Welcome to All Aircraft Are Not Involved.

Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, make your voice heard!


may also include historical analysis and perspective


Unread postby Don Smith » Wed Aug 08, 2007 4:42 am

{With merged threads, the adjusted view count is +263}

False Positive: Bush's Deadly Odor of Mendacity
Written by Chris Floyd
Wednesday, 08 August 2007

President Bush's many media sycophants tell us over and over that he is not the dribbling idiot of popular imagination. As Hugh Hewitt and other genuflectors who are ushered routinely into the great man's presence insist, George W. Bush is an intelligent, focused, purposeful leader, with a firm grasp on the complexities of modern statecraft.

Let us grant the truth of this assertion. (Indeed, I have already granted it, in two previous pieces: here and here.) What this means, of course, is that when Bush makes a statement in public, he is very much aware of what he is saying, and fully cognizant of the implications of his words. Therefore, when the intelligent, focused and purposeful Mr. Bush declared Monday -- at a highly publicized meeting with Afghan President Hamid Karzai -- that the Iranian government "has proclaimed its desire to build a nuclear weapon," we must assume that he knew full well that he was telling a barefaced lie, and that he told this lie for some specific purpose. That purpose is obvious: to further prepare the PR ground for inducing the public to go along with a future military strike against Iran.

This is precisely the same kind of focused and purposeful lie that Bush told when he declared, on national television, that there was "no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised," and that Saddam Hussein had "aided, trained and harbored terrorists, including operative of al Qaeda." In fact, the new lie is even more brazen, for it involves only the public statements of Iranian leaders, not cherry-picked and falsified nuggets of murky intelligence data buried from all public view. Anyone with a computer -- or a memory -- can readily determine that Iran's government leaders have insistently proclaimed their adamant opposition to building a nuclear weapon; the nation's theocratic leader, the Ayatollah Khamenei, has even declared such a weapons program to be against the will of God.

The veracity of such statements might be controversial, of course. After all, there is no particular reason to believe that the government leaders in Iran are any more honest than, say, American presidents (or American clerics) have proven to be down through the years. But it is simply, literally, indisputably an outright lie to declare that the Iranian government has "proclaimed its desire to build a nuclear weapon." The very opposite is true.

Bush knew he was lying -- and he was lying with a purpose. He was trying to inject this poisonous falsehood into the public debate, and he succeeded. The remark went largely unnoticed by the corporate media, which focused on other themes in the joint press conference. The US media's flagship, the New York Times, did not even mention Bush's falsehood, much less point out the inaccuracy of the remark. As it does so often, the Times smoothed over Bush's actual words with a bland paraphrase, saying only that Bush "is deeply suspicious of [Iran's] nuclear ambitions, a view he reiterated Monday." (That is a further lie in aid of the original lie. Bush did not say he was "deeply suspicious" of Iran's nuclear ambitions; he said outright that Iran has declared its desire for nuclear weapons. There was no "suspicion" about the statement at all; Bush retailed it as an established fact.)

Some outlets, such as the Washington Post, did report Bush's remark -- and even went on to note, at the very bottom of the story, that "Iran actually has not proclaimed a desire to build a nuclear weapon." But instead of asking why Bush would tell such a glaring, provocative lie, the Post merely, and meekly, allowed an Administration spokesman to explain away the remark with a non sequitor: Iran had once kept its nuclear energy program a secret and was now resisting some of the extra inspections demanded of them outside the the nuclear non-proliferation treaty that they have signed and followed for years. The spokesman did not explain how any of this constituted a "proclamation" of the desire to build nuclear weapons. And the Post obviously did not press him on it. Still, in this degraded age of journalism, I suppose we must give a gold star to the Post for even mentioning the discrepancy between Bush's statement and the truth.

(However, full marks must go to AFP for writing a whole story on the lie: Bush levels dubious Iran nuclear arms charge. But they're just a bunch of foreigners anyway, so they don't count. Only the echo chamber of the Homeland media is important in the new warmongering campaign.)

