let the dead bury the dead release date & other issues surrounding the text

This is still up in the air. I'll be prepping a standalone site for the book. It should have an excerpt, no you cannot quote from it or republish without permission, period. Written requests will be fine, and granting use will be completely at the author's discretion. There is no middleman here.

On the media, interviews, reviews copies, etc.: There will be no advance copies, period, and serious inquiries only. Not to be a dick (or to be one to the right people), but I'm not made of money. No free rides, I would if I could. Also, the idea of someone reviewing a book on something so personal seems pretty laughable to me outside of the technical side--style, format, depth, things that are logical and sincere rather than someone playing games. You'll be kicked to the curb immediately the moment I detect you're fucking me around, it's not going to play. That written, I expect the mainstream media to go out of their way to ignore this book because so much of it is about them and how disgusting they truly are, you have no idea.

Even in death, they keep killing her, mark this. CNN is one one of the major offenders: they will occasionally throw a blurb out there on the case either in a crappy documentary on prostitution (often upscale, with the rich & powerful), and the results speak for themselves: a willfully superficial misrepresentation of the case to protect what it was really about, their usual mercenary MO.  For this reason, even were they to somehow contact me, they'd have an uphill battle on their hands, and that's putting it mildly. I don't expect to hear from any of them no matter how well the books sells.

You didn't just walk into McDonald's, and no, you cannot have fries with that. I don't value most of your opinions, because you weren't involved. I don't even value those of many others who were, as the book will make plain as day. Yes, they're my opinions, and they're more educated than yours about the case. The only people who probably know more are the former prosecutors and judges, and they're compromised. Don't expect anything honest out of most of them, and many of them cannot tell you anyway thanks to confidentiality agreements. My role was far looser, so I can tell more, much more. But, you don't care about the truth anyway, my whole point here and in the book...

On the cult of personality & writers: When I was a kid, over a generation ago in the 1970s, there was no access to the Internet by the general public. You frequently didn't know what an author looked like, what their life was like or where they'd been, and so on, unless you did a lot of looking and research, and that was costly. Now, it isn't, it's all a few keystrokes away. What's the same between then and now is the cult of personality, which I hate and view as part of the disease of this dying culture and nation. People to others for answers are at the top of my shit-list, so, don't come looking to me for any, that's not my job, it's everyone's. The individual has to look within. Fools don't, cowards won't, and I don't have time either, not one moment, so save the effort. I know almost every trolling approach too, so again, don't bother, I will detect it and you will be removed or ignored. If you don't take a hint, if you harass me, for whatever reason is in your head, as compromised as some of them are, law enforcement and the courts will be brought into play. I'm not fucking around ask people who know me, they'll tell you. They'll also tell you that if you cross the line far enough that I'll be coming for you until I'm satisfied.

On Mark Capansky: I believe this little shithead has been harassing me. Any phony or actual cease and desists without a court order will be duly ignored. And, if I have to publish the book out of some Siberian shithole, I will, maybe even out of Iceland if necessary. I will not bow, because, unlike most of you out there, I have nothing to lose, and everything to gain.

However, if Mr. Capansky wants to explain why his number (or parents') was in the DC Madam's phone records, I'm all ears, and we can keep it off the record. On the other hand, if the dialog devolves into threats--if you even piss me off--it all goes online unredacted. I'm not fucking around here at all. If you want to fuck around, do it with the stupid women that are attracted to such a retard. By the way, I'm not jealous, as the book will make starkly clear. I don't share your hollow values and view America as a criminal, white supremacist nation, and hence, a large part of why it's crumbling, it's dysfunctional. This country sucks, you definitely suck, and go fuck yourself...

On writing a book that's non-fiction, true crime, & a historical document: I don't recommend it. There are no ground rules. Reconsider if it looks like it will take up a stage of your life. I was in my thirties when this began, now I'm rocketing towards the bad side of fifty, fuck you very much.

On literature: The book is very literary. For me, this isn't the usual approach. I do read a lot of fiction, but most of my reading is historical and non-fiction. I have been more of a student of history than anything else. A lot of reading in my life is packed into this book. The reader might find this not to their liking, or anything in-between--these are not my concerns, and unless it's constructive, I don't want hear your opinions beyond pointing-out factual errors, typos, and so on. The case, as the primary materials in the book will show, was riven through with literary references. I wasn't looking for them. They announced themselves. That brings me to...

Occult references & themes in the DC Madam case: These were also present and announced themselves. I wasn't looking for them. However, as Jesus said, for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear, and I do, and did. Most aren't attuned to this, I am, and once again, I'm not interested in the expressions of your egos, only in fact and truth, which the vast majority of you wouldn't know either were they to bite you in the ass extracting a pound of flesh. You couldn't miss this, especially considering the well-established fact that Jeane was fascinated by American Spiritualism (yes, seances, no, I am not a believer).

The case was archetypal on its own. I didn't see anything that wasn't there or implicit to it. Again, your opinions are irrelevant, and I don't care unless they augment and add something to the story, understanding, illuminate it more, whatever, but other than that, don't care.

On the former Pamela Martin escorts: I don't have a lot of respect for these women. Some wrong-headed types do for reasons that escape me, but I'm sure have to do more with gender and identity politics and wishful thinking. Once again, I don't care what you're opinions are unless you somehow had contact with them, know previously unknown aspects and facts about the case, or you have an angle on it I never considered for some of the aforementioned reasons. Beyond that, I don't care and don't want to hear your ego flexing, it won't play and I'll kick your ass to curb.

