View Story | 465 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
N. America.
We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"
by Gooserock on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 12:22:36 AM PDT
[ Parent ]
but i posted late night recently and the night owls made it hit the rec list - so there are plenty of us...
i have to say ABOUT F@$&%#G TIME - i have been waiting to find what if any THERE was there with the SE thing for FOREVER
and damn - there seems to be a THERE THERE
No single raindrop believes it is to blame for the flood
by ResponsibleAccountable on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 12:25:46 AM PDT
It's been years now. Maybe now we're finally gonna get somewhere. The U.S. media HAS to pick this up ..... but I'm not holding my breath.
Maybe McClatchy would/could? Or Olberman?
by Inky99 on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 12:27:50 AM PDT
most people will dismiss any new angle to the whole 9/11 thing as unlikely because "it was all sorted out by the 9/11 commission right?"
it won't get touched - the corporate media is happy this one has been put to bed
the interests at the top are so corruptly infested with criminality of such stomach sinking proportions there is just no way anyone is prepared to risk exposing the wound to the public
by ResponsibleAccountable on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 12:32:15 AM PDT
but almost everybody I know, if you bring up the subject, LOVES to talk about 9/11 and all the weirdness surrounding it. I find very few people who accept the official story without question. But like I said, maybe my world is out of the norm.
I think what you say is what the media would like us to believe.
Just like today it was leaked that the Associated Press will treat anything Britney does as a Big Deal, and expedite it to the supposedly hungry (and disgusted) American public:
http://poynter.org/...
From: Baker, Frank S. Sent: Tue 1/8/2008 11:58 AM To: News - Southern California Editorial Staff Subject: Britney All: Now and for the foreseeable future, virtually everything involving Britney is a big deal. That doesn't mean every rumor makes it on the wire. But it does mean that we want to pay attention to what others are reporting and seek to confirm those stories that WE feel warrant the wire. And when we determine that we'll write something, we must expedite it. Thanks. Frank
From: Baker, Frank S. Sent: Tue 1/8/2008 11:58 AM To: News - Southern California Editorial Staff Subject: Britney All:
Now and for the foreseeable future, virtually everything involving Britney is a big deal. That doesn't mean every rumor makes it on the wire. But it does mean that we want to pay attention to what others are reporting and seek to confirm those stories that WE feel warrant the wire. And when we determine that we'll write something, we must expedite it.
Thanks.
Frank
There's what we think, and what we are TOLD "most of us" think.
I'm probably just a freak.
by Inky99 on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 12:43:33 AM PDT
about Britney Spears? I don't even know anyone who cares about her. Just another dysfunctional pop celebrity, "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing". Other than a dysfunctional mass media, of course.
It says something that the more or less progressive "fake news" shows that discuss real issues probably have far higher ratings than "real news" shows discussing fake issues.
IMO, there's a very nice market niche for 'real news' shows discussing 'real issues' for the first group that can figure out how to tap into it.
Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.
by alizard on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 02:15:02 AM PDT
n/t
"I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused..." - Elvis
by Gearhead on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 02:42:51 AM PDT
...no one I know cares anything about celebrity pop culture, but the media keeps churning it out, anyway.
The first group that comes up with a "real news" program will have huge ratings.
In TX-32, track the voting record of Pete Sessions at SessionsWatch.
by CoolOnion on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 06:51:50 AM PDT
obviously someone is buying US Magazine and Star or it wouldn't being made... right?
by Hey BB on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 09:05:47 AM PDT
would be me... I use it as a tool to numb my mind a little after it's been swimming all day it work and current events.
"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect." Mark Twain
by dotdot on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 09:31:27 AM PDT
Just look at it in the checkout line and laugh, don't give them your money. That's what I do. Get a nice garden book for down time.. or whatever floats your boat without supporting these abominations with your cash.
A society of sheep must beget in time a government of wolves. Bertrand de Jouvenel
by Little Red Hen on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 10:35:04 AM PDT
into consideration, you have a good point. I've justified it by only buying maybe one of those a month. I always feel like a tool on the subway reading it though.
by dotdot on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 10:41:32 AM PDT
... you are the tool on the subway reading the tabloid.
Sorry.
