Find the Differences

Check this one out -- it took me awhile to find 2 before I gave up. There are 2 pictures almost identical to each other. You have to find 3 differences. You have to look close (look at the town). See how many you can find. Turn on your sound in order to hear the timer.

If you can find 3 differences, then (apparently) you are part of an elite group of individuals. This has been tested on 8.000 people, and only 19 people out of 8,000 found the 3 differences. There is no trick, all three differences exist. Click on the link:

Find 3 Differences in these 2 pics.

Black Unemployment Drops Under Bush

by Jerry Bowyer
October 28, 2005
"On the 10th anniversary of the Million Man March this month, Louis Farrakhan led what he called the “Millions More Movement,” which, ironically, appeared to have hundreds of thousands fewer attendees.

Here’s a possible explanation: A lot of people had to work that day. After all, anybody keeping up with the African-American unemployment rate would know that it is at one of its lowest levels ever.

George W. Bush is laying a claim to be the President who did the best job creating jobs for blacks. Currently, black unemployment is 9.4%, which is significantly lower than the 10% it averaged in the Clinton years. The current rate is also much lower than the average black unemployment rate over the past 30 years, which is 12.4%."

And the reason Black unemployment is down ?

PrisonSucks.com
October 31, 2005
If you look at males aged 25-29 and by race, you can see what is going on even clearer, June 30, 2004:

For White males ages 25-29: 1,666 per 100,000.
For Latino males ages 25-29: 3,606 per 100,000.
For Black males ages 25-29: 12,603 per 100,000. (That's 12.6% of Black men in their late 20s.)

South Africa under apartheid (1993), Black males: 851 per 100,000
U.S. under George Bush (2004), Black males: 4,919 per 100,000

Eric May, Ghost Troop

I came across the name above when reading an article on Progressive Independent, a good site if you enjoy news and discussion. Mr. May's name was mentioned in an article titled Soldiers Join Sheehan in Protesting the War on Iraq.

The article states : "Eric May, “Captain May,”a Houstonian who might be compared with Che Guevara in a cowboy hat, was on the scene to support Cindy and protect the protestors. A former military intelligence officer, May has for the past couple of years headed an Internet activist group called “Ghost Troop,” whose mission is fighting propaganda and misinformation issued by the Bush Administration and propagated by the corporate media. Prior experience as a high school teacher of classic languages along with his insider’s military experience make May an engaging speaker. He mesmerized listeners with his account of the April 2003 Battle of Baghdad and its cover-up, while the engineered “rescue” of Pvt. Jessica Lynch was played out on television."

The blurb above had my attention as two of my sons are MI, and one was actually there during the "Battle of Baghdad" in 2003. Initially I thought Captain May had served/fought in the April 2003 Battle of Baghdad but further reading showed that not to be the case. So I googled for more information on the Captain, not having seen anything previously from him on the internet and having spent a great deal of time surfing and reading, especially the past five years.

Using "ghost troop" as search, the first google link is May's website, with his Tae Kwon Do photo, military background, and "published essays" although it seems the publishing of Battle for Baghdad by the Houston Chronicle, was in the Outlook section, a readers opinion page. Online Chronicle does not archive Outlook so I found nothing there. Another link showed what appeared to be a May 2005 posting of snips from May's essay and responses. One gentleman disputing May's information sounded very credible.

So I googled "ghost troop of Baghdad" and the first link was from National Vanguard, the white supremist group. At the bottom of the Vanguard page was Source: Adelaide Institute. Well, that might explain why I haven't surfed across Cap'n May before as both Vanguard and Adelaide are too white for me.

So I googled "adelaide institute eric may" and the first link was a reprint of e-mail from Eric May explaining his position on the Zionist control of the media.

The second paragraph of May's e-mail :
"I re-include the press release we of Ghost Troop have issued, giving confirmed "news" that the Zionist-controlled US Media has repressed for 30 months, in complete disregard of the tenets of the Constitution and the ethics of journalism: http://www.nationalvanguard.org/printer.php?id=6479."

There's that National Vanguard again. At this point I suspect one of two possibilities: Captain May is still MI and infiltrating the peace movement, or – and more likely, he's as full of shit as a Thanksgiving turkey.

Whiner/Aggressor Leadership Blues Rant

For the past 7 years or so, at least since the Clinton/Monica situation, liberals have heavily played the party of victim. Victims of the rightwing conspiracy to get Clinton. Now victims of a neocon cabal of zealots out to get us all, stealing elections, smashing towers, manipulating wars.

When victimhood is overdone - it can become a whine, and whiners lose public sympathy. It's become easy to label some as whiners simply because doing so gives excuse to ignore their plight, even if legitimate. A victim always has an aggressor.

While I believe there are elements in the government who would like to destroy liberties that we the people want to keep, I can't point to it as being solely a plot from an aggressive rightwing, neocon, Christian Zionist cabal. As far as I'm concerned, destroying the republic as we know it, is a two party ongoing multi-faceted effort, with more fake fronts than La Cosa Nostra in Palermo.

The democrats point to this malevolent neocon undercurrent controlling the Republican Right - so why does the "left" and/or Democrat party counter by investing in mediocre leadership, or no leaders at all? Look at Black leadership today. Anyone fired up by Jesse? There are traits I like about Jackson and issues I agree with him on, but the man knew long ago which side of the balcony his butter was standing on, he became an eloquent full-time activist and part-time whiner.

Obama? Charismatic, but he's not playing for the left. Ray "the cable guy" Nagin? Or how about Jack Ford, the Toledo mayor who felt Nazis had a right to march in a predominantly Black residential neighborhood shouting racial slurs and making ape noises? Which side of brilliant ideas sign his paycheck? Would he agree Nazis have the right to march in a residential Jewish neighborhood shouting slurs, making the sound of cash registers and ovens? Nazis – get to be the whiner, aggressor, and victim in one staged scene.

There's the New Black Panther Party, which I once considered too militant and they promptly told me I'm "an old gray-head, stuck in the old ways." Might need to reconsider militancy; dyed my hair though. Huey P. Newton says there is no new Black Panther party; Malik Shabazz says there is, and the ADL whines the NBPP is a "hate-mongering" group. Is that a new new tag for "uppity"? Everyone gets to be both victim/aggressor here.

Who might be considered progressive leaders, progressive alternatives? Ralph Nader? He's been around as long as Jesse and never lit a fire under any sizable movement. Congressionals such as Pelosi, Kennedy, Waters, Kucinich? Agreeable persons but no fire. (Note Hillary going from whiner to aggressor as she leans further toward the right.)

And for all the hype and whine on this Zionist/Jewish neocon cabal influencing US government policy – how come congressional pols aren't out here claiming they're worried about it? Since most of our representatives aren't concerned about a powerful cabal of Jewish insiders, maybe the whole notion is tinfoil. (Or maybe most pols need those AIPAC contributions, and the few who don't seem to make little political difference.)

Movements? The anti-war Cindy Sheehan? I admire her courage, appreciate her speech, empathize with her grief - but when she speaks, she whines. Her vocal timbre does not energize or activate. There are others with more power of presence. Plenty of anti-war vets who could've been chosen yet the "left" preferred to go with Sheehan. Movements have to be led by fiery inspirational word warriors. Sheehan comes off as meek, a victim. She may develop more leaderspeak with time but is there time? Pump up the volume because Ghandi and the flower children are dead. I know, MLK preached nonviolence – but it wasn't peaceful if you were on the receiving end of water hoses, dogs, baton, jail cell, church bombings, bullet or rope.

Where is the American labor movement? Who leads it? No Cesar Chavez or Eugene Debs. AFL-CIO speaks out against the war and State chapters hold rallies, but their acronym has become synonymous with liberals and liberals synonymous with social decay (according to the belligerent rightwing). Thanks to Reagan/Bush, decades of outsourcing, and Wal-Mart being risk-takers according to Senator Judd Gregg, union power vanished quicker than Jimmy Hoffa. Also, again thank the Gipper if you're a true believer, for the defeat of evil pinko empires and genuine leftist governments which began to disappear faster than the penis of a weightlifter on steroids.