I'm sure most of my sources have withheld things from me--that's normal, human behavior. I'm not a believer in human nature or unicorns. We have tendencies. Those tendencies come out under certain circumstances and conditions. I'm intolerant of mythmakers and believers of myths. None of these women were saints. Yes, they were paid inadequately--welcome to the contemporary world, welcome to the United States and a world that's primarily ordered along patriarchal lines. I didn't make this world, you didn't, most of us didn't, and I'm not a supporter of it. In fact, I'm one of its victims, fuck you very much. You can beatify these ladies all you want, but when the truth came out, you'd look like the genuine fools with an opinion that you really are. Welcome to the human jungle, now think more often before you open your trap, or when you post something online. We all make mistakes. None of us is made of light, we all shit every morning, if we're lucky. That gut you have going is all the proof you should need that you're not a god. We're all imperfect, we all die one day, and the rest is games, lies, deceit, and horrendous, tragic, stupidity.

Insofar as I have been able to ascertain, no one, and I mean no one, has been able to find and interview these women and get some new relevant information from them, and to publish on it, nary a soul. Only one of them has come my way--allegedly, Andrea Detty who's alleged to be an alleged journalist now--and they may not even be one of them, perhaps a fake online identity, and of course, they weren't willing to convey anything of value whatsoever that I didn't already know. That's because, and this should be no surprise to anyone with their higher functions still intact, they were prostitutes and there's a reason why the term "lying whore" came into being, which I learned from direct experience in the case. Not one of them has had the courage and credibility to come forward and to follow through. One of them approached journalist Ken Silverstein during the proceedings, his moronic secretary lost the phone number they left (why not search of the phone calls that day at Harper's?), and they never reestablished contact. Thanks for fucking us, lady, but at least you tried. The rest stand as rats as far as I'm concerned, the real whores, not Palfrey, and they have earned this derision. Ever heard of confidentiality agreements with journalists, ladies? Quit kidding yourselves that you have credibility. Your silence speaks volumes.

On Jack Burkman of Focus on the Family & a lot more: There's an entire chapter devoted to dear Jack, as a template for the average Republican player in Palfrey's phone records. Expect fireworks. Expect what you suspected and knew--that he's a pathetic asshole, a scumbag, and a hypocrite.

On SAIC's presence in the phone bills and elsewhere: They're key to whatever was behind the case and the charges moving forward, not the actual solicitation by Jeane and the girls, which was what was really the incidental side of it. They're emblematic of the crisis in government today of runaway spending and war profiteering by contractors and politicians. They're connected to so many players in all this that it does have meaning to the case in ways that I never expected, not was looking for, but once again, there it was, winking at me over and over.

On the CIA's role in the case: This will get more of a factual airing than previously, although, regardless of what you might think of him, Montgomery Blair Sibley, Jeane's longest running counselor during the proceedings, has done a good job addressing in his own text, Why Just Her. I recommend it and consider both our accounts complimentary of each other. I'm not going to defend his public behavior. Federal District Judge Gladys Kessler granted wide-ranging subpoenaing power to the Palfrey defense that covered virtually the entire intelligence establishment. Ask yourself why the mainstream media never covered this, then go ask them, over and over again, until they cry uncle.

I'll have more to say later. Search the labels on this article for more. I cannot see a release date of later than late November, but no later than some time in December. That is all.

On the Wikileaks State Dept. cable controversy

WWW--Make no mistake: The leaking of the State Department cables is--far-and-away--bigger than the release of the Pentagon Papers. Even that scandal's whistle-blower, Daniel Ellsberg, is giving this one a thumb's-up, and so am I and millions. Could we be wrong? I don't think so at all.

I wholeheartedly support their release because crimes are routinely committed in the name of the American public. This is about institutionalized corruption being hidden from the public and the world; the victims of American foreign policy are the first to know, the American public, the last, and for good reason. That's a systematic abuse of power and calls for things like this release to happen just as systematically if we wish to live in a free and open society. Such releases are the best defense we can possibly have since these clowns are risking our lives every single day in the service of anarchic and unregulated power.

These people in the State Department and the national security state are going to get us all killed if we're not careful; they're the great terrorists of our common era.

This last week has brought numerous attacks on Wikileaks, and coming from all kinds of nefarious corners, across the globe. It's coming from an international, criminal power structure that's bent on total domination of the rest of us, the salt of the earth, the average man and woman, everyone outside of the corridors of power. This is, in the words and observations of many of us on the true left in America, the first major information war, a war with incredible stakes: The survival of human civilization and possibly the species itself, not merely the freedom of the average man and woman.

Make no mistake that the mask is off and that this is a global phenomena. It's not just America's mask being ripped-off. Predictably, the shills and lackeys are coming out of the woodwork and exposing themselves to patch things and instate damage control. Amazon.com, Ebay/Paypal, Time Magazine, CBS, CNN, and much of the rest of the American mainstream media as well as corporations are running into the fray. The walls of their Castle system are quaking right now and it's time to take notes on who's part of the problem. It's now obvious who they are.

A national security issue? It is, just not the way it's being presented. We, the people of the world, have a right to know these things--we must know them for our own safety and the preservation of human rights and democracy itself, now under incredible and sustained attack. The stakes couldn't be any higher. Many Internet providers like Amazon are cutting the lines that feed Wikileaks into the United States.

This is mainly to keep the American public where it's usually at: In the dark, the last to know what is being done in their name, and what is being done is systematic crime, make no mistake about it. This is crucial for unaccountable power to succeed, which could mean the end of us all.

Links to Wikileaks mirrors and foreign-subsidiaries: http://czardonic.wordpress.com/

Arlen Specter surprises again: Reintroduces legislation to allow 9/11 lawsuits against Saudi ruling-class to move forward

Washington D.C.--If there's anything one can say about the senator from Pennsylvania, it's that he's unpredictable and probably really does have this nation's best interests at-heart--in his own mind at least. We'll set aside the magic-bullet theory for a moment...

This week--on December 21st--Specter called on the floor of the Senate for the passage of legislation that would allow lawsuits initiated by thousands of survivors (as well as the families of those killed and insurance companies) of the terrorists attacks on September 11, 2001 to move forward, and introduced the proposed bill with bipartisan support from no less a non-man than Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), although I'm sure it's purely a political move on his part since it's not likely to pass, at least not on his watch.

