Archive for May, 2007

Cindy Sheehan conversation concerning stepping down from Anti-War leadership

May 31, 2007

Advertisements

If you’d like to know more about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict

May 31, 2007

http://www.occupation101.com/

The Core Error of the Conspiracy Theorists

May 28, 2007

The biggest error is derived from their lack of understanding of the psychology of the people they suppose to be conspiring.

Let’s take the many conspiracies attributed to the U.S. government: here’s a newsflash about government officials: *They do not think like you do. They do not share your values, or if they do they don’t often use those values once inside the governmental institution.*

Hence while it might seem ridiculous to a normal person for George Bush to take some action and hence he must be conspiring, this is not the case at all. There’s something more subtle going on.

The beginning position of, say, George Bush is far different from Joe Schmoe. Different ideas, different priorities, different attitudes. On top of this fundamental difference comes tremendous discipline. Our governmental leaders train themselves, some almost from birth, to increase their own power. So while the conspiracy theorists say “George Bush is trying to fool us into believing he’s a cowboy” this is completely false: George Bush is so self-disciplined that because it serves his own interests, he’s CONVINCED HIMSELF he’s a cowboy. George Bush is *neither* a cowboy nor is he trying to fool us into believing he’s one. Since he’s “done what’s right” and convinced himself, he does what he sees as a good thing and tries to convince you as well. It’s like a religious missionary… first he convinces himself of certain ideas about God and morality and then *because it’s the right thing to do and benefits humanity*, he tries to convince everybody else of that. To George Bush, you thinking he’s a cowboy benefits *you*.

You have to stop treating these people like they are normal. *They are not*. These are political monsters, artificial to the absolute core, who train themselves to do what in their mind benefits them. The Clintons are exactly the same way. It’s actually likely that the more successful the politician, the more of this flavor of self-discipline he has. This will continue until Americans wake the fuck up.

The naivity of the conspiracy theorists is their downfall. They start from an understanding of “they are just like us” and then express amazement and outrage when they show themselves to not be, and assume a conspiracy.

Government officials tend to be arrogant, “daddy knows best” authoritarians, whether democrat or republican (the Neocons are the worst)… that’s their starting position. Daddy needs a spanking.

For those who think invading Iran is a good idea

May 28, 2007

Because they really need a hug

May 27, 2007

Back when Christopher Hitchens was honorable

May 27, 2007

Understanding the Irrational

May 27, 2007

The largest problem with the treatment of people like Rush Limbaugh and conspiracy theorists is that they are treated like everyone else.

Despite that these people use words, they aren’t rational. This doesn’t mean they are meaningless… both the demagogues and the hysterical crazies serve one very important purpose: they express emotion. What they are is constant raw emotion on display (on their best days). Listeners respond to the emotion, often mimicing it with raw emotion of their own.

This serves an interesting purpose: rationalists are turned off by it, or they laugh at it as I did back in the early ’90s when I heard Limbaugh. Yet the IRrationalists, which as we’ve seen are quite numerous especially in American society, are excited by it as long as the person expresses something close to their own emotion and framed words.

It’s really a kind of performance art, what Limbaugh does. Yet of course at no time does Limbaugh inform his listeners of this, in fact he’s happy to project himself as “telling the real truth about America”. And his listeners, bless their hearts, are too irrational to care.

Yet does anyone attack Limbaugh with that understanding, or do we see attacks on him from a rational perspective? And then people wonder why the attacks don’t work.

This brings up some dark truths about the supposed “good” people of America: they are afraid to take on the irrational. People like Limbaugh are (or were) confident, not in their words but in their shared *emotion*. The words, again, are just art that supports the emotion. The rationalists don’t understand how to deal with Limbaugh and therefore shun him, or make excuses like “he’s polluting the airwaves”.

Keith Olbermann, let’s say, who is on a campaign of oppression and suppression of the Limbaughs of the world. Just like racists or smokers, he hopes that there is enough room under the rug to fit Limbaugh.

But if Limbaugh is indeed swept under the rug, the problem is merely swept under and not dealt with. Thus, just as with racism, it will continue to underlie American culture instead of being *destroyed*. Olbermann will thus be directly responsible for perpetuating irrationality in American society.

So will Olbermann inform his listeners about HOW to listen to Limbaugh, how to analyze him and nullify all deception and see him for what he is, or will he continue to ignorantly put him in flashing color on his “Worst People in the Worrrrrld!” list again and again, hoping through repetition to work the viewers into a frenzy of fear and hate?