Bush's deliberate lie ratchets that campaign up to another level. We have already had months of stories asserting Iranian involvement in the killing of American soldiers in Iran and Afghanistan -- stories rooted, like the WMD canards, in the murk of unsourced, unverifiable "intelligence data" passed along by Bush's military minions to credulous reporters. Now the Bush Regime is moving on to fantastical falsehoods, based on nothing but a bold perversion of facts available to anyone. And again, as with Iraq, the main war drum remains centered on that ole debbil "mushroom cloud" rising over an American city. (And why not? The Money Power militarists have made mountains of hay (and silos of cash) with that threat for nigh on 60 years now.)

But before the "debate" about striking Iran slips away entirely into the realm of fantasy, it might be useful to look at Iran's nuclear program in context -- provided here by Abbas Edalat and Mehrnaz Shahabi in their Guardian article, Prospects of Armageddon:

...the calamity of Iraq has failed to dampen the belligerent clique within the White House. The arrival of an IAEA team in Tehran yesterday to discuss inspections is equally unlikely to dissuade advocates of a strike, nuclear or conventional. Such an assault would be in flagrant breach of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, but it would hardly be the first time the US has disregarded the 1968 accord.

The treaty obliges nuclear states to pursue negotiations in good faith towards cessation of the nuclear arms race and on to disarmament. It also guarantees non-nuclear states help with and access to peaceful nuclear know-how and technology. All five original nuclear states are in violation of the treaty for failing to take effective action towards disarmament. The US systematically contravened the treaty in the 1980s and 1990s by successfully bringing pressure to bear on western governments and companies, as well as China and Russia, not to enter nuclear collaborations with Iran - which, as a signatory of the treaty, has been entitled since 1970 to receive material, technology and information for the peaceful use of nuclear power. This eventually drove Iran, after the bombing of Iraq's Osirak nuclear plant by Israel in 1981, on to the black market in order to pursue its nuclear programme. The subsequent partial concealment of Iran's nuclear activities gave rise to western suspicion of its nuclear ambitions, but rarely does the media characterisation make reference to the context in which the recourse to the black market took place. It is rare, too, to see mention made of the fact that the IAEA has found no evidence of a weapons programme after over 2,200 hours of snap inspections of Iranian nuclear plants.

In marked contrast to western suspicion of Iran, the real nuclear programme in Israel has been eagerly sponsored by the governments of France, Britain and the US. They have actively supported Israel's development of an arsenal estimated to include more than 200 warheads. It is a weapons programme Tel Aviv is determined to shroud in secrecy. Mordechai Vanunu served an 18-year prison sentence, including 12 years in solitary confinement, after speaking publicly of Israel's possession of nuclear weapons in 1986. Last month he was sentenced to a further six months in prison for speaking to foreigners.

Even as Iran discusses renewed inspections with the IAEA, the risk of a military attack on its nuclear facilities remains high. Israel's threat to deploy nuclear bunker busters to destroy Iran's weapons potential is in line with the US's national security strategy of 2006 and the Pentagon's doctrine for joint nuclear operations which justifies use of tactical nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons states as a "deterrent". The ultimate irony is that the leading violator of the treaty, the US, and the region's sole nuclear power and non-signatory, Israel, are contemplating nuclear strikes on the pretext of nuclear limitation.

But this is nothing new. The National Security State that essentially replaced the American republic in 1947 has always relied on "scaring the hell out of the American people," as we noted here earlier this year, when writing of Bush's brutal regime change by proxy in Somalia:

It's clear that no nation on earth will be allowed to organize its own society as it wishes, or work out its own internal conflicts, if the American elite decides they have some financial or strategic interest in the matter. The only nations immune to this power-mad interventionist philosophy are those who can strike back hard enough to upset the elite's apple cart. And thus we have Bush's "war on terror" -- which is, as we've often noted, simply an escalation of the long-running, bipartisan foreign policy of the "National Security State" that has ruled America for 60 years.