That would require will and real support, something Graham and others in both major parties aren't inclined to do since there's a lot of money at stake, never mind the destabilizing effects actual justice directed at the Saudi ruling-clans would have on the world's oil supply and the global economy. The coverage in the mainstream media--once again--has been virtually non-existent.

It's not his first time, and he began this road in late 2003 with roughly the same reaction, meaning indifference if not obstructionism. On October 25th, 2007, Specter introduced the "Saudi Arabia Accountability Act" that was designed to accomplish essentially the same aims, meaning dragging the Saudi government and various institutions and charities into the light and allowing lawsuits to proceed that are currently being barred by the State Department (the executive branch) and questionable Federal Circuit Court rulings, more recently in the 2nd Circuit:

Specter (D., Pa.) said the legislation would clarify that lawsuits by U.S. citizens could go forward without a sign-off from the State Department.

A federal appeals court in Manhattan last year dismissed claims against the Saudi government, saying such litigation can proceed only if the State Department finds that the Saudis provided financial aid and other assistance to terrorist groups.
Besides clarifying the law, the bill would reinstate those lawsuits.
The Philadelphia law firm Cozen O'Connor has sued Saudi Arabia, members of the Saudi royal family, and more than a dozen Islamic charities, alleging responsibility for the 9/11 attacks. The Cozen lawsuit, on behalf of dozens of U.S. and international insurers that lost billions of dollars at ground zero, accuses the Saudi government of financing charities that in turn laundered money into al-Qaeda. ("Specter looks to revive 9/11 suits against Saudis," Philadelphia Inquirer, 12.24.2009)

This is all very new since Americans have never been allowed to sue a foreign power without the permission of the executive branch through established channels at the State Department. In other words, this is a new right that Senator Specter is proposing, an expansion of legal recourse for the American people that should have been in-place generations ago.

Granted, this is just a new submission of essentially the same legislation he's been proposing since as early as 2003, but he's not giving up, and neither should anyone concerned at getting to the bottom of what happened. The problem for the "truther" movement is that this doesn't fit the anti-government agenda or many of their theories that go in the same direction (nowhere), so we can expect a general lack-of-enthusiasm let alone any noise over this from them. They're hardly alone in the business: there are extremely powerful players in the financial and political sectors whose ties to the Saudi regime run deep. Instead, hundreds-of-thousands are running around in denial with their science fiction theories that would never stand the legal test in a court of law.

This is why the last administration did everything it could to keep these things from going anywhere, and likewise for the new one. Rather than actually protecting the American people then, what we have is a sham in the so-called war on terror, making it blatantly reminiscent of that other failed war, the war on drugs. Who's side are they on anyway? Do we really want to get to the truth at all? If not, we need to stop talking about concern over the victims and using them as a political hot-potato, now. Frankly, it was always distasteful, but this is probably another reason that Graham signed-on with Specter as a co-sponsor, to cover his and the GOP's ass for the next elections hoping everyone's forgotten their real role in all of this.

Here are a few things remarked on by Specter when he introduced a similar bill in 2007 that "truthers" (their "truth" being highly-selective) tend to ignore:

Since the attacks of September 11, 2001, evidence has emerged indicating that support for al-Qaeda, Ramas, and other organizations has come from Saudi Arabia.

Testimony presented to several Congressional committees, including the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, Judiciary Committee, and Intelligence committees in both houses, has indicated that Saudi Arabia is an epicenter for terrorist financing. These committees have also found the Saudi government's cooperation in investigations into the al-Qaeda terrorist network has been lackluster.

In the 108 Congress, as a member of the Governmental Affairs Committee and as a member of the Judiciary Committee, we worked to establish a basic point that anybody who knowingly contributes to a terrorist organization is an accessory before the fact to murder; so when people contribute to al-Qaeda or Hamas, knowing that both organizations employ suicide bombers, they are accessories to murder.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373, adopted in 2001, mandates that all States "refrain from providing any form of support, active or passive, to entities or persons involved in terrorist acts,'' take "the necessary steps to prevent the commission of terrorist acts,'' and "deny safe haven to those who finance, plan, support, or commit terrorist acts.'' There is mounting evidence that Saudi Arabia has not been compliant with this resolution.

The 9/11 Commission interviewed numerous military officers and government officials who repeatedly listed Saudi Arabia as a prime place for terrorists to set up bases and found that "Saudi Arabia's society was a place where al-Qaeda raised money directly from individuals through charities.''

The Council on Foreign Relations concluded in a 2002 report that "for years, individuals and charities based in Saudi Arabia have been the most important source of funds for al-Qaeda, and for years, Saudi officials have turned a blind eye.''

There are indications that, since the May 12, 2003, suicide bombings in Riyadh, the Government of Saudi Arabia is making a more serious effort to combat terrorism. That said, I would like to draw attention to the following findings recanted by organizations which have studied the record of the Saudis.

In a June 2004 report entitled "Update on the Global Campaign Against Terrorist Financing,'' the Council on Foreign Relations reported that "we find it regrettable and unacceptable that since September 11, 2001, we know of not a single Saudi donor of funds to terrorist groups who have been publicly punished.''

A joint committee of the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives issued a report on July 24, 2003, that quotes various U.S. Government personnel who complained that the Saudis refused to cooperate in the investigation of Osama bin Laden and his network both before and after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

It should be remembered that the Saudi regime executes their own citizens publicly in Riyadh with beheadings and amputations for violations of religious laws in what is a theocratic dictatorship. Interestingly, there's no entry for the legislation for either December 21st or the 24th (the date of the Philadelphia Inquirer coverage) on his own web page, but the story is gradually getting out there. This pretty much spells-it-out in a clear and basic form that should be understandable to anyone who can read and comprehend, and Specter is hardly a radical.

Neither is Charles Schumer (D-NY). What's radical in the current political culture, however, is for this legislation to go anywhere at all. Is this about justice or agendas? Go ask Alex Jones. Go ask the Obama administration. They're against any such moves that the senator from Pennsylvania is suggesting. But Specter appears to feel that the prospects for the bill and its main-thrust are good, stating, "I think it will pass." Let's hope so since the Saudis aren't about to stand down anytime soon without sanctions. Think what you want, but government is the only answer in all of this, surely not oil companies and trusts.