Post Ironical
by lifexpert on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 09:07:20 PM PDT
There are many things one can do to qualify to be a tool. Inserting rude pointless comments is one of them.
by dotdot on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 07:53:11 AM PDT
I'd laugh at all the articles, then put it back. Now, I feel bad that they're out of business. :( I shoulda bought one every now and then, for all the good times they gave me in the long lines.
by CoolOnion on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 06:11:56 AM PDT
it doesn't mean FAUX fucking "news" needs to borrow their headlines...
I find it curious that Keith Olbermann hasn't touched this one yet. I love him to pieces, don't get me wrong--but sometimes I feel like he's the "token" reporter/crumb we get thrown, to make us have hope that "real news organizations" will start reporting "real news".
Let's don't get suckered in too much by that, and grow complacent in the process--let's keep the pressure on. Everywhere we can.
IMPEACH, NOW.
On second thought , let's not go to Camelot. 'Tis a silly place
by o the umanity on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 09:42:53 AM PDT
my news program. If I want it I know where to get it.
by dotdot on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 10:20:41 AM PDT
My husband and I were on the train yesterday--like some local trains in the UK, it has little screens blaring news clips and PSAs--and the 3rd and 4th stories were Britney's custody mess and Nicole Kidman's baby. The teenage girls behind us were apparently totally into the Britney "drama"--"ooh, that girl's gonna come to a bad end!" etc. but we both rolled our eyes. Seriously, who gives a flying **ck? Knowing that there is SO much going on that could be on the news, and provide plenty of scandal and interest as well if that's your thing. I mean, what's more scandalous--a dimwitted Republican bimbo with a substance abuse/mental health problem losing custody of her kids to her equally dimwitted ex, or the outright theft of our country by those at the top?
But then again, maybe I'm weird. I was totally hooked on watching the Watergate hearings as a kid, I remember more about those than I do episodes of the "Partridge Family."
Political Compass says: -8.88, -8.67 "We never sold out cos no one would buy."--J Neo Marvin
by expatyank on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 02:38:07 PM PDT
Hence, his ratings.
Stil has to lick boots, however.
If you dance with the devil, then you haven't got a clue; 'Cause you think you'll change the devil, but the devil changes you. - illyia
by illyia on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 10:41:31 AM PDT
because that's what keeps me from watching his show. That crap at the end really really annoys me, along with the other fluff stuff sprinkled in. I just don't like my news mixed up with crap.
by dotdot on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 10:47:46 AM PDT
online, saw about two days worth, and was disgusted by how much "Britney" crap he had on the show. I don't care if he was making fun of her, he was still talking about her like the subject mattered, at all.
And he had some catty guy on there breathlessly reporting her every move (while trying to appear like he was slamming her), he would not have a job if covering this tripe wasn't profitable for no apparent reason.
I long for the days when the news was a reporting of what happened, and the "celebrity" bullshit stayed in People magazine.
Has Olbermann covered Sibel Edmonds, at all? I somehow think Murrow would...
"Can I just ask a question? What is Fox News, it's just a Parade of Propaganda, isn't it? It's just a Festival of Ignorance." --Lee Camp, FOX News guest
by twalling on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 11:52:12 PM PDT
Britney has long been the go-to girl for corporate media when they want to push corporate scandal or republican failures off the front page.
Example: People powered movements shocked the staus quo in the Iowa elections, Britney suddenly goes nuts and needs to go into the hospital.
Remember the terror alert color scale? Olbermann remarked on the coincidence between Bush's scandals and the government's increased terror alerts. Both just a diversion tactic, really.
by RagingGurrl on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 01:07:25 PM PDT
the missing white girls who are their other go-to story.
Speaking of go-to's, how many have noticed that Lee Hamilton is the democrat the rethugs go to when they want an investigation not to uncover anything. He was the guy that failed to investigate the "October surprise" and, of course, the 9-11 commission was a complete whitewash.
by Eric Blair on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 07:34:56 PM PDT
Go Barack Obama
by concerned on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 03:33:30 AM PDT
involved in 'financing'...but certainly not limited to the Family Bushes. We are looking at the 3rd generation in the WH now.
"...fighting the wildfires of my life with squirt guns."
by deMemedeMedia on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 03:43:45 AM PDT
Solarz and Lantos are D's.