Women's movement? There doesn't seem to be much good coming from feminists these days. A few old faces such as Steinam lecturing, in between publishing slick magazines of rehashed articles and ideas. Who would have thought feminism coming full circle would bump into Cosmo Helen Gurley Brown - how to please your man while putting out the abortion clinic fire. Now real American women strive to outplastic their surgeons and display testosterone asskicking skills in a Victoria's Secret bra. Not what I remember "women's lib" being all about. (I support liberated women; every girl should know how to assemble an AK or equivalent.)

Once this was a nation of firebrands and instigators, with people from all walks of life, races and creeds, willing to put their lives on the line to light a fire under fellow Americans.

It grows harder to distinguish the party from the rhetoric, as they wallow in the same globocorporate bed, committing the same crimes. Agreeing to wage and fund 2 wars, the Patriot Act, domestic snooping, confirming criminal nominations; what's to disagree on? Headstart and energy assistance for the poor?

Both parties launch small controlled and/or uninspired counter movements, contrive a base from contrived polling, publish phony announcements that things are going great, introduce look busy drivel legislation – raise their own salaries as the infrastructure crumbles and national poverty rises like water in the 9th ward. Both parties drive the sane and honest out of government as they meld into one big complaining aggressive politburo.

Joe Pawndog

Maybe life is vastly different outside the Heartland, but I've listened to Joe Pawndog here for years, and intensely so since Bushco arrived. Joe figured almost from the beginning, after the hunt for bin Laden went nowhere, that the real reason for it all was oil and "so the rich can git richer and the poor git poorer." Joe thinks simplistically maybe, but rightly so. (Intellectual type Heartlanders call it US military establishing geopolitical hegemony, they don't usually hunt but do have dogs.) Joe may be ignorant in that he tries to ignore what his own government does to him, but he's not stupid. He sometimes has an uncanny sense of the inevitable.

Joe Pawndog, then and now, doesn't much care if Iraq had WMD or not. Nor did he know who Libby was or care about the lady who says she feels her life is in danger after being outed but they keep showing her face anyway.

Joe also figures Mr. Anyone Bigg won't be prosecuted for an "illegal war based on lies" because he's familiar with how trails end in American political hunts. He sniffs that the Niger yellowcake lies are one of many distractions from other things; those four 9/11 planes, the sinking economy, his layoff after 18 years, corruption, rising costs, that it now takes 3 times the money to fill his tank, and all the needless blood and capital spent "over there" just so the rich can git richer.

Perhaps that explains some of the "kill 'em all" mentality in the Heartland – the quicker they're all dead the sooner the Pawndog family might be safe from the "git richer" system.

Joe tells me congressional critters and newshounds knew WMD was hyped; those in government or the media who didn't must be idiots, pretending now to slobber hot on the trail of liars – when it's "just more lyin' like they all do." Scratch Joe's ear on a logical day and he'll tell you all the barking "tricked with lies" is more lying. One Pawndogger told me "they" probably used the Monica/Clinton scandal to keep folks attention while "they" planned 9/11, but he wasn't certain who they are or what they are cooking up now.

For Joe flipping through cable news has some of the drama and music of a nippy night of coon hunting in the river bottoms, but none of the fun because the hunt is rigged. Joe's heard the bay and bark often and knows when the dogs have prey. And knows a snipe hunt when he sees one. His remote button rarely stops to hear the yapping, but sometimes he'll catch a few minutes for secondary noise - like hoot owls or bullfrogs when he really wants to hear the true pitch of the redbone. Wag the masses. Those neocons are treed ain't they?

Joe wasn't feeling duped, but with all the repetition he catches a point or two – yea, that's it, he was tricked. He can howl indignant, he's been lied to, used goddammit! He can roll over and yelp about those low-down lying neocon hounds - and avoid biting the hand he thinks feeds him.

Fitzman Pow! Kaboom!

I suppose I'll push out an opinion on Patrick "Bulldog" Fitzgerald since the "left" writes as if he's a superhero – as usual I'm scratching my head over why. Fitz is said to be many wonderful things : relentless, honest, tough but fair, a steely-eyed sleuth, workoholic, nonpartisan, a tenacious enforcer of the law, extraordinarily well-respected, a straight shooter. Fitzman is seen as incorruptible; and he presses his own tights and cape.

All that because he prosecuted a couple or three Gambino soldiers and although some sites claim he won a conviction against John Gambino, truth is John caught a hung jury and then made a deal with the prosecutor; the capo should be out in a few. Fitzman convicted the Sheik and his gang in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, but kinda like anyone could have won that one.

Fitzman convicted 4 nobodies we ever heard of in the Kenya and Tanzania embassy bombings (where nearly all the casualties were Black African, not the blue-eyed devils Al-queda seeks to destroy - go figure). And last but not least on his list of oft repeated accomplishments : he got an indictment against Osama bin Laden (still at large)! Now that's a ham sandwich - holy felony Fitzman!

Fitzman's activity brought to mind a term we used years ago and Aretha sang it : who's zoomin who baby, as in hustling, hustler, hustle.

Scowcroft Rifted

So Mr. Brent is doing some CYA. At 80 years of age, he wants the final footnotes to state unequivocally he was not part of BushCo fiasco. In this New Yorker article Amy Davidson and Jeff Goldberg discuss Scowcroft's long friendship with Bush the Elder and his rift with Bush the Younger. I think we're supposed to believe Bush Elder and Scowcroft have had no input or influence on Bush the Younger.

Davidson asks Goldberg : "Why is Brent Scowcroft worth writing about now? He’s been out of government for some time." Not really a loooong time. As Scowcroft is head of the PFIAB (President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board). The PFIAB was created by Eisenhower for the purpose of providing the president with ample, accurate and timely intelligence. Scowcroft currently chairs the board in overseeing intelligence agencies, including the CIA, various military intelligence groups and the Pentagon's National Reconnaissance Office. That may not be government enough for Davidson but it is for me.

"And he’s (Scowcroft) the best friend of the father of the current President, and the mentor of the current Secretary of State, so it’s worth exploring why the Administration of George W. Bush doesn’t listen to his advice on Iraq and other subjects." I say it's worth exploring why "rift" is a 4 letter word for CYA.

I might swallow Scowcroft's not guilty plea but I keep remembering the "incubator story" which helped launch the first Gulf War for Bush the Elder. In the fall of 1990, Congress and the American public were swayed by the tearful testimony of a 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl, known as Nayirah. The girl testified before a congressional caucus and elsewhere, that as a volunteer in a Kuwait maternity ward she "had seen Iraqi troops storm her hospital, steal the incubators, and leave 312 babies "on the cold floor to die … In the weeks after Nayirah spoke, President Bush senior invoked the incident five times, saying that such "ghastly atrocities" were like "Hitler revisited."

The truth – "Nayirah was in fact the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to Washington and had no connection to the Kuwait hospital. She had been coached – along with the handful of others who would "corroborate" the story – by senior executives of Hill and Knowlton in Washington, the biggest global PR firm at the time, which had a contract worth more than $10 million with the Kuwaitis to make the case for war."

"We didn't know it wasn't true at the time," Brent Scowcroft, Bush's national security adviser, said of the incubator story in a 1995 interview with the London-based Guardian newspaper. Hmmmmmm sounds like Kuwaiti brown babycake to me. They haven't changed tactics have they?

Goldberg has a good deal of praise for Scowcroft's honesty, principles, integrity. (For a moment I thought I was reading an Armstrong Williams piece, you know - bought and paid for.) Goldberg also stresses the younger Bush administration not listening to dissenting analyses (such as Scowcroft's). He adds that in the first Gulf War, Bush the Elder's decision not to enter Baghdad now seems prudent rather than wimpish. Although it's been written Bush the Elder had every intention of going in for Saddam but Colin Powell and others convinced him such a mission would be unwise war and a political folly. Bush the Elder had to resign himself to wait another 10 years for the family patsy to folly for him and cronies.