It will be pure irony and a horrible defeat for rationality if a mob forms outside Limbaugh’s studio and demands his head.  And his severed head? It will bear a smile.

Keith Olbermann is becoming what he hates. He’s becoming what I warned about several years ago… the rise of the Irrational Left (he’s centrist actually, but close enough).

Stewart and Chomsky are more important than they are given credit for. It’s not the LEFT that needs to be defended today in America… it’s rationality. Let issues like left and right take care of themselves.

Mr. Olbermann may find himself on his own list soon.

US Government’s response to 1976 Military takeover in Argentina

May 26, 2007

The notable thing about this is that the US often claims it’s interests include democracy-promotion.

This is the intelligence summary of the coup the very next day, from page 136 of The Condor Years by John Dinges.

“US interests are not threatened by the present military government. The three service commanders are known for their pro-US, anti-communist attitudes…”

That’s right, folks… anti-democratic forces don’t even *threaten* US interests. Wow, if it wasn’t for the American elite the world might actually be democratic today! Go Go US government!

US gov: “We’re in the business of democracy prevention, and business is good.”

Remember, democracy prevention begins at home. Celebrate the Military Commissions Act today!

Excellent Iraqi link

May 26, 2007

http://aliveinbaghdad.org/category/video/

The Use of Corpses

May 26, 2007

Corpses shouldn’t necessarily be put in the ground right away. Let’s take some of the corpses in Iraq, transport them to the United States, and bring them into the offices of members of Congress who are not for pulling our troops out of Iraq. I would SO love for the outraged congressman to press charges. I wouldn’t mind dumping the corpse on the congressman directly. Maybe prop it up in his chair. Maybe lay it on his desk. Get creative. Don’t worry… once they bury that one there will be plenty more to bring over. Given the difficulty of carrying entire corpses, perhaps (with the family’s approval) cut off the head and just use that.

“This is an outrage!”

“Wrong answer. YOU are an outrage.”

Great New The Pinky Show episode!

May 25, 2007

http://www.pinkyshow.org/archives/episodes/070525/

The Pinky Show can use your donations if you enjoy the episodes.

Eternal Freedom – the Art of the Broken

May 25, 2007

To be able to break down and reassemble your own mind is to attain eternal freedom.

I keep looking at something humans tell me again and again, “He was tortured until his will was broken, then he talked”.

It’s so completely nonsensical to me. I take one look at a torture device and my will is *already* broken. Yet I have the strongest will of any human I’ve ever seen. I hope to explain this in this post.

It’s necessary to understand that torture is horrifying. Not just to the direct victim and the perpetrator… the primary purpose and effect of torture is to terrorize people in the same “class” as the torture victim – because they could be next.

It doesn’t make any sense. Torture is so horrible that it drives all thought out of your head other than the agony you are experiencing. All other thoughts merge into irrational streaks and pain. The idea of torture breaking your will is obviously true… but it breaks your ability to present truth as well.

But lets say that after a session of torture the perpetrator rebuilds the victim… the idea being that you rebuild his ability to present truth while giving him the memory but no longer the direct experience of terrible agony. The obvious counter to that is to not let yourself be rebuilt. It’s necessary to be under a condition of torture whenever you are not free, even if you are not receiving direct physical or psychological abuse.

This is the secret of forming a society free from oppression, violence, and imperialism… the secret is NOT to resist, not to *be strong*, not to *retain truth*, but to have a broken mind while being oppressed and to have an unbroken mind while free.

Oppressors don’t want to break your mind, they want to *control* your mind. Oppressors can’t work with a broken mind.

This leads to the final solution for eternal human freedom: the ability to break or form your own mind at will, given the circumstances you find yourself in.

LET them break you if they have you… you need to remember only one thing… how to *unbreak* yourself. Remember your glorious free state, and return to that state when the monsters are gone. Let all other truths vanish, and the hopes of your oppressors will vanish with them.

“He was tortured until his will was broken, then he talked”. It won’t be long before this is seen as the ridiculous statement it is. It’s not about resistance, you silly humans!

How long will it be until eternal freedom is achieved?

On the Institution of Dictatorship

May 24, 2007

The first thing a dictator looks for when he wakes up in the morning is opposition to him. It doesn’t matter who the opposition is. It doesn’t matter how much of a threat the opposition is. It must be destroyed. The dictator focuses on what he perceives to be the most powerful, most dangerous threat. If there is nothing more powerful than a spider crawling up his leg, he crushes the spider. Otherwise he ignores the spider and deals with the greater threat.