This year marks the anniversary of this coup d'etat: the 1947 "National Security Act." Writing on the 50th anniversary of this supplanting of the Republic, Gore Vidal wrote:

Fifty years ago, Harry Truman replaced the old republic with a national-security state whose sole purpose is to wage perpetual wars, hot, cold, and tepid. Exact date of replacement? February 27, 1947. Place: The White House Cabinet Room. Cast: Truman, Undersecretary of State Dean Acheson, a handful of congressional leaders. Republican senator Arthur Vandenberg told Truman that he could have his militarized economy only IF he first "scared the hell out of the American people" that the Russians were coming. Truman obliged. The perpetual war began. Representative government of, by, and for the people is now a faded memory. Only corporate America enjoys representation by the Congress and presidents that it pays for in an arrangement where no one is entirely accountable because those who have bought the government also own the media. Now, with the revolt of the Praetorian Guard at the Pentagon, we are entering a new and dangerous phase. Although we regularly stigmatize other societies as rogue states, we ourselves have become the largest rogue state of all. We honor no treaties. We spurn international courts. We strike unilaterally wherever we choose. We give orders to the United Nations but do not pay our dues...we bomb, invade, subvert other states. Although We the People of the United States are the sole source of legitimate authority in this land, we are no longer represented in Congress Assembled. Our Congress has been hijacked by corporate America and its enforcer, the imperial military machine..."

Obviously, the situation that Vidal describes didn't begin with the illegal implantation of the Bush Regime by the rightwing faction of the Supreme Court (two of whom had family members profiting from the Bush campaign) in December 2000. It has gone on for decades, under "liberal" Democrats and "conservative" Republicans. But it has reached a new pitch of intensity, audacity and recklessness today.

That audacity was on vivid display in the latest war-stoking lie to issue from the presidential mouth: a lie rank with the smell of corpse-flesh -- past, present and future -- that mingles with Bush's every breath. ***

Don Smith sez;
The problems involved in rousing interest in issues such as this are so complex, it is as if the willful ignorance were a normal thing.
I believe that if more people were aware of the horrible effects of war, it would not recieve the lip service it now has from that small pecentage of psychopaths guiding "national policy". As a participant in a war, I have seen nightmarish events, death in industrial quantities, and there is absolutely no good to be found in the destruction of our brothers and sisters, no matter what the cause.
When "leaders" push events to the point that all is madness,(Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Bush I, Clinton,Bush II), there must be some intuitive sense that something is really wrong here.
Most people in the world do not have information available to them, not with the ease we here in cyberspace have. This makes the criminality of the situation even more pronounced, as we cannot claim, as the German people did after WWII, "We didn't know".
We DO know, and anyone denying this is willfully blind, and complicit.

So much for short posts, Socrates.
Last edited by Don Smith on Sat Sep 01, 2007 2:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
Don Smith

Re: Mendacity...

Unread postby socrates » Tue Aug 21, 2007 12:38 pm

Don Smith wrote: The problems involved in rousing interest in issues such as this are so complex, it is as if the willful ignorance were a normal thing.
I believe that if more people were aware of the horrible effects of war, it would not recieve the lip service it now has from that small pecentage of psychopaths guiding "national policy". As a participant in a war, I have seen nightmarish events, death in industrial quantities, and there is absolutely no good to be found in the destruction of our brothers and sisters, no matter what the cause.
When "leaders" push events to the point that all is madness,(Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Bush I, Clinton,Bush II), there must be some intuitive sense that something is really wrong here.
Most people in the world do not have information available to them, not with the ease we here in cyberspace have. This makes the criminality of the situation even more pronounced, as we cannot claim, as the german people did after WWII, "We didn't know".
We DO know, and anyone denying this is willfully blind, and complicit.

The tide will only turn against the "ignorance is bliss" nonsense, when truth is put at the forefront of our educational system.

A People's History of the United States
by Howard Zinn

War Is the Health of the State
"War is the health of the state," the radical writer Randolph Bourne said, in the midst of the First World War. Indeed, as the nations of Europe went to war in 1914, the governments flourished, patriotism bloomed, class struggle was stilled, and young men died in frightful numbers on the battlefields-often for a hundred yards of land, a line of trenches.