The article goes on with the funniest explanation I've heard yet regarding the "rift" among republicans. Goldberg describes two types of republicans walking around today : "realists" and (not kidding) "idealists." Yes, republican "idealists." One way to put it is that the realists didn’t go after Saddam, because it didn’t seem tenable. The idealists went after him, because he’s such a loathsome man. Bush the Younger is an idealist. Initially I laughed at that one but I suppose if Hitler could be considered an idealist in that other races were loathsome, then Bushite republicans could be idealists in that other regimes are loathsome.

(And to think – when I was younger I considered the New Yorker a quality, brainy magazine and kept copies around my apartment to impress older intellectual friends.)

Bush the Elder, Scowcroft, and many of the now very aging pols knew well that there would be no domestic support for a bigger War. In this 1998 article the two men explain why they didn't remove Saddam in the first Gulf War. They had 7 years after Gulf War I to hone and pen such wise explanations. They state " First and foremost was the principle that aggression cannot pay." Was not the Contra-War and Panama aggressive? (For a glimpse into Scowcroft's honesty, see this item during the time he served on the Tower commission, the Iran-Contra "investigation." Scroll to "Deceiftul Dinner." Sometimes perjury is just doing "what's good for the country.")

They know damn well aggression pays if they convince the public to buy it. But a major "attack" coupled with an imminent threat against the US would be needed to sell it. These old boys play long and dirty, and have fall guys if things gets sloppy. Enter Bush the Younger, whom the groomers wiped off about the same time they recognized Gulf War I was not going to be the big grab they were after in 1992.

In the world of the ruling class what else would a son like Bush be good for? Every deal and dollar he made was through daddy and daddy's old friends. The boy couldn't find oil in Texas. Every endeavor he's attempted has been half-ass and part-time with others paving and paying the way. Bush will always be daddy's boy.

Scowcroft and Bush the Elder (and others) spent the 1990s planning how best to prop up the little dummy in their circle. Keeping themselves distant enough from the fan blades so if the it hits they smell like wise statesmen rather than Bush the Younger's council. And MSM backs the propaganda with stories of "rifts" and the boy not heeding the dissenting opinions from daddy and daddy's old friends. Bush the Younger may be dense and slow-witted but he knows who made him. Bush the boy has existed only through being keenly and deeply loyal to family and friends – and now has "rifted" them at the most important time in his life and career. Sure he did, and those strings on his back don't belong to daddy.

First Casualty

My uncle C. died four years ago after a productive life, father of two daughters, married 50 years to the same woman. A farm boy who climbed the company ladder to middle management, retired with a good pension and expensive watch. He spent his final years hunting, fishing, camping and enjoying the grandsons he thought the sun rose and set with. He was also a Marine, and veteran of the UN and US "police action" in Korea.

When the story of troops burning bodies in Afghanistan surfaced this week, burned by US troops for stated reasons of hygiene, and the situation used by psyops to taunt the Taliban, according to the journalist Stephen Dupont who filmed the event, I remembered a similar story of uncle C.

He said once, after a particular heavy firefight, they piled Korean casualties in a mound, haystack high. To draw them out, they chided the enemy to retrieve their dead. After a few days of flies and maggots they incinerated the decomposing bodies. Even after decades the distress showed in his face in the retelling. The Korea war memorial was authorized in 1986 by Congress and dedicated by Clinton in 1995. Better late than never I suppose.

This is not to defend war or what troops do, but what puzzles me is the about face attention to MSM reporting that soldiers do ugly things. Why the telling and why now? They think the phrase 'war is hell' means what?

In the Vietnam era it wasn't the "hippies" or the protestors who disrespected the vets. It was the government and MSM which portrayed the vets as savage, uneducated, low-lifes. It was the government and MSM who ignored the returning vets; ignored their problems, their health, their minds, their benefits. Labeled them drug addicts, crazy, shiftless, homeless, the dregs of society. No one wanted to look.

It was the government and MSM who used Vietnam to demoralize and divide the American people. It was the government and MSM who abandoned those troops because they were no longer of use in "spreading democracy and freedom." The construction of the Vietnam memorial (approved by congress in 1980) was the result of campaigns by Vietnam vets. The government couldn't even build them a memorial. The project was financed privately and the wall dedicated in 1982.

In the 1980s MSM began to play the Vietnam vet as heroes, in sympathetic movies, documentaries, books. The public began to feel good about and respect those vets who lived through and died in Vietnam. The ruling class needed us to love and respect vets because the ruling class needed war. Sure enough, militarism became popular again to the public. Khaki fashions, camo everywhere, ponchos, cargo pants; the era of Apocalypse Now, Rambo, Platoon. The doves hoped such movies discouraged war; hawks hoped it would make boys yearn to buff up and play with weapons.

The country supported Reagan freedom fighters around the globe. Then came testing - toe-in-the water widening excursions. Contra-war, Granada, 1989 Panama invasion, 1991 Gulf War, Clinton Kosovo-Serbia. Anyone paying attention knew in January 2001 we would have no more proxy or weekend wars. We were heading for the big time.

We've been shown stories and images of mutilated bodies of Americans burned on a bridge, videos of hostages beheaded, children killed as our troops handed out candy. A few short months ago MSM was broadcasting Operation Iraqi Freedom as if it were a Hollywood box office success; Western heroes delivering a nation from tyranny, from the Butcher of Baghdad, from Chemical Ali, from Uday and Qusay, plastic grinders, torture, and rape rooms. Critics of Iraq War were punished. MSM gave us Judy "spy" Miller reporting the gospel on Iraq.

The government banned viewing flag draped coffins (the Dover effect), the government and MSM ignored the pain at Walter Reed, but initially and often showed the tears of joy in returning troops to their loved ones. MSM showed troops crying over fallen comrades; as lone silhouettes in a foreign sunset, or cradling wounded Iraqi children. MSM pushed the public's buttons, demonizing the enemy as wicked and grisly.

After ignoring false intel, and war for profit, the MSM sees truth? After two years MSM reports there never were WMD, no Saddam connection to bin Laden, and the wicked and grisly are us, torturing, murdering, mutilating, burning. Whatever is going on – it still isn't truth.

Will our liberation heroes become ruthless barbarians in the MSM? Will they become "of no value" as Rumsfeld said of Vietnam vets? Will they be the “Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy” as Henry Kissinger says?

But why the MSM / ruling elite backpedaling now? We the people are not shamed and miserable enough to buy the solution of one benign government administered from Brussels by wise elders in a world parliament. Are we being prepped for the viable "third party" to enter and ease our national pain? But beware of a new party shilling to heal us with new honor; it may be no more than an old party with new names - cattle prodding us to a political promised land of no war, as long as we accept the global grunt psyche and do as we're told. Peace by threat.

Hey! Job Openings

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — Scores of illegal immigrants working as cooks, laborers, janitors, even foreign-language instructors have been seized at military bases around the country in the past year, raising concerns in some quarters about security and troop safety.

The immigrants did not work directly for the military but for private contractors, as part of a large-scale effort by the Pentagon to outsource many routine rear-echelon jobs and free up the troops to concentrate on waging war.

Some worry that this fast-growing practice could make U.S. military installations more vulnerable to security breaches.

Millions More Movement

I wonder where Cindy was ?

Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Long Before

"Insider accounts published in the British, French and Indian media have revealed that US officials threatened war against Afghanistan during the summer of 2001. These reports include the prediction, made in July, that “if the military action went ahead, it would take place before the snows started falling in Afghanistan, by the middle of October at the latest.” The Bush administration began its bombing strikes on the hapless, poverty-stricken country October 7, and ground attacks by US Special Forces began October 19."

Just needed a Pearl Harbor type event PNAC says.

The chant "war planned long before" has been around a while, nearly always in reference to Iraq. We were lied to, tricked, deceived, by Bush and his evil band of Neocons for greed, power, profit, corporate fascism, imperialism, oil, liberation, freedom, hubris, hegemony, empire, because we are good people and want to spread democracy, because "they" attacked "us" – check all that apply, continue on.

Apparently most people believe the war on Afghanistan's Taliban was justified in a Bush photo-op manhunt moment of smokin' out bin Laden, dead or alive. But the strike on Afghanistan was no more legitimate than the war in Iraq.