Because dictators are so paranoid and defensive, they are poor rulers by design. They don’t have the time or the interest to do *good* things for the people, unless they are in a rare circumstance of seeing no threats at all. One of the underappreciated benefits of democracy is that it frees up rulers from having to defend themselves. That’s an easy way to test how strong a democracy is… if the rulers start acting like dictators it’s not much of a democracy.

Some people think of dictators as excellent rulers, and point to their sustained presence as proof. “Look, how bad could he be, he hasn’t been overthrown in 30 years! This must mean the people at least tolerate him.” They neglect the fact that the whole POINT of dictators is to maintain their own rule… they EXCEL at that since they put all their time and effort into it. Dictators by design are the complete opposite of a *good* leader… a dictator might even be a *great* leader if he didn’t have to cater to the needs of a dictator to constantly defend himself. What is not understood is that a dictatorship is not a person, it’s an *institution*… bringing democracy to a country is not a condemnation of a particular dictator but a recognition of the evil of the institution.

Another interesting truth follows from this: while dictatorship is always a bad institution, it IS possible for an exceptional person to overcome the evils of the institution. If, for example, a person is so impressive that there is little or no threat to him AND he takes advantage of this space to implement impressive policies and actions, he can perpetuate the lack of threat and create a good or even great society and people. It’s not *impossible* certainly, but it’s such a rare event that it’s better to do away with dictatorship and leave those very rare individuals to a mere position of leadership in a democracy.

In America propaganda has caused people to think of dictators as people and not members of an institutional structure… Americans love the concept of the Evil Dictator Who Must Be Overthrown (when it’s convenient). Note the cleverness of this propaganda… it pretends that it’s all about the *person* thus, see, a person we *like* is just fine as a dictator. People we like can stay, people we don’t are Evil Dictators Who Must Be Overthrown.

A Global Government for Global Peace

May 24, 2007

As I read about one atrocity after another committed by various brutal regimes around the world, it occurred to me that it would be very useful to have a global government to come to the defense of the people being obliterated by heavy weaponry and highly trained users of the people-killers. Think the United Nations, except with an army. Along with this is the set-up of global laws, thus brutal dictators get seized by the international community and thrown in jail.

How fucking cool would it be instead of reading about a mass slaughter where we just throw our hands up and say “Well, nothing can be done” to instead say, “Let’s send in the United Nations to fix it”. Also, it would finally be *honorable* again to serve in the armed forces… soldiers instead of being either ignorant, desperate, or pathological could actually be proud and happy to serve.

Right now, the problem is political, stemming from one main source… pursuers of global empire. It’s simple…. you don’t support such a plan if YOU are the one either committing, planning to commit, or holding the possibility of planning to commit such atrocities, since by pursuing that plan you are going against your own interests.

This brings up the obvious solution… we need to eliminate the power of the parties resisting a global force for justice. This means they need to be expelled from power, thus paving the way for a just world.

The two main culprits in the world right now are the governments of the United States and Israel. The problematic entity is a militaristic, expansionist mentality generating terror, instability, and oppression (both at home and abroad). So get rid of it, one way or another. You might say “It’s simple, just vote them out.” I’m not familiar with the process in Israel, but in the United States we get two competitive choices, with little difference between them. Though with the rise of the Neoconservatives, there is arguably more difference than there used to be. It’s not so much not being able to vote them out as not being able to vote anyone else IN. The political system needs to be changed to give the people real choice in their leaders. There are also more radical political options that can be considered.

My Diet

May 24, 2007

My diet is working out so incredibly well that I thought I’d share it with you.

Originally it was intended as low-sodium. On the advice of a good friend I then became a vegetarian (nearly so). I’ve refined it since into this (per day):

550 Calories of Tofu, containing 70 grams of Protein and 22.5 grams of Fat (unsaturated)

340-680 Calories of Yogurt, containing 66-132 grams of Carbohydrates (mostly sugar), 10-20 grams of Protein, and 3-6 grams of Fat (2-4 saturated)

400 Calories of Pasta, containing 84 grams of Carbohydrates, 14 grams of Protein, and 2 grams of Fat (unsat)

~300 Calories of Fruits and Vegetables – 2 Bananas, 2 Apples, 2 (small) Cucumbers, 1 Green Pepper, and 1 (large) Tomato.