In the United States, not yet in the war, there was worry about the health of the state. Socialism was growing. The IWW seemed to be everywhere. Class conflict was intense. In the summer of 1916, during a Preparedness Day parade in San Francisco, a bomb exploded, killing nine people, two local radicals, Tom Mooney and Warren Billings, were arrested and would spend twenty years in prison. Shortly after that Senator James Wadsworth of New York suggested compulsory military training for all males to avert the danger that "these people of ours shall be divided into classes." Rather: "We must let our young men know that they owe some responsibility to this country."

The supreme fulfillment of that responsibility was taking place in Europe. Ten million were to die on the battlefield; 20 million were to die of hunger and disease related to the war. And no one since that day has been able to show that the war brought any gain for humanity that would be worth one human life. The rhetoric of the socialists, that it was an "imperialist war," now seems moderate and hardly arguable. The advanced capitalist countries of Europe were fighting over boundaries, colonies, spheres of influence; they were competing for Alsace-Lorraine, the Balkans, Africa, the Middle East.

The war came shortly after the opening of the twentieth century, in the midst of exultation (perhaps only among the elite in the Western world) about progress and modernization. One day after the English declared war, Henry James wrote to a friend: "The plunge of civilization into this abyss of blood and darkness . . . is a thing that so gives away the whole long age during which we have supposed the world to be . . . gradually bettering." In the first Battle of the Marne, the British and French succeeded in blocking the German advance on Paris. Each side had 500,000 casualties. The killing started very fast, and on a large scale. In August 1914, a volunteer for the British army had to be 5 feet 8 inches to enlist. By October, the requirement was lowered to 5 feet 5 inches. That month there were thirty thousand casualties, and then one could be 5 feet 3. In the first three months of war, almost the entire original British army was wiped out.

For three years the battle lines remained virtually stationary in France. Each side would push forward, then back, then forward again- for a few yards, a few miles, while the corpses piled up. In 1916 the Germans tried to break through at Verdun; the British and French counterattacked along the Seine, moved forward a few miles, and lost 600,000 men. One day, the 9th Battalion of the King's Own Yorkshire Light Infantry launched an attack with eight hundred men. Twenty four hours later, there were eighty-four left.

Back home, the British were not told of the slaughter. One English writer recalled: "The most bloody defeat in the history of Britain . . . might occur . . . and our Press come out bland and copious and graphic with nothing to show that we had not had quite a good day-a victory really...." The same thing was happening on the German side; as Erich Maria Remarque wrote in his great novel, on days when men by the thousands were being blown apart by machine guns and shells, the official dispatches announced "All Quiet on the Western Front."

In July 1916, British General Douglas Haig ordered eleven divisions of English soldiers to climb out of their trenches and move toward the German lines. The six German divisions opened up with their machine guns. Of the 110,000 who attacked, 20,000 were killed, 40,000 more wounded-all those bodies strewn on no man's land, the ghostly territory between the contending trenches. On January 1, 1917, Haig was promoted to field marshal. What happened that summer is described tersely in William Langer's An Encyclopedia of World History:

Despite the opposition of Lloyd George and the skepticism of some of his subordinates, Haig proceeded hopefully to the main offensive. The third battle of Ypres was a senes of 8 heavy attacks, carried through in driving rain and fought over ground water-logged and muddy. No break-through was effected, and the total gain was about 5 miles of territory, which made the Ypres salient more inconvenient than ever and cost the British about 400,000 men.

The people of France and Britain were not told the extent of the casualties. When, in the last year of the war, the Germans attacked ferociously on the Somme, and left 300,000 British soldiers dead or wounded, London newspapers printed the following, we learn from Paul Fussell's The Great War and Modern Memory: .....

A few books helped to shape my anti-war outlooks at an early age.

All Quiet on the Western Front Book Notes Summary
by Erich Maria Remarque

Johnny Got His Gun
by Dalton Trumbo
published in 1939


The Oliver Stone Trilogy on the Vietnam War also helped to raise the awareness that Don Smith wishes was more prevalent. If people did truly understand the horrors of war, then GW Bush and the other fascists wouldn't be able to get away so easily with their war crimes.