However, to look closely at Afghanistan might be to look at 9/11. And looking too closely at 9/11 might remind us of those boxcutter totin' fireproof passport packin' extremists who dropped more clues than a trail of Hansel and Gretel-Atta breadcrumbs.

Might remind us that bin Laden immediately denied the attack but then released mini episodes of "Death to America Allah Allah" starring fat and skinny versions of himself. OBL transmitted guilt from his palatial cavern on the steppe then began to quickly disappear down the memory hole to Osama bin forgotten, after a brief stint as material for standup comics. Now his fan club fundamentalists release bulletins when the mostly Anglo need reminding that it's a different world, a world of fear and tell - if it looks suspicious, you know a soda can, t-shirt, brown skinned musicians on a plane, high school art projects, etc.

Many of the widest read "liberal progressive" news sites have no category or column for Afghanistan and those that do post a couple of stories and find the area a little used forum. Talking heads label it the "forgotten war" when they remember to report something on it.

The 911 truthseekers can count on a little anniversary exposure, some Cspan discussion, then fade - becoming JFKish, heard from in even numbered leaps, the 10th anniversary, the 15th, the 20th, etc. Marginalized to a few devoted investigators writing books and theories in the coming decades.

It's as if the public has been hurricaned. Inundated with so many countries, players, plots, lies and theories that we're on rooftops holding help signs as the foul water of a "different world" rises around us. It's not really different in the elite rule of doing business, but the stench reached a new level of awareness.

Yessiree, Iraq is the lie of the century we're told, and this past week or so birthed a new acronym, WHIG, but not everyone has caught yellowcake fever. While others demand to know who forged the Niger documents and await the severing of a few neocon heads (which changes nothing on the platter), some folks want the heads of who really planned those 9/11 planes long before.

Thinking

It started out innocently enough. I began to think at parties now and then -- to loosen up. Inevitably, though, one thought led to another, and soon I was more than just a social thinker.

I began to think alone -- "to relax," I told myself -- but I knew it wasn't true. Thinking became more and more important to me, and finally I was thinking all the time.

That was when things began to sour at home. One evening I had turned off the TV and asked my wife about the meaning of life. She spent that night at her mother's.

I began to think on the job. I knew that thinking and employment don't mix, but I couldn't stop myself. I began to avoid friends at lunchtime so I could read Thoreau and Kafka. I would return to the office dizzy and confused, asking, "What is it exactly we are doing here?"

One day the boss called me in. He said, "Listen, I like you, and it hurts me to say this, but your thinking has become a real problem. If you don't stop thinking on the job, you'll have to find another job." This gave me a lot to think about.

I came home early after my conversation with the boss. "Honey," I confessed, "I've been thinking..." "I know you've been thinking," she said, "and I want a divorce!" "But Honey, surely it's not that serious." "It is serious," she said, lower lip aquiver. "You think as much as college professors, and college professors don't make any money, so if you keep on thinking, we won't have any money!" "That's a faulty syllogism," I said impatiently.

She exploded in tears of rage and frustration, but I was in no mood to deal with the emotional drama. "I'm going to the library," I snarled as I stomped out the door. I headed for the library, in the mood for some Nietzsche. I roared into the parking lot with NPR on the radio and ran up to the big glass doors... They didn't open. The library was closed.

To this day, I believe that a Higher Power was looking out for me that night. Leaning on the unfeeling glass, whimpering for Zarathustra, a poster caught my eye. "Friend, is heavy thinking ruining your life?" it asked. You probably recognize that line. It comes from the standard Thinker's Anonymous poster. Which is why I am what I am today: a recovering thinker. I never miss a TA meeting.

At each meeting we watch a non-educational video; last week it was "Porky's." Then we share experiences about how we avoided thinking since the last meeting. I still have my job, and things are a lot better at home. Life just seemed...easier, somehow, as soon as I stopped thinking. I think the road to recovery is nearly complete for me.

Today, I registered to vote as a Republican...

Bush the Temporary

Since 2001 Bush has played president, the comfort daddy consoling a nation shocked by 9/11. The presidential bantam rooster strutting before a dazed nation flapped and wrapped in ribbons and flags, having warm fuzzies of troops shipping out or coming home, heads bowed in prayer, singing proud to be an American. For some it was oh so grand to feel united.

The MSM attitude muzzled dissent as unpatriotic. MSM talking heads praised Bush in an obscene national orgasm for war; nationalism folks. Bush was the man. His every flub excused and glossed; every pointless gesture and speech exaggerated into history. His half-witted necessity to nickname everyone was considered cute; his inappropriate sense of humor deemed funny. MSM pretended Bush was an elected president, a Godly man, our President Uniter. Approval ratings up the kazoo, he created departments, enacted laws, allocated funds to protect the Homeland from the evil that sneaked up and sucker punched all us good cowboys and girls.

Suddenly that fervor seems to be pissipating away in a steady stream. Is it time to say Bush is the elite's fall guy? While many celebrate and salivate at watching the fall of Bush - it is not a good sign. The almost overnight turning of the mainstream media against George Bush should scare us more than anything Bush the man has done. Just as ominous as the November 2000 operation to shove Bush into the White House, are the recent moves against him.

The beginning of the end for GWB debuted this year when MSM began reporting the Wilson/Plame "leak" as if it were a valid investigation, real controversy. A few bloggers are credited with this political infotainment as they had pushed the "leak" as a "story" much sooner.

In May the "anti-war" movement found itself deserving more respect and credibility in the MSM. In August MSM gave Cindy Sheehan sympathetic air time with the vigil of mom versus Bush. The "torture" scandal reentered the MSM after having been sidelined for over a year. Along came Katrina, and MSM without even trying, made GW and his policies look dismal indeed. Had the hurricane hit in 2001 to 2003 it's unlikely MSM viewers would have seen folks on rooftops for days or wading butt deep in putrid water. The timing of this natural disaster may have been the catalyst for the elite sacrificing of the Bush goat. Remember his Skull and Bones name was "Temporary."

Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers has even the conservative pundits frowning at their man. Within minutes of her nomination the MSM was rolling out chatter of Miers being unqualified, inexperienced, her connection to GW's disappearing Texas guard records, etc. Bush's worst appointments and nominations went over easy with the MSM – Rumsfeld, Bolton UN, Negroponte NID, Porter Goss CIA, Paul Wolfowitz head of World Bank, John Roberts SC, and dozens of others, some important but little known to most folks i.e. Victoria Nuland Kagan NATO. But Little Harriet Miers has become one more rope pulling George to the post.

A chat with troops this week was gleefully reported by MSM as rehearsed and scripted. There's coverage of WH gossip : speculation of Bush on the bottle again, Bush's tics, jitters, tremors, and blinking discussed by pundits on MSM. His fits of vulgar rage and verbal attacks on anyone near are reported and commented on. Where they once aired the toppling statue, mission accomplished, and Bush consoling grieving families the MSM now debates the blatent failure of Iraq, the loss of lives, the fear and in-house loathing among BushCo.

It's been almost overnight that the MSM has become a "free press" again - after being the solid BushCo propaganda machine that ran five years showing us Bush with bullhorn, flight suit, serving (plastic) Thanksgiving turkey to the troops, and pensive photos of the beloved leader in deep thought. There's been pitiful attempts to replay ops that once worked so well with in the MSM news : this week the troop telecon chat, wearing a hard hat and hammer. A few fellow conservatives now point that the emperor has no clothes.

Did MSM change hands? No. The elite rule may be setting us up folks. The lower Bush poll numbers sink the closer disaster courts the little folks. Bush is being shown for the incompetent and arrogant half-wit that he's always been, and with that comes a very high risk that if he's going down, why not let him take the fall for even more. Another "attack" to further the world elite/PNAC goal is a viable idea. (The PNAC signers may be American but their goals and loyalty are not restrained by borders.)

At the moment I would rule out a biological attack. The media reports bird flu and rabbit fever scares but such a method would be risky, unpredictable, uncontrollable. I'm not sure "they" want that many of the "useless feeders" dead. Not yet anyway (too much warring to be done); but they need the herd psychologically cowed, and angry. The scale of the attack would have to exceed 9/11. A subway or bus exploding isn't going to frighten most Americans for longer than a month.