200-400 Calories of Cereal – usually Honey Smacks, containing 48-96 grams of Carbohydrates (mostly sugar), 4-8 grams of Protein, and 1-2 grams of Fat (unsat) Sometimes I switch it out for Cocoa Krispies which are much less healthy but far tastier.
200 Calories of Brown Rice, containing 43 grams of Carbohydrates, 4 grams of Protein, and 1.5 grams of Fat (unsat)

200 Calories of Potatoes, containing 52 grams of Carbohydrates and 8 grams of Protein

20 Calories of Soy Sauce (for the Tofu), containing 750mg of Sodium

0 Calories of Mrs. Dash potassium-based spices – they taste great too!

Note that most of these foods have no sodium. Only the Soy Sauce and Cocoa Krispies have substantial sodium.

I tried Soy Yogurt instead of regular but it tastes yicky. I’d love to reduce my sugar intake perhaps by switching something out for a bread product like bagels but I haven’t found a low-sodium bread product yet. I’d really love to get rid of the Soy Sauce, but I haven’t found a low sodium replacement that works well.

Honey Smacks are amazing. FAR healthier than any other sugared cereal I’ve seen.

I eat the pasta on a small bed of rice with spices.

In total it’s roughly 2500 calories per day. This maintains me around 190 pounds.

Oh, and I drink Light Minute Maid Lemonade or Limeade, 30 Calories with 8 Carbohydrates daily.

Bad Chemistry

May 23, 2007

“Chemistry” is a horrific and damaging banner ad. There are at least 5 variations.

One shows a sad woman with the caption “Was it my bangs?” Then a hand comes down forcefully next to her head, stamping “REJECTED”. Next to “Was it my bangs?” you can click a link which says FIND OUT NOW.

Other captions include “Should you play hard to get?”, “Do all men have ulterior motives for turning up the romance?”, “How far is too far on the first date?” and “What does your jawline say about your sensuality?”

This company is exploiting insecurity, spreading suspicion, pretending generalities, and promoting superstition. They manage to do all of this in the course of just 5 banner ads… at least inefficiency is not their problem.

Hopefully they will have one more problem in the future. As these ads are damaging to people, they should not be legal. Lets move some of those dreaded and horribly dangerous marijuana users out and put some of these asswipes in jail. That will give them plenty of time to think about your jawline.

Another great quote

May 22, 2007

Douglas Valentine’s ‘The Phoenix Program’ is tremendous. Here’s another quote:

“Immediately following the Cambodian invasion, massive antiwar demonstrations erupted across the country. In Ohio Governor James Rhodes reacted violently, vowing to “eradicate” the protestors. On May 4, 1970, the Ohio National Guard responded to his exhortations, firing into a crowd of demonstrators at Kent State College, killing four people. The spectacle of American soldiers killing American citizens had a chilling effect on many people, many of whom suddenly realized that dissent was as dangerous in the United States as it was in South Vietnam. To many Americans, the underlying tragedy of the Vietnam War, symbolized by Phoenix, was finally felt at home. Nixon himself articulated those murderous impulses when he told his staff, “Don’t worry about decisiveness. Having drawn the sword, stick it in hard. Hit ’em in the gut. No defensiveness.” Nixon backed his words with actions. He ordered one of his aides, a former Army intelligence specialist and president of the Young Americans for Freedom, Tom Huston, to devise a plan to surveil, compromise, and discredit his domestic critics. The Huston Plan was called evidence of a “Gestapo mentality” by Senator Sam Ervin of North Carolina. What Ervin meant by the “Gestapo mentality” was Phoenix in its conceptual sense – the use of terror to stifle dissent. Reflecting Nixon’s “Gestapo mentality,” offensive counterintelligence operations were directed against dissenters in America: blacks, leftists, pacifists, the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW), and American Indians.”

This is the GOOD side of the West

May 22, 2007

Check it out starting at 7:28

“How do you feel about having to turn so many people away” and the obvious answer that follows.

An obvious alternative to that approach is to with a translator ask the Ethiopians how they are doing, but apparently that answer is even more obvious.

It never ceases to disappoint me that in a sea of Africans the Westerner finds the LONE other Westerner to talk to. It’s like a magnet, apparently.

These kind of people are the *best* the West can offer… it’s not difficult to see why the world is so problematic.

Talk to the people WITH the problems!

Talking to that nation’s government to find out what else can be done is also more useful.

Stop playing on the emotions… these people don’t need pity, they just need some food.

