MY CONFIDENTIAL SOURCE IN IRAQ: IT'S CIVIL WAR

IRAQ--Having seen the worst, my source contends that it's situation-critical in Iraq. Religious factionalism is unstoppable in-country now, it cannot be fixed. Iraq isn't a real country, it was created by the British after WWI, and they arbitrarily subdivided all these groups into a geopolitical entity that could only be governed by tyranny. We all know all this, yet the American media is just barely beginning to report it as fact. Insulting, isn't it? Perhaps this is part of why newspaper-subscriptions are plummeting, and why when the other media-outlets actually take a stand and vocalize what is really happening in Iraq that they begin gaining-on Fox's ratings. And while the FCC grants people like Murdoch a licence-to-kill on the American airwaves (legally-owned by the public, incidentally), Al-Jazeera is barred from any access to even one cable system in the United States. Is someone so convinced the 'conventional wisdom' is wrong? It would have that we aren't 'at war with Iran', but we are. We've been sending-in Special Forces and Rangers for almost three-years now, according to my source. They're doing reconnaissance and hitting infrastructure-targets with raids. That's an act of war, kids.

Are they afraid that if any shred-of-truth was put alongside it, their 'line' would simply vanish as the obvious rubbish it is? Yes. This was the reason to gut the Fairness Doctrine of the FCC in 1987, ordered by Ronald Reagan and Roger Aisles. To their credit, the Democratic party of that time fought it twice. The last-time in 1993, when they attempted to make it law. Nonetheless, technology fills-the-gaps.The internet is going to continue to expose these things. You can arrest us, but it won't stop anything for long. Arresting bloggers is a clear act of desperation--it couldn't be any clearer. The jig is up. Your boy in the White House has given the game away, and the public has noticed--even the kids. You could have twenty Trilateral Commissions, and it wouldn't help. Yes, you'll be fighting for your scraps for an entire generation, the genie is out of the bottle. Adam Smith was right: the 'wealth of nations' rises and falls, with time. But the acceleration of this is thanks to George W. Bush and his incompetence. We can be thankful that empires end, but where will the next begin? Probably with China, and the world will have to wear them down too. To my source: keep your head down, and be safe. This isn't over yet.

LITVINENKO'S SUSHI BAR CONTACT CHANGES HIS STORY A TAD, WORLD PRESS MISSES IT, BUT LEARNS MORE ELSEWHERE...

Rome--Italian Professor Mario Scaramella is beginning to talk, but he just contradicted-himself. Originally, he mentioned that he felt-strongly that the Russian mafia were involved in the assassination of former FSB Colonel, Alexander Litvinenko.

But now, the London Times is reporting that he's saying 'he had no doubt that the Kremlin was behind the death of Mr Litvinenko.' It might be nothing, or it might mean a lot. Scaramella is insisting on his innocence in the affair, and is still under-suspicion. It gets worse:

...and La Repubblica yesterday published interviews that it conducted last year with Mr LitvinenkoEvgeny Limarev, another former Russian intelligence officer, in which both men claimed that Mr Scaramella used his status within the commission to run a shadowy parallel intelligence operation with right-wing aims.

It seems possible that Mr. Litvinenko was well-aware of another-side of Professor Mario Scaramella, and wanted to pump him for information on Russian intelligence networks in Italy and elsewhere. There is a linchpin here somewhere that is typical of the modus operandi of all intel-operations, and it is ugly. It's possible a variety of interests feared information Mr. Litvinenko possessed--including Western ones. Bets are still on Vladimir Putin's regime and the FSB.

The other theories make some sense, but the hit seems very personal and not based on rational aims...yet. The London Telegraph has stated it would have been impossible for Litvinenko to drink polonium-210, as "the drink" would bubble and the heat would be too intense.' The notion that the ex-spy committed suicide to defame Putin isn't worthy of comment, and simply favors Putin.

Speculation about missing radioactive elements from Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union are also preposterous, as polonium-210 has a half-life of 138 days. He could certainly have become poisoned by it after this duration, so it is a wait-and-see. The fact that Litvinenko left a radioactive trail is disturbing, however, scientists assert that the element must be ingested or inhaled.

There is a strong-possibility that Litvinenko's clothing was dusted with the material and inhaled over the period of one day. Another possible motive has emerged: Litvinenko had passed-on a dossier to a Russian billionaire living in Israel, and it covered FSB infiltration-tactics (directed by Putin) into the Yukos energy company--the largest in the world. Russia is a major supplier of energy to the EU. Another twist:

The building near the Millennium Hotel [Ed.-site of a bar Litvinenko visited and contaminated] contains a business intelligence company, Titon International Ltd. — whose CEO was a former U.K. Special Services director, and Erinys UK Ltd., an international security and risk management company. Erinys confirmed that Litvinenko had visited the office "on a matter totally unrelated to issues now being investigated by the police," but declined to elaborate. (AP, 11/27/2006)

It could be a constellation of interests are involved here at a time when oil and natural gas have reached dazzling heights in value. It could even be a corporate hit. An autopsy might commence this week. Curiouser and curiouser, further and further down the rabbit hole we go, Alice. People are forgetting another possibility: America was also involved.

This isn't as strange as it might sound, and (geo)politics makes for strange bedfellows. In 2004, American intelligence helped the FSB assassinate Chechen separatist leader Zelimkhan Yandarbiyev in Qatar. The State Department has been curiously supportive of the genocidal war in Chechnya since its inception in the late-1990s.

If it was rogue elements of FSB, Putin is still responsible, and in serious trouble from his own security agency. This, however, seems doubtful as he is a creature of the KGB, and has survived this long. I believe Vladimir knows exactly what he's doing.

A final question: why was Professor Scaramella allowed to exit Great Britain so easily?

Maybe MI6 has some questions to answer. The contention that the polonium-210 was purchased on the black market sounds dubious in the face of a 138 day half-life. You have to have state-clearance to obtain it in this form. What would the world reaction be if it came from an American or British reactor? Or what about an Israeli one?

Revised 09.10.2008

Shake-Hands With Beef:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2473384,00.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/27/nspy127.xml
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2473385,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1957704,00.html

SOCIALISM ON THE MARCH: NOW ECUADOR!

'The people will have the opportunity to punish the oligarchy and the political parties.' --Rafael Correa


ECUADOR--AP is reporting that Leftist economist Rafael Correa has won the Ecuadoran Presidential election in what appears to be yet another rejection of IMF policies by the people of a Latin American nation. Correa also includes-himself amongst the allies of Hugo Chavez, and so we can see that a nexus of Populist control of South America is emerging here. These are heady-days for the region, and will likely embolden progressive-tendencies in the United States and Mexico, lynchpins in pushing-back what has been decades of a corporate-advance on the poorest populations within the Western Hemisphere. Correa has called President George W. Bush 'dimwitted', like the majority of humanity.

