once again: it's fortune cookie exegesis time

A trinket/reach-around from the recent raping of my digestive system at a nearby Chinese eatery: "People may doubt what you say [,] but will believe what you do."

Ratiocination: this is actually a sage observation, cricket-head. Listen to what people do, not what they say. This cookie came 49 years too late for Lee Harvey Oswald, poor guy...

A.J. Weberman on Ron Paul

Ed.--This is a pretty good set of personal observations by a Jewish activist on Ron Paul and the people he surrounds himself with. I too stumbled upon Spotlight (a defunct anti-Semitic/right wing extremist paper), speaking for myself in the early 90s, and agree with his conclusion: Ron Paul is an authoritarian fascist and a race baiter, a demagogue, a liar. Paul is a sad reminder of the failings of American Populism just over a century ago too, the fixation on the gold standard-and-all...as well as the baggage of anti-Semitism.

Make no mistake: This man, and more specifically, the people who are his base, are an incredibly dangerous political phenomenon on the American landscape. Worst of all are his Christian Identity connections. His son Rand (named after Ayn Rand) has been put on the SPLC's watch list not long ago, and for good reason. These people are scarier than you think. The scariest part is that there are numbskulls on the left (really arch-conservative flakes) who are being swayed by him out of desperation and a desire for expediency, for immediate change. Yeah, we'd get change alright--an even greater acceleration of the move towards corporate tyranny and a more openly racialist state.

"Ron Paul - The Most Dangerous Nazi in America": http://www.slideshare.net/AJWeberman/ron-paul-the-most-dangerous-nazi-in-america?from=new_upload_email

Postscript: Again, I don't agree with all of Weberman's contentions, historical or otherwise, but the raw data is there. I do agree that Paul is a demagogue, a Christian Identity freak and a corporatist, a bad populist.

Some more observations on conspiracy buffs and the Boogeyman...

They--the ubiquitous "they"--see them everywhere, and they know the score, according to...well, to them. Above all others, they understand the "true" machinations of our civilization, never mind those silly academics-they're part of the conspiracy too if they don't agree with the conspiracy buffs. Which conspiracy theory? Take your pick. Isn't it really about crime, under the color of law and authority? Isn't that something you could actually try in a court of law, before a jury? Wouldn't going after politicians who are criminals by treating them as such work better? No, it's a conspiracy, because that's easier for me to unthink about.

The truth? Ultimate truth is unknowable, so the conspiracy gurus like the Alex Joneses and Alex Constantines of the world must be elves, pixies, faeries, and the Oracle at Delphi, atop mount Parnassus, telling everyone what they already know: that conspiracy buffs are full of shit, possibly nuts in many cases, and need to get a life and learn to be responsible citizens who really watchdog their government. Constantine claims that he once did. He might return to his good work, but like Alex Jones, it takes him all morning to get his coffee back from the toxicology lab. No, the ones that really get away with murder in our society are the business & finance sectors. But most of the cranks love them, contrary claims aside, because those CEOs believe most of the same things that the dopes do: the Libertarian credo of the lawless Frontier maverick (long dead in the real world, meaning it's alive-and-well on Wall Street and in boardrooms) who's entitled to do whatever he wants without any repercussions. That's not freedom for everyone else, it's negative freedom, negative "Liberty."

There are legitimate researchers, journalists, and historians out there who are doing diligent and thoughtful work that at least eventually gets some kind of a "peer review" (we won't dwell on the nano-thermite flap regarding the rickety WTC-7), and they should be thanked. Naming them here would be unfair, and anyone familiar with academic intelligence history and credible historiographical research (private and academic) into our political history knows wildly speculative crap when they see it. Many in the public today do not, and I lay the blame at the feet of educators and the individual. The mainstream media is also sorely to blame. Too many members of the public are simply not credible or rational thinkers, generally, and more standardized requirements for logic training would go a long way in ameliorating this problem. Americans don't stand on the international stage as especially rational thinkers, hardly. Many Americans have literally never written a thesis in their entire lives if they even know what it means.

Our domestic policies are a great illustration of this: on the one hand, many Americans don't trust their government (thanks partly to scandals like Watergate and Iran-Contra, but perpetuated by anti-government cranks who call themselves "conspiracy researchers," etc.), yet expect to receive social services from it. The prevalence of the myth of "the disappeared" gives this attitude an especially weird quality when one considers that many Americans don't want to pay taxes, but again, expect social services like Social Security checks, roads, bridges, power plants, drinkable water, and all of the things social infrastructure can bring. Still, according to some on the fringe, the government is totalitarian and "evil." That's a conservative argument, though not a traditional one. There are no real conservatives, but that's a theme for another time.