User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Unread postby Don Smith » Tue Aug 21, 2007 1:52 pm

Trashing the Troops: The Bush-Cheney Way of War
Written by Chris Floyd
Tuesday, 21 August 2007

Army cuts time spent on training (Boston Globe):
The US Army, struggling to cope with stepped-up operations and extended deployments of its soldiers to Iraq, has shortened the duration of several of its bedrock training courses so that troops can return to fighting units on the front lines more quickly, according to senior training officials. One training course that is considered the "first step" in educating newly minted sergeants -- the noncommissioned officers considered the backbone of Army units -- has been cut in half to 15 days. Meanwhile, an intensive program designed to prepare young officers for advanced leadership has been compressed from eight months to less than five months so that the Army can fill positions in constant demand from commanders in the Middle East...

""The whole intent is to get the soldier into the unit where he can be used faster," [said Colonel Joe Gallagher, chief of plans for the US Army Training and Doctrine Command]. "Time will tell if something is missing."

No, Colonel Gallagher, time will not tell if something is missing -- death will tell: the death of an undertrained soldier, or of a soldier led by an undertrained officer, or the death of a civilian, or many civilians, killed by an undertrained soldier or officer. That is the "metric" by which the new "compression" of training will be measured. But full marks to the colonel for candor: the intent of the Bush Regime is most assuredly to "use" the troops as fast as they can -- then throw them aside just as quickly when they're used up.

The striking animus that the leaders of the Bush Faction exhibit toward America's soldiery grows more pronounced all the time. Indeed, their pathological hatred of the actual human beings in the armed forces seems to increase in proportion to their increasingly frenzied rhetoric about supporting the abstract entity known as "the troops."

Perhaps this is a result of unconscious envy on the part of Bush and Cheney, gung-ho militarists who cowardly avoided a war they were happy to see other people fight. Or perhaps it is simply the deliberate, knowing disdain of pampered elites for all those below their exalted station – especially the riff-raff who do their dirty work, such as the soldiers sent to kill and die to increase the elite's powers, privileges and pleasures. Most likely, it is a combination of both causes – with the latter element predominant.

Don Smith says;

The one lasting effect of the Viet Nam era that I can see is the fear of reinstituting the draft. Nothing highlighted the social injustice of our class system more than the draft.
When I went in, and I am sure of this, if one had a worth of $100,000 or more, one was exempt from the draft, as the capital was too important to the economy and the nation needed the impetus of monetary action more than it needed one more body in a uniform.
As the war dragged on, year after year, those in college graduated, and their exemptions were ended. The round up of middle class citizens was as much a cause for ending the war as any sense of moral outrage.
We see now that moral outrage has been neutralised by the media, most people do not know of the million plus dead Iraqis, most do not know of the poisoning of all combatants by depleted uranium, most have only a shadowy sense that something isn't quite right, however, they must defer to the "experts", and trust that the "leaders" will do what is best.
When I address these things at public meetings, for the most part, I might as well be speaking in Swahili, as there is no recognition of my ideas, they are outside the conventional wisdom, and not regarded as anything beyond the ravings of a "conspiracy theorist".
A small minority knows these things, they, too are swept aside by the popular will.
We shall see.
Don Smith

Unread postby socrates » Wed Aug 22, 2007 4:45 pm

War needs to be outlawed except for self-defense and humanitarian reasons. If I was king, that would be the rule.

My problem with all the talk of impeachment is that it doesn't resolve what really needs to be investigated; Were there war crimes?

This is from AfterDowningStreet.org, a 2005 article on a Kucinich resolution looking into the White House Iraq Group.

Congressman Dennis J. Kucinich Press Release

Congressman Dennis J. Kucinich (D-OH) today introduced a Resolution of Inquiry to demand the White House turn over all white papers, minutes, notes, emails or other communications kept by the White House Iraq Group (WHIG).

"This group, comprised of the President and Vice President's top aides, was critical in selling the Administration's case for war," stated Kucinich. "We now know that the Administration hyped intelligence and misled the American public and Congress in their effort to 'sell' the war. After over 1,900 American troops have been killed in Iraq, it is long past time for this Congress to ask serious questions about WHIG and its role in the lead up to the war."