Reviving the Rational – increasing the goodness of words

May 21, 2007

Something I’ve been hearing a lot lately is various versions of “a picture is worth a thousand words”. While many of the people I’m hearing this from are television journalists (go figure), other people are accepting of it as well.

This is extremely dangerous and limiting. The 1984-85 famine in Ethiopia for example… it was said to only get the West’s attention after images of the human devastation were shown to them. This begs the question of why the equivalent words of “over 1000 people dying per day” didn’t have an equivalent effect.

This illustrates that danger: it’s a lot easier to describe the truth than to film it. Cameras are becoming smaller and cheaper, but high quality ones still require substantial costs. Filming has one big weakness: it’s localized. You can only film what the camera can reach – also film is a fairly new medium and thus viewers are not trained to recognize deception like they are when reading… as Hollywood filmmakers and the Bush Administration knows all too well it’s fairly easy to deceive even an impressive audience.

Although I never hear it said, I suppose the favoritism for viewing film is that it’s seen as giving the viewer more control… “seeing is believing”. Nevermind that the camera’s narrow range means that by being selective the filmer controls exactly what the viewer sees.

I’d rather that culture take a different approach. Forget notions of the superiority of film – treat film as just another medium. Instead establish policies, laws, and procedures to increase the strength of the written and spoken word. If your argument is “how can we possibly believe someone when he says “1000 Ethiopians are dying per day”? then instead of the solution being “show me the death on film” use one that says “let’s make sure that statement is correct”.

This basically means that instead of speech being “free”, certain classifications of speech are no longer free.

Restrictions on speech are based on audience size… the larger the audience for the words the more important it is that those words be truthful. My objection to Rush Limbaugh for example is not that he lies or distorts, but that he lies or distorts to millions of people, twisting them. Hitler would have been relatively harmless if he had spent his life in front of a mirror.

There are many things to consider prior to executing this plan. One is the notion of in what situations truth is not the concern of the words – for example in artistic matters falsehood might be used not to deceive or manipulate but to illuminate or provide some benefit. We need to be careful not to repress the good while we constrain the bad.

The notion of all-encompassing accountability: ANYONE in the world should be able to call someone to account. Culture has reached such a global scale that the words we speak can have an impact on the other side of the globe. With agency comes responsibility and laws governing that responsibility. But just as with frivolous lawsuits, we need to take measures to ensure that people aren’t wasting the esteemed Mr. Limbaugh’s time with silly accusations against him. Perhaps something as simple as countersuits.

This project then deems to do two things: to make words accurate and meaningful, and to hold to account with penalty of fines and/or jail time EVERY human, whether they be the president of the United States or Joe Schmoe for lies, manipulation, or deception. The president of the United States will be held to a much higher standard as he should be.

Due to the rather large potential for disaster even upon a well thought out implemention of this policy, I suggest employing it first on a small scale to see how things go. It can then be refined, revised, and expanded as time passes.

Awesome Quote

May 20, 2007

This great passage is from Douglas Valentine’s ‘The Phoenix Program’, concerning the American War in Vietnam.

“Milberg would not talk about the other traumatic incident, other than to say he was asked by the CIA to parachute into North Vietnam. That he did, even though he had never jumped from an airplane before. And something terrible happened, something too painful to describe, something that made him question the motives of war managers who would ask him to do such a reckless thing. He wondered if the mission had any purpose other than testing the men involved – to see how far they could be pushed and to prepare them for equally preposterous missions in the future. He wondered if he was a guinea pig. “This event resulted in my being afraid, which was a new experience for me. I spent a lot of time between tours thinking about it and wondering how I would react the next time. So it was almost like I needed to test it again.” In this way Warren Milberg’s self-doubt compelled him to return to Vietnam in August 1967, at the request of the CIA as part of the Presidentially Directed Counter-Insurgency Program that fleshed out ICEX. On the other hand, remorse drove Elton Manzione out of Vietnam, out of the military, and nearly out of his mind. Consider the case of Manzione and Milberg: two men equally exposed to a blend of secrecy and terror. Enlisted man Manzione turned on his masters, renounced American imperialism, and spoke out against the misdeeds of the CIA. Officer Milberg submitted to authority and in return became one of the protected few, accepted into the cult of the phoenix, rewarded with the American dream.”

One example of America’s washed brain

May 17, 2007

There’s a fine line in manipulation and propaganda. You can’t give the people pink unicorns… they’ll scoff and your propaganda is worse than useless. *Eventually* (if you’re successful) you’ll be able to mock them by giving them pink unicorns and seeing their adoration, but in the meantime you have to be clever. For now much more subtle means are necessary.