The fact is that even with all of the corruption, the bribing lobbyists, crony appointments, kiss-ass politicians, a mostly comatose and wrong-headed public, obviously unconstitutional legislation, absurd Supreme Court rulings, and the resultant scandals and cock-ups, they still have to deliver these social services because the social contract has to be served. Regardless of what anyone says, we're still a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, no matter how impaired these things might be at present. Classical liberal theory on servicing the social contract through the redistribution of wealth is a warning, not a threat, that if you don't manage your society wisely, you will reap chaos. If it is not, you can expect very serious drama indeed. What the conspiracy buffs and nuts are saying is that the social contract has been entirely forfeited, and that's not true by any stretch, especially compared to many other nations around the world where it's patently obvious that that's the case. However, were many of them to have it their way, yes, a cohesive society we can be proud of would be almost entirely null-and-void.

Without even understanding what the social contract is, conspiracy nuts say that we're already at the critical mass, that the government isn't delivering--or even that it should at all. Most of these people don't believe in traditional Western democracy nor the ideals of the French Revolution, meaning Liberty, Fraternity, and Equality. They're barbarians. They don't really believe in our most cherished American ideals of Liberty and democracy. What they believe in is selling you a t-shirt or a poorly researched and produced DVD so that they can turn a profit off of social discontent and sell you the anti-government line. Government is only as good as the people of a nation, and in that sense, it's not complicated. You must stay engaged. You must watch the watchers as a lifetime responsibility. If you want government services--rich, poor, or even middle-class--you must expect to pay for them, but you should also pay your fair share. When the top 500 corporations are often paying significantly less than a working-class individual, something's very wrong with the body politic.

But the conspiracy nuts--in-the-main--don't get this...or much else.

Don't tell Alex Jones: Journalist Ike Pappas, witness to murder of Lee Harvey Oswald, dead

WWW--Ike Pappas was a longtime journalist for CBS. He as sent to Dallas after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy on November 22nd, 1963 (45-years-ago).

Pappas was shoved-away from Lee Harvey Oswald's path as he asked him a question by Dallas nightclub owner (...and a mafia courier, Jew, and FBI informant) Jack Ruby. What was really going-on? Who knows? To say you do is ignorant and a gambit for money.

It doesn't appear that Alex Jones is claiming he was "suicided"...yet. Perhaps he can sell some more t-shirts and mugs if he does. Why not? For those who think Jones is anything but a clown and a huckster: you're a simple little man/woman/transsexual.

And, if you stew cranberries like applesauce, they taste more like prunes that rhubarb does. Ike Pappas: 75, Greek-American, dead, and taken by poor health. Rest in peace.

Ike Pappas, dead by natural causes: http://enews.earthlink.net/article/ent?guid=20080902/48bcba40_3ca6_1552620080902-1891201945

Obama invokes the late, great Wild Bill Hickok as an ancestor

Springfield, Missouri--Obama's claim of descent to James Butler "Wild Bill" Hickok (where he engaged in a duel, possibly during the Civil War) today is an interesting one.

The Democratic presidential candidate came to this town on the edge of the old West on Wednesday and laid down a challenge for his GOP rival.

"If Sen. McCain wants a debate on taxes in this campaign, I'm ready," Obama said, noting that Hickok is said to have fought a duel here. "I'm ready to duel John McCain on taxes right here, quick draw," Obama said before closing the loop with Hickok.

"The family legend is that he is a distant cousin of mine. I don't know if it's true but I'm going to research it." ("Political Play: Obama claims link to the Wild West," AP, 07.30.2008)

He doesn't need to, a noted genealogist named Chris Child has confirmed it. Never mind that-- 25% of everyone roaming the Wild West was Black (it's true). Obama went to the heart of the matter, to one of the legends, Wild Bill.