"Specter looks to revive 9/11 suits against Saudis," Philadelphia Inquirer, 12.24.2009: http://www.philly.com/inquirer/business/homepage/20091224_Specter_looks_to_revive_9_11_suits_against_Saudis.html

Arlen Specter's Floor Statement on the Saudi Arabia Accountability Act of 2007, introduced October 25, 2007: http://specter.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=NewsRoom.ArlenSpecterSpeaks&ContentRecord_id=f6853748-1321-0e36-baae-0e4b60c0cd96&Region_id=&Issue_id=bd50d272-7e9c-9af9-72de-559d0e9aeed9

DLA Piper and Sibel Edmonds' revelations about Dennis Hastert

WWW--It's been several weeks now since the sworn deposition of FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds, and she's been doing a lot of talking. About whom, you might ask? About former House Speaker Dennis Hastert, Indiana Rep. Dan Burton (can't control the...you know), an unidentified Democratic Rep. who's been compromised and blackmailed in a lesbian affair to aid the Turkish government, and a whole lot more.

Most of the players are Republicans, but this time we're going to get some Democratic fish in the barrel. In one case--it looks like Burton and a few others involved--nuclear secrets were being sold to Turkey, Pakistan, and a few others that are on terror-lists as "renegade nations." They were also listed by the last president as being part of an "axis of evil." You do the math.

Burton's office and someone representing him has been around, but there have been other players. This exchange from the deposition transcript before Congress is pretty extraordinary and raised some flags for me on DLA Piper's recent visit to the site:

... Q: Now, are you --- has it come to your attention that some members of Congress once they've left Congress like Dennis Hastert engaged in lobbying for the Turkish government?

A: Dennis Hastert is known publicly. Stephen Solarz is known publicly. He used to be a Congressman, and then he became lobbyist as soon as he left both for Israel and Turkey.

Bob Livingston, he within a year after he left Congress, he became lobbyist for the government of Turkey, and he is registered under Foreign Agent's Registration Act. But then there are people who work for these lobbying firms who are not the top, but they have received their share while they were working, whether they are in Pentagon.

One person was Defense Intelligence Agency person, Dana Bauer, and now she works for Bob Livingston, but this individual, Ms. Bauer, did a lot of favors and illegal favors to --- for government of Turkey and others, and then was hired by Livingston and put on a big salary to represent Turkish government.

So it's not only top tier of the lobbying firm, but then the people who work for them later and the various layers of those people.

Q: How about Richard Gephardt? You know, who he is, right?

A: Yes, I do.

Q: And do you have any information about whether or not he took money from Turkish organizations?

A: No, I just have (unintelligible) information based on what I read that he joined the lobby firm for --- that represents Turkey, the lobby that Mr. Hastert got hired, but I don't have any information.

Q: For the firm called DLA Piper?

A: Yes.

Q: Law firm. Are you aware of them lobbying for the Turkish government?

A: Yes.

Q: Let me give you a hypothetical and just get your understanding of what might be going on because it's particularly relevant to our case.

You have a hypothetical Congresswoman from State X. Her district has no Turkish population to speak of or Armenian population to speak of. She's the largest recipient of Turkish PAC money in the 2008 election cycle. All right?

She meets with Livingston and Rogers or Livingston Group when they're escorting members of the Turkish parliament to a reception. She receives fact sheets from the Livingston Group talking about Turkish relations; goes to luncheons in honor of the Turkish Foreign Minister, and she opposes Armenian genocide resolution and, in fact, refuses to even recognize the genocide as a historical fact. ...

Curiouser and curiouser, that. The soon-to-be-identified congresswoman is done, toast. Once her identity is out there and it's known that she's being blackmailed by the Turkish intelligence community and their government, that's it, she can no longer discharge her duties. This is coming very soon, and she's not going to be the only one marching out of Congress and into a courtroom.

Did I mention that it appears Indiana Rep. Dan Burton has been caught screwing around on his wife again, this time getting his dick caught in the gears of the Turkish government? Yes, he did. That's right folks, elected officials are taking bribes, being proffered a piece-of-ass, and even promised all kinds of things like a kingdom in hell, but most of all, they're being blackmailed and turned to spy on the rest of us, against our common interests.

That's treason, and it's not a joke or a laughing matter. Ask your local news outlet, paper, CNN, Fox, and all the rest of the mainstream media, why they're not covering the Sibel Edmonds story. Is there a connection to the DC Madam scandal? Could be. She and her defense counsel--Montgomery Blair Sibley--issued subpoenas to the DIA and the CIA, both institutions refused to accept them. It's a good thing they had Federal District (and former FISA court) Judge James Robertson looking out for their interests. It seems protecting reputations of criminals in high office is more important than national security, which makes it more than a little ironic when they invoke it in court to avoid exposure. That's not merely corruption, it's a dysfunctional political culture, a system in free fall.

Sibel Edmonds' August 8, 2009 sworn testimony before Congress: http://www.bradblog.com/Docs/SibelEdmondsDeposition_Transcript_080809.pdf

Portions of suppressed detainee photos may have been online since February 15, 2006

Sydney, Australia--A section of the detainee abuse photos that President Obama is fighting the release of in federal court might have been posted as early as February 15th, 2006 on the Sydney Morning Herald's site by-way of an anonymous whistle-blower of unknown nationality. Some of these photos are as bad if not worse than the ones previously released in 2004 to a horrified world.

The president has stated that keeping the photographs from disclosure is to protect American troops and to limit any more damage to the reputation of the United States throughout the world, especially in Muslim nations. The security situations in both Iraq and Afghanistan have also been invoked.