Racism is quite a problem in America. And WOW does it ever have people’s attention. But everything is a matter of perspective, and what else can we see in America?

I’ll tell you what we *don’t* see in America… class consciousness. While we’re lambasting someone pathetic enough to use a racial slur 10,000 people just had their health decline due to a lowering of their wages, or being forced to have less children because they can’t afford them, or any other of the myriad problems of poverty or near-poverty.

The wealth gap in America between the rich and the poor is at least 100 times more important than racism. In fact, racism is mostly encapsulated IN the wealth gap, so fixing that will fix much of racism as well.

Everything is a matter of perspective. What is the ratio between discussion of racism and discussion of the wealth gap in America? 10 to 1 maybe? 50 to 1?

There’s an easy way to measure the amount of propaganda in society. Simply measure the difference between consciousness and reality. Successful propaganda causes people to lose sight of their real interests. *Clever* propaganda uses real concerns of people but warps and distorts them, either reducing or increasing their *perceived* importance at the cost of creating blindness towards their real importance.

Ask yourself a rather simple question: What does capitalism fear more? – black people or poor people? What capitalism fears they propagandize against. Sure, there is racism within American capitalist society and there is certainly no love for blacks. But they’ll gladly support anti-racism if it means a distraction away from the true danger.

“The Don Imus story!” capitalism tells us, and tells us, and tells us, and tells us. Nevermind that OH, we just lowered taxes on the rich again, we just reduced benefits for minimum wager again,  we just funnelled $10 Billion more taxpayer dollars into government contractors in Iraq again.

But oh, that dreadful Don Imus! HE is the problem in America!

FIRED! Yes, now America is saved! Oh wait, what’s that homeless person clinging to my leg? {Shakes him off}. That’s better.

Propaganda works when the *entire* mainstream in on-board… only the dissidents in America, the people the mass media can safely ignore, talk about class consciousness. It’s always cute, nearly hilarious if it wasn’t so pathetically sad, that the right freaks out over Keith Olbermann. Olbermann is just another trained monkey. The person I’d like to see in the mainstream is Noam Chomsky. *That* would give the right something to really freak out over.

Remember folks, FEAR KEITH OLBERMANN. HE IS A RADICAL CRAZY MAN WHO EATS YOUR BABIES!

Just the way the propagandists want it.

A comment to michael in “Things have to go wrong, very wrong”

May 16, 2007

I tried to put this comment in the normal place – following his own in the previous topic – but it didn’t show up and then when I resubmit it it says I already made that comment. So I’ll post it here…

Israel would only make a direct threat if there was political gain involved. Hence they won’t, so a lack thereof doesn’t prove anything about their intentions. Israel’s motivation is to downplay both their nuclear capability and their nuclear intentions for obvious political reasons. Of course, this is only true so long as Israel does not control the region… as America has taken a more aggressive rhetorical stance during the Bush Administration so too would Israel take such a stance if they have some way to nullify or prevent any threat to themselves following such a stance.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article1290331.ece

“ISRAEL has drawn up secret plans to destroy Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities with tactical nuclear weapons.

Two Israeli air force squadrons are training to blow up an Iranian facility using low-yield nuclear “bunker-busters”, according to several Israeli military sources.”

————

Iran is over a decade away from nuclear weapon capability even if they intend to create them, according to Scott Ritter through his work. Futhermore there is no reason to believe they intend to, nor any reason to believe that weapon inspections would not do their job. Iran is open to such weapon inspections and inspections of the facilities that are developing materials for use in nuclear *energy* projects.

The Israeli government has not been committed to peace since 1993 as you claim. I’ll refer you to Noam Chomsky, who has a ridiculous amount of sources far beyond anything I can refer to in the minutes I have available to me.

The Israeli government (much like in America, the people are a bit different) would be delighted to exterminate the Palestinians if there wasn’t such a thing as an international community that would take action upon that project. So instead they do what amounts to torture… push them into closed off areas, set up checkpoints, build enclosures, remove their access to water. Meanwhile they build up a nuclear arsenal in case anyone in the region objects too severely to it or decides to take action, which then *oops* they will have to “defend themselves” by either conventional or nuclear force… you know, whatever is necessary to sustain their approach.
As you examine world politics and world history consider this: it’s not defenders of truth and justice that have ever had huge militaries. Militaries are used to exert force… if you’re not committing crimes there is no need to exert force. If you’re *stealing* however then you need force to prevent the other party from achieving the cessation of that theft.