A mini nuke seems most feasible. I've a difficult time placing it in a large metro area as that could create panic and lawlessness in numbers too difficult to control. However, if a larger metro area were chosen it would be some place many Americans have already written off – i.e. Detroit, East St. Louis, Memphis, even DC. But St. Louis is likely too far inland to claim the "evil-doers" managed to cross a border and travel there undetected, although it could be done and covered. (The public believed Atta played a few days on a 727 flight simulator and then flew a real jetliner.)

But more likely a smaller town would be the choice. Fewer casualties, easier to cordon off and contain; but generating the shock and awe needed to corral the herd. The story would be that something went awry for the "evil-doers" plot during transport to the intended major city target, and the "nuke" took out a smaller area. But what the heck do I know. We could lose several cities with mass casualties through smallpox. Maybe Bush knows and agrees with the next provocation to the orderly planet sought by those running the world. He may be convinced his 72 rewards await him in heaven. And maybe this is conspiracy buffery, but hey, I respect tinfoil.

Ron Paul Report Card

Ron Paul, one of the rightwingers giving succor and inspiration to the "left" these days with his needling of Bush, perceived by some as incising the neocons a new one - asking if America is a police state, condemning the loss of civil liberties, vocal on issues the pseudo-democrats are afraid to touch.

Libertarian-ish Paul prefers strict anti-immigration laws, pro-lifer, low score on labor issues too, and a member of the RLC. An OB/GYN he began a brief political career in 1976 but in 1984 did not seek reelection and returned to being a "love doctor" or as Bush the Boy would say – "to practice … love of women."

In 1988, Dr. Paul won the Libertarian party presidential nomination although he does not now identify himself publicly as Libertarian. In 1996, he was again elected to the House as a Republican; Texas laws prevented him from running on the Libertarian ticket. Being a libertarian in Republican clothing he drubbed Clinton often, once filing a lawsuit against Clinton for violating the Constitution and the 1973 War Powers Resolution with regard to Yugoslavia.

In 1992 Paul had a bit of a problem when accused of "racism over an article in a 1992 issue of the 'Ron Paul Survival Report'. The article, about the L.A. race riots and titled "Los Angeles Racial Terrorism," characterized blacks as "barbarians" and called the rioters "thugs and revolutionaries who hate Euro-American civilization". The publication cited reports that 85 percent of all black men in Washington, D.C., are arrested at some point.

The article goes on: "Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the 'criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal." It blames "liberals" and the welfare state for telling blacks that they "are entitled to something for nothing". Paul later explained that this article was written by a staff member without his knowledge. He is not known to have made similarly controversial remarks at any other time."

(Of course no pol wanting a career would admit to that article. Would you let staff put your name to an article? If you would is it because you trust their judgment and they think as you do? No one claimed the article. Paul was the only dissenting vote against giving Rosa Parks the Congressional Gold Medal of Honor, although he voted to give one to Reagan for "historical leadership." He also is against affirmative action, says such programs are against the constitution. )

In 1998 he he introduced legislation to prohibit Clinton from using force in Iraq. "… no moral or constitutional reason to go to war with Iraq at this time … Foolish actions against that nation will only make it more likely that American citizens and cities could be targeted for terrorist or military attacks … With nearly every nation in the region opposing offensive action against Iraq, a war by this president right now has the potential to destabilize the region, cutting off trade and political relationships." ? A "war by this president" ? "at this time"? Is there a good time by another president?

October 4, 2002, however, Paul called for Congressional Declaration of War with Iraq. He says "A state of war is declared to exist between the United States and the government of Iraq … America has a sovereign right to defend itself … Congress should give the President full warmaking authority, rather than binding him with resolutions designed to please our UN detractors."

Today, Paul remembers from Reagan memoirs : "Sending troops into Lebanon seemed like a good idea in 1983, but in 1990 Reagan said in his memoirs: "…we did not appreciate fully enough the depth of the hatred and complexity of the problems that made the Middle East such a jungle…In the weeks immediately after the bombing, I believed the last thing we should do was turn tail and leave…yet, the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics forced us to rethink our policy there." (I guess Worshipers of Rontology forgot Reagan's wisdom and that occupying the ME makes them hate us when that happens. BushCo should have consulted Nancy and Ron's astrologist.)

Paul's voting record and ratings in the areas I grade on would earn him a C- or D, but I'll give him a B simply for being one of the six Republican nay votes in the House on the Iraq Resolution. He preferred a Congressional Declaration of War rather than a Resolution so drop it back to a D for being a little dingy, and using the "UN detractors" spin.

Known as "Dr. No" because he votes no on anything that increases government spending, which is good, brings him back to a C . But he does get Texas pork barrel farm and shrimping welfare, and recently requested hurricane aid programs, Unemployment Assistance, Hazard Mitigation, small business disaster loans, and USDA loans, which as a devout follower of Mises he has claimed such type of programs are unconstitutional. So the C would drop back to D for being another porker who yells about so many at the trough as he stands in line.

Drop it to an F for his amnesia regarding Reagan's death squads in Central America and that Reagan aided and abetted al Qaeda and Saddam through the 1980s. He deserves an F as he fears al Qaeda is scattered around the world and might strike us again as they did on 9/11. He doesn't question who was behind 9/11; he repeats the other side of the official line - it happened because of US intervention and/or foreign policy. The idea of 19 brown men with boxcutters simultaneously hijacking 4 airliners under our nose and bringing those towers down like professional demolition crews – is politically secure.

Millions More

Saturday, October 15th 2005 on the National Mall in Washington, D.C.

For all. Black, brown, yellow, red, white, gay, straight. Millions More Movement TM to Mobilize and Empower America's Poor and Disenfranchised at 10th Anniversary Gathering of the Million Man March October 14-16 on the National Mall in Washington, D.C.

Small Potatoes

Something doesn't smell right with the idea that Plame was outed because the WH was tricking the media, the congress, and the public into ignoring the report from Wilson on Iraq's attempted purchase of yellowcake. I don't buy the theory that Plame was outed simply because the WH knew the Niger story was a lie. A lot of folks knew it was a lie in March 2003, some sooner. How would "outing" Plame protect a lie already known?

Around the world many news agencies, blogs, and papers were reporting the Niger documents were faked. Anyone blogging, surfing, reading, or stumbling around online for news would have come across a few reports of the lie, months before Wilson put it in print. On March 24, 2003 Seymour Hersh reported in the The New Yorker that Mohamed ElBaradei on March 7, 2003 told the UN Security Council the Niger story was a fake.

ElBaradei was given the documents in February and he and his team concluded almost immediately the documents were false, with signatures of a Niger foreign minister who had not been in office since 1989, outdated letterhead, incorrect names of Nigerian officials, etc. How does an administration so effective and efficient it can steal two presidential elections, pull off an inside 9/11, have Mossad & CIA at their elbow, but fail at producing one set of simple forged letters?

Wilson's op-ed on the Niger yellowcake was published July 6, 2003 in the NYT. Hardly news to anyone reading anything relevant before July. More questions, when I misspend time on the matter, is why would the CIA send Wilson if he wasn't going to play their way? Why would Wilson wait until July to go public if the mention of Niger yellowcake in Bush's January SOTU speech bothered him, as he states? What would it benefit the WH to "out" Plame? Was the "outing" revenge? Revenge for what, for Wilson reporting what was already old news from El Baradei and Hersh? Seems the WH "outing" only made the original lie a shiny sparkling glare in the national bauble.

Regardless how stupid some believe Bush to be, those faceless directors offstage are anything but. Remember the agency Plame works/worked for and that it's job is deceit. Regardless who goes down in this Niger Wilson Plame Rove Scooter-gate, the US is still committed to years of occupation in the Middle East, billions have disappeared, billions have been made in profit, the nation is literally bleeding to debt and death. Bush, Cheney, Rove, Scooter, Wilson, Plame are small potatoes.

One potato, two potato, three potato, four, five potato, six potato, seven potato more. Bush Cheney soda cracker, Rove blossom boo, Judy Scooter, soda cracker out goes Y-O-U!