I like this man already. Correa has a Doctorate in Economics from the University of Illinois. He flatly-refuses signing any free-trade agreements with Washington. I hope he defaults on all of those loans, the Rockefellers and the other financiers are rocks. They'll be OK, their interests aren't mine or the average American's. Also in his favor: he is not allowing any US military bases in Ecuador. He has similar leverage as Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, as Ecuador also has substantial oil-deposits. Thanks, George W. Bush, you're making that wave of Populist Socialism I always wanted happen faster than any of us would have dreamed possible! And those pesky exit polls--you'd think the rest of the entire world found them valid (except when a Bush runs-for-office, then the bets are off).


Rafael Correa:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061127/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/ecuador_election
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6187364.stm
http://www.rafaelcorrea.com/
http://www.tonisolo.net/correa.html

American Intelligensia Panic-Response:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/26/AR2006112600311.html
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=a31B5.qZxWgo&refer=news

Bobby (2006) review

This was an unexpected surprise, a very enjoyable movie! The pundits/talking-necks have been slagging this film as a deification of Bobby Kennedy, but I never noticed any Oliver Stone overreaching here. The story is simple: you have around 20 different-characters in their little subplots during a 24-hour period at the Ambassador Hotel on June 5-6, 1968, the site of Bobby Kennedy's assassination. It seems many reviewers were expecting JFK (1991), which is goofy. Maybe they're just liars? ;0) It's obvious from the beginning of Bobby that all the characters are composites of real-people who were there, and they are mostly-fictitious. There's a good-reason for this, because the film is not about recreating specific-events. It's a cultural and social 'photograph' of the hopes and dreams of the American people in 1968, and today. Yes, the ensemble-approach is a lot like Robert Altman,'s but Emilio Estevez has his own style that has a nice flow and sheen (pun-intended) to it. A young Czech-journalist informs us about the Prague Spring that was occurring in Czechosolvakia, while others illustrate the racial-tensions of the time. Other subplots are about the dynamics of marriage at that time, and the torture women had to endure under the fashions of the time! There are hints of the emergence of feminism, and 1968 was that year. We have guests of the Hotel, Mexican busboys, waitresses, beauticians, but RFK is only seen as he can be, in clips that weave throughout all the lives of the characters. It's pretty effective, but it was surprisingly subtle.

For the jaded, you just won't like this, and that's too-bad. I really feel-sorry for you. On just a technical-level, Estevez did a great job here. The performances by William H. Macy as a manager of the Ambassador, or Lawrence Fishburn as a wizened head-chef are satisfying and drew me in. All the characters drew me in, and I never felt distracted by star-cameos. The performances are too-good for that to happen. Harry Belafonte's (a prominent-critic of the Bush administration) geriatric-rapport with Anthony Hopkins' Ambassador concierge is so warm and genuine, and adds to a tapestry of what is a compelling-swath of Americana. I valued these characters, and I cared about them. Like I said, this is Frank Capra territory, with all the Populist sentiment of the originals (without being derivative). There isn't any moment where I felt the film beat me over-the-head with any particular-message, it just made some very humble and quiet-observations about where America has been, and where it's at today. From the references to hanging-chads and Black Americans being-denied the right-to-vote in the 1968 primaries, or Lindsey Lohan's war-bride pondering why her government hasn't provided adequate reasons for the American-invasion of Vietnam (or Iraq now), this is about 1968 and 2006. The writer/director did his homework, and the film is as densely-packed with bits of that fateful year as it can be.

But there is more. Ashton Kutchner (groan, but he was funny!) provides some comic-relief and some cultural context with his hilarious drug-dealer, a freak who's holed-up in the Ambassador selling-dope. Yes, like Altman, a number of the subplots intersect with each other. You either like the style or you don't, and I'm with the former. Bobby isn't a perfect movie by-any-means, but it is a very entertaining and enlightening set of stories about average-Americans on a very bad-day in our history. What struck me was how much happened in such a short-time--it was as if the public was truly overwhelmed by the assassinations of JFK, and Dr. King, but after Bobby, we sank-into a daze that we only seem to be awakening-from now. The 1960s was peppered with political-assassinations of progressive leaders, and by the late-1960s so much had been invested in them that their deaths were almost a body-blow to American enthusiasm and a social-movement. We lost our inertia and our positivity. With the murder of RFK, there wasn't much hope left for many people. It seemed a watershed, and a shared-sense of destiny evaporated for a time. This was a tactical mistake-in-thinking. We all have to be leaders now.

But forgetting all that, it's just a very competent film from a guy I had written-off! Visually, it just looks beautiful, and there was an excruciating effort to capture the styles and the look of 1968. Even mannerisms and dialect fit very well with what I know of the period. Seeing two geeky Kennedy campaign volunteers drop acid (via the Kutchner character) for the first-time is a more-accurate depiction of the 1960s than most period-pieces of the era--the whole-point is that the 'normals' from the suburbs were turning-on and joining the counterculture and the anti-war movement, folks. That was the reason why there was such a violent-reaction from the beltway, there were massive cultural-changes emerging. Freaks and hippies were rare, even in 1968, just like 'dropouts' of any era. Bobby gets this right. But watch other movies on the 1960s, and it seems they were everywhere! It's untrue, the counterculture was widely-distributed and fragmentary.

Emilio Estevez just gets so much right, it's hard to fault him here. Rather than obsess over the counterculture, the movie simply shows us the lives of a variety of ordinary-people. Bobby is a time-capsule of where the culture was at, and what the concerns of people were. It is their and our ideals that are important in the story. Bobby Kennedy was merely invested with those ideals by the American public, and he was responding to us. This is what made him special, and it's what the public wants from the new Democratic majority in Congress today. Will they rise to the occasion? Why RFK was murdered is another story, this isn't a story of para- politics or conspiracies, but of life as it is lived. It really isn't about Bobby Kennedy at all, but about us. This is what makes it Capraesque, like the Populism of "Meet John Doe."

NOTE: COMMENTING FOR EVERYONE ENABLED!

I've enabled commenting for non-Google members. Here's the rules, and if you don't follow them, I'll delete your comments and block you from the site permanently:


1. Only constructive and civil comments. Non-negotiable.

2. No trolls. If I notice you, you're gone. You won't be tolerated here. Why? Because. Start your own blog, shithead, it's your right.

3. No advertising bots, though if you want to promote your blog, that's fine, though I won't hesitate to delete ones that promote right-wing agendas/ideologies, or anything advocating the overthrow of the United States government (it's illegal since 1940). Again, go create your own blog.

4. Not set-in-stone, but please try to keep on-topic if a thread exists. However, if you attempt to hijack the dialog, you'll be ejected permanently (see 2).

