of the FBI. So much for background checks with government contractors. These young girls and women were forced into sexual slavery by a pimp calling himself a religious leader. He is not: he's a criminal who was tolerated by criminals doing a poor job of running a criminal system.
Site Meter--Indefatigable. It's a word that I don't use often, but there it is. Now that Jeffrey A. Taylor and all the other Bush/Gonzales appointees can rest easier...well, you tell me. There was a recent DOJ word search leading to my site, and now this. Why would they still be so concerned? It's "over," right? Maybe not.
|Domain Name||usdoj.gov ? (U.S. Government)|
|IP Address||149.101.1.# (US Dept of Justice)|
|ISP||US Dept of Justice|
|Operating System||Microsoft WinXP|
|Browser||Internet Explorer 6.0|
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; DI60SP1001; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.2)
|Time of Visit||Apr 18 2008 4:13:25 pm|
|Last Page View||Apr 18 2008 4:13:25 pm|
|Visit Length||0 seconds|
|Search Words||subpoena of senator|
|Visit Entry Page||http://chickasawpick...oenaing-senator.html|
|Visit Exit Page||http://chickasawpick...oenaing-senator.html|
|Out Click|| |
|Visitor's Time||Apr 18 2008 4:13:25 am|
The fact is, Couric's that despicable equivalent of a TASS news reader in the former Soviet Union, or some banana dictatorship our State Department supported (or still does). The public doesn't like careerism of this sort, and she's reaping the rewards of being a shill and a mouthpiece of the wealthy. Granted, some other pathological careerist will take her place like a Pez-dispenser, but she's the current candy. Or is it currant candy?
CBS executives like news president Tom McManus and CBS President Les Moonves can voice their support all they want, but eventually, the majority shareholders will have the final say. CBS made the news wildly profitable once, beginning with their news magazine "60 Minutes," a program that lost its luster after its unnecessary capitulation to the tobacco industry. Most of its original-members are dead or headed there. The show really had its moments, but they're long-gone.
It seems a fitting-end, really, for big news. Its time has come...to end. Making the news a business was a horrible sin that needs to be rectified. For that reason, it should be nationalized as it is in the United Kingdom, Canada, and much of the Western world. This can never be said or written enough: damn Ted Turner for creating CNN as a 24 hour national news network. This was one of the final-blows to journalism in this nation. Successive terms of Congress and presidential administrations have allowed the crass centralization of ownership of media for decades. We just don't want to learn what really works.
None of this matters. American newspapers are exponentially growing their Internet presence, while actually losing advertising dollars and hard copy readership. There is no parallel in our history for this. Internet journalism, analysis (my area), and general writing are taking-over, mirroring the publishing landscape of the 1840s when almost every neighborhood had a newspaper or a newsletter.
The answer is both centralizing and decentralizing media. Private ownership of national media was a mistake from its inception. Equal access for other viewpoints is essential, and the Internet is already accomplishing a lot of this. The American public are tired of being lied to, and having most of the real picture of our world withheld from them. A British CNN reporter named Richard Quest was caught in Central Park at 3:40 AM today trying to score methamphetamine. 24 hour news means reporters have a lot in common with truckers! Never mind your kids--do you know where your press is?