A Resolution of Inquiry is a rare House procedure used to obtain documents from the Executive Branch. Under House rules, Kucinich's resolution is referred to committee, and action must be taken in committee within 14 legislative days.

"For two-and-a-half years Congress has sat on the sidelines neglecting its oversight responsibility when it has come to Iraq," continued Kucinich. "We owe it to the American people to hold this Administration accountable and to find out the truth."

OCTOBER 20, 2005
11:40 AM
CONTACT: Congressman Dennis J. Kucinich
Doug Gordon (202) 225-5871(o); (202) 494-5141(c)


From: Samantha Spinney, Legislative Assistant, Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich
Date: October 21, 2005
Re: H. Res. 505

On Thursday, October 20, Rep. Kucinich introduced a H. Res. 505, a resolution of inquiry that would require the President and Secretary of State to transfer documents relating to the White House Iraq Group, or WHIG, to the House of Representatives. Andrew Card formed this taskforce in August 2002 - seven months before the invasion of Iraq - with the mission of marketing a war in Iraq. The group consisted of high-level Administration officials and strategists including: Karl Rove, I. Lewis Libby, Condoleezza Rice, Karen Hughes, Mary Matalin, Stephen Hadley, Nicholas E. Calio and James R. Wilkinson.

The WHIG produced white papers detailing so-called intelligence of Iraq's nuclear threat that later proved to be false. This supposed intelligence included the claim that Iraq had sought uranium from Niger as well as the claim that the high strength aluminum tubes Iraq purchased from China were to be used for the sole purpose of building centrifuges to enrich uranium.

Unlike the National Intelligence Estimate of 2002, the WHIG's white papers provided "gripping images and stories" and used "literary license" with intelligence. The WHIG's white papers were written at the same time and by the same people as speeches and talking points prepared for President Bush and some of his top officials.

The WHIG also organized a media blitz in which, between September 7-8, 2002, Bush and his top advisers appeared on numerous interviews and all provided similarly gripping images about the possibility of nuclear attack by Iraq. The timing was no coincidence, as Andrew Card explained in an interview regarding waiting until after Labor Day to try to sell the American people on military action against Iraq, "From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August."

September 7-8, 2002:

· NBC's "Meet the Press: Vice President Cheney accused Saddam of moving aggressively to develop nuclear weapons over the past 14th months to add to his stockpile of chemical and biological arms.

· CNN: Then-National Security Adviser Rice said, regarding the likelihood of Iraq obtaining a nuclear weapon, "We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."

· CBS: President Bush declared that Saddam was "six months away from developing a weapon," and cited satellite photos of construction in Iraq where weapons inspectors once visited as evidence that Saddam was trying to develop nuclear arms.

Congress and the American people deserve to know exactly how the WHIG marketed a war using fabricated intelligence. The white papers produced by this group cut right to the heart of the lies and deceptions spouted by Administration officials in the lead up to the invasion of Iraq.

For more information or to cosponsor H. Res. 505, please contact me at 5-5871.

Samantha Spinney
Legislative Assistant
Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich
202-225-5871 (p)
202-225-5745 (f)

2008 can't come soon enough.
Hopefully the elections are clean,
and we start seeing some positive
developments in this country.

As the great philosopher "Don Smith" once said,
we shall see.
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Unread postby Don Smith » Sat Sep 01, 2007 4:01 am