Surely you’ve seen a bully in school push a kid and then stand over him and say “Whatchoo gonna do? Huh?” {Pushes him again} “Whatchoo gonna do?” {Shoves him harder}

He continues until he’s broken the resistance of the other party to his will or until he’s stopped.

Our “leaders” are no different. The military force of the Palestinians is a total joke compared to what even the Israelis can project, much less the Americans. For diplomatic reasons they don’t say “Whatchoo gonna do?” in those exact words… that’s the difference between a bully as a child and as a man. Oh, and instead of fists it’s now missiles and bombs. Those are the *only* differences.

So you have a choice, michael. You can either watch the Palestinians have their will broken, which will happen prior to their (complete) extermination. The Israeli government isn’t totally heartless… they want to encourage this breaking *soon*… it creates less animosity in the international community. *Or* you can work to stop the bully.

Regardless of what many think, stopping the bully is in NO way Anti-Israeli or Anti-semitic. Have you ever turned a bully into a good person in your life? HE is the person who most benefits from such a process, his victims benefit as well but less so.

Take care, michael… do plenty of research as I will continue to do.

Things have to go wrong, very wrong

May 15, 2007

I was wrong. I said back in 2003 or 2004 that the Bush Administration was incompetent in their execution of the war in Iraq (which was not the *problem* with the war, that’s another issue). I should have been paying more attention to Orwell. That error has been corrected.
The Bush Administration is quite competent in their execution of the Iraq war. They were never trying to win the war. If you win the war the problem is that the war is over. No more government contracts, no more need for military bases, etc. Sure, you might seize oil, but the goal here is *sustained growth*, not simply a singular economic spike.

In order to create perpetual war, you must never either win or lose the war. The ideal situation is a pitched continuous battle with few casualties (large casualties speeds up the war’s conclusion regardless of who receives the casualties). So the idea is continuous war while arguing for increasing funding (which is a simple transfer of wealth from the American taxpayer to private corporations). The ideal is little killing… but where troops remain necessary to “keep the peace” and to “stabilize the region”. The vastly ironic humor of people who want perpetual war talking about regional stability is apparently completely lost on the blind and corrupt American media. Their goal is regional *instability*.

From their perspective it’s *great* that they are increasing recruitment for Al Qaeda and related organizations… as I said four years ago Bush and Al Qaeda want the same things… global war. Actually though they want different things… only Bush wants perpetual war.

Much like Orwell’s oppressive state, bear in mind that this is all about controlled conflict. Controlled chaos. The Bush Administration does *not* want global nuclear war or anything that can jeopardize the world economy. What they want is oppression, control, and power… ideally they will use low-yield nuclear weapons to “shock and awe” their enemies (who are anyone not open and accomodating of American corporations) into submission… they want obedience based on fear and perpetuated through threat of destruction if that obedience is not maintained. The Bush Administration is doing one thing… setting up a global tyranny with themselves (or whoever succeeds them in one of the Business classes of the American government) as the tyrant.

This is utterly a lose-lose-lose situation. If they succeed the world is doomed to exploitation, poverty, fascism, and oppression. If they fail unless they fail *soon* they will wreak vast destruction trying to “liberate the world” or “bring freedom to the world” or whatever they are mouthing next month. Don’t worry though… I’m sure government contractors will be waiting in line to offer “reconstruction” in that event, so at least someone will benefit. The worst situation may be if they neither succeed nor fail… if perpetual war rages for 10 years, or 20 years, or 50 years (there’s still Iran, and Syria, and Pakistan, and, and, and…). If we continue to intentionally avoid capturing Bin Laden out of fear that that might end the conflict. Don’t worry though… in a few years we’ll have created such strong terrorist organizations that we can lose that fear. Then whoever is the American president can capture Bin Laden and be cheered and celebrated in the media for this bold attack in the “War on Terror”, which the media will trumpet as providing hope for all of us.

Our true hopes lie in two areas… the American people and the people living in Islamic and Arab countries (also other people of the world, but to a lesser extent). The American people can change America, can overthrow the structures of their government that ensure their domination by means of politicians who are not amenable to their will. People living in Islamic and Arab countries can unite under the notion of the perils of American imperialism and demand that their leaders take a unified stand against that imperialism. Much as is occurring in South America, Arab and Islamic nations need to unite, need to form a coalition that opposes in every way (including aggression against terror) the attempts of the American government to steal their resources.

