The Insurgency

Benefit of Syrian Conflict

2014-01-29T20:42:00.000-05:00

Last weekend UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon invited Iran to the upcoming Syria negotiations. The US-backed rebels immediately threatened withdrawal. Then the US demanded Iran agree to the terms of Geneva I (read regime change) before participating, which Iran rejected. This controversy was interesting not for what transpired but for what remains unmentioned by the media, Hezbollah.
Hezbollah and Iran are enemies of the US and Israel. Assad deposed from Syria not only removes a key ally for Hezbollah and Iran, the two will lose a useful conduit for Iranian arms into Lebanon. Further isolation leaves both more susceptible to US / Israeli geopolitical maneuverings.
When viewed through this context, the Syrian conflict looks less like a spontaneous eruption of Arab discontent. The Syrian civil war, and its propagation by outside influence, is likely a calculated act of neoliberal imperialism.

Bonds Boot Berlusconi

2011-11-10T23:34:00.004-05:00

Italy’s Prime Minister Berlusconi recently announced his resignation. With the amount of political turmoil worldwide, this alone isn’t surprising. But driving home from work, I happened to turn to NPR’s Marketplace when I hear correspondent Heidi Moore ask, “Who picks the leader of Italy? The voters elected Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi. The bond markets want someone new. They don't have confidence that he'll cut back on spending. So who really runs the show? Here's a hint: Berlusconi is on his way out.”

This is followed by an expert who restates the cliché, ”When you run up a lot of debts, you're beholden to the people who loan you the money.”

Moore summarizes the piece with, “The good news for Italy is that it's in better financial shape than Greece. But until it gets a leader the market trusts, it will have to keep paying higher interest rates.”

That’s the good news? That Italy’s democracy is a façade. A sham, a parlor trick played on unknowing citizens by financial markets. Market selects the candidates, population elects from pre-selected candidates, when winner performs poorly, Market step in to remove politician until next rigged election.

There was neither discussion nor mention of how democracy is being eroded by this action. In Ms Moore’s defense, the show is called Marketplace so political punditry is not the focus. However, shows on National Public Radio should discuss its news in a context that is relevant to the public. With the growing Occupy Movement, teabaggers crying foul about government finances, more and more Americans concerned about Wall Streets influence over Washington, one might expect this commentator to show insight or perhaps concern when a financial market overtly usurps democracy. Instead of predicting the next investment bubble, Marketplace should stop living in one.

Protecting Libyan civilians?

2011-04-10T00:08:00.005-04:00

The UN mission in Libya is protecting civilians.
pause.
scratch head?
pause.
"Protecting civilians?" I had to say it aloud a few times.
An empty statement for justifying dropping hundreds of bombs daily on a sovereign nation. Not that protecting civilians isn't noble, but who are the NATO forces protecting?
The rebel forces of Benghazi!
Of course.
Rebel. Forces.
Armed Libyans from eastern regions fighting armed Libyans from non-eastern regions.
???
Sounds like a civil war. So I looked up the definition.

civil war: a war between opposing groups of citizens of the same country.

The NATO mission is oxymoronic.
Civilians are the only people harmed in a civil war. Aiding either side of a civil war only leads to more civilian deaths. May someone please speak truth to power.

Lessons in Change?

2011-02-10T22:30:00.004-05:00

The events in Egypt (and Tunisia) continue to captivate us. It has livened our debates; it has stimulated discussions regarding dictators, foreign policy, sustainable energy policy, peak oil, amongst others subjects. We all collectively hope for Mubarak's quick resignation. Some theorize the power of Twitter or Facebook, whether Wikileaks had any influence, but none are focusing these conversations on future domestic action.

Egypt and America are very different states. Our governments, economies, and societies are very different. But I sense, amongst most Americans regardless of political affiliation, a feeling of disconnect from our political process. We have legalized political bribery in the form of lobbying. Our politicians tailor legislation for corrupt big business. Our military leaders wait in line to become hired guns as defense industry consultants. Our most elite soldiers are eager to become oppressive mercenaries. Our court system recognizes non-living, non-breathing corporations as having human rights. And in the midst of our second largest recession, wealth (and power) is being consolidated into less and less of the citizenry. Our democracy is slowly becoming such only in name. This is the very issue the people of Egypt are rising against.

The effectiveness of the Cairo demonstrations may not been seen for months or years, if ever. We in America have rich history of effective mass struggle. But are mass demonstrations still an effective means of change in America? Or is the utility of these uprisings contextual, depending on culture, country, time, or issue?

Is there something else to learn from Egypt? Is it time to reignite mass protest here in America or do we feel we can effect needed contemporary change within our current political structure?

Bloggers Wonder About Clinton Diplomat Meeting

2011-02-09T19:51:00.003-05:00

A couple of blog threads yesterday were discussing the purpose of Secretary Clinton's unprecedented Diplomat meeting. If one understands the mission of the US State Dept and has followed recent world events, then the reason for the meeting is very clear.

Our State Dept and embassy network is about furthering "American Interests".
American interests currently involve oil, military hardware, and perceived scope of power.
The middle east as all know is the last great reserve of black gold. Egypt (and Israel) are our projections of power into the region. If Egypt falls to pure "democratic forces" the future of US influence in the region is questioned. If oppressed people in other US-client states see Egypt fall, then other less powerful nations may have the same fate.

Then there is the business of US foreign aid. Oppressive client states serve as conduits through which tax payer dollars go to defense industry companies. Massive amounts of corporate welfare is disguised as foreign aid. "We give you a few billion, but it must be used to purchase American weaponry." Egypt is the largest recipient of foreign aid behind Israel.

The likely aim of Clinton's massive meeting is to put the fire under some diplomat ass. Tell them to get out of the embassy, make better contacts within the local society. America cannot continue to keep getting surprised with its pants down if it is to maintain its status quo.

I wish the meeting were more along the lines of firing most of the staff. The administration should take the radical steps of dismantling the empire, shrinking our embassy staff and maybe eliminating our military bases as well. Our empire can die a slow reaction filled death or we can actively dismantle it, thereby have more control over its future.

Diplomatic Scramble?

2011-02-02T21:44:00.005-05:00

NY Times posted an article I found interesting, "Diplomatic Scramble As Ally Is Pushed To Exit".
By MARK LANDLER, HELENE COOPER and DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

"Last Sunday at 2 p.m., a blue-and-white Air Force jet left Andrews Air Force Base bound for Cairo. On board was Frank G. Wisner, an adroit ex-diplomat whom President Obama had asked hours before to undertake a supremely delicate mission: nudging President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt out of power."

Why is Obama sending ex-diplomats to quietly nudge a leader of another nation out of power? How far up the scale of puppet government does Egypt go? It's like he's firing some Secretary within the US government.

"But it is also one of political calculations, in Cairo and Washington, which were upset repeatedly as the crowds swelled. And it is the story of a furious scramble by the Obama White House — right up until Mr. Obama’s call Tuesday night for change to begin “now” — to catch up with a democracy movement unfolding so rapidly that Washington came close to being left behind."

Why is the self-proclaimed beacon of democracy, the US, catching up with democracy? We should be cheering it on at every opportunity, obviously except when it involves our totalitarian allies. And what are our diplomats scrambling for? There should be nothing surprising about what is happening in Egypt, considering Tunisia a week earlier. But just like the fall of the USSR, our intelligence agencies are caught unprepared again.

"At the Saturday meeting, the officials also agreed that Mrs. Clinton would start calling for “an orderly transition” when she taped a round of interviews for the Sunday talk programs. Administration officials were already smarting from not coming out more fully in support of the protesters earlier. In particular, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. had been criticized for an interview with “NewsHour” on PBS on Thursday, in which he answered “no” when the host, Jim Lehrer, asked if the time had come for Mr. Mubarak to go."

Who are we, or for that matter, anyone outside of Egypt, to determine how a people chose exercise their political choice?

"American officials had also been in close contact with Vice President Suleiman, who may be playing a particularly pivotal role in managing the transition of power. American and Egyptian officials who know him well describe him as both a cunning operator and Mr. Mubarak’s closest aide. He is also considered the figure with the largest base of support in Egypt’s security forces because his work as intelligence chief built him deep ties with the internal security police and the military."

So this is Mubarak's his successor? Omar Suleiman. He is a CIA asset closely involved in our rendition program. Not a stalwart for transparency, human rights, nor democracy.

"And for the United States, can an Egypt without Mr. Mubarak serve American interests in the Middle East?"

So what are American interests in the Middle East? Oil? Regional Control? Religious Crusade? Protector of Israel?

Egypt has been a loyal projection of American military power into the region; and ally on several fronts, but most recently as a favorite destination of CIA renditions. It has received the second highest amount of US foreign aid behind Israel. Being a powerful military in the region and neighbor to Israel, one may assume that this aid pacifies any potential aggression against Israel. But our relationship with Egypt is deeper than that. This aid is almost entirely in the form of armaments. American tax dollars given to Egypt with the stipulation that it be used to buy American military weapons to build it arsenal. Industrial welfare payments washed via international aid.

So Washington is loosing one of its prized cloaks covering the large amount of corporate welfare to our Military-Industrial Complex. Besides the bureaucrats in Washington, Wall Street and the Pentagon may be scrambling soon. One less dictator to make billions of dollars off of. Main Street however, should start cheering. This is potentially billions of dollars saved, hopefully destined for domestic use.

Main Street can learn something from the streets of Cairo, the power of grassroots mobilization.

From Hope to Hopeless Criminal

2010-04-10T17:20:00.001-04:00

Last week the White House announced it authorized the CIA to assassinate an American citizen. "It can't possibly be the law that American citizens enjoy greater legal protection from being wiretapped than from being placed on a government kill list," said the ACLU's Ben Wizner.
The proper response should have been, "it can't possibly be lawful to murder anyone without trial!" But truly, I wasn't surprised by the announcement. Wahsington's decade long track record of black ops crimes is well documented. The Change We Can Believe In have been underwhelming at best. Whenever given a chance to implement change, Obama has done nothing but maintain the despotic practices of the previous regime in Washington.
Drone attacks? Increased them.
Illegal occupying forces in foreign lands? Increased them.
Numbers of innocent civilians murdered? Increased them.
The list can go on and on and on....

Obama has proven himself a failure, a failure because he continues to ignore how these imperialistic endeavors destroy our economy and erode our international goodwill. He willfully nurtures an abusive and power lusting executive branch that has grown unchecked for almost a century. He is a failure for changing nothing.

These brazen criminal acts are likely the death throes of a dying empire. May the innocent be spared from the sinking ship. Sadly, silence does not equal innocence.

Deserving the Nobel?

2009-10-11T04:11:00.006-04:00

"What has President Obama actually accomplished?"

remarks Michael Steele, chairman of the rival Republican party, in response to news of President Obama winning the Nobel Peace prize. Valid comment by itself. But when placed alongside the drivel spewing from Republicans and their internet agents, one sees the irrationally combative, insular, and tribal nature of American politics, where one cannot congratulate a fellow American for winning a benign award if he belongs to a different political party. Although the comments are malicious and prejudiced, are they correct? Is President Obama undeserving of the Nobel Peace prize? Why did the Nobel committee chose him?

"There is no way Barack Obama earned it in the nominations period"

says conservative blogger Erick Erickson. I'm not on the Nobel board, neither is Erickson, but its safe to assume they were aware of his longevity in office. They're also undoubtedly aware of what President Obama has or hasn't accomplished. So why give him the prize? Faux News may use the reflex excuse of liberal bias, however I feel he received the award for two reasons.

The first being his presidential campaign. Millions of world citizens were energized by Barack throughout 2008. After 8 years of military extremism and burgeoning economic chaos, people were finally united in hope across the world, believing that change was possible. Even the most ardent Obama critics, such as myself, cannot ignore how he captivated the globe. Secondly, I believe, he received the award for who and what he is not. Obama is not the instigator of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. He is not George W. Bush. Was giving this award to his successor pejorative slap in the face of President Bush? I hope so.

Do I feel Obama deserves the Nobel Prize? Not yet. As energizing and inspiring he was in 2008, he fails to end Bush's adventures in the Muslim world. He fails to put pressure on oppressive apartheid Israel. And Obama hasn't the courage to confront his criminal financiers from Wall St. who caused our current financial crisis.

However, Obama symbolizes something larger than either his accomplishments or failures. He signifies our hope for change, peace, an end to the rising tide of oppressive oligarchical fascism. The Nobel committee recognized not just his ability to inspire but that you were willing to invest in him. Awarding Obama the award reflects this; the Nobel is indirectly award to you. Deserved for your passionate debates with colleagues, attendance at rallies, support of progressive groups. Cumulatively these actions demonstrated your yearning for different direction.

I hope Obama comes to deserve this award in the future. I also hope you to stay aware and force elected politicians to follow through on the spirit of change you demonstrated in 2008. Complacency is not an option.

Israeli Egg on Obama's Face

2009-10-08T16:41:00.013-04:00

Other presidents have known that talk of "Middle East peace" is a charade. A magic show. A sleight of hand pacifier to bide time for Israel land grabbing. It's Zionist version of "Don't ask don't tell". Don't ask about their nuclear arsenal, Israel won't tell. Don't ask blah blah, you get the picture. In the upper echelons of US government, this must be common knowledge. That's why no US president engages Israel / Palestine conflict until they're heading out of the White House, and only then half-heartedly. That's until Barack Obama. He entered the White House promising to tackle Middle East peace early in his term. I applauded his enthusiasm, albeit naive. But for someone hailed as a pragmatist, he has no historical perspective on the Middle East conflict. His ineffective engagement to date has resulted only in Israeli egg on his face. As passively talks of peace, Israel remains defiant of his wishes and his credibility as world leader takes a hit every time Israel throws egg in his face.

A recent omlet landed in the Oval Office via Avigdor Lieberman. "Israel's Foreign Minister has ruled out any permanent peace deal for years to come, even as the US envoy to the region called for swift resumption of peace talks," says James Hider of TimesOnline. While castrating Obama's envoy but essentially nullifying any peace talks, Lieberman says "What is possible to reach is a long-term intermediate agreement ... that leaves the tough issues for a much later stage." Doublespeak. What is there besides contentious issues? The status of Jerusalem. National borders. Palestinian right of return. Settlers. These are all serious matter. But Lieberman is happy to ignore these issues, let hatred fester, meanwhile Palestine remains an illegally occupied bantustan. How long do we wait? Until Palestinians to have no land to call home. Or until the Palestinian people are no more.

Israel obviously has no respect for Obama. Since taking office, Obama's representatives have been completely ignored by Israel, usually leaving Tel Aviv utterly embarrassed. Obama inspired hope in the world with his "change we can believe in". Sadly, Israel neither believes in Obama's change nor wants change to the status quo. As a sovereign nation, that is Israel's prerogative. That does not allow the US, nor the world to watch as idle spectators.

Acutely, Israel is not to blame, Obama is. Israel has been defiant of any country or world body that doesn't agree with its zionist ambitions for decades. This is nothing new. The recent failures in Middle East peace belong to Obama. He has lacked the understanding, conviction, and fortitude to deal with his ally effectively. He lacks the courage to mete out reprimands, whether in economic, military, or diplomatic arenas. Since Israel will remain obstinate and Obama will likely remain impotent in Tel Aviv, he should at least tell them how he likes his eggs cooked.

Silencing of Sibel

2009-09-24T06:16:00.014-04:00

Heard about Sibel Edmonds? She’s the FBI agent that discovered the treasonous connections between Bush government officials and foreign agents. She actually discovered that there is audio recorded proof that Washington and Downing St were dividing up before 911. When she attempted to expose this crime, then Attorney General Ashcroft issued a gag order on her citing States Secrets Privilege.

Secrets are interesting; a secret is leverage, its power. A magician uses this advantage to amaze us. When government holds secrets, it has leverage over its citizens. William Proxmire warned “Power always has to be kept in check; power exercised in secret, especially under the cloak of national security, is doubly dangerous!” Even worse, what if the secret is knowledge of a crime? Well we must question a government that would protect said secret unless it were complicit in the crime.

What we know of John Ashcroft, this maneuver doesn’t surprise. He claims states secrets privilege. I say "No shit!" Most criminals want their crimes to remain a secret;

America

arms its traitors with legal ammunition to avoid justice. Fortunately, most of the world acknowledges the criminality of the Bush regime. Unfortunately most world citizens are not in a position bring that regime to justice. What does surprise me is that 8 years on, no major media outlet wants to touch this story.

We are all grateful for Ms. Edmonds bravery. She has spoken truth to power, sharing one more piece of evidence exposing the deception behind America’s illegal invasion of Iraq. Her story also warns us how a pathological lack of transparency is poisoning American democracy. For an insightful look at American government deception read A Nation of Secrets by Ted Gup.

Friendly Beer Summit

2009-08-03T08:53:00.005-04:00

The notion that the Gates arrest was unrelated to race is preposterous. That it happened in Boston, a city with history of tense racial division, is not surprising. Sgt. Crowley’s response, although blurred with racism, reflects an underlying sentiment of police superiority, their contempt for those who question their authority, as if it didn’t come from the people they police. Our president recently remarked how he considers America exceptional among nations; untimely as it was, this incident is neither novel nor uncommon. And while talking heads debated who was to blame, I wondered why there wasn’t a 5th person at the White House Beer Summit, the 911 caller.

We are engaged in a war for the future of America. Distractingly the corporatist recruit your mind to sacrifice your child’s and grandchild’s earnings, and enlist your friends to fight on battlefields of blood and oil, the war will be won in your home, your neighborhood. The true battle for hearts and minds need be fought right outside your door.

How many of us know our neighbors? Introduced ourselves to the new family on the block? Look out for suspicious activity on the street? Do we consider our homes to be in neighborhoods anymore?

Most decisions in life aren’t black or white; we generally find a balance in life. We live in the gray. We are forced to choose between being watchful nosy neighbor or selfish uninvolved recluse. But even in this seemingly innocuous gray area, racism or perhaps unfamiliarity clouds our judgment, creates situations where a man gets arrested for entering his own home. I wasn’t with the 911 caller that Thursday in July. I don’t know if the voyeur’s line of sight was obscured by an errant leaf or untrimmed hedges. I do know that this all-seeing-eye doesn’t know his neighbor from Adam. And probably hasn’t apologized for their involvement in this situation. And this bothers me.

America is in trying times. The empire is imploding, slowly. Now is the time to build partnerships, alliances bigger than income, race, or color-state we were born. The future isn’t hopeful when we can’t introduce ourselves to our neighbors. Perhaps we can start being an exceptional nation by walking across the street and inviting the neighbor over for a Beer Summit.

"To love our neighbor as ourselves is such a truth for regulating human society, that by that alone one might determine all the cases in social morality."

-John Locke

And Then There Was One

2009-07-29T07:05:00.004-04:00

The Multi-National Force, the official title of Bush’s “Coalition of the Willing”, is no more. Australian forces planned to leave by weeks end and UK forces did not get an agreement extension from the Iraqi parliament. Perplexing that the UK waited for an extension, though this is a great excuse for leaving without embarrassing the US.

Pointless that US military bureaucrats are hastily creating a new official title for US forces in Iraq. Then again, a name is important because the original seemed to have fooled most Americans. The Coalition of the Willing totaled 38 countries, not all participating simultaneously, and most volunteering less than 100 troops. Japan committed troops that weren’t allowed to engage in battle!

Amazingly geology and coalition building have something in common. Recent mysterious tectonic plate movements have created an Atlantic coast line for the once landlocked Afghanistan. That’s given NATO grounds to frighten together its Coalition of the Unwilling for another protracted quagmire.

Change That's More Of The Same

2009-07-27T08:03:00.004-04:00

The Obama administration has underwhelmed us again. They’ve resorted to Bush warmongering lesson #1: fear as the greatest motivator. The latest target our ally New Zealand (NZ). This nation of only 4 million people is fiercely independent in the foreign policy arena. So staunchly antinuclear, it prohibits any nuclear armed or powered naval ships to dock in any of its ports. Why would the US think that it could pressure this nation into a war that is very unpopular amongst its citizens? Not sure myself, but Obama’s proxy gave it a go. The new US ambassador to NATO, Dr. Ivo Daalder, was quoted in the NZ Herald saying “God forbid there be a threat directly to New Zealand. Wouldn't it then be good for a country like Holland or Canada or Slovakia or the US to be there [for you]?”