Christopher Wolf – Thought Cop

Internationally recognized expert on the Internet and leader of the Anti-Defamation League's efforts to combat hate online, Wolf, has been tapped to lead the world's foremost organization working to counteract cyberspace bigotry.

Very interesting. Wolf is also the neighbor and maybe or maybe not lawyer of Wilson/Plame Outed Duet fame. Nice to know the Wilsons have Wolf guarding their backs.

Wolf : "Building on my experience at the ADL fighting cyber-hate, I look forward to helping organizations around the world coordinate their efforts to counter the evil that lurks online, and to building alliances with government and industry."

You can obtain a free copy of ADL HateFilter® here. A guaranteed parental gatekeeper to block sites that, "in the judgment of the Anti-Defamation League, advocate hatred, bigotry or even violence towards Jews or other groups on the basis of their religion, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation or other immutable characteristics." (Don't worry – nowthatsfuckedup.com snuff porn and Persiankitty are not blocked.)

Wolf, the new Chair of the International Network Against Cyber Hate (INACH) will lead cyberpolicemen. Surely one target is Nation of Islam Farrakhan. ADL director Abe Foxman has more than once called Farrakhan, the million man marcher, the "pied piper racist and anti-Semite." But what sane individual would agree with Foxman (known crook) or ADL's honoring of Silvio Berlusconi, Italian PM who excused Mussolini as a “benign dictator” who “never killed anyone” – he would only “send someone on holiday in internal exile." Fine bunch of anti-defamer crusaders to tell us what is and is not lurking evil.

While the average Joe Jew stood with Blacks during the Civil Rights era it was at the direction of the self-serving ADL and similar groups, which used the movement to open the doors to a much wider acceptance of Jews, knowing much of America would be relieved that at least Jews weren't - you know, Black. This victory on their part explains the almost immediate loss of unity among Jewish and Black groups after that era. Today's national spokespersons for both groups issue obligatory responses defending one another when the occasion arises, but a genuine coalition is not there.

Mr. Wolf is employed at Proskauer Rose law firm, which was founded by Joseph Meyer Proskauer. Proskauer was appointed by the governor in 1923 to fill a New York Supreme Court term. Amazing, in that while appointing Jews to the NYSC, the nation was lynching and burning down Rosewood, chasing Black citizens into the swamps of Florida. And, maybe a stretch, more recently herding Blacks into the superdome. The ADL also last month condemned Randi Rhodes remarks on Air America, comparing Katrina evacuations to the Holocaust, as "demeaning six million Jews." Isn't any Republican pundit going to say they're playing the Jew card?

Lets be real. We know who owns most of the media. We know in many ways Blacks are worse off than ever. There is no benefit whatsoever with Wolf/ADL et al "counteracting evil online"or anywhere else. The agenda is to silence critics of Israel or any Jew googling. Is this where I'm 'sposed to say "some of my best friends are Jews?"

McCain's Crock of It

Senator John McCain, fake from Arizona, introduced legislation "forbidding torture" which passed 90-9, with Bush threatening to veto. McCain's amendment would prohibit the "cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment of prisoners in the custody of America's defence department." (American inmates are exempt – your cruel and degrading treatment will continue.)

The amendment changes nothing that isn't already on the books, specifically the Army Field manual covers it but McCain is lookin' good while doing nothing other than talk, talk, talk, (politicians are fatted on empty words). McCain says : "The amendment I am offering would establish the Army Field Manual as the standard for interrogation of all detainees held in DOD custody." There the difference is – a prisoner or detainee. I guess it all depends on who the "is" is? There "is" no "torture" of "detainees." The field manual is like everything else the government prints – all you need is a good lawyer to interpret and get around it.

Those at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo were labeled "detainees" to legally sidestep the rules of the Army field manual, Geneva, Hague, etc. McCain's amendment will not change that and McCain knows it; and like 99% of politicians he was in on giving Bush the powers they gave him. Detainees are not subject to rules of war. Congress has not passed a formal declaration of war regarding Iraq. Bush never sought a formal declaration of war from Congress. He requested, and received, the authority to use armed forces "as he determines to be necessary and appropriate" to defend American interests against "the continuing threat posed by Iraq." We don't have "wars" anymore, we have resolutions. Therefore, "interrogation" is more flexible with "detainees" in authorized "resolutions."

McCain is a lackey subtly painting the Boy King uglier than he already is as day by day it seems Junior is the designated crusader fall guy. The bonus for McCain is he looks reasonable yet still supporting the boss Bush. Torture is a hot topic. Like crime, abortion, gays, God, welfare, education, war on drugs - it's the newest knee-jerker fired up when of value to politicians. No one big is going down for torture folks. As with Riggs bank and Pinochet – lawyer up good, pay a few million in restitution to the victims, and/or keep it in court until the litigants are dead or demented. One good sex scandal would knock torture off the radar. (Isn't there one republican faithful willing to be caught in bed with his neighbor's underage twin teen sons and a donkey show?)

While there is no torture going on that the US hasn't always done, and Bush the Fall Guy may take the heat, he's unlikely to eat the nuremberger that goes with it. Afterall, you know the drill : it's a different world and he's a war president. The issue will disappear. It's almost enough to make me feel sorry for Bush; first they sobered him and convinced him he was sent by God and now they may kick him to the curb because he fell for it. Enough to make a man take up the bottle again and become a real liability.

McCain's amendment is tacked on to the $440 billion money bill for Bush's Iraq Resolution but senators were "confident that most of the language would survive." McCain says : "the war on terror is ultimately a battle of ideas, a battle we will win by spreading and standing firmly for the values of decency, democracy, and the rule of law." Ha! I said below our betters like to throw out that "rule of law" phrase. McCain says he stands with Bush in this commitment of spreading American values.

Maybe McCain is eyeballing the WH again, presenting a kinder gentler face to the constituents. Maybe folks are so fat, happy. and well-off that congressional ferrets have few domestic concerns, and too much time for spreading American values, with language I'm confident many folks won't survive.

Gumpy News

That's what came to mind with the "god told me to" line Bush said two years ago. His handlers denied it then and deny it now. Politics is like a box of propaganda, you never what you're gonna get. In this case, it's to scare little gumps with the idea that Bush is a religious man, and not the ordinary religious man but one of the crazy type – talking to God and God talking back, telling Bush who to smite and who to set aside (for another day). Gumpese: Stupid is as stupid does.

And why is it news that Bush seeks powers to use the military in a bird flu epidemic? Bush (or any prez) can use the military any way he wishes. If you think Posse Comitatus will stop anything, read again, U.S. Code Sections 331 through 334. Section 332 states: "Pursuant to the presidential power to quell domestic violence, federal troops are expressly exempt from the prohibitions of Posse Comitatus Act, and this exemption applies equally to active-duty military and federalized National Guard troops." With any "disaster" be it natural or man made, there will be "violence" for the president to "quell." In Gumpese : Run tularemia bunny run.

This week Putin draws line in sand. Putin will attempt to persuade one of the Gringostan countries the US has yet to purchase, Tajikistan, to maintain the vow of "no US troops" on their soil. Gumpese : We were like peas and carrots, Putin and the US. Will Putin jump up and bite us on the buttocks? Or will it be China, the fiery dragon in Revelations.

According to this article Nerves jangled as threat disrupts N.Y. commute. But I read a poll somewhere a few hours ago that 2/3 of New Yorkers were not overly concerned (don't want to look for the link). And there's that intercepted "Ayman al-Zawahiri to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi" letter - Zarqawi's group has claimed responsibility for a series of killings, hostage beheadings and major suicide bombings in Iraq. Zawahiri was number two Zzzzzz - behind only Bin Laden … Osama sure has a lot of right-hand men and number twos. And that's all I have to say about that.

Bush says 10 plots by Al Qaeda were foiled. Since 9/11. Bush isn't a smart man but he knows what terrorists is. Last night Bush claimed Iran/Syria are "allies of terror and enemies of civilization." Where will "it" come from? Birds, rabbits, Arabs, non-Arab, dragons, in the air, the water, by bomb, by train, plane, cars, by stealth.