Don Smith is my real name. (There are thousands of us, I know, I recieve their bills by mistake quite often).
Some great thinker, (I am not going to look this up right now, as I am on a roll), said that "tragedy is the inexorable movement of things".
The materialism of the consumer society is not simply the aquisition of a new car, or the purchase of a new teevee, it is a mind set which regards the entire spectrum of the "real' world as a commodity.
At it's most crass level it displays a disposition to regard all events and even ideas as "things", things which promise to enrich the quality of existence by making life more comfortable, or by showing that one has the "edge" on the neighbors.
Marriage not going well? Throw it away, start another. Children pissing you off? Throw them out, they are ungrateful wretches in any event. Religion making you uncomfortable? Find another, there are plenty of churches out there that allow you to bribe God, so that He "owes" you.
The simplistic view of existence as a life long cycle of consumption and defication plays well among the "leaders" of the corporate elite, this same elite has been in charge of society for many years, perhaps since Cain slew Able, ( the imagery of Cain and Able is not simply a fantasy, it was an expression of the dominance of fixed agricultural society over the previous system of hunter/ gatherer social organization).
The hope that the next "election" cycle will lead to a new direction in the United States seems romantic to me. Sure, the populace is fed up with the way things are going, the majority wants to end the wars of Empire which the corporate masters have foisted upon us. The majority wants health care, infrastructure redevelopment, an end to fear and the "war on terror".
40% of the electorate will not bother to vote.
The 60% that does vote will hold their nose as, once again, we get to choose which vermin we want stealing from us.
Above was a most trenchant comment about education.
Most people have no idea about the history of the nation, the structure of economic control, or anything having to do with ideas beyond "winning" or
It is a national festival of the nature of a teevee show, a popularity contest in which any issues of substance are shoved in the background while the "contest" is played out to the entertainment and distraction of the mob.
When the Constitution was framed, great care was taken to prevent any save the white property owners from voting.
At the beginning of the 20th century, the Senate became an elective office.
A more sophisticated system was put in place as the 20th century wore on, with the vote being given to women, minorities, and the vote being the measure of the will of the people, a very subtle shift was put into play.
If there was no real difference between the candidates, it didn't matter who the vox populi voted for.
The best of all possible worlds for the elites, the people get to believe they are in control, and the elites control the government. No matter which candidates "win" office.
The "government" seems to be an illusion, it does exist, though what the functions might be is anybody's guess.
Since the Taft-Hartley Act, labor has been denied any power, and union power is gutted. Few remember that people died to achieve the 40 hour work week, health care, retirement benefits, an end to child labor, and many other advances in the well being of the working people of this nation.
Now there are knee-jerk responses to the idea of a union-they are lazy parasites, robbing the rightful owners and risk takers of wealth, all the while they are part of an organized criminal conspiracy etc.
People have been brainwashed into forgetting that there would be no wealth whatsoever if not for labor.
Since WWI,(maybe even the Civil War), the companies which owned the natural resources of this continent have directed the "national" aims of society. Hearst could conjure up a war with Spain, T.R. could "recognise" a nation called "Panama",( to the people of Columbia, this was a simple matter of theft), and the "American Century" was the watchword of "popular wisdom".
With the entanglement of the U.S. in European affairs, all the stops were gone. Few remembered the warnings of George Washington about becoming involved in foreign events.
In any event, things are not what they seem, and very few people that I know are better off for all of our involvement in foreign adventures.
The direction of a free people is now one of throwing off the old structure of social organization. More and more, there are gatherings of local communities which question the nature of life under the banner of corporate control. More people are looking to local producers for organic food, alternative energy sources, a sizing down of what we need, the old systems have failed, and those paying attention are looking for an alternative.
The higher costs of organic foods are a puzzle to many, until they realise that most corporate foods are subsidised by the taxpayers' dollar. Archer, Daniels, Midland recieved 600 millions for corn subsidies alone in fiscal 2005. this enabled them to flood the markets of Mexico with cheap corn, driving millions of subsistance farmers from their lands, and forcing them to live in the cities, or move to "Del Norte", where they search for jobs and add to the labor surplus which is needed to drive labor costs down for the corporate controllers which manipulate these events.
As to the effects of air pollution by the chemtrails, I believe it is an effort,(very shortsighted), to reduce the effects of solar radiation upon the planet. The casualties inflicted upon humanity are part of a "necessary cost", which will be borne,(of course), by the weakest members of human society.
The very wealthy, believe themselves to be outside the laws of nature, that they will be able to exclude themselves from the general collapse of the ecosystem which must be part of the result of the widespread industrial polution which we have allowed to occur in the last two centuries.
They are willing, if they give it any thought at all, to see an increase in cancers, pulmonary disease, genetic defects, renal failure, and a host of diseases yet to be seen, in order to maintain a social structure in which an elite remains distant, and aloof to the pain of humanity.
The future of the planet belongs to those willing to emphasize the commonality of humanity, not to those eager to gain a "place" in the hierarchy of control.
Many have demanded a new social order, Christ, Marx, Hitler, the pressure of survival was not implicit when these demands were enunciated.
We now live in a time which demands clarity, without the shades of superstition.
The human organizations which have survived to this hour are not the social constructs which will lend themselves to our survival.
Local action is the key, local awareness to the reality of the dire position we are all caught upon.
Speak out.
The future depends upon those willing to break the mold.
Don Smith