Ahmadinejad needs to be thrown out of power immediately. That will give him plenty of time to visit Bush who should be sitting in a jail cell. The two can share their thoughts, what there is of them.

Ahmadinejad has joined the Al Qaeda/Bush group that is promoting chaos and instability. It seems he’s an unwilling dupe though… I think the guy is just a political monster who doesn’t really know what he’s doing other than that it’s helping his political career (maybe he doesn’t have any other thoughts… proof positive that politicians need to become an extinct species).

Ahmadinejad is promoting chaos by providing fuel for Bush’s rhetoric. He is jeopardizing the state of Iran… directly threatening the Iranian people. The Bushies can say “Look at that madman! Surely he almost has his finger on the trigger of Iran’s nuclear weapons! He must be stopped!”. The Iranians need to be promoting calm, determined, focused leadership, a leadership actively educating it’s people and the world’s people about the threat of the American government and building a coalition of like states… NOT calling the Holocaust a “myth” and saying that Israel should be “wiped off the map”. Israel is an exceedingly minor threat to Iran relative to the American government at the moment.

There are LOTS of ways to criticize America and Israel that are wholly legitimate, if Ahmadinejad would like my advice on the subject. For starters, they have and threaten to use nuclear weapons, a vile act of aggression outlawed by the international community. America’s military policy in general is ridiculous and easy to criticize. Israel has a longstanding policy of expansion and eventual driving out or exterminating of the Palestinians. They have been abusing and oppressing the Palestinians for decades. Instead he says “the Holocaust is a myth” and Israel should be “wiped off the map”.

Le sigh. I suppose if we didn’t have leaders the people wouldn’t be able to point to others who they were superior to.

Gotta love leaders!

The American government: screwing America yet again

May 13, 2007

From Cooperative Research’s website:

“Concerned that the balance of power in the Middle East has tilted in favor of Shiite-dominated Iran, the Bush administration implements a major shift in its policy toward the region. According to a number of current and former high-level government officials interviewed by reporter Seymour Hersh, the focus of the new policy is to roll back Iran’s growing influence in Iraq. The administration’s top concern is that the failure of its policy in Iraq has empowered Iran. To undermine Iranian influence, the Bush administration begins supporting clandestine operations in Lebanon, Iran, and Syria. The administration avoids disclosing these operations to Congress by skirting congressional reporting requirements and by running them through the Saudis. The White House is also turning a blind eye to Saudi support for religious schools and charities linked to Islamic extremists. “A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to al-Qaeda,” Hersh notes. One former senior intelligence official explains to Hersh, “We are in a program to enhance the Sunni capability to resist Shiite influence, and we’re spreading the money around as much as we can.” The official adds that the money “always gets in more pockets than you think it will. In this process, we’re financing a lot of bad guys with some serious potential unintended consequences. We don’t have the ability to determine and get pay vouchers signed by the people we like and avoid the people we don’t like.” Much of the money used to finance these activities became available as a result of the budgetary chaos in Iraq, where billions of dollars are unaccounted for. A Pentagon consultant tells Hersh, “There are many, many pots of black money, scattered in many places and used all over the world on a variety of missions.” Hersh reports that according to his sources, the US is providing large sums of cash to the Sunni government of Lebanon, which in turn is being funneled to emerging Sunni radical groups in northern Lebanon, the Bekaa Valley, and around Palestinian refugee camps in the south. “These groups, though small, are seen as a buffer to Hezbollah; at the same time, their ideological ties are with al-Qaeda,” Hersh writes. Another group receiving support is the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood, a radical Sunni group that is an avowed enemy of the US and Israel. The “Redirection” is reportedly being led by Vice President Dick Cheney, Deputy National Security Adviser Elliott Abrams, former Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad, and Saudi Arabia National Security Adviser Prince Bandar bin Sultan. The clandestine activities are said to be guided by Cheney. Critics of the White House’s new policy compare it to other times Western state-powers have backed Islamic militants, such as when the CIA supported the mujahedeen against the Soviets in Afghanistan during the 1980s (see 1986-1992). The “blowback” from that policy included the creation of al-Qaeda. Vali Nasr, a senior fellow at the Council of Foreign Relations, notes another instance: “The last time Iran was a threat, the Saudis were able to mobilize the worst kinds of Islamic radicals. Once you get them out of the box, you can’t put them back.””

Nice Hollywood Critique

May 13, 2007

http://tinyurl.com/2a5jyn