Gumpese: Shit happens.

UPDATE
Breaking news :
D.C. Police
Evacuate
Washington
Phallus.
The Washington
Monument
was evacuated
Friday after
a bomb threat
was called in
to local police.
An initial search
turned up
nothing
worrisome.

Thump Al Gore on the Head

Several times and real hard, please. Gore's impressive-sounding but meaningless speech on current affairs and the standard textbook refresher course on the intent of the founding father's was a forced read for me. Half-way through the piece I had to bribe myself to even finish it. (Okay, I confess, a few times I had to re-read paragraphs as I lost my place in the drone.)

Sure there were items I could agree with but I wasn't interested in being reminded how voyeuristic, sadistic, shallow, and ignorant the public is - in regard to his references to the obsession with the OJ trial, or that ½ + of the public still believes Saddam was connected to 9/11, or that we are routinely torturing helpless prisoners. Gore points out our abhorrent medieval behavior shortly before reiterating the continuing gap between rich and poor and our increasing apathy and lethargy. I then wandered off asking myself if the rich being abhorrently medieval has led to the poor being pathetically lethargic.

He states : "On the eve of the nation's decision to invade Iraq, our longest serving senator, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, stood on the Senate floor asked: "Why is this chamber empty? Why are these halls silent?" Yes, where were all those apathetic pols? Were those senators scurrying without putting up a fight? Not that I'm referring to Gore's past behavior, or maybe I am.

Al continues with a nostalgic walk through the country's early period, reminiscing on the founding fathers placing their "trust in the wisdom of a well-informed citizenry. But they placed particular emphasis on insuring that the public could be well-informed."

(Rut-ro I thought, here it comes, bash the media.)

But Al, to be informed the public needed to be educated. Back in the founding fathers' day, much like today, the first quality schools were private. When "free" schools came about they taught the basics and/or a tradecraft. Apprenticeships (indenture) were for boys who could read and write; the "middle class" if you will, but a large percentage of the general public remained illiterate. In the 13 colonies those who could read were taught by parents with a Bible. Upper class education was usually taught at home by tutors, and college often meant shipping the kids off to England. The average female didn't attend school. Everybody's hero, Thomas Jefferson, fratted at William and Mary College, founded by royal charter and British royalty. Not for the common man back then although considered a "public ivy" today. Al himself is an alumni of the oldest American university, Harvard. The manner/manor of education most Americans did not have access to then, or today.

Al does the usual, romanticizing the founding fathers and their intent; a no fail no brainer in any speech. So many these days seem to think we've fallen away from what the founders intended but I believe the founders and their intent have been followed more or less for the last 200+ years. An elite and educated class of very predominantly white male surrogates for the European royals.

After the Revolutionary War much of Jefferson's public couldn't vote. Ineligible were those men without property, women, slaves, free black men, apprentices, indentured laborers. You know, all those Joes who built the country at the direction of their leaders who sailed back and forth between New York and Europe. It was only when lots and lots of Joe Little House OnPrairies became educated enough and informed themselves that troubles began for the ruling class. Demanding the right to vote, abolition, suffrage, protection from government and corporate abuses, etc. We the people have fought, died, nibbled, and gnawed for 2 centuries at attaining the rights today's elite tell us we always had. Could that be because the "we" originally meant only "them" ? The better educated property owning public?

Gore hums on in my head, about the uses and abuses of television and how overly much Americans watch it, etc. and about the bad people who own, control, and manipulate television. Sorry Al, but I hear this with every administration regardless which party, and it's always true - power controls the media. He even mentions a "former male escort" in the WH press pool posing as a reporter. Thanks for the chuckle there.

"Clearly, the purpose of television news is no longer to inform the American people or serve the public." Al, Al, Al. I haven't trusted television news to inform since the government took over the airwaves on November 22, 1963 and blacked out everything but the official reports and bulletins played over and over and over and over until folks were ready to kill Walter Cronkite so they could watch Guiding Light again.

I voted for Gore in 2000 but he really is a bore. This speech included the usual talking points in connection to history, freedom, education, news, television, the environment, advertising, campaign finance, the internet, marketplace of ideas, the fact that we are vertebrates with brains, and on and on and on. And now look what I've done - went on and on about his speech.

What I don't see mentioned is where Gore was a few years ago, back when those members of the Congressional Black Caucus moved to challenge the vote of the Electoral College. He should remember it clearly as he presided over that session, bringing down the gavel each time one of those members objected to the certification of Bush. I hope the faces, of those who stood and begged at least one Democratic senator to stand against tyranny, keep Gore awake at night, as the results have certainly been a nightmare for the rest of us. Gore's last public political performance was ratifying the theft of democracy. And he now expresses concern.

"Four years ago I didn't intervene, I was asked by Al Gore not to do so, and I didn't do so." Senator Boxer. (Thump her head too.)

Easy Over There - In a Chair

It's easy to sit behind the keyboard, stroking keys about the Iraq prison abuse or the criminality of the "current administration." Piece of cake to turn out phrases on the most recent headline, hero, or scandal one feels hot for. And it seems real easy for some to call our troops knuckle-draggers feasting on an orgy of killing when one doesn't have a son or loved one sitting and shitting in the sand over there. Easier to chastise others for "sending" their sons to die when one doesn't have a son or loved one to send. Easy to condemn the troops if you don't have to wonder if your rants could get a son fragged over there. There's a lot of crazy in the free world you know.

I wish these wise ones would quit wasting pixels and tell me how a 35 y/o man with 16 years invested, a wife and daughter, with the responsibilities that most Americans have, can throw his hands up and refuse to fight in wars launched by his government. Court martial is not an option for most soldiers. Unfortunately, the jarhead doesn't see those 59 million 2004 Kerry voters in the street to support him if he did lay down his arms.

Where are those 72 percent who when questioned said the conflict has made them feel worse about the use of military force "to bring about democracy"? Are those the same folks who think "democracy" equals "freedom" and together they mean you can vote and own things and go wherever you want? That's the Heartland definition even though most here in the poverty belt own very little, usually don't vote, and their idea of travel is crossing the state line to booze it up with cousins.

Easy to link the ugly news, and it's often ugly, and make snide comments, or snipe at those who disagree; I do it myself at times. The same cowards who urge others to protest or sign online petitions cringe or slink away from calling for revolution; might get their own bourgeois butts in boiling water with the government thugs they claim are corrupt and perverse. Real easy to call for carrying signs or signing petitions; as if that will change anything other than the flunky faces running the system. Easy to sell some stickers, shirts, and buttons; politically it doesn't make any monumental change or significant gains, but it can be a good income. And we're guaranteed to get a few more monuments eventually.

Some keyboard tappers think we can have a "velvet" revolution, in reference to the "bloodless" overthrow of communism in Czechoslovakia. Such keyboard pacifists should know it's not going to happen that way in the USA. Forget that the Czechs split into 2 countries afterwards, Czech Republic and Slovakia, or that the "velvet" was nothing more than switching from a state owned economy to privatization and foreign investment economy i.e. "free market capitalism." Nevermind that whatever "ism" it's called it still operates pretty much the same way, i.e. for the benefit of the few at the expense of many.

Easy to tell others to stand-up while your butt remains comfortably seated. Sitting safely behind the flat screen it's easy to claim the military has betrayed us, but not advocate overthrowing the government of course. Look folks, the military is doing as it has always done, read Major General Smedley Butler's lips : "... muscle men for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers … racketeers, gangsters for capitalism." That is what troops do. They rape other countries for your benefit. Yes, they defend your freedom; your liberty to live as comfortably as you do with the toys you can afford.

The elite seem reassured that folks will stay behind their desk, with a plate of sandwiches and a cola, bleating about bloodless revolutions and how things will be better if we just vote in the right guy the next time. Yep, keep voting. It really does encourage the bankers and gangsters.

The Wandering Wonderland of Sibel

Translator caught in web by John Aloysius Farrell. "When Sibel Edmonds was a young girl, her father, a physician in Iran, was asked to falsify an autopsy finding. Angrily, he refused, daring the authorities to retaliate. At home, he told his family: "Things like this do not happen in truly democratic civil societies - like America."