Unread postby Don Smith » Wed Sep 19, 2007 2:36 pm


I noticed a number of allusions to various political and social issues scattered about the site. Here is a large site which contains much information and analysis of our current situation.
Don Smith

Check This One Out For Mendacity

Unread postby socrates » Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:10 pm

The People Who Assaulted a Gold Star Father on September 15th

Afterdowningstreet.org is a good source. This one story caught my eye. It gets real interesting in the comments section.

[quote="Matty"]So this guy who assaulted Arredondo is obviously from within the inner circle of the Gathering of ASSholes; he is not just some random, pissed-off neighbor. And his (first) post above smacks of pure CIA-type psy-op - just exactly the kind of professional ****-stirring you'd expect from a spook with "extensive post military travel to and residence in some 23 different countries", as claimed in his profile.

This guy - and clearly, the leadership of the Gathering of DipShits - are TRUE, PAID PROVOCATEURS - precisely that which they accuse the protesters of being - except these people truly are from a government conspiracy - probably straight from the CIA itself.

"Rory"'s profile names his "Industry" as "Communications or Media". No fucking doubt! Why, here he is "communicating" in his preferred "medium" - attempted intimidation - in DC last Saturday:


User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Unread postby Don Smith » Fri Sep 21, 2007 10:22 am

Silber has some very wise words on this-
Don Smith


Unread postby socrates » Fri Sep 21, 2007 12:39 pm

Keith Special Comment: President of Hypocrisy

Also found this-
The Mendacity Index Which president told the biggest whoppers?

Yeah, this is mostly a chemtrail board, because a tinfoil free one is needed for those on the fence and the newbies. A chemtrail board is needed for any real "chemmies" who wish to spread the word about the widespread, deliberate tampering of the atmosphere.

Yet, lies are lies, whether they are made by those saying that chemtrails are contrails, or if they are made by those willing to start illegal wars which result in over a million deaths. Over One Million Dead, AND NOT ONE OF US WAS EVER CONSULTED. Most Americans, if they have a soul, do not believe in war, do not want war, and we want those from other nations to know that we do not believe in GW Bush, that our elections were STOLEN!
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Unread postby socrates » Mon Sep 24, 2007 5:26 pm

Feds Target Blackwater in Weapons Probe

Associated Press Writer

I'd put up an excerpt, but the AP says that none of the article can be rewritten. But feel free to pay them some cash for it. Wow. Guess they never heard of "for educational purposes." Part of the mendacity persists because of greedy entities who feel the need to own "knowledge."

Basically, Blackwater is being investigated for smuggling in weapons, and then those arms have ended up in "terrorist" hands. Hmmm. Where have we heard of something like this before. Oh yeah, IRAN-CONTRA!

CBS 2 Reporter Files Complaint After Scuffle
Mike Flannery Was Shoved By Aide After Rep. Weller Speech

Maybe the guy couldn't figure out something good to say to the reporter. The Republicans need to bring their people in for another training session on mendacity!

Dan Rather : 'Somebody's got to take a stand and say democracy cannot survive... with government interference in news'

Classic blame the messenger with this one. Rather's sticking behind the story that GW Bush has a shady past concerning his time in the military.

US snipers 'bait' Iraqis: report

Great, fits in with the Blackwater mercenary/war profiteering crap. Keith Olbermann sure has plenty of material to choose from.
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts


Return to Current Events

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests