<< August 2007 >>
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
 01 02 03 04
05 06 07 08 09 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31


If you want to be updated on this weblog Enter your email here:



rss feed

8.11.2007
HOW THE RULING ELITE USE POLLS



There are few methodologies that get used with such cynicism as polling. The majority of the population, particularly in the United States has no idea how and why polls are used by those who think they "know whats best for us," or should I say for themselves.

Polling was introduced by the PR industry as a tool for the control of the people, it is a "science" for measuring the direction or intent, the will of the people. What many do not understand is that he (or those) that controls the environment, what people see and hear, control the will of the people.



I am going to tell you EXACTLY what the purpose of polls are in the United States - in the sense of how the dominant media uses them. Granted, there are polls which are what you might call contrary polls, in the sense that they ask full questions, to a major and fair portion of the population, for the purpose of enlightening the people - but they are few. I am not saying if polls are good or not, I am just asking what are polls good for?

Always before a major poll is launched by the corporate media, there is a major campaign of concentrated propaganda repeatedly voiced through the major (major in the sense of the monopoly) media sources - national, such as NBC CBS CNN FOX, etc. Why? Because they wish to set a precedent of opinion, that is they try to garner authority through the majority, which has been influenced by the said propaganda blitz. This is layered, and can go on for a long period of time, to make sure that the right message is embedded in the psyche of the population.



Only after the above is done, is there a poll taken, and that with specific questions related to the media propaganda. Essentially what the polls do is verify "how effective" the propaganda blitz has been. So, when a decision is taken by the powers that be, whatever the subject, they look legitimate - as if they are just following the major "view of the people." THAT is the major use of the poll in the weapon arsenal of the PR firms, and their cognate media sources. Mind you, this is an exact science, that has been perfected to manufacture the consent of the people (to use a phrase coined by Noam Chomsky).

So, whenever you look at polls, as used by the so-called "major sources" it is good that you keep the above scenario in mind.  What polls are for the most part, is the way to measure how effective the propaganda blitz has been. Plain and simple, they are a synthetic methodology, used in a cynical fashion, by a ruling elite. The question they ask themselves is "have we been effective in this quest to move the will of the people?" (lets take a poll and see).



This way they see if they can make their move, whatever that is, feeling they have influenced the people enough, or, whether they should go back to the drawing board, make some major or minor adjustments, or take a different course. The IMPRESSION that you are left with (not knowing what I told you above), "gee Marge, they really want to know what we think, isn't it grand to live in a democracy, they really care!"  Or, an equally fallacious conclusion from the deception - "look Marge! Sixty five percent of the people agree with us, we are in the majority!"

You must also realize that society itself is set in motion with it's "challenges" to stack the deck, so to speak, to limit your sources - resources. The United States is set in motion with a break neck speed, to busy you to such a degree that you become exhausted.


(Urban Rat Race - From the Schmitt-hall studios)

What they count on is the fact that you will be so exhausted, trying to keep a roof over your head, put food on the table - the general nasty rat race, so that when you finally get home the only thing you will do is avail yourself of a "major" form of media like the corporate news. Hence, they have you by the balls, so to speak, and you fall into their environment from not only the necessary work schedule, but the forms of media that are so easy to use. There they are for you, after a hard days work, all you need to do is relax, press the remote, sit back and be inundated with their non-stop pounding propaganda drivel.


 
The problem is  that when polls are being taken, the damage is already done, the PR blitz has already calcified opinions. The deception of legitimacy permeates the "major corporate media." It is "news you can trust," and "fair and balanced," etc.  So, remember these facts the next time you look and rely upon polls, the deck is stacked and the game is rigged. Polls are used in conjunction with big money, they are attached at the hip with popular media which is merely the driving force for the powers that be which rely on these PR giants.


THE INFLUENCED AMERICAN MIND

MASS MEDIA AND CONTROL - PART I OF 2

MASS MEDIA AND CONTROL - PART 2 OF 2

BOMB PROPAGANDA

PROPAGANDA

CONCISION AND CONVENTIONAL THOUGHTS

MANUFACTURING CONSENT

LIVING ROOM MANUFACTURING

LOOK AT POLLING LIKE A MIRROR. IT IS "SUPPOSED" TO REFLECT THE OPINION OF THE PEOPLE, BUT IT DOES NOT. WHAT HAPPENS IN REALITY IS THAT SOMEONE DRESSES YOU UP WITH CLOTHES AND THAN TELL YOU TO LOOK INTO THE POLLING MIRROR, AND WHAT YOU SEE IS WHAT THEY HAVE CREATED.

Jamming Pearl Jam

""Over the weekend," comments SaveTheInternet.com, "AT&T gave us a glimpse of their plans for the Web when they censored a Pearl Jam performance that didn't meet their standard of 'Internet freedom.' During the live Lollapalooza Webcast of a concert by the Seattle-based super-group, the telco giant muted lead singer Eddie Vedder just as he launched into a lyric against President George Bush. The lines — 'George Bush, leave this world alone' and 'George Bush find yourself another home' were somehow lost in the mix." After the band complained, an AT&T flack said the deletion was a mistake by its "content monitor," who was only supposed to be deleting profanity. (But since when do music groups need "content monitoring" at all?)" Note by Anthony Lappe, GNN's Executive Editor.

AT&T BECOMES GATEKEEPER - SAVE THE INTERNET.COM

Posted at 12:38 pm by deadringer
Comments (2)  

8.9.2007
GENERATING GHETTOS WORLDWIDE - COMING SOON TO A NEIGHBORHOOD NEAR YOU


(Warsaw, Poland Jewish Ghetto 1940 from Yad Veshem)

Just in case you were not aware of it, America is famous for creating ghettos all throughout it's states.  Now, this same process is being replicated all over the world. Granted, this is a picture of a Ghetto created by Nazi design in 1940 - but the same processes that created this one creates the present epidemic all over the world. Because you have to understand nothing else can be created with this system, it only recognizes the rich and substantial, and the rest of the people are cut off - sometimes in other nations they do not even build the middle class insulation, the fat, they don't have to - because there is no substantial democratic movement.



Ghettos can be created in many ways, they can be mandated through a direct act of war,  as found in the Nazi Ghettos of the 20th century.  They can be created by a so-called liberation, which is just another war,  reducing people to animalism through forced pauperism.  They can be created through economic down swings through capitalistic design which as I mentioned above  always enfranchises the few who feed off the many.



Ghettos can come in the name of "progress" in any given nation.  Where there were once factories that created little boom communities, these factories can disappear, so that the design of the corporation can be relealised in a foreign country for cheaper labor - all blessed by those in the government through legislation, and the exploitation then stalks the nations.



Ghettos can suddenly appear through the application of international trade agreements. Where there were once farms run by families agri-corps rise up in their place.  Where there were fishing villages refineries suddenly appear, or coastal homes for the rich and famous.  The people are introduced to a new means of survival - drugs, and prostitution in the new exploitation of industrial jungles.



Ghettos suddenly appear when a supposed government opens it's resources to other more "financially viable" countries.  An aristocracy is created in a day, and an entire population is displaced, while the rulers become rich beyond their imaginations (and their chosen circle) while others are disenfranchised.  In "previous" colonial enterprise  people become dependent of created institutions, trading frameworks and armed forces from outside the region.



Ghettos expand when their is racial prejudice, and a system of apartheid rears it's ugly head without seeming remedy.  When one people see themselves as better and more deserving of life and liberty than another. It comes through racial hatred, or when countries are based merely upon an exclusionary preference.



Ghettos proliferate when it is the design of a global elite to exploit a country or region for it's resources, whether they be material or human.  They are the result of selfishness and greed,  when humanity is seen as nothing more than chattel - a mere number,  or when people are commodified by what they can contribute to an elite few.



Ghettos appear when institutions which are supposed to be to the benefit of all become the soul province of the privileged few.  When governments no longer chose to listen to their people, but to corporations which feed upon the poor.  Ghettos thrive when there is merely equal opportunity in word but not in deed - when the educational tools for success are out of the reach of the needy. This is what is taking place at breathtaking speed in the United States - do you think anything else will be produced in other countries by leadership like this? The domestic carnage taking place in America will replicate itself in "client" nations.



INDEED, GHETTOS BEGIN TO APPEAR ALL OVER THE WORLD WHEN A GLOBAL ELITE ARE LED BY A NATION, LIKE THE UNITED STATES WHICH EXCELS IN THEIR CREATION IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY.  WHEN THE WESTERN WORLD WHICH IS KNOWN FOR IT'S OWN APARTHEID PRACTICES SAYS IT IS GOING TO BRING THE REST OF THE WORLD PEACE AND PROSPERITY. STOP GHETTOS FROM SPREADING THROUGH THE DESIGN OF IMPERIALISM, WHOSE ENGINE IS CAPITALISM, THE COMBINATION OF WHICH IS FASCISM, BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY!

WHAT IS PRODUCED WORLDWIDE

YOU WILL GET WHAT YOU DESERVE

MASTER OF PUPPETS
(The spread of empire is worse than addiction)

GHETTO GOSPEL

STARVE THE GHETTO
(From Queens to Iraq)

DYING TO LIVE

BORN DEAD

THAT'S GLOBILIZATION

THE CASE FOR REVOLUTION - AN INTERESTING VIDEO


dPoetry Written In Gasoline

"Scrap the extras - Let's keep our eyes wide open
Cut out the spareparts - Let's keep our eyes wide open
Keep our eyes wide open

fuck the idol - Let's keep our eyes wide open
Reject the star - Star, star, star
Let's feed ourselves some - Let's keep our eyes wide open
Destruction

Convention blackmails - Let's keep our eyes wide open
Creativity - Yeah! Yeah!
This lack of challange - Let's keep our eyes wide open
Kills me, kills me, kills me, kills me

Scrap the extras - Let's keep our eyes wide open
Cut out the spareparts
fuck the idol, idol - Let's keep our eyes wide open
Reject the star

The rhymes of revolution
Poetry written in gasoline
The rhymes of revolution
Yeah! Yeah! Yeah!

Manipulate the obvious
Cowards bought by traditionalist manners
Scream at the herd that are heard the most
Without substance and with useless... banners
Banners, banners, banners

Your art, your art, is worth, is worth nothing
Like a city with no meaning
Like a city, with no meaning, with no meaning
Your creation holds, holds no hope

The rhymes of revolution
Yeah! Yeah!
The rhymes of revolution
Poetry written in gasoline
Poetry written in gasoline
Poetry written in gasoline
Ah! Yeah!
You had a witness over there"

POETRY WRITTEN IN GASOLINE

BOMBS

WHAT YOU DON'T SEE - THE BOMBING OF AFGHANISTAN

FUCK THE SYSTEM

Posted at 11:14 pm by deadringer
Make a comment  

8.7.2007
OCCUPATION 101 - A LINK TO THE ENTIRE DOCUMENTARY

Perhaps one of the finest documentaries on what is taking place in the current conflict in the Middle East, between Israel and the Palestinians. Now available in full -

OCCUPATION 101
(Thanks Datta)

Posted at 11:14 am by deadringer
Comment (1)  

8.5.2007
PLANET PENTAGON - OR, THE TRAPPINGS OF EMPIRE

For those who have the quaint idea that there is no American Empire, one needs only to look at the Pentagons holdings and the massive amount of the budget that is swallowed by this beast. This is in contrast to anything, and I mean anything for the people - perhaps the next post will entail the amazing shrinking domestic budget, that brings such things as cities like New Orleans post-Katrina condition and collapsing bridges in Minnesota.

This artcle was written by Nick Turse associate editor and research director of Tom's Dispatch.com:



How the Pentagon Came to Own the Earth, Seas, and Skies

"Recently, the Wall Street Journal reported on a proposal, championed by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, to reduce the number of U.S. troops in Iraq in exchange for bipartisan Congressional support for the long-term (read: more or less permanent) garrisoning of that country. The troops are to be tucked away on "large bases far from Iraq's major cities." This plan sounded suspiciously similar to one revealed by Thom Shanker and Eric Schmitt in the New York Times on April 19, 2003, just as U.S. troops were preparing to enter Baghdad. Headlined "Pentagon Expects Long-Term Access to Four Key Bases in Iraq," it laid out a U.S. plan for:

a long-term military relationship with the emerging government of Iraq, one that would grant the Pentagon access to…. perhaps four bases in Iraq that could be used in the future: one at the international airport just outside Baghdad; another at Tallil, near Nasiriya in the south; the third at an isolated airstrip called H-1 in the western desert, along the old oil pipeline that runs to Jordan; and the last at the Bashur air field in the Kurdish north.

"Shortly thereafter, then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, denied any such plans: "I have never, that I can recall, heard the subject of a permanent base in Iraq discussed in any meeting…" – and, while the bases were being built, the story largely disappeared from the mainstream media.

Even with the multi-square mile, multi-billion dollar, state-of-the-art Balad Air Base and Camp Victory thrown in, however, the bases in Gates' new plan will be but a drop in the bucket for an organization that may well be the world's largest landlord. For many years, the U.S. military has been gobbling up large swaths of the planet and huge amounts of just about everything on (or in) it. So, with the latest Pentagon Iraq plans in mind, take a quick spin with me around this Pentagon planet of ours.


Garrisoning the Globe

In 2003, Forbes magazine revealed that media mogul Ted Turner was America's top land baron -- with a total of 1.8 million acres across the U.S. The nation's ten largest landowners, Forbes reported, "own 10.6 million acres, or one out of every 217 acres in the country." Impressive as this total was, the Pentagon puts Turner and the entire pack of mega-landlords to shame with over 29 million acres in U.S. landholdings. Abroad, the Pentagon's "footprint" is also that of a giant. For example, the Department of Defense controls 20% of the Japanese island of Okinawa and, according to Stars and Stripes, "owns about 25 percent of Guam." Mere land ownership, however, is just the tip of the iceberg.

In his 2004 book, The Sorrows of Empire, Chalmers Johnson opened the world's eyes to the size of the Pentagon's global footprint, noting that the Department of Defense (DoD) was deploying nearly 255,000 military personnel at 725 bases in 38 countries. Since then, the total number of overseas bases has increased to at least 766 and, according to a report by the Congressional Research Service, may actually be as high as 850. Still, even these numbers don't begin to capture the global sprawl of the organization that unabashedly refers to itself as "one of the world's largest 'landlords.'"


The DoD's "real property portfolio," according to 2006 figures, consists of a total of 3,731 sites. Over 20% of these sites are located on more than 711,000 acres outside of the U.S. and its territories. Yet even these numbers turn out to be a drastic undercount. For example, while a 2005 Pentagon report listed U.S. military sites from Antigua and Hong Kong to Kenya and Peru, some countries with significant numbers of U.S. bases go entirely unmentioned -- Afghanistan and Iraq, for example.

In Iraq, alone, in mid-2005, U.S. forces were deployed at some 106 bases, from the massive Camp Victory, headquarters of the U.S. high command, to small 500-troop outposts in the country's hinterlands. None of them made the Pentagon's list. Nor was there any mention of bases in Jordan on that list --or in the 2001-2005 reports either. Yet that nation, as military analyst William Arkin has pointed out, allowed the garrisoning of 5,000 U.S. troops at various bases around the country during the build-up to the war in Iraq. In addition, some 76 nations have given the U.S. military access to airports and airfields -- in addition to who knows where else that the Pentagon forgot to acknowledge or considers inappropriate for inclusion in its list.

Even without Jordan, Iraq, Afghanistan, and the more than 20 other nations that, Arkin noted in early 2004, were "secretly or quietly providing bases and facilities," the available statistics do offer a window into a bloated organization bent on setting up franchises across the globe. According to 2005 documents, the Pentagon acknowledges 39 nations with at least one U.S. base, stations personnel in over 140 countries around the world, and boasts a physical plant of at least 571,900 facilities, though some Pentagon figures show 587,000 "buildings and structures." Of these, 466,599 are located in the United States or its territories. In fact, the Department of Defense owns or leases more than 75% of all federal buildings in the U.S.



According to 2006 figures, the Army controls the lion's share of DoD land (52%), with the Air Force coming in second (33%), the Marine Corps (8%) and the Navy (7 %) bringing up the rear. The Army is also tops in total number of sites (1,742) and total number of installations (1,659). But when it comes to "large installations," those whose value tops $1,584 billion, the Army is trumped by the Air Force, which boasts 43 mega-bases compared to the Army's 39. The Navy and Marines possess only 29 and 10, respectively. What the Navy lacks in big bases of its own, however, it more than makes up for in borrowed foreign naval bases and ports -- some 251 across the globe.

Diversification

Land and large installations, however, are not all that the Defense Department owns. Until relatively recently, the U.S. Navy operated its own dairy, complete with a herd of Holsteins. Even though it did get rid of those cows in 1998, it kept the 865-acre farm tract in Gambrills, Maryland, and now leases it to Horizon Organic Dairy.

While it doesn't have a dairy, the Army still operates stables -- such as the John C. McKinney Memorial Stables where many of the 44 horses from its ceremonial Caisson Platoon live. It also has a big farm (the Large Animal Research Facility). In fact, the Pentagon owns hundreds of thousands of animals -- from rats to dogs to monkeys. In addition to an unknown number of animals used for unexplained "other purposes," in 2001 alone, the DoD utilized 330,149 creatures for various types of experimentation.



Then, there's the equipment the DoD owns, loads of it. For instance, it is the unlikely owner of "over 2,050 railcars, know[n] as the Defense Freight Rail Interchange Fleet." The DoD also reportedly ships 100,000 sea containers each year and spends $800 million annually on domestic cargo, primarily truck and rail shipments. And when it comes to trucks, the Army, alone, has a fleet of 12,700 Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Trucks (huge, eight-wheeled vehicles used to supply ammunition, petroleum, oils, and lubricants to other combat vehicles and weapons systems in the field) and 120,000 Humvees. All told, according to a 2006 Pentagon report, the DoD had a total of at least "280 ships, 14,000 aircraft, 900 strategic missiles, and 330,000 ground combat and tactical vehicles."

The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), the DoD's largest combat support agency (with operations in 48 of the 50 states and 28 foreign countries) boasts: "If America's forces eat it, wear it, maintain equipment with it, or burn it as fuel…. DLA probably provides it." In fact, the DLA claims that it "manages" some 5.2 million items and maintains an inventory, in its Defense Distribution Depots (which stretch from Italy and Japan to Korea and Kuwait), valued at $94.1 billion.

The DLA runs the Defense National Stockpile Center (DNSC) which stores 42 "strategic and critical materials" -- from zinc, lead, cobalt, chromium, and mercury (more than 9.7 million pounds of it in 2005) to precious metals such as platinum, palladium, and even industrial diamonds -- at 20 locations across the U.S. With a stockpile valued at over $1.5 billion and $5.7 billion in sales of excess commodities since 1993, the DNSC claims that there is "no private sector company in the world that sells this wide range of commodities and materials."

All told, the Department of Defense owns up to having "[o]ver $1 trillion in assets [and] $1.6 trillion in liabilities." This is, no doubt, a gross underestimate given the DoD's historic penchant for flawed book-keeping and the fact that, according to a study by its own inspector general, it cannot even account for at least $1 trillion dollars in money spent -- or perhaps, according to former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, as much as $2.3 trillion. Cooking the books and stashing cash is fitting enough for an American organization, in the age of Enron, that thinks of itself not just as a government agency but, in its own words, as "America's oldest company, largest company, busiest company and most successful company." In fact, on its website, the DoD makes the point that it easily bests Wal-Mart, Exxon-Mobil, and General Motors in terms of budget and staff.

It's Got the Whole World in Its Hands



In addition to assembling a dizzying array of assets, from tungsten to tubas -- in 2005 alone, it spent more than $6 million on sheet music, musical instruments, and accessories -- the Pentagon owns a great deal of housing: 300,000 units worldwide. By its own admission, it is also a slumlord par excellence -- with an inventory of "180,000 inadequate family housing units." According to the Office of the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense (Installations & Environment):

Approximately 33 percent of all [military] families live on-base, in housing that is often dilapidated, too small, lacking in modern facilities -- almost 49 percent (or 83,000 units) are substandard.

Meanwhile, the Department of Defense's own home, the Pentagon, bests the Sultan of Brunei's Istana Nurul Iman palace, the largest private residence in the world -- 3,705,793 to 2,152,782 square feet of occupiable space. The DoD likes to boast that the Pentagon is "virtually a city in itself" -- with 30 miles of access highways, 200 acres of lawn space. It includes a five-acre center courtyard, 17.5 miles of corridors, 16 parking lots (with an estimated 8,770 parking spaces), seven snack bars, two cafeterias, one dining room, a post office, "credit union, travel agency, dental offices, ticket offices, blood donor center, housing referral office, and 30 other retail shops and services," a chapel, a heliport, and numerous libraries. Moreover, says the DoD, the Pentagon consumed a huge portion of its natural environment, its concrete reportedly contains "680,000 tons of sand and gravel from the nearby Potomac River."

In value, the Pentagon's other properties are almost as impressive. The combined worth of the world's two most expensive homes, the $138 million 103-room "Updown Court" in Windlesham, Surrey in the United Kingdom and Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan's $135 million Aspen ski lodge don't even come close to the price tag on Ascension Auxiliary Airfield, located on a small island off the coast of St. Helena (the place of Napoleon Bonaparte's exile and death). It has an estimated replacement value of over $337 million. Other high-priced facilities include Camp Ederle in Italy at $544 million; Incirlik Air Base in Turkey at almost $1.2 billion; and Thule Air Base in Greenland at $2.8 billion; while the U.S. Naval Air Station in Keflavik, Iceland is appraised at $3.4 billion and the various military facilities in Guam are valued at more than $11 billion.

Still, to begin to grasp the Pentagon's global immensity, it helps to look, again, at its land holdings -- all 120,191 square kilometers which are almost exactly the size of North Korea (120,538 square kilometers). These holdings are larger than any of the following nations: Liberia, Bulgaria, Guatemala, South Korea, Hungary, Portugal, Jordan, Kuwait, Israel, Denmark, Georgia, or Austria. The 7,518 square kilometers of 20 micro-states -- the Vatican, Monaco, Nauru, Tuvalu, San Marino, Liechtenstein, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Maldives, Malta, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Barbados, Antigua and Barbuda, Seychelles, Andorra, Bahrain, Saint Lucia, Singapore, the Federated States of Micronesia, Kiribati and Tonga -- combined pales in comparison to the 9,307 square kilometers of just one military base, White Sands Missile Range.


Downsizing?

While it has been setting up hundreds of bases across the globe to support ongoing wars, the Pentagon has also been restructuring its forces in an effort to reduce troop levels at old Cold War mega-bases and close down less strategically useful sites. Does this mean less Pentagon control in the world?

Don't bet on it. In fact, the U.S. military is exploring long-term options to dominate the planet as never before. Previously, the DoD has only maintained a moving presence on the high seas. This may change. The Pentagon is now considering -- and planning for -- future "sea-basing." No longer just a ship, a fleet, or "prepositioned material" stationed on the world's oceans, sea-bases will be "a hybrid system-of-systems consisting of concepts of operations, ships, forces, offensive and defensive weapons, aircraft, communications and logistics." The notion of such bases is increasingly popular within the military due to the fact that they "will help to assure access to areas where U.S. military forces may be denied access to support [land] facilities." After all, as a report by the Defense Science Board pointed out, "[S]eabases are sovereign [and] not subject to alliance vagaries." Imagine a future where the people of countries at odds with U.S. policies suddenly find America's "massive seaborne platforms" floating just outside their territorial waters.


With a real-estate portfolio that includes the earth and the sea, the sky would, quite literally, be the limit for the DoD. According to Noah Shachtman, editor of Wired's "Danger Room" blog, the "U.S. Air Force Transformation Flight Plan" of 2004 outlined what "analysts call the most detailed picture since the end of the Cold War of the Pentagon's efforts to turn outer space into a battlefield…. the report makes U.S. dominance of the heavens a top Pentagon priority in the new century." As the U.S. military's outer-space policy statement puts it, "Freedom of action in space is as important to the United States as air power and sea power."

When you're focused on effectively controlling a planet, the idea of occupying Iraq, a country about the size of the state of California, for the next decade or five, must seem like a small thing. In practice, however, the global landlord on the Potomac has found property values in Iraq steep indeed. As all now know, it has been fought to a standstill there by modest-sized bands of guerillas lacking air power, sea power, or high-tech spy satellites in outer space. The Pentagon may be landlord to massive swaths of the globe, but from Vietnam to Laos, Beruit to Somalia, U.S. forces have also found themselves evicted by neighborhood residents from properties they were prepared to consider their own. The question remains: Will Iraq be added to the list of permanently occupied territories and take on the look of long-garrisoned South Korea as Secretary of Defense Gates and President Bush have urged -- or will it be added to a growing list of places that have effectively resisted paying the rent on Planet Pentagon?"

Nick Turse is the associate editor and research director of Tomdispatch.com. He has written for the Los Angeles Times, the San Francisco Chronicle, the Nation, the Village Voice, and regularly for Tomdispatch.com. His first book, The Complex, an exploration of the new military-corporate complex in America, is due out in the American Empire Project Series by Metropolitan Books in 2008.

WHAT DOES THIS ALL MEAN?

MILITARIZATION OF SCIENCE AND SPACE - NOAM CHOMSKY PART 1

MILITARIZATION OF SCIENCE AND SPACE - NOAM CHOMSKY PART 2

COUNTER-RECRUITING ON CAMPUS

WELCOME TO THE MACHINE

APOCALYPSE SOON

SIR! NO SIR

MEANWHILE AT HOME - STATE OF THE NATION

NAZI WAR PROPAGANDA - WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? NONE

MESSAGE TO THE POWERS THAT BE

Posted at 10:13 am by deadringer
Comment (1)  

8.1.2007
"HOLY" JOE - "SATANIC" MUSLIMS - AND THE ESCHATOLOGY OF DEATH

You have got to see these kooks to believe this! This is a veritable three ring circus of holy rollers that want to incinerate Iran and usher in the "End." The next time you see rhetoric and threats to Iran coming out of this current U.S. administration remember this group of goons. This is the crazy constituency.

Max Blumenthal's latest takes us on a shocking and at times bizarre tour of right-wing Pastor John Hagee's annual Washington-Israel Summit, blowing the cover off the Christian Zionist movement in the process. Starring Joe Lieberman, Tom DeLay, Pastor John Hagee, Ambassador Dore Gold and a host of rapture-ready evangelicals praying for Armaggedon.

RAPTURE READY: THE CHRISTIANS UNITED FOR ISRAEL TOUR



I want the Christian Zionists to consider another photo to depict their support for Zionism in the Middle East.  Here you have a child, who is hiding from the IOF (I do not call them the Israeli "Defense" Forces, they are occupiers, and as an aggressively standing occupation force, there is NO defense). Look carefully at her face for there you will see what you are supporting - fear, agony and endless torture, the pain that twists this child's face, that of the Palestinians. What I see in this child's face is not only what happens in the Occupied Territories, but all over the world, as Western Hegemony spreads  their culture of terror -

SUPPORT ISRAEL



(Originally taken from The Angry Arab News Service, where As'ad described this photo in this manner - "She is trying to stay alive during an Israeli invasion of Bayt Lahya"
HERE.)

Posted at 08:10 pm by deadringer
Comments (9)  

7.29.2007
WILL THE REAL DARFUR PLEASE STAND UP



Western Hegemonies writers will continue to "expose" the fighting, or the bare facts of atrocities,  but never expose the elements behind the war(s) or the genocide. It is just "old animosities" that suddenly are supposed to explode. Or, as in the case of Darfur, it is merely "Muslims" rather than the power struggle engendered by natural resources and who will control them, or be the benefactor of the foreign investment or the largess for the resources.

Here is an article written by Keith Harmon Snow and Dimitri Oram, originally titled "Keeping Peacekeepers Out Of Darfur at the ALL THINGS PASS WEBSITE. The link was originally posted on the Angry Arab News Service by Randall Jones of the GETTING TRUTH BLOG.


(Starving for oil - IRIN, on Village Voice Blog)

"The humanitarian tragedy in the Darfur region of Sudan revolves around
natural resources. Such struggles in Sudan began in the days when a
budding journalist passed through Khartoum and reported on the British
victory at the Battle of Omdurman. "The weapons, the methods and the
fanaticism of the Middle Ages," reported Winston Churchill, "were
brought by an extraordinary anachronism into dire collision with the
organization and inventions of the 19th century. The result was not
surprising." The gattling gun silenced some 60,000 Sudanese tribesmen
armed only with spears, bows and arrows.

While colonialism died a hard death in Sudan, during the Cold War the

control of the Sudan remained central to the U.S. and its
anti-communist allies throughout the 1970's and 1980's. War began in
the early 1980's, and after 1990 the U.S. supported the southern
Christian rebels, the Sudan People's Liberation Army, for over a
decade, until a peace deal was struck in 2003.



In the 1990's an Islamic government came to power, and tensions
escalated (1998) when the Clinton Administration bombed the Al Shifta
pharmaceutical factory, the country's only producer of medical
supplies. After 9/11 the Bush Administration warmed to the Government
of Sudan, and today Sudan is both credited as a pivotal ally in the
"War on Terror" and castigated as "a rogue Arab government committing
genocide against black Africans in Darfur."

Darfur is now the flash point for the international geopolitical

chess-game to control Sudan and its resources. For example, the U.S.
Sugar industry notes that Sudan is a major sugar producer, and the
American Botanical Council credits Darfur with supplying two-thirds of
world-supply of high-quality gum Arabic—an ingredient in soft drinks
and pharmaceutical products. USAID funded Gum Arabic projects
throughout the 1980's, but suspended them with the ascension of the
Islamic government in the 1990's. And, as noted by Khalil Ibrahim, the
leader of the rebel Justice and Equality Movement, one of mysterious
factions fighting in Darfur, "oil is everywhere in Sudan." Darfur is
rich in uranium, copper, gold and petroleum.



Combatants in Darfur not only arrive on camels and horses—the infamous
"janjaweed" ever credited with genocide—but also in C-130 aircraft,
with logistical and strategic support provided by U.S. Air Forces in
Europe, under U.S. Marine General James Jones. Backed by the U.S.
and NATO, the 7000 troops of the African Union (AU) "peacekeeping"
force have only deepened the quagmire: the AU force is accused of
taking sides and there are calls for withdrawal. Rwandan troops with
the AU mission in Darfur are themselves accused of having committed
atrocities in the Congo. The U.S. and its allies, including Britain,
Israel and Taiwan, continue to press their interests in the region:
both the U.S. and Israel today support combatants in Chad, Sudan and
Congo.

U.S. taxpayers also support the operations of U.S. troops in Uganda,
Chad, and Ethiopia—three states embroiled in humanitarian crises and
war. Acts of genocide and war crimes proliferate in each, but no one
is calling for "peacekeeping" missions here. International aid and
human rights organizations widely acknowledge that the crises in
northern Uganda is the worst in the world, yet the least talked about.
Atrocities routinely occur in Ethiopia, and Ethiopian military leaders
defected to Eritrea last month in protest of the government's role.
Meanwhile, the attention of the U.S. public has been narrowly focused
on the "moral necessity" of intervention to "stop genocide" in Darfur.



While spending two billion dollars a year on the world's most
neglected emergency, the United Nations Observers Mission in Congo
(M.O.N.U.C.), partially funded by the U.S. public, was unable to stem
the mortalities: some 30,000 Congolese have died monthly (1000 people
a day) from violence, disease and malnutrition. The situation in
Congo remains dire, more deadly than Darfur. M.O.N.U.C. "peacekeepers"
have committed atrocities against civilians. Weapons and minerals
continue to flow across Congo's borders routinely, and recent news
reports claim that uranium from Congo has appeared in Iran. War in
Congo continues.

Those in the U.S. who call for intervention in Darfur fail to
understand the greater geopolitical context. Given current realities
in Sudan, no intervention in Darfur will proceed, and if it did it
would fail. U.S. citizens should support the ongoing peace process
mediated by the Eritreans, involving the Sudanese government and the
Darfur resistance, which seeks to find a permanent solution to the
Darfur crisis. The saying in the Horn is "all roads to peace in the
Horn of Africa run through Asmara," the Eritrean capital, and this is
where the winds of change are blowing.



In every case, intervention in the Horn of Africa has only worsened
the crises. The promise of the United Nations "peacekeeping" missions
has been compromised, and attention needs to shift to reforming
"peacekeeping" and "humanitarian" agendas and addressing the root
causes. Sending more armed forces from outside Sudan will destroy all
hope of peaceful resolution, and the people of the Horn of
Africa—given their awareness of Sudan's vast petroleum and uranium
reserves, and war in Lebanon and Iraq—are deeply cynical of the
motivations of Westerners who call for "peacekeeping" and
"humanitarian" intervention.

At the Smith College Panel on Intervention in Darfur (6 July 2006),
organizers, panelists and sponsors called on Mayor Claire Higgins—a
signatory to the Darfur Action Group campaign of the Congregation Bnai
Israel—and the Northampton City Council to hold a public hearing to
explore the geopolitical realities of this conflict, in hopes to
educate and inspire the public to take appropriate action. This call
is repeated here, and the public is urged to support it.



Concerned citizens should ask for [1] transparency of U.S. foreign
policy and involvement in Sudan; [2] good faith negotiations and
diplomacy offering concessions and support from the U.S. and its
allies; [3] respect for the sovereignty and self-determination of the
people of Sudan; [4] accountability from all factions, and their
backers, involved in the conflict; and [5] a withdrawal of all foreign
troops from Sudanese soil.

War does not occur in a vacuum, and Americans will pay a high price
for misguided action. We need only recall the "humanitarian" failure
of the U.S. military in Somalia, and the ridicule and humiliation
served to the American people as young American soldiers were dragged
through the streets of that far off place."

(A native of Williamsburg, MA, keith harmon snow has worked on the Horn
of Africa as a consultant on genocide and humanitarian aid for the
United Nations (2005), and he worked in Ethiopia, Sudan and the Congo
as a human rights researcher and genocide investigator for Genocide
Watch (2004-2005) and Survivors Rights International (2004, 2005).
Also an award-winning journalist, he has worked extensively
(2004-2006) with the multinational peacekeeping forces of the United
Nations Observers Mission for Congo (M.O.N.U.C.). In 2001 he reported
from the International Criminal Tribunal on Rwanda, and he has worked
or reported from 17 countries in Africa. In 2006 he has been working
in Congo and Afghanistan. Dimitri Oram is a human rights and genocide
researcher, and writer, based in Northampton, MA.)

People swallow this in the states, because everyone has had the "education" of Africans just being vicious headhunters that dwell in the bush and boil human parts in big black pots (and the media in the sense of popular just continues the charade). Covering up the facts above is the common "practice" of all major media, which is nothing but the purveyor of the elite agenda. The same rings true for the "Arabs," or any region of exploitation that the national Security state has on it's agenda for both natural and human resource exploitation. This way, when human carnage is wreaked upon the "backward" people, it is seen as their own fault, or something endemic to the region because of natural animosities, and the public barely raises an eyebrow - they have been neutralized from both natural feelings and outrage by the lack of information and by propaganda! Recognize it for what it is, reject it, and expose it.

JOHN PILGER - FREEDOM NEXT TIME - PART 1
(Or, the result of complicit corporate "journalism")

JOHN PILGER - FREEDOM NEXT TIME - PART 2

ROTTING CORPSES

BRAINWASHED?

THE OVERDUE SPEECH

TODAYS MEDIA HAS THE GOEBBELS SYNDROME

THE PR BLITZ

THE MANUFACTURING FACILITY

NO SHELTER

YOU CAN'T WASH IT OFF

THE ENTIRE WORLD NEEDS TO TAKE TO THE STREETS NOW

When I was a small child, not more than 7 or 8 years old, my uncle told me about the horrors of what takes place in Africa. He pointed to the chrome on a car and told me I had no idea of the blood that was on these materials like chromium. How men were lured from their villages with stories of fame and fortune only to be trapped in mines which were assured death traps, and how the money that was promised never went home to the waiting families. I want you to hear, and to understand what takes place in Africa, and in some what atrocities have increased to this day -

Posted at 05:24 pm by deadringer
Make a comment  

7.26.2007
PALESTINIAN UNITY AND SOLIDARITY



It is time to  propose unity among all Palestinians. That is, those "inside" Israel the "last class" citizens, those who think they are a little more privileged than the Gaza, the occupied West Bank, and the occupied Gaza. All that has been attempted by the Palestinians did not take root, and I believe this artificial division is the major weak point  in the resistance. Too many people think they have "too much to loose" to join with their heavily oppressed counterparts - sort of like the "class warfare" that is taking place in the United States, without the terribly violent occupation.

When this unity is realized it will put pressure "inside" of Israel as well as from the occupied territories for substantive change. The world will not stand by if the rabid Zionists try to banish their "citizens" (Palestinian) to the occupied territories, as the extreme right Zionist elements have advocated. The "new moderate" illegal governemnt led by Abbas must be resisted, not only among those in the West Bank and Gaza, but by the Palestinians inside of Israel - because a new division will only serve to destroy a viable Palestinian people in the state. The unity of all, not separated by these destructive class divisions is an unbeatable force, and must result in one truly democratic state - not two states.



I said before that the Palestinians have the "right" to use any means necessary to succeed, not to continue to use means which have proven unsuccessful. When the entire whole of the these three parts are unified, resistance can be brought to bear through the means of demonstration, and resistance - all of the conventional means that have proven effective in other civil rights movements. In order to stop this, the Zionists will have to oppress their own third class Palestinian citizens out in the open, which will prove to the most die hard Israeli supporters that indeed apartheid is in the warp and woof of this Zionism, and that will prove to be disastrous for them.

If this does not take effect, the stakes go up, by the use of civil disobedience by all of the heretofore separated "groups,"  inside and outside of Israel. This ratchets up till we have full blown rebellion and revolution regarding all of the artificially separated groups in a unified fashion. Nothing like before - a much more planned and sophisticated approach, using world class revolutionary methodology -  no ineffective acts here. THIS IS THE WAY THINGS MUST PROCEED IF FREEDOM IS TO PREVAIL FOR THE PALESTINIANS.



So, the strategy that Bishara is proposing, which is very close to what I have proposed would be the end game for Zionism HERE. It would propose a true democratic state for all of the inhabitants, and it would dismiss the already patently outdated and deceptive idea of a two-state solution, which has been a deceptive carrot on a stick to nowhere. The Zionists have brought this on themselves, they have sown the seeds of their own destruction in their exclusive and destructive Zionist ideology - they have proven by their violence and oppression, their damnable aparthied wall, that their "two state" solution is a farce.

What must happen (as I said above) is these three strands must be brought together - those inside Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza territories. These artificial barriers, which throw crumbs to the Palestinians which keep one artificially seperated group from another, must be seen for what they are, mere placation till all hope for the Palestinians disappears. The Palestinians inside of Israel are just the facade which is supposed make the Zionist enterprise legitimate, so that it looks like a democracy - but taking just a cursory view of what is happening to the Palestinians inside of Israel should disabuse them of any fantasy that they are, or ever will be equals -




Just look what happens to the "official" representatives of the Palestinians inside of Israel - one need look no further that what has happened to Bishara. See what has taken place in land rights, education, economic opportunity,  those in the Negev (12%), etc.  People believe they can create this dichotomy between "inside" Israel, and the Occupied Territories, and than try to split the territories again (West Bank vs. Gaza) - as if they are apartheid to those "outside" and democratic to those "inside." Tell me, if these Zionists that rule in Israel were brought up on charges for what they have done inside of the Occupied Territories, would they be two different groups? NO. Would their alter egos go to jail and their nice inside Israel ones not? I rest my case.

The formula for freedom is in unity, it is in realizing that anything you think you have (inside of Israel, or in the West Bank) is truly not anything else than mere window dressing for dominant Zionism! What I have said here is what the Zionists fear the most, a unity of the territories with those inside of Israel will undo them post swift, and in the place of their Zionist atrocity will be a true democratic state that serves all of the people equally.

ISRAEL A STATE OF IT'S CITIZENS?

ISRAEL A STATE OF IT'S CITIZENS? - PART 2

ISRAEL A STATE OF IT'S CITIZENS? - PART 3

SEE- WHY ZIONISM WILL FAIL

As a rough starting point, there should be five goals to shift to a single state solution which means freedom for all of the Palestinian people.  Jeff Halper has written a concise anaylsis of what needs to take place:

"(1) In our framing of the campaign for a single state, we should stress that as much as Israel might object, it is its own settlement and incorporation policies that are responsible. Since a Palestinian "state"-cum-bantustan, the only alternative entertained by Israel, is totally unacceptable and unworkable, Israel has brought the single state solution upon itself. A two-state solution that leaves Israel intact has been proposed by both the Palestinians and by the Arab League through the Saudi initiative. Indeed, it is a basic term of reference in the road map. As in the case of South Africa, however, where apartheid was put in place by white South African governments, Israel has only itself to blame if it has created, through its own settlement and occupation policies, a single state. Despite repeated warnings from the critical peace camp, successive Israeli governments, Labor as well as Likud, have locked the country into such a dead-end situation. The Israeli public may not support the vision of a "Greater Land of Israel" (recent polls say 65% of Israelis would like "separation" from the Occupied Territories), but its support of governments pursuing such policies makes it complicit and ultimately responsible. If the road map fails, it is in large measure because of the indifference of the Israeli public to its own leaders' subversion of the initiative. To turn around and then complain that the demand for a democratic state in the entire country is "anti-Israel" and "anti-Zionist" is downright disingenuous. When the struggle for two states becomes, as I believe it must, a struggle for one democratic state, we must make it crystal clear that this development arises exclusively out of Israel's refusal to countenance a viable Palestinian state on even 22% of the country. Perhaps the realization of where Israel is headed will finally impel its Jewish public to reject policies, parties and leaders that maintain the Occupation. In that case the two-state option may be revisited. Until that happens, however, the priority of a campaign for a single state has been dictated by Israel itself.

(2) We must shift the focus of our efforts from ending the Occupation (which, when the road map fails, we must all admit will never happen) to achieving a democratic state. The slogan "One Person, One Vote" should provide a common mobilizing call for an international movement that must reach the scope and effectiveness of the campaign against South African apartheid. Indeed, the emergence of a single state as an agreed-upon goal something we lack today will make organizing much easier. On the way we must continue, of course, to oppose the Occupation and all its manifestations, including the ongoing repression of the Palestinian people. We might even advocate certain intermediate steps, such as an international protectorate over the Palestinian areas, in order to freeze Israel's ongoing process of incorporation while protecting the civilian population. We must prepare ourselves nevertheless for the most likely upshot: a campaign against apartheid and for a single democratic state.

(3) We should couch our campaign in the language and requirements of human rights and international law. A campaign for a democratic state is intended to secure the rights of all the country's inhabitants; it is not against the Israeli people or seeking in any way to delegitimize Israeli society or culture. Upholding the notion that the security and well-being of all the peoples of the region is guaranteed only through a political solution that addresses every people's human rights and that national self-determination will have to find its expression through a regional Middle East Union we must present the single democratic state as a vehicle that will facilitate collective and individual rights rather than posing a threat. The fact that occupation and apartheid constitute fundamental challenges to a world ruled by human rights and law should also be a central message. Since the Israel-Palestinian-Arab conflict is emblematic to the Arab and Muslim worlds, certainly the notion that the international system will never find stability (including a response to terrorism) unless this issue is resolved will help raise wide concern over the effects of the conflict.

(4) We should call on the Jewish public Israeli and diaspora to avoid the suffering witnessed in the struggle against apartheid in South Africa and engage pro-actively in this best-chance for a just, secure and positive resolution to an otherwise irresolvable conflict. More than anything else, Zionism was about Jews taking responsibility for their own fate. A Jewish state has proven politically and, in the end, morally untenable. It is time we salvage the good parts of Israel its vibrant national culture, society, institutions and economy and let go of that which cannot be saved: exclusive "ownership" of a country in which the Jews will soon be the minority.

(5) We must recreate an international movement similar to the anti-apartheid one. This will be difficult; Israel has far greater credibility and support than apartheid did. But we find a way to link the many disparate NGOs and activist groups into a coherent and coordinated network focusing on the issue of the democratic state itself, then forge them into a worldwide movement that goes far beyond our various groups and networks."

Even though I do not find all of these issues to be totally workable I believe this gets to the general thrust of how we must think and act.

Posted at 09:32 pm by deadringer
Make a comment  

7.24.2007
ANOTHER NEW LOW FOR "HIGHER EDUCATION" - THE FIRING OF WARD CHURCHILL



Apparently the "empire" is not satisfied with stealing the freedom of people abroad under the name of "democracy," it attempts to silence free speech in the academic arena with a vengeance. It is interesting how lies mutate over a period of time, and how they have become the earmark of official government acts these days.

First when Iraq was attacked is was "weapons of mass destruction," than it became the toppling of a dictator, and finally it became "spreading democracy." The Churchill lynching started with an outburst of what he said in regard to 9/11 and how he should be fired, than turned into "he is not a real Indian," to academic improprieties! Isn't it funny that the same fingerprints produce similar results in two totally different set of circumstances?



You are fooling yourself if you think this has a single thing to do with academic improprieties, it is actually a concerted effort to silence any dissent in the academic community, a community which in the United States has always been the first line of defense domestically for the official positions of the status quo. Currently, you have democracy being rolled back - so that any gains of freedom in academia are made tenuous.

I mean, when you look at this 120 page plus piece of nonsense that came out of "investigative committee" you have to almost laugh, not because it's funny, not funny "ha, ha," but because it is a work of complete academic hackery! The inquisition of old had nothing on these modern day witch hunters. You have contextual fraud in the report, in regard to the work and even the emphasis of what Ward Churchill wrote.  You have the imposition of what he not only wrote and said, but what he was supposed to have  meant - which he did not even imply!



We have all been put through the academic mill, and the product from K-12 and on through "higher education" that they want to produce is compliant people, "good citizens" who have had every dissenting bone removed from their bodies, every critical thought or even the apparatus for critical thought removed from their minds, veritably predictable benign consuming slaves!  Where the population is primarily a commodity to be consumed by an engorged elite, used for canon fodder in the empires wars of aggression, a disposable populace which is nothing but a cog of complicity in the corporate machinery.

So, they in public pillory a tenured academic, with laws of plagiary which would make anyone academic or no, a flaming plagiarist! 
They make a mockery of free speech when that speech targets their crimes, and the consequence of their crimes exact a toll on the American public. Look carefully at anything that came out of the 9/11 commission report - do you see anything, anything that resembles changing foreign policy that would produce the backlash which the people experienced? NO. What horrifies them is a man which pleads - "please stop killing their babies!"



They recruit students like the Nazi brown shirts to record, write down, and report to the academic fascists that be. They do it in the name of "balance," that is, suppression in the name of "fairness," lies in the name of furthering an agenda of hegemony. When the real question is not balance, it is truth!

However, these people are not interested in the truth historically or in the present.  You can see this in the committee to crucify Churchill which uses falsification  which bears the University of Colorado's imprimatur - which is merely an authority to fabricate by all intents and purposes! No different than a kangaroo court set up for guaranteed prosecution (like the "courts" set up to prosecute so-called "enemy combatants"). The process is so invalid, that you might as well have tortured Ward Churchill to get the confession that you wanted! Why create this two year ellipsis, which is nothing but an academic charade?



Indeed, found in the heart of that infamous think (stink) tank document, PNAC, you find the goal of cleansing the universities of any dissent. Did you think PNAC was just a document about foreign policy (atrocity)? No, it also has a domestic agenda which was to clear the path to make these atrocities acceptable to the American people - and thereby to cleanse all dissent from institutions of higher learning in order to indoctrinate the American public.

Brought to you by the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, founded by Lynne Cheney in 1995 that claims to have contributed billions of dollars to colleges and universities, connected to Horowitz and his fetid Campus Watch, the goal which is
``Defending Civilization: How Our Universities Are Failing America,'' the American Council claims that ``colleges and university faculty have been the weak link in America's response'' to Sept. 11. It also asserts that ``when a nation's intellectuals are unwilling to defend its civilization, they give comfort to its adversaries.''



WARD CHURCHILL IS ONE AMONG A NUMBER OF ACADEMICS TARGETED BY THESE ABOVE FASCIST GROUPS, AND IF YOU THINK THERE IS NOT CONNECTION YOU ARE SADLY MISTAKEN. IT IS TIME FOR THE PEOPLE TO RESIST THIS ONSLAUGHT, STOP THE ASSAULT ON DISSENT AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH, BECAUSE IF WE CANNOT CUT OFF THIS ACTIVITY IN OUR OWN INSTITUTIONS IT WILL NOT ONLY DOOM US BUT THE WORLD AT LARGE.


 
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience. Our problem is that numbers of people all over the world have obeyed the dictates of the leaders of their government and have gone to war, and millions have been killed because of this obedience. . . Our problem is that people are obedient all over the world in the face of poverty and starvation and stupidity, and war, and cruelty" : Howard Zinn

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

"A true story which came from a presentation
given of the Cherokee 'Trail of Tears'."

Story from Freeman Owle
Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians
November 1996

Copyright © 1996 Owle
All Rights Reserved


Freeman Owle is a lecturer and storyteller from the Eastern Band of the Cherokee Indians. This is a true story he told in November 1996 at a Native American awareness program.

A few years ago, Freeman Owle went to Cincinnati to make a presentation before a university group. He told about the Trail of Tears and how one set of his great-grandparents had escaped from the march with their infant child, crossed back over the Mississippi River, and returned to find their Georgia home burned to the ground. Realizing that they could no longer stay in Georgia, they moved to Birdtown, a community on the Cherokee Reservation in North Carolina where Freeman was raised and where he lives today.

Mr. Owle also told the students that there likely will never be a Cherokee named Andrew because of the many deaths of Cherokees and people of other tribes during their forced relocation to Oklahoma...deaths attributed to President Andrew Jackson and his anti-Indian policies. [As it turns out, there were several named Andrew even back then.]

Following the presentation, several students stated that they wanted to help do something on the reservation. He said he had just the project and arranged for them a come down in a few weeks. The group of about 10 students arrived late one Friday night and called to tell him that they had checked into a hotel and would be ready to go the next morning. Early the next day he took them to the home of an 81-year old Cherokee woman who for the first time in her life was unable to plant a garden and grow the old Indian corn that had been with her family for many generations. Freeman equipped them with hoes and, under the watchful eye of the elderly woman, began to dig long straight rows in the rocky ground.

About 10 am, most of the students had stopped to get a cold drink and take a break under a shade tree, except for one girl who kept working. Freeman asked her if she wanted to take a break and she replied that she was fine and kept working. About noon, the students stopped to eat lunch, except for the one girl who kept working. Freeman went to her and asked if she wanted to eat lunch with the others. She said no, that she wanted to keep working. He told her "Joy, you need to take a break and get something to eat and drink." Putting his hand on the hoe, he pulled it gently from her hands. As he did, he saw that her palms and fingers were covered in blisters, many of which had already broken.

With her eyes turned downward, she said "You don't know who I am, or anything about me, but I need to keep working. I have to give something back to the Cherokee people." Looking up with tears welling in her eyes and her lip trembling, she continued "You see, Andrew Jackson was my great-grandfather."

Posted at 09:03 pm by deadringer
Comment (1)  

7.21.2007
WHY ZIONISM WILL FAIL



I want to start this post with a set of definitions. First, Zionism should not be confounded with Judaism. Second, even Zionism must be parsed from a virulent form and a seeming benign form, but citizens are still complicit by participating  actively, by silence or passive support - the virulent form having found it's way into leadership over a number of years, and which can be plainly seen committing atrocities on Palestinians and as the handmaiden of imperialism. Third, when Israel became a recognized nation state it became susceptible to the same criticisms of any other nation.



The sign above says it all, being against a certain form of Zionism in not in any way, shape or form antisemitism, period.  This is a particular issue in the United States where some have confounded the two (Zionism of the virulent form with the total Jewish population), that is about as viable as quack doctors selling snake oil for cures! 

Here in the United States, they have even tried to equate antisemitism with resistance to virulent Zionism in official policies. No nation is above criticism, and just like I make a difference between U.S. citizens and the acts of it's government, even though some U.S. citizens are active, and others by silent support  have become complicit, so I make that same distinction in Israel.



So I have made the title of this post "Why Zionism Will Fail," what this specifically means is that it will fail in it's current form.  It will fail if it persists in it's inhuman activity against the Palestinians, it will fail if it continues to assault it's neighbors committing war crimes, as in the case of Lebanon, and it will fail being the handmaiden of western imperialism!



Zionism in it's current form has bee equated with racism, at one time the United Nations (1975) defined it as such, but because of the outcry of both Israel and the United States it was repealed in 1991.  However, there has been no marked policy change in Israeli Zionist policies to the present day, and it remains the backbone of Israeli politics with no end in sight.



In the very Encyclopedia of Zionism we find that it's founder, Theodore Herzel did not claim any religious aspect to Zionism. When asked Mr. Herzel said "I am an agnostic,"  and further he states that Zionism is not a matter of social or religious significance, but "national."  Again, when asked if he needed Palestine to achieve his goals, he answered in the negative.




Zionism at it's foundations is a political movement, who's reality has been realized through a series of wars and the acts of colonialism.  From the regious aspect, it is a heresy of Judaism - where the 12th principle of the Jewish faith explicitly says that Messiah will gather his people from the nations of the world. 

Zionism fly's in the face of this principle stating that it does not accept it's exile , and choses to reconvene as a national entity.  The Jewish people have been restrained by an oath not to force itself back to the "Holy Land" against the will of the current residents.


Zionism is the exploitation of spiritual Judaism, and over a period of time Zionism has refined it's national objective in the world market, with it's current customers being the Jewish population and it's patrons the United States - United Kingdom, and other western powers. Who (these powers) have seen fit in their colonial enterprise to pay their perceived European debt by bequeathing property that was not theirs to the detriment of it's residents.



Having cleared the deck with some of these statements of fact let me say that I am not denying the legitimacy of Israel to exist, I am denying that it can or will exist in it's current Zionist form.  Currently it is an apartheid system, and the Zionism that reigns in it's halls of power is irreconcilable with lasting peace, because it maintains it's existence on the premise of racial purity.  You cannot mix spiritual and biological attributes with impunity.

This goes beyond mere excptionalism and enters the arena of racism,  seeing it's right to extra-racial and extra-judicial warrant. It cannot continue to exist in this form, in a post-apartheid era. Zionism conjures for itself divine authority - which expresses itself in the violent maintenance of property that does not belong to it, all in the name of Zion. This is a formula for demise.


Zionism refuses to recognize or abide by the rules of International Law.  Most notably adhering to the UN ruling 242, to withdraw to the pre-1967 borders, and 194 which guarantees the right of return to the dispossessed Palestinians.  This arrogance is seen in statements like that of Ariel Sharon who said "certainly no one has the right to put the Jewish people and the State of Israel on trial."  Note how he confounds the Jewish people with Zionist Israel.

Zionism cannot survive thinking that it is above the law. Zionism sees itself as immune to law because of it's patron the United States, however, even the United States will hit the proverbial wall soon with it's arrogant stand of being "above the law," and Zionism will crash with it.  Zionism will crash when the United States is divested through disgust of the foreign capital that tenuously holds the house of cards up!


Zionism has survived being based on mythical deception, and we live in an age where myths are exposed and debunked soundly.  It suggests that every single Jew is an Israelite, and that God promised Jacob's descendants the land. 

It also says that the Palestinian goys are interlopers to the land.  This does not even deserve a commentary, but it is a major tenet of the current proponents of Zionism.  All that has to be said is that this is a patent form of racism, that is the only treatment that is needed.  Along with this is the myth of invincibility in war, having "God's will on it's side" (Nazi belt buckles had that written on them), but that has been soundly trounced by the "rag Tag" army of Hizbullah fighters that kicked their arse in ground war.

In this, it seeks the support of an equally deluded fundamentalist Christianity in the United States, which the people of America are fed up with to the gills!  One ideology is about as correct as the other in this instance, and Zionism's baby will be thrown out with the proverbial bathwater. Fundamentalism in the United States is about to fall as hard as Oliver Cromwell's fiasco in bygone England.


Modern Jewry is not threatened or presently escaping an antisemitism anywhere today.  However, Zionism which is in power today in Israel , it seems would try to make itself so repugnant with it's wanton thievery and murder, so as to try to force the ugly head of antisemitism to rise! 

Jews are currently threatened no where, and the expose of this current Zionist debacle is the target of disgust, not the Jewish people at large. This also will contribute to the demise of the Zionism currently in power in Israel.



Zionism has become equally deadly for not only the Palestinians, but for the Israelites. The only answer is to abolish Zionism as a legislative authority. In it's place a free and democratic state can arise, where equality for all can be realized.

VIRTUALLY AS I WRITE THIS, A POISONOUS ZIONISM PLANS FOR WAR WITH SYRIA AND IRAN. IT IS THE DUTY OF THE ISRAELI PEOPLE TO RISE UP AGAINST THE ZIONIST POWER ELITE THAT NOW EXISTS IN ISRAEL; IT IS THE DUTY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO RISE UP AGAINST THE LEADERSHIP IN WASHINGTON FOR IT'S HEGEMONIC LAWLESSNESS WHICH ALSO SUPPORTS THIS PERVERTED FORM OF ZIONISM FOR THEIR OWN EXPLOITATIVE PURPOSES.  SOON ZIONISM AND WESTERN HEGEMONY WILL FALL BUT IT WILL COME FASTER BY POSITIVE ACTION, IT IS THE DUTY OF PEOPLE ALL OVER THE WORLD TO MAKE THIS A REALITY!

Posted at 09:15 pm by deadringer
Comments (3)  

7.18.2007
IF THIS IS SUCH A RICH COUNTRY, WHY ARE WE GETTING SQUEEZED?



This is an article written by Heather Boushey and Joshua Holland of Alternet HERE.  My reason for repeating it here is not only that it is an excellent piece of journalism, and that it is true - but I get tired of being accused that I am the only one who writes such things about our economy. So here we go again, but this time your going to hear it from someone else!

While the rich are getting richer, they're slashing social security, Medicare and other social programs for the rest of us. What gives?

"The commercial media is telling us two perfectly contradictory stories about the American economy. The first is how wonderfully rich we are in the United States. The stock market's booming -- some analysts predict the Dow will break the 15,000 this year -- the economy is expanding at a healthy clip, productivity growth is up and unemployment and inflation are relatively low.

But, at the same time, we're also told that we don't have the money to pay for a robust social safety net. When it comes to paying for universal health coverage, affording retirement security for our elderly, investing in programs for the poor or educating our children, we need to pinch pennies. According to this storyline, we face a looming "entitlement crisis" -- we won't be able to afford to keep the Baby Boomers in good health and out of poverty, we're told, unless we slash their benefits and privatize the programs that their elderly parents enjoy today.



This is the line we hear from the Administration when it talks about entitlement "reform": Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson says that "The biggest economic issue facing our country is the growth in spending on the major entitlement programs: Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security." The solution, according to the Heritage Foundation, is to cut entitlement spending: "Reforming Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid is the only way to get the budget under control."

How can two narratives that are so clearly at odds with each other be so pervasive? Are we seriously supposed to believe that Paris Hilton has to dig between the cushions of her sofa to buy a can of tuna?



What reconciles these two themes is absent from our mainstream economic discourse: we "can't afford" all sorts of programs that are clearly in the common good because most of the benefits of our growing economy have gone to a very small group of Americans, who have, in turn, seen their taxes slashed again and again in the past six years. It's a story that isn't told as often as it should in the commercial press because it's a supposedly "liberal" narrative -- never mind that über-conservative former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan told Congress that there is a "really serious problem here, as I've mentioned many times … in the consequent concentration of income that is rising."

Saying that the majority of the country's economic gains in recent years have gone to the top one percent of the income ladder understates the trend. You have to cut the pie into even smaller slices to get the full picture. Because while the bottom half of the top one percent of the income distribution have done far better than the average wage slaves, it is a smaller slice still -- the top .01 percent -- that has grabbed most of the gains--seeing an impressive 250 percent increase in income between 1973 and 2005 -- from an economy that's grown by 160 percent.


(Booming Economy - by Rob van der Bijl Bilbao, at the Guggenheim)

An analysis by economists Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez gives us the best perspective of what's going on for everyone else. They found that despite several periods of healthy growth between 1973 and 2005, the average income of all but the top ten percent of the income ladder -- nine out of ten American families - fell by 11 percent when adjusted for inflation. For three decades, economic growth in the United States has gone first and foremost to building today's modern Gilded Age. The recipients of those gains don't care about a fully funded Social Security system or a healthy Medicare program -- they don't need them.

Meanwhile, even as the top earners' incomes have gone through the roof,
their tax burden has shriveled. At the same time, the share of federal revenues contributed by corporations has declined -- by two-thirds since 1962.


(A golden Hummer)

It's important to understand how that plays out in our national economic discourse. When people tell us that our economy cannot "afford" things like universal health care or paid sick days, it fits with the economic experience that most Americans have had in their real lives -- the benefits of our boom-boom economy have not gone to the great masses, but to "someplace else."

Americans feel pinched. Polls show that they feel a time crunch--not having enough time for family and friends--and that they're anxious about getting into or staying in the middle class. Over the past generation, the economy has not been good to the typical, married-couple family (let along single-parent families) and families feel, rightly, that they need to be careful about where their dollars go.



It's not that they're not working hard. The typical U.S. family puts in more time at work than ever before. The typical married couple works an additional 13.3 weeks per year--533 hours--compared to a generation ago. But even though families are working more, their incomes have grown by only a third between 1973 and the present. That's much worse than the generation before -- between 1947 and 1973, the typical married-couple family saw their income rise by 115 percent. And that was often just one parent's income -- this was a period when most families could afford a stay-at-home mother. Of course, fewer families have that luxury today -- those with stay-at-home moms have the same inflation-adjusted median income in 2007 as they did in 1973 -- they haven't gained a penny from three decades of growth.

When we talk about the slow growth of family income, economists like to mention globalization, mechanization, or other factors that require us to be lean and mean and more "competitive." The storyline is that U.S. families have not seen their income grow because America has had to fight it out in a wide-open global economy, and these are lean times for workers.

But that's simply not true.


The economy--as measured by gross domestic product (GDP)--has grown by over 160 percent since 1973 (PDF). This is only slightly less than the period from 1947 to 1973 when GDP grew by 176 percent. That's come as Americans have become much more productive -- productivity has grown by over 80 percent since 1973 -- meaning it now takes fewer workers to produce the same number of widgets as it did in the past.

As each worker in the U.S. economy produces more "stuff" per hour, be that DVD players or clients served, those goods and services are being sold in greater numbers. In a healthy economy, that growth is shared between workers and investors and wage growth should rise with productivity. This was the case in the decades between World War II and the early 1970s, when productivity and median wages both increased by an average of two to three percent every year. But since 1973, productivity increased sharply, especially after the late 1990s, but median wage growth has been flat. So firms are getting much more output per worker, but they're not paying for it. They've pocketed the difference in executive compensation and corporate profits. The share of national income going to wages is at the lowest level ever recorded, while the piece of the pie gobbled up by corporate profits is at its highest point since 1960.



But when the masses ask for help paying for health insurance or child care, or request that everyone be given the right to paid sick days, we're told we cannot afford it. "Afford" seems to be a very special term in the current American context: letting the wealthy take ever-bigger pieces of our national product is something we always seem able to afford.

We work hard. We--the 99.9 percent-- and deserve a bigger piece of the pie. With a growing economy, we can afford it and we all know just where to look for how to pay for it.

THEY WANT SYMPATHY

MAKING IT?

DESTINATION NOWHERE

NEED A CHANGE?

WORKING CLASS

DON'T GET SICK!

WATCH IT GROW

THE RICH SAY = YOU WANT MORE??!!

BORN INTO CAPITALISM

CAPITALISM, CORPORATISM, AND THE WORLD

WHY IS THERE NO CLASS WARFARE IN AMERICA?

CLASS WARFARE NOW-STOPPING THE INCOME SHIFT

THE TRILLION DOLLAR INCOME SHIFT

If I may, I would like to point out a specific world fact for your consideration. Wherever you find capitalism, in whatever country, you find this same case scenario. In some places it is less severe than others, in some places it is more severe, but it follows a similar pattern. Take for instance Israel -

REPORT: 19 ISRAELI FAMILIES CONTROL ONE THIRD OF THE ECONOMY

Now, lest you think I am just picking on the United Sates and Israel, let me emphasize what I said above - wherever you find capitalism, in whatever country, you find this same case scenario. In other words, you can find the same scenario worked out in the "new" Russia, India, Australia, etc.

The governments are merely the franchise of the elite, which set the agenda for their enrichment, both foreign and domestic - it is now a GLOBAL PHENOMENA.  Wherever capitalism goes you find this broadening gap between the rich and the poor - so the  question naturally is this, WHEN WILL THE PEOPLE ALL OVER THE WORLD WAKE UP and understand that this just does not "naturally" occur?  When will the people unite? When we put a stop to our long night of disenfranchisement and pain?

Posted at 06:45 pm by deadringer
Comments (8)  

Next Page