5. Any comments that advocate any violation of state and federal law, implicate yourself at: your own blog.

6. Friendly discussion/dialog is always welcome on this site.

777. You can always disagree with the opinions posted here, but you had better come-prepared. Don't bring a butter-knife to a gunfight. In-other-words, are you up to it? Do you have anything pertinent to add? Things to consider.

8. Friends can always tell me to 'get fucked.'

9. Any new facts you can bring here makes you my hero.


Otherwise, if you want to write about your mother's douche-bag, the time your dog died, actual intellectual dialogues, why punk still sucks, the bully everyone piled-on, a brush-with-death, your herpes warts, why you hate the GOP, your favorites things, your first or best-lay (usually not your first-one), how to give better blow-job instructions for the ladies, a brush with the famous, a crime you witnessed, your war-stories, or when you first dropped-acid or smoked pot--you go, girl!

Everyone's free to disagree, but you had better have a good argument here, and state your case with some prior thought invested in your post. But, if you just want to 'chat' and play nice, that's cool too. If you want to talk sex, that's fine, as long as it's nothing related to pedophilia or bestiality. Normal human-beings are intolerant of these things.

Postscript, 12.29.2008--Since the time of this post there were abuses, so I screen comments. Don't like it? I don't care.

IT'S OAXACA TIME AGAIN

"The only one who can dismiss and impose governors is God." --Gov. Ulises Ruiz, November 2006

OAXACA, MEXICO--Demonstrators (primarily APPO--the Popular People's Assembly of Oaxaca) again engaged Mexican Policia for control of the center of the city in what has been almost six-months of stand-offs and confrontations that began as a teacher's strike in July. But the strike has been met with extreme violence from off-duty cops, and unidentified vigilantes, and has grown into a movement against the corrupt Oaxacan state governor, Ulises Ruiz who is thought to be behind the vigilante-attacks as well. This can all be seen as a continuation of a cycle in Mexican politics that extends back to Aztec rule, as it is well-known that Oaxacans suffered under their domination before the time of the conquistadores.

Oaxacan-auxilliaries comprised most of Hernan Cortez's forces that took what was once the Aztec capitol, but is now Mexico City. It seems little has changed, and Vincente Fox, the oligarchs and foreign-interests have merely replaced the Aztec rulers who still harbor that cannibalistic-urge for human-sacrifice to maintain the social-order. In-response to the October invasion of the town by Federales today, protesters attempted to encircle the Policia, sometimes throwing fireworks and molotov cocktails. This is an escalation regarding the gasoline bombs, as protesters have previously refrained from using them in past-confrontations.

Presidente Calderon will be sworn-in on December 1st, and he will have his hands full. Protests by supporters of Leftist candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador are also still very active in Mexico city. Viva la Mexico! Viva Zapata! Before the uprisings, Oaxaca was known as a tourist-center, but that ended in-substance after July. Much of this has been brewing in Oaxaca for some-time (years), with Leftists, Zapatistas, and the general-population being fired-on by PRI-supporters and municipal-backed vigilantes. In many-cases, nobody is safe from state-repression in the city and the state that bear the same name. It's hardly an exaggeration to say that local and federal Policia hold a monopoly on violence in the state. The vast-majority of fatalities are APPO-members and the local-citizenry. Imagine that. You don't have to, and dozens of people are disappearing in Oaxaca.

Viva la Muerte (to imperialists):

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N25398452.htm

http://ww4report.com/node/2810

http://deletetheborder.org/node/1332

Viva la Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos:

http://www.narconews.com/Issue40/article1673.html

First-Hand Account from October 31st:

http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/2006/10/31/mexico-first-hand-account-of-oaxaca-violence/

Oaxaca News Blog (En English):

http://mexico.indymedia.org/oaxacaNews

Just a Few Happy-Reminders for the Holidays...

'Happy talk, keep talking happy talk, talk about things you like to do. You got to have a dream, if you don't have a dream, how you gonna have a dream come true?'

Mark Foley is a pedophile. Dennis Hastert and the GOP-leadership covered it up, and Arlen Specter is old, ugly and a loser. Mainstream feminism is still an impotent and divisive club for rich women. The GOP and Democratic leadership in Congress still support the war in Iraq, which will sink them, God-willing. The American dollar will soon be almost-worthless (too-late). Habeus Corpus (the right to know why you've been dragged-to-jail) is still gone, and we're still in deep-shit with a future that looks apocalyptic. Columbus did not discover America, it discovered him. There's always hope. The Korean War never ended. You suck. The human-race is a lethal-mutation. There is no God. The vent-worms at the bottom of the oceans will survive us, since our desire to return to being primordial-slime is so strong (we're not quitters). Fortunately, Republicans don't have to take any steps in this direction, they're already there. Ewige Blumenkraft! Prague is a seat of the occult. Let's fuck! 'Republican friend' is an oxymoron for twats. The Simpsons were hilarious for 5-years. Friedrich Nietzsche died of syphilis. In-laws usually suck. Have a nice day! We will fall. There is no justice. I collect stamps. Did you take-out the trash? Punk died in 1978. Are you 'metrosexual'? Yes? You must be young and stupid then. Heavy metal hair-bands will always suck. Gay men are better conversation than the hottest women who ever-lived in the entirety of human history. We suck. Canada is friendlier than America. Many gay men hate women. Over 50% of all American marriages fail in the first two-years. Finland has a higher suicide-rate than the United States, even proportionally. Kurt Vonnegut's last decent novel was Deadeye Dick. Most women are attracted to men who show 100% certainty at-all-times. Men have nipples--why?! Yu look good in that dress (madame Yu). No, you don't look fat (I'm lying to you now). You suck. Stanley Kubrick is still dead. Happiness is a transitory-sensation. The world is round. Uranium is not the heaviest-element. People are more-interesting when they don't talk, especially young women. Iraq is a disaster. Germans do indeed love David Hasselhof. There is no truth. Dutch Elm disease changed America's landscape. The carrier pigeon tasted good. The human-race is a dead-end proposition. Men are generally taller than women. Kurt Cobain is still dead. Children are cruel. Men are base. Nobody ever got-laid at a party by whipping-out a bag of pot in a room full of women.