The influence of the [executive] has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished.
by lysias on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 04:16:24 AM PDT
by lenlarga on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 06:40:20 AM PDT
I love the smell of impeachment in the morning!
by gabbardd on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 06:45:33 AM PDT
...the Dems - having received a very clear mandate in the '06 elections - still refuse to do any real investigating? Surely it's not that much of a stretch to suspect there's some dirty hands in D.C., and that not all of 'em are 'Puglicans. Just sayin'...
People First Politics
by Joy Busey on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 07:24:42 AM PDT
The story DOES state that some top-dog Democrats are dirty in this and I suspect that is why the Democrats in Congress adamantly refuse to really do much investigating of anything at all. See, too many "leading" Democrats have dirty hands with regards to virtually all the major crimes of the Bush Administration that any real investigation of BushCo is, automatically, an investigation of Democrats too.
Regardless of which party "controls" Congress, the foxes ARE guarding the hen house.
"Events are in the saddle and ride mankind." --Ralph Waldo Emerson
by Terminus Est on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 07:50:43 AM PDT
Whoever wins the election, the government gets back in.
Most people assume the fights are going to be the left versus the right, but it always is the reasonable versus the jerks. Jimmy Wales
by 4Freedom on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 09:28:27 AM PDT
the insiders and the outsiders.
by livy on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 11:28:35 AM PDT
In all religions there are always insiders (the faithful) and outsiders (infidels, heretics, etc.).
However, within the religions there are further insider/outsider dichotomies: * Lay vs. priesthood * Priest vs. those in higher positions * Leader vs. everyone else It all seems to part of the existence of any organisation.
The Prince of Peace has been usurped by the God of War.
by Spoc42 on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 01:14:51 AM PDT
What happened to the bullets?
That should have read (bullets changed to numbers):
In all religions there are always insiders (the faithful) and outsiders (infidels, heretics, etc.). However, within the religions there are further insider/outsider dichotomies: Lay vs. priesthood Priest vs. those in higher positions Leader vs. everyone else. It all seems to part of the existence of any organisation.
However, within the religions there are further insider/outsider dichotomies:
It all seems to part of the existence of any organisation.
by Spoc42 on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 01:17:11 AM PDT
... who said that?
by lifexpert on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 09:11:06 PM PDT
ago. I googled to find out if I could find a source, but NG.
by 4Freedom on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 10:40:45 PM PDT
I suspect that, for the most part, there are two categories of Democratic "players" on the current DC stage: (1) spineless wimps and (2) those also on the take . . . Category three -- true patriots who take their job of protecting the public interest -- are in very short supply.
by Ann Galloway on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 10:26:29 AM PDT
This is why I'll remain with John Edwards through the primaries and on to the convention, where his delegates will no doubt swing it to either of the virtually tied frontrunners. Hillary's the 'old guard', same old same old same (35 years' worth of change!?) and while Obama's 'change', he's much an unknown quantity to me I'm not entirely sure can be trusted. I know John, he's real and he's serious about fighting the entrenched players for real change.
For whatever that's worth, which might not be much when the dust settles.
by Joy Busey on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 11:33:33 AM PDT
Who is going to bell this cat? Maybe us? Because the corporate media are unlikely to do so as, apparently, with Congress. Needed: a dedicated research group.
by Clio2 on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 08:31:54 AM PDT
Research/History Commons, where quite a bit of citizen investigation goes on. In case you haven't already been there or have contributed: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/
Thank goodness Keith Olbermann and Glenn Greenwald are not "trained" journalists. You know, trained like circus animals.
by media whores on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 09:03:48 AM PDT
Please DONATE today if you want to revive the History Commons The fourth quarter of 2007 has ended, and we only raised 35 percent of our budget for the quarter. We regret to say that we had no choice but to lay off our editing staff and pull the plug on the research projects we were supporting. They continued working on a volunteer basis for as long as they could; however, like you and everyone else, they have bills to pay and basic human needs that need to be met. Just like everyone else, they need an income to survive. The History Commons website will remain fully operational, so volunteer contributors can continue to log in and add events to timelines. However,... >snip<...</p> If we manage to raise enough money to fund another quarter, we will recommence funding of the 9/11, Global Warming, Loss of Civil Liberties, Prisoner Abuse and Torture, Iran, Seed Privatization, and other timelines.
Please DONATE today if you want to revive the History Commons The fourth quarter of 2007 has ended, and we only raised 35 percent of our budget for the quarter. We regret to say that we had no choice but to lay off our editing staff and pull the plug on the research projects we were supporting. They continued working on a volunteer basis for as long as they could; however, like you and everyone else, they have bills to pay and basic human needs that need to be met. Just like everyone else, they need an income to survive.
The History Commons website will remain fully operational, so volunteer contributors can continue to log in and add events to timelines. However,... >snip<...</p>
If we manage to raise enough money to fund another quarter, we will recommence funding of the 9/11, Global Warming, Loss of Civil Liberties, Prisoner Abuse and Torture, Iran, Seed Privatization, and other timelines.
It looks like a great site--aggregated info that we are all interested in ... I didn't know about it, but will give it a more thorough look, and hopefully donate.
by nancelot on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 09:14:33 AM PDT
by Clio2 on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 11:20:35 AM PDT
the matters left outstanding that Kerry requested further scrutiny.
9-11 should NEVER have happened. Bush2 should NEVER have happened.
by Jail the BFEE on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 04:47:27 PM PDT
And if you look at the big contributors to Hillary's campaign, you'd be hard pressed to consider that she'd be any kind of change agent. She's joined the club. . . .
by Ann Galloway on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 10:23:25 AM PDT
throughout that campaign.
http://www.depauw.edu/...
http://www.cnn.com/...
http://www.tpmcafe.com/...
http://www.youtube.com/...
http://consortiumnews.com/...
This is NOT just coincidence - Bush2 NEEDS Clinton2 to continue the protection just as Bill did for Poppy and his cronies.
by Jail the BFEE on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 04:45:33 PM PDT
I think the threat factor is real; if someone hints that you may be killed or your children kdnapped, you may become much less courageous.
However, the next layer of "protection" involves powerful financial interests. The only viable Democrat who refuses to take contributions from fat PACs is Edwards -- which is why there has been a near-total blackout of his campaign from the outset.
The Powers-That-Be have calculated that the best chance for Republicans is either a Hillary or Obama candidacy on the Democratic side -- with bigots and Hillary/woman haters in ample supply to prompt an improbable Republican victory; failing this, the same interests have made certain that these two candidates have received sufficient financial support from the Big Boys that they owe something to their "investors."
Oh, and then there's always the election fraud option. This diary is the Real McCoy, a reminder of the depth and breadth of that criminal enterprise we still call the US Government.
Get it? The fix has been in for some time. And I don't see many brave cowboys with white hats on the horizon. . .
by Ann Galloway on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 10:21:49 AM PDT
this is just one gals humble opinion, but the Clinton's and the Bushes are a bit to snuggly for me. I don't think she poses a threat to the establishment and I wouldn't be surprised if the powers that be want her elected.
by dotdot on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 10:50:34 AM PDT
by lifexpert on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 09:28:59 PM PDT
I wish I had set up a half dozen phony accounts because the single rec I can give you is not adequate.
by Eric Blair on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 07:41:50 PM PDT
high-ranking government, CIA and FBI officials have serious questions about the official 9/11 story and are calling for a new investigation. These are not CT'ers but former insiders who have a variety of sources and information that lead them to suspect that what Sibel Edmonds and other whistleblowers are pointing at is quite serious, endemic, and goes all the way to the top.
I highly recommend the web site in my sig: Patriots Question 9/11. It presents the kind of responsible questioning and doubts that our democratic process need more of these days.
Thank you for your work on this issue. Investigative journalist and impeachment activist Dave Lindorf also adds some other pieces of the puzzle.
by media whores on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 05:12:03 AM PDT
"Osama bin Forgotten."
They discuss it and wonder what the hell our government is doing with all their taxmoney, government apparatus, and many years of huge military operations.
Even Koolaid isn't strong enough to cover up that particular stink.
Read news on Radioactive Leaks.
by means are the ends on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 07:39:18 AM PDT
At least your wingnuts are asking questions. The lemming WNs in my family are on the B. Spears bandwagon. The koolaid is good.
Well, I guess I don't know what you mean by "equal justice under the law." - Bushy McSpokesperson
by gatorcog on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 09:22:36 AM PDT
He'll be a dittohead until he dies. Also not the sharpest tool in the shed. Sigh.
by means are the ends on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 10:05:35 AM PDT
For fuck's sake. I'd strangle that man for collaborating in the destruction of this country if I could. It's what a soldier would do in a time of war. But I just can't.
God this just makes me so ill.
Been wiretapped lately?
by m00nchild on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 08:35:59 AM PDT
I am speechless... We are surrounded. Unbef^ckinglievable...
by illyia on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 10:40:19 AM PDT
If what you say is true and they are inside, then what good would it do to bring you in?
by Fallon on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 03:46:05 PM PDT
so far to impeach TGDSOBGWB, this isn't going to do it. I can only hope that the next adminstration frees him and these criminals to be tried in an international court, maybe in Nuremberg. And they all chew their poisoned pills.
A private gyn office offering full gyn services including abortion care to 18 weeks.
by william f harrison on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 02:38:53 AM PDT
If there were so many moles running around, one of them could have gotten hold of the date & details for the joint services anti-terrorism drills that occurred on 9/11/2001.
And then that information could have made its way back to Bin Laden, who then chose that date for his attack, to take advantage of potential chaos and confusion between the real attack and the drill.
Note that this is not a conspiracy theory: it's a "crappy security" theory, a "one person leaked to a mole" theory, and that's all. And it's hardly a stretch of the imagination, since we know the Bushies have a crappy track record protecting national security secrets, and now via Edmonds we know that the Regime was rotten with moles in high places.
If anything about that drill was leaked to a mole, and if that could be proven, impeachment wouldn't be the only thing "on the table."
by G2geek on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 04:38:42 AM PDT
was one of the people who met with ISI chief Gen. Mahmoud during his 2001 visit to D.C. that coincided with 9/11.
by lysias on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 07:28:38 AM PDT
...wonder what that conversation was about!
by lenlarga on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 07:37:09 AM PDT
...in Paraguay? Anybody know what the Paraguayan extradition treaties are like?
by HugoDog on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 12:45:57 PM PDT
by deMemedeMedia on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 01:40:33 PM PDT
There are no extradition treaties with Paraguay, which is why rendition may become necessary...
by Spoc42 on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 01:28:41 AM PDT
Both of the chairmen of the 9-11 Commission just wrote in the NYT that their investigation was "obstructed" by "government officials". We have no report that we can put any faith in at all.
OK, I like a good conspiracy theory as much as the next guy. Well, OK, I probably like them a little more than the next guy, but we have WAAAY more than we need to have a special prosecutor look into all issues related to the obstruction of the work of the 9-11 Commission.
by philipogog on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 06:48:08 AM PDT
Both of the chairmen of the 9-11 Commission just wrote in the NYT that their investigation was "obstructed" by "government officials".
Check out Kean and Hamilton's book, "Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission." The first sentence of the first chapter is, "We were set up to fail," and that pretty much sets the tone for the whole book. Stonewalled by the CIA, the White House, the Pentagon, and threatened by the FBI. Hell, one commissioner, Max Cleland, even resigned because of the obstruction. He told salon.com,
"We've had to subpoena the FAA. We've now had to subpoena documents from Norad, which they have not given us. I for one think we ought to subpoena the White House... ... [W]hy doesn't this White House, which was on the bridge when the ship got attacked, why doesn't this White House want to know everything that happened on their watch so that it can't happen again? Why they want to play games with this commission, to make deals, I don't know. It's information control. It's not transparency. I don't know if they're hiding something. But the public will never know and the 9/11 commission will never know..."
"We've had to subpoena the FAA. We've now had to subpoena documents from Norad, which they have not given us. I for one think we ought to subpoena the White House...
...
[W]hy doesn't this White House, which was on the bridge when the ship got attacked, why doesn't this White House want to know everything that happened on their watch so that it can't happen again? Why they want to play games with this commission, to make deals, I don't know. It's information control. It's not transparency.
I don't know if they're hiding something. But the public will never know and the 9/11 commission will never know..."
by JeremyA on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 05:31:23 PM PDT
This is a question I am really interested in.
Everytime Ross Perot's name comes up-- he is called a nut. Who called him a nut-- the MSM. Why because he publically said Bush threatened his family. This was too ridiculous to believe then --- but now?
Does Perot get any credit for being Revere? His charts were absolutely correct. He created himself a billionaire by developing software in its infancy. He worked for IBM and he offered it to them and they turned him down! He was loved and respected by a huge majority of his employees.
He is known for identify the problem find the solution. And he was and remains labeled crazy. Until we Americans can do truth and resolution to our current history; we are no where.
What do you think Perot knows about Bush since they ran in the same circles until Perot smelled all the corruption. Somebody needs to get his death bed memoriors. There are others out there. No one is reading them. Books still hold more than the internet.
Joseph Kennedy was as corrupt as Prescott Bush which just made them enemies on the political spectrum but rats in the same capitalistic disaster sewer. This is true on both sides of the party because Charlie Wilson was wrong does not mean he reflects the whole party. None of these guys represent the people in any party; only their personal agendas and their special paid interests.
by yoduuuh do or do not on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 09:52:34 AM PDT
could be right about others.
I'm really skeptical about insinuations that Bush actually organized or caused 9/11, but I think we could find all sorts of scandalous things that would be shocking without being quite that shocking.
We know that the United States was openly providing financial support for the Taliban a few weeks before 9/11, and maybe there was some funny business involving that.
by sclminc on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 11:06:47 AM PDT
but do you ever wonder why Tommy Franks pulled US troops and let Afghans try to apprehend bin Laden at Tora Bora? Was Franks dumb as dog sh*t or did they want to keep bin Laden free to maintain an apparent threat?
by Eric Blair on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 07:46:21 PM PDT
He created himself a billionaire by developing software in its infancy. He worked for IBM and he offered it to them and they turned him down!
That's a nice myth, but Perot "made himself" a billionaire by getting the contract for computerizing the brand new Texas Medicare system, which he stole from IBM. He paid people to write new SW, or bought SW from IBM along with their machines to do it. That wouldn't be that interesting, except that it's different from the myth. And that Perot's presidential campaign prioritized eliminating exactly the kind of government healthcare that made him rich enough to threaten it.
Joseph Kennedy was as corrupt as Prescott Bush which just made them enemies on the political spectrum but rats in the same capitalistic disaster sewer.
I don't think that any of what Joe Kennedy did as a gangster, or as a politician, compares to what Prescott Bush did as a banker (including fund Hitler's rise) or, most likely, in secret, as a politician.
Perot nailed some populist truisms, and likely was indeed illegally threatened at least some by Bush. But he was also crazy, if not 100%. And though politics isn't at all the good vs evil partisan story we're told by one or another side, Republican evil typically makes Democratic evil look pretty mediocre.
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST
by DocGonzo on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 01:25:23 PM PDT
of bulges and its recap coming loose: Ka-thug, Ka-Ka-thug-surlap, Ka-thug.
by deMemedeMedia on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 01:47:35 PM PDT
of many of my positions in recent years - and indeed this is part of why I seem to get into arguments with so many fellow Kossacks as I just see a lot of things differently to what I once did
Peak Oil is a great filter to see things through as a different perspectives...
...being a European I also have a better perspective than most Americans on the multi-generational struggle against fascism that this whole thing is just a small part of.
Peak Oil is here. It's effects include a near-total breakdown of the institutions of society. There is a lot of understanding of this at the top. Those in the know with the means are engaged in a rapid power grab and resource grab ahead of the world that is coming.
by ResponsibleAccountable on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 04:00:11 PM PDT
I look at "Charlie Wilson's War as Connecting everything neocon from the war on poverty, the war on drugs, Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, China and the assassination of Bhutto back to Ghandi and the partition of India.
Agha Hasan Abedi began BCCI. He's the link between Pakistan, Afghanistan, the United Arab Emirtates, BCCI, the CIA, drug smuggling, oil cartel pipelines, arms deals, Iran Contra, and nuclear proliferation from the seventies onward.
Start with Gorbechov cagily folding his cards in one game to deprive us of a conventional enemy while refocusing spending from the military industrial complex onto energy in an effort to win another bigger game Reagan et al never even saw coming.
In corporate banking circles being deprived of an enemy was a much larger catastrophe than a nuclearwar. With the military industrial complexes entire raison d'etre at stake, corporate America was forced to develop some new business contacts asap.
http://en.wikipedia.org/...
Clark Clifford was appointed emmisary to India by Carter
http://en.wikipedia.org/... http://en.wikipedia.org/...
As it happened Shell was looking for some funding for a tapline, and
In 93 I ran into a Mujahedin in Khamis Mushat while I was living in a garage with some egyptian after I blew an engine in the rub al khali. He claimed they all loved the way the Americans operated.
The Americans brought money, guns and lawyers from Houston and more importantly foreign workers, principally a bunch of religious fanatics from Saudi Arabia who came to run a pipeline from Baluchistan through Afghanistan to Azerbajan to compete with the Chinese and the Russians who were running a pipeline through the Tarim Basin with the object that whomever could get at and control the Russian oil fields and new gas prospects in Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan first would dominate the world by controlling its energy.
The rest was as they say just a matter of technique...
Remember the Buddah of Bamiyan?
http://www.rawa.org/...
The Taliban running Afghanistan from Northern Pakistan loved the promise of jobs, roads, and a tourist industry,
http://www.afghan-network.net/...
the Tajiks were working with the bandits of the Northern alliance to develop ski resorts in Badakshan and the pirates in Dubai were talking deals with the Taliban to open up schools, and with the Pashtuns and Balochis to provide inport export oportunities for their high quality sporting rifles, pharmaceuticals and businesswomen.
The Iranians and Turks had their own business interests in the region and so somewhere between Iran Contra and the War on drugs
Its kind of sneakily making the right points inside of a healthy dose of the kind of propaganda war correspondents love to focus on, dead babies and the Buddah af Bamiyan, rioting villages and bad evil doers.
By using the phrase "Charlie Wilson's War, it makes the point the Cold War had nothing to do with Reagan, and it doesn't matter what kind of a guy Charlie really was, or whether the CIA chess players were smarter than the bankers in New York playing chess with the chess master on their lunchbreaks, the real point there is that the Chinese were playing GO with the Russians.
In the old days they used to wage peace, send in the agricultural workers and just keep an ear to the ground. By bringing god into it so forcefully in the way that followed the Reagan revolution, God, Star Wars, and video games, we see not the loss of the cold war but http://www.theoildrum.com/
Live Free or Die --- Investigate, Impeach, Incarcerate
by rktect on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 04:53:01 AM PDT
in a diary series. I know it's been diaried here before but it could use a nice clear storyline, in digestible chunks.
An aside, I'm amazed at the popularity of the movie Charlie Wilson's War. The theatre was packed when we saw it, in the afternoon. The evening show was sold out and apparently had been selling out since it was released.
"The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." --Samuel Johnson
by joanneleon on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 05:00:22 AM PDT
it was an excellent book.
How was the movie?
Abe: My Homer is not a communist. He may be a liar, a pig, an idiot, a communist, but he is not a porn star!
by Sylvester McMonkey Mcbean on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 05:50:02 AM PDT
Chalmers Johnson's review of Charlie Wilson's War ?
Boot out Bushbot Barrett, donate to Jane Dyer SC-03 (vet & union member)
by sc kitty on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 07:52:48 AM PDT
by worldwideellen on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 09:34:02 AM PDT
Thank you.
PATRIOT I+II, MCA, FISA CAPITULATION, NOW TORTURE. YOUR COUNTRY IS SLOWLY BEING DISMANTLED. WHAT R U GONNA DO ABOUT IT?
by maxschell on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 02:40:23 PM PDT
yes, its a conservative pub, but it has all the names of those who are involved in the creation of American Imperialism:
The War Whisperers
by maxschell on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 02:54:59 PM PDT
by media whores on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 09:05:36 AM PDT
Yes, please diary, even in installments.
Against silence, which is slavery. -- Czeslaw Milosz
by Caneel on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 03:49:07 PM PDT
be GIVEN our ports by Bush just two years ago.
Yeah sure - it's all just coincidence.
by Jail the BFEE on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 04:39:49 PM PDT
My relationship with God is defined not by religion and ritual, but by attitude and action.
by World Citizen on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 05:46:35 AM PDT
I want to hear what Clinton, Obama, or Edwards would do about this. Why doesn't somebody ask them?
I get the sense of what Edwards would do - hunt them down and prosecute them until ever dime was extracted from their off-shore accounts. It would be great if he would SAY that.
But Clinton or Obama? They might be inclined to dump it in the Memory Hole in the name of "change" or "unity" OR "moving on".
Will they tell us what they intend to do?
Circumstances rule men; men do not rule circumstances. -The Histories of Herodotus, Book 7, Ch. 49
by Louise on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 09:31:46 AM PDT
Change, unity, moving on... all cop-outs (that I expect full-well to hear if JE is not the president).
by World Citizen on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 12:32:28 PM PDT