All the president is pointing-out is that torture doesn't work and that he would prefer we don't know about...just like the last president. They honeymoon's over, believe it. It's even money that Rahm Emanuel weighed-in on this one in a very big way, but that's Dutch Schultz for ya'.

Below are a few photos I captured from the Australian site, just in case they're "yanked" (pun intended).

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/photos-us-doesnt-want-seen/2006/02/14/1139890737099.html

George W. Bush's final press conference as president

Washington D.C.--What did you expect? It was always going to be pathetic. George W. Bush has always been the kind of personality who wanted to be liked. Based on this fact, it was strange to put someone in there to use-up all of his political capital and the public's goodwill for the purposes of making the few richer, and he's feeling the heat like never before.

He should be after being the one who did as much deregulation of the economy as he humanly (and illegally) could. George W. Bush has presided over what can only be called the largest corporate crime wave in American history, the list is almost endless. What's more, it probably has no other human precedent just based on its own sheer scale. But he had help, and it was bipartisan: Congress.

That he's "feeling the love" these days is good, and President-elect Obama is also being confronted to create a special prosecution to investigate the crimes of the Bush II administration from many quarters that cross the artificial boundaries between "left" and "right." Welcome to the electronic frontier, Mr. President-elect, we're watching. The honeymoon has already ended, and it's time to deliver, and fast. Yes, the economy needs top priority, but we're going to have to be insistent on a special prosecutor to investigate the crimes of the Bush II administration. That's why he was throwing his little fit today--he's got that hunted look in his eyes again, and it's something to treasure for the rest of our lives.

The majority of Americans want justice and accountability from this outgoing administration and aren't going to accept Obama's mealy-mouthisms of "putting the past behind us."

As the president blurted today: "Pathetic." Yes, that sums-up his tragic time holding office in the White House. It also sums-up the GOP and those loyal to her. Fun's over GOP, don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out. You and your cronies had a weird sense of victimhood, because it was fictional and based on your queer sense of entitlement to do whatever you wanted, whenever you wanted to. Game over.

If the Republican Party doesn't change with the tenor of this new era, they're done for. I have no problem with this, but then it's going to be time to dismantle the Democratic Party.

To all members of the Bush II administration, both former and present: We'll be watching you and pursuing you in the world's courts--all the co-conspirators under George W. Bush's watch--for the rest of your natural lives if necessary. Think about that the next time you purchase an airline ticket to another country, or when you enter specific counties, New England towns, and a growing number of cities within the territorial United States.

There are already warrants for your arrests patiently waiting to be served in many of these places. Now, I understand that your former-and-disgraced Attorney General Alberto Gonzales cannot find a job with any law firm. Welcome to reality, because when large law firms do this, it's because they know the long arm of the law is coming, soon. Time to feel the love. What a terrible president, the worst that I'll probably ever live to see, and I can remember Nixon. Both Republicans, both embarrassing, neither were men, but stupid people have to vote too. Sometimes, they steal elections and manage to fight their way into office. Bye-bye, asshole!

The U.S.S. George H.W. Bush: Obsolete before it ever leaves port

Norfolk, Virginia--Costing over $6 billion before all the other fittings and aircraft, the U.S.S. George H.W. Bush was not applauded as it was commissioned today in the presence of its namesake, his mentally retarded son and his family, President Dick Cheney, and the largest gathering of Village People fans in human history.

The gathered dignitaries were applauding themselves and the fact that they were still bilking the American public for defense contractors and corporations everywhere, their latest contribution coming in the form of a now-obsolete weapons platform, the aircraft carrier.

Why is the aircraft carrier obsolete? The U.S.S. George H.W. Bush is the last of ten in the "Nimitz" "supercarrier" class, the kind of hulking behemoth that was rendered useless the moment the Enola Gay dropped its payload on Hiroshima to keep Soviet influence off of the Japanese mainland. Subsequent weapons platforms have made the obsolescence of the aircraft carrier a strange part of the arsenals of many nations, but it's good for the gander. Like the former president it's named after, the U.S.S. George H.W. Bush is part of a dying order, a hangover left to us from the WWII generation.

What's so remarkable is that the ship isn't even finished, but far be it for the Bush dynasty not to have an occasion to cry for themselves, never mind their victims. All that said, naming a boat after just one more executive war criminal and systematic human rights violator doesn't seem such a bad idea, since it's emblematic of the dead-end of a militarized society and economy. War and the unleashing of violence by the Bush dynasty have been its hallmarks, it's history, and a big part of America's history in general. Naming it after a washed-up warmonger with his draft-dodging son present in his last days as president has all the airs of reality parodying itself. How Bush of them.

When the U.S.S. George H.W. Bush is finally torpedoed, sunk by a low-yield nuclear device, or simply destroyed when it's anchored in port, nobody's going to care. When there's no more money to help the American public in an unprecedented economic crisis, it's going to be because of the frivolous spending on worthless weapons systems like this one, and the wars in the Middle East.

It would behoove the incoming president-elect to shutter these types of programs that are currently in the developmental stage, such as the longstanding "Star Wars" (aka "Missile Defense Shield Part I") space defense program that scientists have told us "does not work, and will never work" for over twenty years. The Star Wars program has cost an estimated $107 billion since the 1980s, just one more gift from Ronald Reagan and his cohorts, many of whom will be leaving and entering the White House after January 20, 2009.

The Bush II administration increased spending on the Star Wars program by 20% during its tenure. It's unlikely that a President Barack Obama will end the program--or others like it--however, because nothing succeeds like failure. But, with money running as short as it's appearing to be, he and Congress might have no other alternative. The Senate can enable all it wants, and the GOP incumbents in it can obstruct all they want, but eventually that wall called reality is going to rear its ugly head. The horse and pony show will be over. That time is coming very soon.

"Opinion: The First Cut is the Deepest," The Harvard Crimson, Dylan R. Matthews, 12.03.2008:

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=525673

"5 Reasons the Aircraft Carrier is Obsolete," NewWars.blogspot, Mike Burleson, 09.04.2007: http://newwars.blogspot.com/2007/09/5-reasons-aircraft-carrier-is-obsolete.html

Man throws shoe at outgoing President George W. Bush at Iraq press conference

"This is a goodbye kiss from the Iraqi people, dog!"
--Muntadar al-Zedei, displaying more courage than the entire American public since the 2000 inauguration.

Baghdad, Iraq--Where was the Secret Service? Guarding the real president, Barack Obama back in the states.

Iraqi journalist Muntadar al-Zeidi did what no American has had the moral courage to do since the 2000 inauguration when the public threw ice-balls, snowballs, and rocks at the then president-elect: throw things at George W. Bush out of a well-earned disrespect. The Al-Baghdadia television correspondent did what most of us have wanted to all along (if not much more), this time not throwing something at a television screen but the actual source of irritation.

Disappointingly, he almost connected, and didn't, but it sums-up the president's relationship with Iraq and the world. This must be some kind of hell for a man who has always prided himself on being liked.

Unfortunately, the president's intelligence on the shoe size and its trajectory were a little off. But his experience in baseball and his indefatigable ignorance saved the day--he ducked the spitball. Hey, they dragged Al-Zeidi away by force (authorized by Congress in 2002), so he's making sure everyone knows he's still "fearless leader," our great Generallisimo, until January 20th, 2009. Still, where's the blame for the CIA in this one? That leads us to...

Statistically, a mere sect (located somewhere in West Virginia-by-way-of Idaho), a cult, still supports the war in Iraq in the United States. They're overeager believers with a pinch of fear, paranoia, and desperation. That's because something should happen to people like them.

Throwing the full weight of the law on top of Bush would be more appropriate, or simply enforcing it, but that's inconvenient and could be messy.

As Bush stated so ineloquently but accurately, "So what if the guy threw a shoe at me?" Right, so what? He knows that he's done enough to warrant far worse and that at minimum he should be before the Hague, not a press conference in Baghdad for a bye-bye visitation with his victim, Iraq. From 2003 until now we went from Iraqis throwing shoes at toppled statues of a dictator, to an Iraqi throwing his shoes at the real deal, a strange kind of progress, but progress nonetheless.

Now Al-Zeidi's action is there for the ages, making him as immortal as Gavrilo Princip taking aim at the Archduke...and missing, but trying again until he hit his target. George W. Bush is going to have to look over his shoulder for the rest of his life, and eventually, the bill will come due. His nail-biting anticipation will be punishment enough, but these precedents must be rolled back.

Future generations will look at us as we look at past ones: "How did they put up with it? Why didn't they do something more? What were they waiting for?" Exactly. What were we waiting for all this time? The cavalry, of course, and it never came because life isn't a movie.

The lowest insult throughout the Middle East is to call someone a "dog," they're fighting words, and Al-Zeidi was echoing what nearly every single Iraqi feels. They will never give up, and they will never stop fighting to remove America or any foreign power from the region.

"Speak Out For A Special Prosecutor For Bush/Cheney At The Obama Change Site" by the Pen

We Were Promised Change, And Change Is What We Will Hold Our New

President To

Of all the things that must change, the FIRST thing that must change

now is that the rule of law and respect for the Constitution must be

fully restored. Obama has set up a site where he professes to want to

know what his priorities should be. Therefore let us all go there and

make the number one idea this one.

Appoint a Special Prosecutor for the Crimes of the Bush

Administration

The direct link is rather longish, so we have set up a special action

page that will open up a new window and forward you directly (or else

look for the link at the very top) to the page where you can vote for

this most critical idea.

Special Prosecutor Voting Link:

http://www.usalone.com/special_prosecutor.php

Important: To cast a vote, when you get to the voting site, click on

the box with the current number count to the left of the main header

for the idea, NOT on the widget on the right hand side of the page

lower down, which just reloads the same page.

President-elect Obama recently said, "If I found out that there were

high officials who knowingly, consciously broke existing laws,

engaged in cover-ups of those crimes with knowledge forefront, then I

think a basic principle of our Constitution is nobody above the law."

Attorney General-designate Eric Holder recently said top Bush

Administration officials "authorized the use of torture, approved of

secret electronic surveillance of American citizens, secretly

detained American citizens without due process of law, denied the

Writ of Habeas Corpus to hundreds of accused enemy combatants, and

authorized the use of procedures that both violate international law

and the United States Constitution."

We must now hold them to honor their words of accountability.

The Bush administration has refused to investigate its own crimes and

President Bush may issue blanket pardons before he leaves, indeed we

fully expect him to even try to pardon himself. But that is all the

more reason why we must keep as much heat as possible on the

potential for real post inauguration prosecutions. No pardon could

possibly be broad enough to exonerate the entire litany of the crimes

of the outgoing White House without itself raising serious

constitutional questions.

President Obama must appoint a Special Prosecutor - ideally Patrick

Fitzgerald - to fully investigate these crimes and prosecute those

responsible to demonstrate that we are truly a Nation of Laws and no

one - including the President - is above the law. And you can make

sure that happens by going to this link and helping to make the

appointment of a special prosecutor the number one idea on the Obama

"change" site by a very large and dramatic margin.

Special Prosecutor Voting Link:

http://www.usalone.com/special_prosecutor.php

And then after you vote, if you haven't requested your "Impeach

Both!!!" cap yet (we just shipped out another 1000 this week), if you

want to go back and get one the page left behind by the link above

will allow you to do that. Because anyone who thinks that the Bush

administration has even now finished committing high crimes has

greatly misunderestimated their depth of incorrigible malfeasance.

Be careful what you ask for because you just might get it. Our new

president has asked us to be involved in telling him what to do. Let

us find out if that was for real or not, by continuing to speak out,

in greater numbers than ever before.

Please take action NOW, so we can win all victories that are supposed

to be ours, and forward this alert as widely as possible.

LBJ Library releases final recordings...and implicates Richard Nixon in treason

Austin, Texas--The library is reporting that these are the very last tapes, covering the final months of the President Lyndon Baines Johnson from May 1968 to January 1969.

What's revelatory is his discussion with Senate Republican leader Everett Dirksen and the person-in-question, Richard M. Nixon. During the Watergate hearings Dirksen was the Republican congressman who stated that Richard M. Nixon would "split the party."

"This is treason," Johnson said, referring to people close to Nixon, during a conversation with Senate Republican leader Everett Dirksen. The Democratic president never accused the Republican who would succeed him of treason, but said, "If Nixon keeps the South Vietnamese away from the (peace) conference table, that's going to be his responsibility." ("New tapes show LBJ worried about Vietnam, Nixon," AP, 12.04.2008)

So, he's stated that Nixon's operatives were committing "treason," yet never "accused" Nixon of them in the tapes directly. The problem is, he was telling Dirksen just those very words. Isn't it great to have the press tell us our history, even when evidence suggests otherwise, right before our eyes?

Nixon's operatives were in South Vietnam doing their best to scuttle peace negotiations until the elections were over in the United States, namely, after November 1968. Their approach was to keep South Vietnamese leaders away from the negotiating tables to hurt the chances of Democratic candidate Hubert Humphrey. This is an attempt at prolonging a war, which is treason.

In our timeworn American political tradition, this was brought-up during the Watergate hearings and quickly swept under the rug like the allegations of CIA drug smuggling in Southeast Asia during the war and in the Iran-Contra pipeline.

Special counsel John Dohr's investigators discovered corroboration into these stories and LBJ sounds absolutely certain that this was occurring in Vietnam. He had intelligence and media reports to suggest this was so, and he went so far as to contact Richard Nixon--then running for the White House--and confronted him over it. LBJ continued to harangue the President-elect after the elections for several days. Nixon being Nixon, he lied and did his best to dissuade LBJ that this was not the case.

But never mind LBJ--he didn't know what treason or abuse of office was, he had no experience there...excepting in the Gulf of Tonkin incident, when he authorized wiretaps of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. (with the aid of Bill Moyers) and many civil rights era leaders, strong-armed everyone who got in his way, and so on. A wolf knows a wolf.

Do a search on John Dohr and his role in the Watergate investigations and hearings, and while you're at it, try finding much of anything on the Watergate probe's findings in any detail. You're not going to find much. Why is that? Unsurprisingly, CBS neglected even one mention of this--the most important revelation--from their broadcasts, instead focusing on LBJ's reactions to the riots at the Democratic Convention and other errata. Big surprise.

"New tapes show LBJ worried about Vietnam, Nixon," AP, 12.04.2008:
http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=32294008

The LBJ Library and Museum: http://www.lbjlib.utexas.edu

The Right of Rule: "Drill baby, drill, and mine, baby, mine" and other yucks from the 2008 unelection

The GOP Campaign Trail of Tears--Those catch-phrases worked so well, didn't they? "Joe the plumber," "Bill Ayers," "pals around with terrorists," and all the rest we'll be happy to forget, didn't work so well this time. We know why.

The economy is a mess because the GOP held the White House and most of Congress for several years, and the Democrats stood down and let them run amok. They also won't hold the Bush administration truly accountable for what can only be described as the greatest political and corporate crime wave that this nation has ever seen.

It would more-than-behoove President-elect Obama to at least call for the creation of a massive independent investigation into the crimes committed by the Bush administration and her allies from 2000 to their last day in office. But there are a number of problems with this, namely logistical ones.

President Obama will have his hands-full in his first 100 days in office. Only FDR faced the kind of daunting challenges that the President-elect faces today. Is he up for it? We don't know this, but if he isn't, nobody is, and does he really have the will to do it? It doesn't matter. I personally don't think that President-elect Obama is going to have any choice on a whole swath of issues, except to address them directly and constructively. But it's also unlikely that he's going to have the time to go after Republican--and numerous Democratic--criminals who aided-and-abetted George W. Bush and his agenda. It's also not exactly his job, but that of Congress. There's another very specific problem.

Obama was one of these congressional enablers of the Bush White House, though as far as we know, not criminally. Obama voted for the FISA rewrite that now allows for widespread surveillance of the American public (and retroactive immunity for the telecoms that participated), essentially every major appropriations bill for the endless occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, and a lot of other issues that don't instill trust in those who want the public good addressed.

Cabinet picks like Rahm Emanuel (a man reminiscent of Dutch Schultz) don't bode well either, but it has to be stated again: what choice are they going to have but to drawdown in the Middle East, and what choice are they going to have except to mandate sweeping political and business reforms and social spending? Yes, they could just do nothing, the wrong thing, and even the opposite of what the electorate voted them in to do. But these aren't normal times. They could act--or not act at all--but there are consequences for "business-as-usual" during a major crisis. Besides, President-elect Obama has already given the GOP the ammunition they wanted in another form.

By breaking his promise and not taking anymore government funds for his election, Barack Obama decided against a grassroots election with transparency and threw in his lot with corporate America. Knowing this as more than a little of a mistake tactically, the GOP is already making their own narrative of this new era, and they're going to attempt to steal the Democratic Party's "outsider" card away from them. It won't be very difficult, sad to say. Propaganda has to have a kernal of truth to it, but this time, when the GOP accuses the future Obama administration of being backed by "special interests," they'll be almost entirely correct.

This isn't to say that they're any different, but this time they assiduously kept the McCain campaign on-track for the aforementioned reasons--it gives them a lifeline for their survival and a comeback. This back-and-forth between the two party system doesn't have a lot of milage left in it before a real collapse, and if the new Democratic majority doesn't deliver in a big way, we could see riots and general strikes across the nation.

It's very possible that our economy is going to go into a genuine free-fall, a depression. Without radical reforms and unprecedented government response, change is going to come from below anyway. You could bring back every single American solider, sailor, and pilot, to the continental United States, and it wouldn't quell the disorder.

The question is, will it be constructive or destructive uprising if things reach that point?

My feeling is that it's going to be constructive. Granted that if we have a tragedy, it's going to be all of our faults, but Congress and a future Obama administration will be shouldering a great share of the blame. They directly created this mess by abrogating their responsibility of oversight and checks and balances, and that's for starters.

Yes, "Drill, baby, drill," might sound like the title of a Russ Meyer movie, but equally empty rhetoric came out of the Obama campaign. None of this matters. There is a time when the same old lies don't work anymore, and that time is now. Without a total rollback of the last eight years, we may as well have voted McCain/Palin. Then--at least--we could get this collapse under our belt. Many of the same reforms would come anyway. Reality trumps hope.

Reality: They're only in there because we tolerate them.

This can end when they no longer have the ability to provide. That time is here, now.

KARL ROVE ANNOUNCES HIS DECISION TO RESIGN

Washington D.C.--You can still be subpoenaed. Your kid is at college. You can still be pardoned, but the president had better save it for last.

You're a traitor, guilty of more crimes than Aaron Burr, or even Benedict Arnold--at least there was a smidgen of validity to their motives. We all know you're going to be running the RNC's campaign strategy for the 2008 elections. This is why we must watch your every move making your life extremely transparent.

The threat of prison will always be over your shoulder, it's coming...or is it? You'll never know, will you? Not until Federal Marshals come for you. Then, it'll be too late. It's funny how you Republicans use the same lame excuse when it's obvious you're about to be felled: "I need to spend time with my family."

Sure. You've been so attentive already. At least Joseph Goebbels had the common courtesy to kill himself.

YET ANOTHER GOP SHOE FALLS: ABRAMOFF-LINKED CALIFORNIA REP. JOHN DOOLITTLE

Oakton, Virginia--This must be a bad day to be a Republican, but what day isn't being one of the cursed? Today, it was John Doolittle's house being raided by the FBI, so it appears that the Bush administration didn't fire everyone they needed to, and that Jack Abramoff is still talking to federal investigators. You've got to love these prosecutors--they've been the firewall protecting our liberties against the GOP and this administration for some time, and especially after 9/11. No, they're not perfect, but many of them have been exemplary.

Today, in Oakton:

The search on the Doolittles’ home came the same day that Kevin Ring, a former Doolittle aide who went on to work for Abramoff, abruptly resigned his law firm job without explanation. Doolittle’s ties to Abramoff have been under investigation in the ongoing probe that already sent one former Republican congressman, Bob Ney of Ohio, to jail on a guilty plea to charges of conspiracy and making false statements. Doolittle is a Northern California conservative and ally of former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. (AP, 04.20.2007)

Or maybe it was Doolittle's former aide, Kevin Ring who squealed? Both? Mugsy don't like it. Expect many-many more of these stories. The GOP seems intent on assuring a Democratic majority in the House for the next-twenty years, or why would they hamstring themselves so badly? Even Spiro T. Agnew was smarter than this, but they thought their majority would last long enough that they could escape investigation. A landslide occurred in our midterms, and they couldn't steal another election, it's that simple. People were watching the polls closer in 2006 as well. The public had had enough.

What we will learn once all of this has ended--in ten years--is that this really was a widespread criminal conspiracy throughout the body of the GOP. This is the third time in 35 years that they've attempted to subvert the Constitution they are all sworn to uphold. This period goes way-beyond that, and into the realms of gutter criminality.

Rep. John Doolittle, in measured but defiant terms, said Friday that he won't resign his House of Representatives seat and will battle the federal government if it brings charges of political corruption in connection with his and his wife's relationship with convicted super lobbyist Jack Abramoff. "If there is anything we should have learned from the Duke (University) lacrosse case, it is that the destruction of the reputations of innocent people can occur when the government, the press and the public jump to unfounded conclusions," Doolittle, R-Calif., said in prepared remarks opening a telephone news conference. (McClatchy Newspapers, 04.20.2007)

Except who said the Duke players are innocent (of holding a woman against-her-will in a bathroom, making her think she would be murdered...) except them, their lawyers, and their wealthy parents? That story isn't over yet because you and them say so.This should all be handled by our criminal justice system, one that has proven itself to be more loyal to the common good than most elected officials currently occupying the White House and Capitol Hill.

I'm actually proud of many of them, and would like to take this moment and saying thank-you to all these professionals who have refused to allow the investigative process to be criminally-tainted! Yes, it's people within the bureaucracy who have been trying to stop the Bush administration and their criminal fellow travelers in Congress. What will we find in the Supreme Court?

Future generations are going to be shocked at the period we're living in, and we should give them the appropriate follow-up: several decades of radical reforms that rollback the influence of Big business and finance.

AP Today: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18202794

McClatchy Newspapers Today: http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/news/nation/17110700.htm

Bob Ney resigns today

Washington D.C.--Today was Bob Ney's (R-Oh.) last day as a congressman.

It's a mixed-bag situation: Ney is one of three Republicans in Congress who voted-against the Patriot Act in 2001.

Ney also voted against normalizing trade relations with China in 2000.

All-in-all, he's a moderate Republican in an ocean of GOP-Bolshevism. But, he's still corrupt. He's the one member of Congress so far who has admitted criminal acts in the Abramoff scandal involving illegal lobbying. One has to wonder if he's the fall-guy they needed, enabling the others (less-moderate incumbents?) in the GOP who haven't been served a subpoena to breath free-air a little longer.

Or at least long enough to keep protecting George W. Bush and his administration as well as all the other crooks in Congress (counting Democrats too) who are obstructing justice by not seriously investigating the rampant criminality that has been a hallmark of this presidency. I'm hoping several Lieberman-like Democrats get caught in the Abramoff net, like Hillary Clinton.

The timing of Ney's resignation is strange, it must have been touch-and-go whether the Bush administration would still need him to retain a majority after November. Apparently, they know something at the GOP that we all don't (a different tactic to steal the elections again?). Maybe they expect a domestic insurrection over this election? The third time's a charm.