VLADIMIR PUTIN, STATIST MURDERER

"You have shown yourself to have no respect for life, liberty or any civilized value. You have shown yourself to be unworthy of your office, to be unworthy of the trust of civilized men and women." --from Alexander Litvinenko's final-statement of Nov. 21


LONDON--Astonishing all of us who know-better, London's Medical Examiner stated that the death (by a deadly-isotope called polonium-210) of former KGB agent Alexander Litvinenko by ingestion of the substance on November 1st was 'not an act of violence.' What could me more of a violation of a human-being than this? Well sure, this happens all the time in London sushi restaurants, and now traces of polonium-210 have been found at the establishment and the victim's residency. Details are sketchy right-now, which one would expect in a criminal investigation. There is an off-chance his killers did a black-bag job and put the contaminant in his home. Still want kids in a world like this? But, fortunately, London Police are investigating the situation as a 'suspicious poisoning'. Kremlin reactions are varied from 'it was accidental' [?!], to allegations of Putin's involvement being 'sheer nonsense.' But who was Litvinenko? MSNBC is reporting that:

In a 2003 book, “The FSB Blows Up Russia,” he accused his country’s secret service agency of staging apartment-house bombings in 1999 that killed more than 300 people in Russia and sparked the second war in Chechnya. Litvinenko joined the KGB in 1988 and rose to the rank of colonel in its successor, the Federal Security Service, known as the FSB. He began specializing in terrorism and organized crime in 1991, and was transferred to the FSB’s most secretive department on criminal organizations in 1997.

Litvinenko has been writing and speaking against the regime of Vladimir Putin since his defection--the resurrection of a Cold War term--in 2000. He knew too-much, it seems, and was meeting with an Italian Professor (Mario Scaramella) who studied KGB activities within Italy during the Cold War. Scaramella was a 'contact' as part of Litvinenko's investigation into the assassination of his compatriot, journalist Anna Politkovskaya. Politkovskaya was also a well-known critic of Putin's regime and the war in Chechnya. It seems almost certain that the Kremlin ordered this action, as it likely did in the attempted-murder through poisoning by dioxin of Ukrainian President-elect Viktor Yuschenko in 2004. At any rate, poison is a preferred method by intelligence operatives because it is discreet. But what is the element Polonium? It's a naturally-occurring element used in atomic-weapons:

In the summer of 1942, the Corps of Engineers organized the Manhattan Engineer District. The purpose of the District's Manhattan Project was to build an atomic bomb. Polonium-210 was vital to this program, because it was to be used in a neutron source that would ensure initiation of a chain reaction. An initiator is a device that produces a timed burst of neutrons to initiate a fission chain reaction in a nuclear weapon. Initiators made of polonium-210 and beryllium were located at the center of the fissile cores of early atomic weapons. (globalsecurity.org)

But beyond this, polonium-210 is sometimes used to convert nuclear power into electricity at a reactor site. All access to polonium-210 requires security-clearances. Admittedly, as broken-up as Russia is now, organized crime could obtain it through corruption in key-positions related to the military, intelligence, or even nuclear plants. But there's a hitch: polonium-210 has a half-life of 138 days. This would make a surreptitious-use by organized crime unlikely, though not impossible. But, it would be quite a feat.

Yet strangely, the Italian Professor thinks it might be the Russian Mafia, which seems unlikely unless they were used as contract-killers. This is coming from Litvinenko's 'contact', so he is certainly under-suspicion here, the comment is peculiar. While surveillance of organized crime was part of Col. Litvinenko's work with FSB, we simply don't know all of the details of what he did under the super-secret agency. But with crimes like this, one has to ask: who gains the most from the action? The motive for Russian organized crime simply isn't as significant as it is for Putin who has a legacy and a power-structure of his own to protect. Compared to the state, any mafia group is small-change, even in the face of a weakened and partially-decentralized Kremlin.

An October 12th article in the Economist states that Russia is potentially heading towards the 'F-word'...fascism. Considering many of Putin's speeches and public-statements on his aims, he sounds much like an incubating Peter the Great, Ivan the Terrible, or even a Joseph Stalin. Relations with the West can be expected to cool as long as his associates hold-power in Russia. Maybe a Marshall Plan for Russia after the end of the Cold War wasn't such a bad-idea, but someone named Bush was in-office at that historical-moment. It was an opportunity that he squandered. This is a time of martyrs, and the world is aflame. This is our fault, and the species is sinking-fast. Yes, it's Miller time, only I drink real beer, not piss.

Polonium:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/intro/polonium.htm
http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:_xpnuebqNmAJ:www.ead.anl.gov/pub/doc/polonium.pdf+polonium-210&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=7

The Poisoning (Don't Anger Vladimir!):
http://www.680news.com/news/international/article.jsp?content=w112459A
http://www.topix.net/world/ukraine
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6165482.stm
http://blog.kievukraine.info/rss/atom.xml
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15808119/

The 'F-word' (Not FUCK, nope.):

http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8031597

MIDDLE-OF-THE-ROAD...

'The middle-of-the-road is the most-dangerous place to be.'
--from John Carpenter's THEY LIVE

THE UNITED STATES AGAIN--Watch for Democrats like James Carville, Rahm Emanuel, 'ittle Chuckie Schumer, Hillary Clinton, and all the other DNC conservatives get kicked to the curb in the next-year. Wha? Yup. Americans don't want a rush to the center, they didn't vote that way in the elections. How do I know this? Look back at the campaign-ads, and you will see a clearly progressive-message. The pols at the DNC & DCCC (like Emanuel) know damn well the public wants some substantial-reforms, not just some half-measures that accomplish nothing. We want change now. If they don't deliver on serious oversight and investigations into GOP-wrongdoing, end the war in Iraq by the end of next-year, and rollback illegal-wiretapping and Bush administration tax-cuts for the wealthiest, they're done. This is the last-chance here, this is it. Either Democrats deliver on reforms, or we have a breakdown of this society, and it's not coming later, it's coming sooner this-time. There will be nowhere to run.

If the Democrats don't deliver some relief for the American worker, we can expect upheavals that could shatter their party. The GOP's time could well-be-up too, since they literally have nothing to offer voters in the economic realm, just a lot of race and gay-baiting, but nothing of substance. Most Americans know that the GOP is 100%-beholden to corporate-interests, and they want new laws that break these ties to both parties. Do both parties generally seem 'moderate'? Maybe compared to public-opinion, but that's relative, isn't it? There is an obvious disconnect in opinon. Look at the polls on various social-issues: does public-opinion look moderate now? The 'prevailing-wisdom' is a crock, and it just comes-off as another insult to the intelligence of even the most daft of individuals (like mainstream Democrats and Republicans). The 'prevailing-wisdom' is actually the extremist-side of the spectrum, but they can keep calling themselves 'middle-of-the-road', because that's where they're going to stay until they're no-longer holding public-office. Yes, even a good chunk of Democrats in Congress are basically Republicans in-disguise (and not very good ones either). Fortunately, there are now enough progressives in both houses to cause some trouble for these shills. Young people are aware of these ploys, and voted-accordingly.

But think of the term 'middle-of-the-road'. Does it sound sexy? Would you have-sex with someone who was 'middle-of-the-road'? Would you hire a mechanic who was middle-of-the-road to fix your car? Would you go see a middle-of-the-road movie (don't answer)? Do the last six-years seem like a moderate course? Well, you would if you were ugly, stupid, perverted, and greedy like most politicos (and Americans). You think the GOP is alone in being corrupt, and that all-is-well now? You're daft. Nobody but a nut, a loser or a coward likes being lukewarm, it sucks. But, as the last six-years have proven, continuing a so-called 'centrist' position just means you're right-wing, with an agenda that will wreck this nation. Most of the same Democrats (John Kerry, Hillary Clinton) who voted-for the invasion of Iraq still cannot form a coherent-strategy because they also want to 'win' the war (whatever that means).

They're against protecting American jobs, the wages of workers and their ability to form unions and bargain with their employers, or even access to adequate medical-care--anything the public wants, they don't want for the public. Sounds radical and extremist, doesn't it? You would think they don't have any respect for democracy at all. Claiming a centrist-stance just means you're a liar who's using the phraseology of the demagogue. Middle-of-the-road? Not sexy. Nancy Pelosi is off to a great-start and they haven't even begun the next-session of Congress, so the same interests who back many DNC and GOP-hacks are attacking her. Howard Dean's approach is the future of the Democratic party, or there isn't one for it. Grassroots, or death.

PS: 'tt', fuck-you.

Let's Go to Prison (2006) review

While Sascha Cohen's 'Borat' may be the most-popular comedy of 2006, there is an even funnier one, and it's this movie! Astonishingly, Universal distributed this little indie, but has given it virtually no publicity whatsoever. That must have been the trade-off, because it's a pretty uncompromising story that could be compared-to Richard Linklater's Fast Food Nation. Directed by Bob Odenkirk (Mr. Show, SNL-writer during the Phil Hartman era, Ben Stiller Show, Conan O'Brien), it's an interesting-take on our corrections system, and it's loosely-based on a non-fiction book called 'You Are Going to Prison', by a former inmate named Jim Hogshire. Much of his humor is intact in the film, but writers Ben Garant and Thomas Lennon have taken it into the realm of fiction/non-fiction . The book was literally just a 'how-to' guide to survival in prison, so you know this isn't going to be a flattering-portrayal of it. Most Americans know full-well their prison system is corrupt, and basically dysfunctional, but our culture has a lust for punishment at its core. Don't believe me? Let's go to prison, and find-out!

The movie makes the case by stating we have 2 million Americans in-prison now, only being surpassed by China and Russia. But this bloodlust is most-obvious during our elections, mostly the local-ones, though Reagan and Bush thrived on the 'crime-and-punishment' issue. And man-oh-man, is there some punishment in the first-quarter of this movie, wow, it really was only slightly-funny until...the story has some very unpredictable and hilarious twists to it! Odenkirk did the Midwest proud by placing the tale in Illinois, and they filmed the prison-scenes at the old Joliet Prison.

There is a scene with the warden of the facility that is priceless ('Take all of your complaints, write them on a piece of paper--and stick it up-your-asshole.'). In a few-areas, it's almost too-close to reality, but this changes as the story progresses.The movie begins with the story of repeat-felon, John Lyshitski (played to-the-hilt by Dax Shepard who plays rednecks alot) who is unfairly put on a path to crime by a certain judge at the age of 8. He has what is euphemistically called 'bad-luck', and gets snared into the system like so many others in America.

Judge Biederman just keeps sending him further-and-further into the corrections system, much like what happened to make John Dillinger a gangster, and untold-scores of minor-offenders into murderers. Because we are so harsh in our penalties here, we actually have created a situation where felons are manufactured. Let's Go to Prison makes this point many-times throughout the film, but it does it with a lot of laughs at the expense of the story's other protagonist, Nelson Biederman IV (played by the brilliant and funny Will Arnett from Arrested Development), the son of the judge. Lyshitski gets-released at the beginning of the film, and we get a voiceover of his story. The man wants revenge, but he realizes that judge Biederman died three-days-before his release, so he decides to take-it-out on his son instead. Like I said, the first-quarter of the movie is grim!

Lyshitski is constantly giving Biederman the worst advice you could give to someone imprisoned, and the plot takes a radical-turn in a confrontation between the judge's son and an Ayran Nations gang-leader that must be seen to be believed. The worm-turns for Biederman, the pathetic yuppie-fop who loves the 1990s pop-tune 'Shake That Body', and Lyshitski is in for quite a ride as his target becomes the 'big man' in the joint. It just gets funnier, and telling you any more would just ruin the ride for you, but you get a greater understanding of life in prison.

This was something I never expected, because...well, we all think we've seen-it-all with prison movies, but Let's Go to Prison goes further than all of them! From Biederman getting-punched everyday, to his being-sold to a Black inmate called 'Barry' (the always-great Chi McBride) for an ounce-of-pot and a carton-of -smokes, to their ongoing 'courting', it's hilarious. It also has an ending for the ages that I would personally love to see in real-life! If the movie says anything, it's that the criminal justice and corrections system is a joke on all of us, and it actually finds some hilarity in this fact. That's a tall order that it fills, no-problem. Flawed, but hilarious. Score.

www.letsgotoprison.com

DEATH OF AN ICON: ROBERT ALTMAN, DEAD AT 81

LOS ANGELES--Maverick filmmaker Robert Altman (1925-2006)has died in a Los Angeles hospital of currently undisclosed-causes, though a heart-attack is likely. Mr. Altman was known for directing M.A.S.H. (1970), Nashville (1975), 3 Women (1977), Gosford Park (2001), Short Cuts (1993), The Player (1992), Prarie Home Companion (2006), Private Honor (1984, one of my favorites), and many-more classics of independent film. He was a great man who showed the world that Hollywood isn't the only-route to make a movie, a member of a dying-breed of indie-filmmakers in a world of followers and yes-men (like Uwe Boll). Robert Altman was also a veteran of WWII. He will be missed by millions because he loved people. I recommend virtually all of his films, just not Kansas City, it's awful! ;0) I strongly-recommend cineastes watch his Private Honor, however, it is a damning-statement on our political system by none-other than the late Richard Nixon. Nixon mailed Altman a signed-copy of one of his own books after seeing the film. He loved it.

PS: It appears Mr. Altman died from complications related to cancer. What a man.

KRAMER LOSES IT: SOME OBSERVATIONS (HAPPY THANKSGIVING BOO!)

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AGAIN--As Americans, we are bombarded in our daily-lives with bigotry, and racism (both everyday and the institutionalized form). It is literally part of the fabric of our lives to-the-point that we are all conditioned with racist-attitudes. This includes Black Americans, though they will protest-loudly--the fact is, it's true. A majority of Blacks hate homosexuals, which is racism. All Americans harbor racist and xenophobic-attitudes, period. But some of us are hypocrites about this fact. When someone like Mel Gibson or Michael Richards does what many of us do while driving when somebody cuts-us-off in traffic, the hypocrites swarm to throw-the-heat off of themselves. He really should have just said something like, 'Wow, Black men with small-dicks, who woulda thought?' Yes, what Mr. Richards said was unacceptable, but it is protected-speech by the First Amendment. You don't believe in democracy if it only applies to what you agree-with, and I find it ludicrous to think that this man is a racist. We'll see about Gibson, but he still has the right to think and say what he wishes within the law.

It's absurd, but the more-liberal-than-thou crowd need fodder to further their ambitions and agendas. Let Black Americans have-their-say on this, it isn't your place to judge this man you rich, lily-white assholes. His career should not be affected, but we aren't a tolerant nation in a lot of cases. He has my support in this incident, but as we all know, he attended the lynching of a Black man afterwards. This is fucking ridiculous when thousands of Iraqis are being murdered by the Bush administration and much of Congress right-now. Not 160-years-ago, now.

Yes indeed, I have used the word nigger in-anger myself, and it shocked and surprised me. I felt ashamed, but should one be ashamed forever about it? No. Do I hate Black Americans? No, I like them better than so-called White America--they've done little to hurt my life. It was wrong, but there it is, not a high-crime like lying about WMDs to get us into a phony war. How about trying to understand why people say such things? You know, an open-dialog? Oh, that would disempower those with a questionable agenda. Welcome to America, home of the pseudo-liberal (you're a joke). Meanwhile, the media gets-rich on your stupidity (like that's new). Want fries with that?

DEMOCRATS.COM RUNNING AN IMPEACHMENT PETITION COVERING EVERY AMERICAN VOTING DISTRICT

THE INTERNET (HERE)--Yep, they've included Vice President Bush as well!

It's Your Call, Man:
http://www.democrats.com/peoplesemailnetwork/88

DEMOCRATIC REP. CHARLES RANGEL REPEATS INTENTIONS TOWARDS REINSTATING THE DRAFT

WASHINGTON--I heartily-agree with Rep. Rangel, and while we're going to do this, let's hammer-shut all the deferrments. This is something I am certain Rangel wants, too. Yes, I'm against-the-war, and I believe it's a good-idea. Americans--especially the youngest of young-adults--will no-longer be able to ignore a war like Iraq again, there will be no room for apathy. Especially when the children of the middle class and the wealthy start getting-killed in large-numbers. But this is key to readoption, making it a shared-responsibility in a time of war. It's a hard argument to disagree-with, as an all-volunteer military has still been disproportionately-populated by the poor since the removal of the draft in 1973 (by the GOP). Rangel's primary-aim is to change this fact. Yes, even white trailer-trash. But he really does have an overarching-goal in bring the draft back, and that's to damage the war machine's ability to expolit the poor.

Congressman Rangel says he wants the draft to provide more-troops for Iraq as a counter to McCain's call for more-troops, but I think this is a bit of a red-herring. He knows full-well it would hasten the end of the war by the inevitable groundswell that would occur. Americans only respond when things affect them directly--something Rangle wants to make tangible and real, and I support his approach. The American public should never be able to escape the responsibility of their or their government's actions. You want a war? Great, we're sending your kids too. Still want this war now? This logic is inescapable, and I love it. Sure, a bunch of bleeding-hearts from the more-liberal-than-thou crowd will gripe, but they're wrong. Rangle even offered the alternative of a couple-years doing public-service as an alternative to duty in a war-effort. He submitted a bill requesting a return of the draft prior to the invasion of Iraq, and I supported that move then. I like this man, he shook Malcolm X's hand when it was dangerous to. He also said Malcolm was Harlem's best-citizen, which was also unpopular during the mid-1960s. Rangel also looks like Caesar Romero, which is cool. He is a swank-looking man, with the class of Percy Sutton and W.E.B. DuBois, impressive. And he has his hair conked (the process), which looks smart coupled with a nice-suit. Just increase those Estate taxes and enact some progressive taxation again, Rep Rangel. The American people expect this from you.

THE INVASION OF IRAQ AS GAS STATION STICK-UP

WASHINGTON--It's entertaining to watch all of the Bush administration's allies fall. Jail? Well yes, but besides that fact they're fleeing the Bush/Cheney/Rove axis of evil as fast as they can. Now we have a Washington Post story giving us the lay of the land--even the neocons who were the architects of their respective pseudo-ideology are jumping-ship. As early as late last-year (post-Katrina), Grover Norquist began making-comments that the Democrats were needed to 'reign-in our excesses', but it was too-late then. It was obvious shortly-after the invasion of Iraq that a disaster was unfolding, beginning with the decommissioning of the Iraqi-military. This wasn't even done in Germany in the aftermath of WWII, as many of us observers noted at the time. And no, there was to be no Marshall Plan, either. Yet, as the war has worsened, and the violence has deepened, the Bush administration has continued their comparisons to that conflict. The American public responded in the elections to this impudence, and rewarded the Democratic party with a landslide-victory and control of both Houses of Congress.

But it's easiest to look at the invasion as simple criminality, akin to the robbery of a gas station, only with an occupation that is as insane as the siege of a crime-scene. Imagine that the stick-up decide to stay at the gas station, based on a similarly irrational-logic. It's as if the robbers said to themselves, 'Hey, we got enough food, water and gas to escape eventually.' But the problem is the same: the jig-is-up, and we have you surrounded. Yes, Keystone Cops. It's just a strange irrationality for a cornered-thug to hold-up the inevitable. We'll see ample-proof of this assertion when the investigations begin. There will be the standard stalling, diversionary-statements and actions, projection-of-blame (already happening) that we saw during Watergate and Iran-Contra, and even with Clinton (though he had committed greater-crimes than getting-laid).

Indeed, it's safe-to-say we can call the invasion of Iraq the largest-mounting of a gas station stick-up job. The objective was to control Iraqi-oil--not to pump more out, but to slow the flow of oil towards increasing the international-pricing. Added to this fact were the security-justifications for the last-round of gouging at the pumps, with the specter of global warming as the backdrop. The illegal-invasion bears all the hallmarks of a primitive-criminality, and there's nothing that complicated about it, really. Kenneth Adelman's (an architect of the war) final quote in the Washpo article is stunning, because it betrays its subtext: 'Most troubling, he said, are his shattered ideals: "The whole philosophy of using American strength for good in the world, for a foreign policy that is really value-based instead of balanced-power-based, I don't think is disproven by Iraq. But it's certainly discredited." ' He's admitting (openly) that he just wants the ability to project American power, a rare-glimpse into the behind-the-scenes culture in Washington. Oddly, the author of the article (Peter Baker) doesn't note this, but deserves credit for giving us the quote. So, Adelman's lesson from Iraq is...well, nothing. He never believed in any lofty-goals, he lied. What a surprise, I know. And what a genius that Karl Rove was, illustrating that all the neocons could manage was seizing-power, just not governing. You got me: this is what they have-in-common with National Socialism and her sister, Bolshevism.

The Original-irritant(s)...
http://www.newamericancentury.org/

One-two-three Punch from the Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/18/AR2006111801076.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/18/AR2006111800944.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/19/AR2006111900287_pf.html

Sharing the Love With Karl Rove, Former Ugly-Genius (But still ugly):
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/19/washington/19rove.html?_r=1&hp&ex=1163912400&en=3d7666a9cf7533df&ei=5094&partner=homepage&oref=slogin

Masters of Horror: H.P. Lovecraft's 'Dreams in the Witch House (2005) review

Amazing is the only-word I can find to express how good this short-film is. Mick Garris deserves thunderous-applause for initiating what will probably be the most-important development in horror in over 20-years, and possibly ever. While Stuart Gordon has done Lovecraft proud with ReAnimator (1985), From Beyond (1986) and Dagon (2001), this simply excels-them in capturing the dread and cosmic-horror in the writings of H.P. Lovecraft. Insofar as horror goes, this is Gordon's finest-addition, and maybe the best translation yet of Lovecraft-to-film. I read the short-story 20-years-ago, and this summarizes it well. Lovecraft-purists are going to have their hackles-up, but the omissions and changes still capture the spirit of the original and do not detract from the basic-thrust of its plot. Frankly, an exact translation of Lovecraft to screen would be boring and slow. It would feature protagonists who aren't very easy to relate-to, and they wouldn't even be likable--something you need in a movie so that the audience can use them as a surrogate for themselves. How else can one be drawn-in?

Yes, the cloven 'Black Man', and a trip to the surface of another planet are not-present, which is fine. Do we really want to see Lovecraft's racism on-display, especially when he rejected-it at the end of his life? The answer is a resounding no, and it does no justice to Lovecraft or who he was when he died. People also tend-to-forget that in some areas, Lovecraft can get tedious, often going-on for too-long with descriptions of things, or he just meanders in some literary-twilight. Yes, you can actually improve-upon some of his work, I contend. Dennis Paoli and Stuart Gordon have achieved this feat, and where Lovecraft was bad at warm-characters, the writer(s) and director compensate. I truly love and care about the characters in this story, especially the mother and her child. The fears of this story are so primal and basic--everyone fears for a baby in a movie, it's true.

What excites me so-much about this short-film is how effectively it conveys many of Lovecraft's themes: the fear of losing-one's-mind, the fear of women, the fear of the unknown, the fear of a loss-of-control, the fear of mortality, and-then-some. Also very exciting is how well Gordon and screenwriter Dennis Paoli realize the Witch--I would say this is the best-depiction of what the Puritans, and Medieval Europeans thought witches were, and what they did. Usually, they try to steal babies to sacrifice to some dark-power. But Lovecraft's genius was taking physics-theory to explain witchcraft, and a witch's powers. This is unique for writers of his time.

To the uninitiated, H.P. Lovecraft's tomes seem to have appeared, fully-formed, but he was an avid-scholar of New England folklore and the literature of horror. Much of the rule-book he uses for the witch and her powers and actions are from the writings of Cotton Mather and other Puritanical leaders, thinkers and witch-hunters. It's likely he even consulted the witchfinder's-manual, 'Malleus Malificarum.' Lovecraft didn't believe in the supernatural as a reality, but he did accept the possibility that odd-phenomena did exist, and could be explained by science at some point. This would be known as 'supranormal', and that's the type of tale we have here.

So, while this tale and many-others written by him seem fantastical, some elements are not-entirely implausible based on his scientific-philosophies! 'Dreams in the Witch House' is not-unlike a rational-mind trying to grasp how a witch could be possible, scientifically. This little crumb-of-plausibility is a component of what makes the writings of H.P. Lovecraft so scary, and so contemporary. Even educated adults can entertain their reality, and this film captures this reality in every respect. People tend to forget that modern-science comes from alchemy, after-all! The story concerns Walter Gilman, a Physics-major, who has found a room at 300-year-old house in Providence. Yes, in the short-story, Walter already knows the reputation of the house, but I think it was wise for film to omit this. Walter represents we, the audience, and this is a story of curiosity, discovery, and tragedy. Walter notices that his theories on multiple-universes, and his mathematical-maps resemble the shape of a corner of his room. In time, he begins to have dreams of meeting a familiar--a rat with a human-face, perfectly in-keeping with the lore of witches! Eventually, it becomes clear from an older-tenant, and other dreams, that the witch is very-much alive within the house, and has found a way to live for centuries in another dimension. She wants Walter (us) to fetch her a child, the infant-son his neighbor.

There is a sense of dread, sorrow and inevitability in Walter's situation that echoes the victims of witches in lore. It is a situation without-much-hope, the only exit being death or insanity, so very Lovecraftian. Anchor Bay/IDT have done a perfect DVD, no-complaints here. The transfer is perfect, the audio is perfect, and the extras are incredibly-generous and substantial for the most die-hard-fan of Stuart Gordon. Richard Band's score is wonderful, and makes this story all-the-more timeless in its sorrow, grimness and evocation of mystery. It has been 12-years since Band has done a score for Gordon with his excellent score for Castle Freak (1994), I cannot sing his praises enough. It has been too-long, and thank-God it finally happened. The entire Masters of Horror series promises to be superb, a great-day for true fans of horror. Gordon and his collaborators are now filming his version of Poe's 'The Black Cat' with Jeffrey Combs (Reanimator)!

WHY IMPEACHMENT ISN'T NECESSARY (VETO THIS)

WASHINGTON--It's not going to be necessary because of all the investigations, jesus. The GOP and the Preznent are already firing-vollies, which means they're screwing-up--they're making it clear they won't be cooperative or bipartisan as they enjoin the Democrats to do. Well yeah, if you're a liar, you project your own shortcomings onto your victims. Sure, the Democrats aren't perfect, but they aren't the GOP, which is why they got voted-in, and many GOP-candidates didn't. At least they had Joe Lieberman, who is now being vaunted as a savior and 'the most powerful man in the Senate'--sorry, that's a L-I-E. Any Democrat who's pushing it is basically a right-wing mole, a wolf in sheep's clothing and they should be purged eventually. One question to the GOP: where's the 'nuclear option' now? Yes, the Democrats WILL FILIBUSTER BUSH'S JUDICIAL CANDIDATES, and there's nothing you can do about it. Nothing. International observers will get the added entertainment-value of watching the cha-cha line into prison...

NANCY PELOSI NOW THE FIRST WOMAN SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES--NOW WHAT?

'The original Patriot Act is a case study in the perils of speed, herd instinct and lack of vigilance when it comes to legislating in times of crisis. The Congress was stampeded, and the values of freedom, justice and
equality received a trampling in the headlong rush.'

-Senator Robert Byd, February 2006

WASHINGTON--This is actually a great day in America, but Speaker Pelosi has an enormous job before her, and some trust to regain. First: Iraq, and a general withdrawl-of-troops, but high-on-the-list is a complete removal of the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act, they must be repealed for a real new-day in America. Will she join all those who stood-against the Patriot Act, like Russell Feingold, Dennis Kucinich, Jim Jeffords, Robert Byrd, Daniel Akaka of Hawaii, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, Tom Harkin of Iowa, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Carl Levin of Michigan, Patty Murray of Washington and Ron Wyden of Oregon. All of these folks need your support, write them, keep encouraging-them. Why? Because all of us can now be arrested and held indefinitely without-trial! This should be enough. Consider this: the Bush adminstration had the Patriot Act ready-for-passage less than one-week after the attacks, which is troubling. Did they have it 'on-the-shelf', waiting? Investigations might reveal this as a fact.

The majority of the Senate that voted-for a renewal of the Patriot Act were Republicans, and even Nancy Pelosi voted to renew the bill in early-March of this-year. But the ten who voted-against renewal on March 2nd were cultivated by Senator Russ Feingold, who was alone in his vote against the Patriot Act in the first-run after the attacks of September 11th, 2001. Now that we no-longer have such a climate, it's time to return to earth. America doesn't need an Enabling Act like the one given to Adolf Hitler. In voting-for the Patriot Act, certain Democrats might have made the same gamble that Hugenberg and von Papen made--that they could give the Bush administration unlimited power, but be able to 'tame them' later-on. This could be why the Patriot Act passed just 45-days after 9/11, with little debate whatsoever. The same can be said about the war in Iraq, virtually nobody in Congress debated the logic of the invasion. Is it Weimar time? We'll see.

Be a Real Patriot (Person):

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0228-07.htm
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?pid=65474
http://blog.reformthepatriotact.org/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20060217-125721-4105r.htm
http://www.archipelago.org/vol6-2/feingold.htm
http://www.kucinich.us/issues/patriot_act.php
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/16/patriot.act/

The Original Irritant (Patriot Act), and the Idiots who Voted For It:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=1&vote=00313

WHAT'S ON THE OLD CD-PLAYER NOWADAYS...

1. Pathological Compilation--Godflesh, Coil, Carcass, Terminal Cheesecake, Napalm Death, Stretch Heads, & Silverfish. Grind and shoegazer bliss, circa 1989.

2. Jamie Liddell--Multiply (best soul music in ages)

3. Captain Beefheart--Lick My Decals Off Baby (perhaps the best of the 69-70 era Magic Band!)

4. MAIN-Hz (Robert Hampson of Loop, great experimental guitar-sound, kinda ambient)

5. Knut-Alter (superb electronic remixes of riff-metal by Mick Harris, Justin Broadrick, kk Null, dalek, dither, spectre, francisco lopez, entayso, asmus tietchens, etc.)

6.Yusef Lateef-Part of the Search (1971 LP, great jazz flute improv)

7. GOD-Anatomy of Addiction (1994, noise-metal with woodwinds! Kevin Martin at his best)

8. Ornette Coleman--Skies of America (1971, Ornette's orchestral compositions are incredible and frightening!)

9. Throbbing Gristle--24 Box (Nearly every live-show TG ever did, it's pretty stunning)

10. 13th Floor Elevators--The Psychedlic Sounds of...

11. PiL-2nd Edition/Metal Box (perhaps the best rock album ever)

12. Head of David--Dustbowl (1986-88 post-punk with a touch of metal. Could do without the solos, though, we hadn't gotten over that stage yet...)

13. Lee Scratch Perry-Return of the Superape (dub, say-no-more)

'IF I DID IT' BOOK & TV SPECIAL WILL HAVE O.J. SIMPSON COMMUNICATING IN THE THIRD-PERSON (PAST SUBJUNCTIVE)

THE UNITED STATES--We are a happy culture, aren't we? Some will say that this approach being taken by O.J. Simpson is somehow 'new', but it isn't. Having a murderer write-about or talk-about their crimes in the third-person began with the book 'Ted Bundy-Conversations With a Killer' in the mid-1980s. The work came from a brainstorming-session between interviewers Stephen G. Michaud and Hugh Aynesworth, after it became apparent Bundy wasn't talking because it could threaten his appeals from death row. So they decided to ask Bundy the questions about a 'hypothetical-killer', and Bundy could cut-loose on nearly everything he did. It works well, and yet Michaud & Aynesworth felt Bundy didn't give them what they wanted (to cover their advance from the publisher):

HA [Aynesworth]: It's frustrating, Ted, to bounce up against this stone wall. What does it matter if you tell us the truth now? ...

TB [Bundy]: That's your problem.

What did they expect? A full-confession? It boggles-the-mind, and now O.J. and some other publishers are going to trample on the graves of someone else's children. At least the Bundy book has socially-redeeming value to it, it's used in criminology classes, and by FBI-profilers. But the real catch was that it was partially in the past subjunctive, through the hypothetical-experiences of someone else in the recent-past, and even more abstract than that at-times. O.J. seems to need money--and desperately. The bills for the civil trial, and the victim-restitution he has to pay the Goldmans must hurt. And so, ironically, Bundy had nothing to gain from his interviews, except furthering the understanding of the modus operandi and psychology of certain serial-killers. This is actually commendable, even for a serial-killer.

However, O.J. was convicted in the civil trial, so he's probably putting himself at-risk, which desirable. It's a testament to the doddering-insanity of a washed-up athlete who always lived a life based around violence. Rumor has it that a wealthy-businessman in Michiana (who was a USC alumni when O.J. was playing there) has O.J.'s Heisman trophy, and secretly sends the chump money to support-himself. You cannot say Americans don't take their Football seriously--they might kill you. Besides, it's not as if O.J. Simpson is the first athlete to talk about himself in the third-person. Bundy was even approaching the poetic in his final-interviews when he said, 'Oh well, who'll remember us in a hundred years?' Yes, who will? But they will remember O.J. and Ted Bundy. Anonymity is preferrable.

Tedmas!

http://www.geocities.com/Wellesley/2813/bundy_links.htmlhttp://www.freeinfosociety.com/site.php?postnum=499

One For the Ages:

http://www.biblenews1.com/docs/bundy.htm

Yes, Bundy's Even Linked-to Masonic Conspiricism:

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/the_bundy_bloodline.htm