And he's correct: he is descended from Wild Bill, a distant cousin. But does he really want to make a comparison? Perhaps. But his challenge of a dueling debate over taxes in Springfield with John McCain doesn't bode well when you look at how Wild Bill ended his days, but people settle their differences in other ways nowadays. Nonetheless, there's an even more intriguing fact about the Hickok family that few will recognize:

Wild Bill Hickok James Butler Hickok in Troy Grove, Illinois on May 27, 1837 to was born William Alonzo Hickok and Polly Butler Hickok. Bill had four brothers and two sisters and his parents were God-fearing Baptists who expected Bill to keep up his chores on the farm and to attend church every Sunday. Bill's parents also operated a station along the Underground Railroad, where they smuggled slaves out of the South. It was during this time that the lean and wiry young man got his first taste of hostile gunfire when he and his father were chased by law officers who suspected them of carrying more than just hay in their wagon. ("Wild Bill Hickok and the dead man's hand," LegendsofAmerica.com)

And so, James Butler Hickok came from very upstanding Americans, from people who saw Black Americans as human beings when few bothered to care. On top of this, they risked their lives, and so did Bill. He was a real man. But then, we should remember that there's that other side of America, where Republicans and sell-out Democrats dwell. It's the domain of the Coward Jack McCall, the world of the back-stabbing scoundrel and the yellow-belly.

Not much is known about McCall except that he was stupid, cock-eyed, a braggart, and a drunk who had once run with some buffalo hunters, possibly in the Wyoming territory. Kind of sounds like the current president, doesn't it? McCall was from Kentucky while Hickok was from Illinois, but both men wrestled with the beast within. Hickok was a lawman with an itchy trigger-finger. We'll never know how many people Hickok killed, and it's positive we never will with McCall either.

But you know a man by his actions, and we only remember McCall because of one of his last ones when he shot Wild Bill Hickok in the back of the head for beating him at cards.

On August 1, 1876 Wild Bill was playing cards in Nuttall and Mann’s No. 10 Saloon when one of the players dropped out and bystander Jack McCall took his place. McCall kept losing and at the end of the evening was broke. Hickok gave him money with which to buy dinner. The next day, on August 2, Hickok returned to the No. 10 and joined in a game of cards. A few hours later Jack McCall entered the bar and stopped a few paces behind Hickok. He pointed his gun at Hickok’s head, pulled the trigger and shouted, “Damn you, take that!” The gunshot instantly killed Wild Bill. McCall ran out of the saloon and attempted to escape on a horse that was tethered nearby, but the saddle had been loosened, and he fell to the ground. McCall ran down the street and hid in a butcher’s shop where he was captured by a large crowd. ("Deadwood History-JackMcCall," AdamsMuseumandHouse.org)

How is this different from John McCain dropping bombs on innocent North Vietnamese civilians over forty-years-ago, then being captured? Can someone like Obama--coming from the Chicago political machine--embody the morality of what was good about James Butler Hickok and America, or will he unleash the spirit of Jack McCall, John Rockefeller Sr., the Vanderbilts, Andrew Carneige, and the Pinkertons on the world as Commander in Chief?

Will he be a backstabbing assassin like the man who murdered his distant cousin, or will he side with the robber barons, the mine owners, and railroad men of our times? The signs aren't good, but one can hope, since that's all we're left with voting within the two party system. Will Obama be the man from Illinois (Lincoln/Hickok) or the malcontent, booze-swilling long-knife from Kentucky (McCall)?

When a candidate evokes the memory of the Old West in America, it's an important event that carries the responsibility of getting the history right. Yes, it makes him look and sound "tough," but does it make him a hero (McCain isn't one either), a man who can enter his home justified? If Senator Obama decides to stand on the side of the law, he's going to have a lot of cleaning-up to do from the last president. This is mandatory. It should be a part and parcel of his own agenda, because no nation can survive lawlessness for very long.

Just 100-years-ago, Pat Garrett was murdered along a lonely road in New Mexico.

He'd been shot in the back of the head and in the chest. Long before we were arguing over which angle JFK was shot from in Dealy Plaza, parties were arguing the same over Pat's murder. They say a big time rancher named W.W. Cox wanted him dead, and that he wasn't alone. Rich "coyotes" smuggling Chinese immigrants across the Mexican-American border might have wanted to bring them through his Bear Canyon ranch. Had they murdered him for money and power? What side of history is Obama on? We already know about John McCain.

"Political Play: Obama claims link to the Wild West," AP, 07.30.2008: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gyXVIfZ2F2CTuuxH3_93vuTP-ywwD928D6QO0

"Wild Bill Hickok and the dead man's hand," LegendsofAmerica.com: http://www.legendsofamerica.com/WE-BillHickok.html

On the Coward Jack McCall:http://www.adamsmuseumandhouse.org/answers/jackmccall.html

"Surprising New Information on Pat Garrett's Death: Details from the Fornoff Report," by Chuck Hornung, WesternOutlaw.com: http://www.westernoutlaw.com/stories/files/NewInfoPatGarrett.pdf

DEATH OF A SPOOK: E. HOWARD HUNT DEAD

Miami, Florida--The man who coordinated the break-in at the Watergate Hotel into Democratic campaigning offices (and many other "black bag" jobs, like the break-in at Daniel Ellsberg's shrink's office) on June 17th, 1972 is dead at 88. He was also involved in the CIA operations into Guatemala in 1954, and the botched Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba, amongst others. He also wrote shitty spy-novels, as many disgraced CIA-operatives do upon their "retirement" (they never retire--unless they're killed).

JFK assassination researchers have pointed-out that Hunt could be one of the "tramps" at Dealey Plaza on November 22nd, 1963. I have seen the photographic evidence, and there is a case for it. Bye-bye shill, you had to declare bankruptcy in 1997 due to fines accrued from the Watergate break-in. Good-riddance to you. He has a new book coming-out in April--fortunately, he won't be able to profit from it now. What a C.R.E.E.P. What a traitor. Hunt is the man on-the-left in the photo.

It was Johnson: http://itwasjohnson.impiousdigest.com/

AP Obit: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070124/ap_on_re_us/obit_e__howard_hunt

Hunt's Recent Revelations About the JFK Assassination and More:

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Convicted_Watergate_plumber_claims_LBJ_may_0114.html

NY Post--"Hunt Blames LBJ for JFK Hit" (01.14.2007):
http://www.nypost.com/seven/01142007/gossip/pagesix/pagesix.htm

1990s Interview with Hunt:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/coldwar/interviews/episode-18/hunt1.html

A Good Bio on Hunt: http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/E._Howard_Hunt

LITVINENKO'S ITALIAN CONTACT SCARAMELLA ARRESTED BY NAPLES POLICE YESTERDAY

Naples, Italy/London, the United Kingdom--We know why:Scaramella is involved in numerous illegal-activities. This site is happy to be right about suspicions surrounding this shadowy man, and the arrest confirms that he's a man with a lot to hide (and not just regarding Mr. Litvinenko).

He has changed his story several times, though I think this blog could be one of the earliest to note it. It struck me as odd how easily he was going back-and-forth between the UK and Italy, so he was either being protected or allowed-to incriminate himself by Scotland Yard.

The Yard isn't claiming no-involvement in the Naples arrest of Scaramella, but are asserting there is no connection with the Litvinenko affair.

Whatever the case-may-be, he's definitely part of the global intelligence community contracting for someone--likely a double-agent with Italy's intelligence-community and the FSB (or other unknown elements). Don't be surprised if he suddenly dies in custody, as people like Mario Scaramella have a tendency to do this. Jack Ruby always claimed he was poisoned with radioactive-materials from his jail cell in Texas, and he died in-custody of cancer in 1967. Sit on that one for awhile. An exhumation of Rubenstein would probably reveal traces of some sort of radioactive-isotope, but one that had degraded for 40 years. Imagine the implications of that one.

Whatever the case, Scaramella's cover is blown. Ironically, Scotland Yard says that the arrest yesterday in Naples is "not connected to the Litvinenko case." There is a strong-possibility that the polonium-210 came from Italy, or was ferried-through the country. This would be yet-another violation of the sovereignty of a European state. Search this site for earlier-posts on Mr. Scaramella, he's a cagey man, and he's in a lot of trouble right-now. Even worse, he's also been contaminated with polonium-210.

This site on Mario Scaramella:
http://chickasawpicklesmell.blogspot.com/search?q=Scaramella

The Telegraph on the Arrest:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/12/24/uspy124.xml

A November 15th Russian allegation that Scaramella is FSB:
http://www.kavkazcenter.com/eng/content/2006/11/15/6425.shtml

An Excellent Eurotrib Piece on Many of the Strange Facts Surrounding the case:
http://www.eurotrib.com/?op=displaystory;sid=2006/11/19/20439/209

Ohmy News just four-days before Scaramella's arrest:
http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?article_class=3&no=335755&rel_no=1

Itar-Tass on Today's Developments:
http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.html?NewsID=11115117&PageNum=0

UK Mail 11.26.2006:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2006/261106Sushi.htm

Postscript, 09.12.2008: Try doing an American google search on "Mario Scaramella." Good luck getting anything recent to come up. However, try google.au, google.it, and some others, and you'll find significantly more. Curious, that.