It happens in America. In America one may even have a brain lost somewhere between the autopsy and the Warren report. How civil is that? Dr. Coverup practices in all countries.

"Sibel still clings to her father's words, but her Kafka-esque encounter with the U.S. government is challenging her faith. She wanders a wonderland of classified documents and covert hearings, waiting to see if the Supreme Court will take her case and lift the curtain of secrecy that the Bush administration has self-protectively wrapped around it. Sibel's offense? She was a patriot who blew the whistle on incompetence, security breaches and alleged wrongdoing in the U.S. government's counter-terror operations."

Clings … father's words … Kaftka-esque … challenging faith … wanders wonderland … a patriot … lift the curtain of secrecy. (There's more cliches here than you can shake a court order at.) Sure wish you'd tell us anyway, damn the secrecy. Do the right thing and sing like a canary, hon.

"Sibel's offense? She was a patriot who blew the whistle on incompetence … For that, she was fired. When Sibel challenged her dismissal in court, she became one of several Americans to be penalized in recent months by the government's "very broad and radical use" of an old legal rule known as the "state secrets privilege,"…

Well, why didn't you tell everything instead of suing the government? Ya had to know they'd pull that "secret privilege" defense, it's not like you fell off the turnip wagon last week.

"This is not just legal theory. It affects real people's lives," says Beeson (attorney). "They have learned secrecy is powerful."

Laughter. "They" have "learned" as if "they" recently discovered this aspect of governing the people? Heaven help us, now "they" know that secrecy works to keep us in the dark!

"Sibel's family moved to Turkey when she was a girl … she attended college in the United States. She became a U.S. citizen and, shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, went to work for the FBI … Sibel was over-qualified, but felt the call of duty, she says. "Remember where I came from: countries where you could be arrested for just dreaming about these rights."

Please. Stop the goose bumps and warm fuzzy tactic of Sibel this, Sibel that. Call of duty? She'd make a good politician with that one. We know how the whole world dreams about being US, that where others come from folks can be arrested for just dreaming (especially if those dreams involve overthrow, coup, takeover, etc. and guess what, many were arrested and worse dreaming of those rights right here).

"But at the FBI, Sibel got a disillusioning look at the management failures, case backlogs, turf battles and bureaucratic gold-bricking that have since been confirmed by several high-level government investigations of the government's counter-terror operations."

Disillusioning? Try being over-qualified and working at McDonald's, Sears, or the Rest Haven nursing home, or as a contract employee at the FBI … oh wait you did that last one already. It wasn't "management failure" that led to 9/11 and those 19 hijackers with boxcutters. It was good old ruling elite inventiveness when a war was needed.

"I thought it was enough to pay taxes, to vote, to be a good citizen," she says. Now she knows the real price of freedom: "Eternal vigilance."

John Aloysius Farrell gets paid to write this stuff ? To tell us how Sibel learned the price of freedom is exactly like mastuh diddler Thomas Jefferson said, eternal vigilance. Tom J. also suggested a rebellion might be necessary every twenty years. We're really overdue on that one ... yet hear so little about it.

Help Wanted : Communications Dept.

London, 3 Oct. (AKI) - The al-Qaeda terror network appears to have launched a recruitment drive, posting adverts on a website commonly used by Islamist groups, the pan-Arab newspaper Asharq al-Awsat reports. The advert says there are a number of communications-related vacant positions, which would involve compiling written and audiovisual reports by militant groups operating in Iraq and gathering footage from satellite TV channels on extremist Islamic groups and their activities in Palestine, Iraq and Chechnya.

According to the 'Global Islamic Media Group' al-Qaeda affiliated website, the terror network is also looking for a video programmer and a researcher for news on Muslims around the world, as well as language specialists with an excellent oral and grammatical knowledge of Arabic and English.

The advert says the group's PR department will follow up applications and contact candidates through private email messages, and it advised applicants to turn to God for guidance and pray before submitting their application.

It did not specify the rank or salary of the posts, but did say: "Every Muslim should know that his life is not his own; it is the property of this violated nation for whom men have shed their blood. No other issue should take precedence over work for the Umma [Community of the faithful within Islam]; it is an obligation for every Muslim."

However, evidence of complaints from other members of al-Qaeda suggest the pay and working conditions offered by the terror network are not particularly good, such as those in a letter written to the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, found by the US military in a raid on a hideout in the northern city of Mosul. In it, an al-Qaeda soldier calling himself 'Abu Zayd' calls his work conditions "deplorable" and complains about bad pay, bad housing and the marginalisation of non-Iraqi fighters.

The nature of the jobs advertised, coupled with the recent launch of a weekly al-Qaeda TV news bulletin, 'Voice of the Caliphate', suggest the network is stepping up its communications operation.

Paul Craig Roberts

I wasn't going to say anything about this guy but keep bumping into his articles at Counterpunch, WRH, NewsMax, Vdare, Townhall, sitting in rightwing think tanks, and had to say something about which direction he's coming from, as he's published on both left and right. Today's piece on Antiwar.com Bush Is Cooking Up Two More Wars really made me wonder. I'm old enough to remember Roberts from the Reagan era, and he still champions Ronnie as the hero who brought down the "evil empire" a.k.a. former Soviet Union. And I'm still not convinced BushCo will attempt another war, much less 2 more. I'm still not convinced that the noise over Iran isn't just propaganda to scare the public, the left, and part of the Arab world. Keep folks busy with what-ifs rather than right-now.

The fact that Roberts publishes regularly at Vdare was enough to raise my eyebrows as that organization has been labeled a "meeting place for the radical right" by SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center). Considered a "racist" site by some. The Center lists Vdare on its roster of "hate groups." Vdare defends itself because some of the articles they've published have been written by a Hispanic, a Native American, a Japanese American, and good old girl Michele Malkin (what I call "white enough folks"). But no Black authors, yet.

Judging Roberts' writings on the current neocons and Bush administration you would think he loathes them. He's accuses the new cons of all the dirty tricks the left has been saying for 5 years. Roberts states : "the Bush administration knows that few Americans have any knowledge of international law and procedures and will simply believe whatever President Bush says. The highly concentrated US media is a proven walkover for the war-mongering Bush administration." Yep, he said BushCo knows Americans are dumb and gullible and the media rolls over for the war-mongering neocons.

However, in a November 27, 2000 diatribe Roberts defends Election 2000 which installed this corrupt batch of war-mongers. In November 2000 Roberts was dribbling out the other side of his mouth when he hammers on the "Florida Supreme Court's brazen decision to assist the Democrats in stealing a presidential election" :

"Massive Democratic vote fraud has made this election a close one. Having sized up Republicans as cowardly and timid, Democrats decided that they could steal the election behind a barrage of lies and propaganda laid down by their faithful allies at CNN and the TV networks. If Republicans can't muster more courage than the Reichstag, the stolen election of 2000 will put an end to representative democracy in the United States."

One could argue Roberts is/was merely championing the "rule of law," another trendy phrase our betters like to toss out to the lower classes; or in his own words "few Americans have any knowledge of international law and procedures" … meaning those same Americans know little of law and procedures, period, other than those folks familiar with hearing cops yell "up against the wall, mother------." And one could say Roberts in 2000 was comparing Democrats to Nazis/Reichstag.

Roberts condemns BushCo for what America has always done : murdering others to maintain the system. The same thing done since giving smallpox blankets to the natives, slavery, phony attacks, war after war, little wars, big wars, overt, covert, whatever it takes to maintain capitalism, the "American way of life." Roberts carried water to wash blood off his hero Reagan's hands, afterall, the tens of thousands of dead Salvadorans and Nicaraguans, was doable and done somewhat quietly. Etc. etc.

Might want to look very closely at those on the right these days who seem to be saying what the left wants to hear. Roberts wants to maintain the same collapsing system as eagerly and desperately as BushCo does. His articles and books support the same basic doctrine of a directed, manipulated, stolen "free" market. Either Roberts was snubbed, rather than rewarded, after he defended the 2000 election theft, or the neocon tactics are too brazen for his sensibilities; perhaps he prefers to slither.