Really? Is this the extent of Dr. Daalder’s diplomatic persuasion, scaring your ally into sending more troops to Afghanistan? Or is Obama hoping NZ’s politicians ignore the negative opinion its citizens have for the US War on Terror? Fortunately, the tiny island nation isn’t easily bullied. NZ Labour Party leader Phil Goff said "New Zealand's contributions to Afghanistan are purely a decision for New Zealand to take, and we should not make that decision on the basis of pressure from anyone else."

If only the Europeans had the same moral fortitude of the New Zealanders, there may have enough voices of reason in 2003 to prevent the US from creating the quandaries of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Iranian Frenzy

2009-07-13T07:21:00.002-04:00

What can be more hypocritical than for one nation stained with two consecutive presidential election scandals to accuse another nation of the same wrong doing? Perhaps a free press executing propaganda duties worthy of state-run media.

But unlike the Colin Powell cartoon-talcum powder presentation or the Mushroom cloud-WMD fear mongering, the

media was correct this time! The Iranian election was a fraud. We didn’t need to peruse poll results or get tweeted from Tehran. The election was sham before the polls were open. This election was rigged back in 1979 when the current constitution was implemented during the Islamic Revolution.

Iran

is not a democracy and doesn’t pretend to be. It is a theocratic dictatorship run by a Supreme Leader (the name says it all!), who personally appoints the heads of the judiciary, police, military, radio, TV etc. He appoints 6 of the 12 member Council of Guardians whose duties include selecting candidates to run in the presidential election. A country run by a dictator, and his hand picked cronies cannot masquerade as a democracy.
As contrary to political freedom this regime may be, it is not unusual for the region. A few seconds into an internet query would return the details of

Iran

’s government structure; I guess corporate news channels don't have time to do research. Another apparent omission; none of our allies in the region are democracies, not

Jordan

Saudi Arabia

, nor

Israel

, so why the fuss? I find the media coverage and hysteria misplaced and frightening. Not because the story is misleading but because the facts are so obvious. I have this strange feeling of deja vu. Didn’t the media help mislead us into the Iraq War? What are they trying to sell us this time? The Obama administration recently stated there is no ceiling to troop levels in

Afghanistan

. Will the extra troops use

Afghanistan

as a base to attack

Iran

?
Free elections are essential in a democracy. And so is a press free from government influence.

Man In The Mirror

2009-07-01T08:29:00.005-04:00

The world mourns Michael Jackson; I’m amazed at how Michael captivated us. He created the most popular music worldwide for decades and may be the greatest entertainer the world will ever know.

Michael accomplished through music what the great empires in history could not; he united the world. Not with sword, gun, or smart bomb, but with music. Music is an amorphous art, not easily described, with meaning dependent on person, culture, and time, yet he used this art to conquer the world. This tormented child was able to meld dance and song into something people from every corner of our planet embraced. This may blasphemy to some, but he was bigger than religion! He reached beyond, touching the hearts of adults and children everywhere. No use of mythology, no fear of hell, he didn’t scare us into believing in his music, we just did.

But there was some darkness around him as well. His childhood is tainted with allegations of abusive from father as well as other mentors. The media constantly hounded the impressionable teenager about his sexuality. He responded by manipulating the media and controlling our perceptions of him by leaking bizarre rumors about himself to the press. He spent years abusing myriads of controlled substances in an attempt to self medicate undiagnosed mental anguish. Obvious self contempt drove him to bleach his skin and scar his face until unrecognizable. And we are all familiar with the sexual abuse allegations that followed him in recent years.

Even though he became the star attraction of a bizarre media circus, we still loved him. He created music that transcended culture, nation, continents; his music united our world. Sadly, the man was a creation of our world, shaped by the many forces within modern society. A society where antidepressants are the most common prescribed medications while our society scorns mental illness. Pain and malaise are the most common complaints we make to our doctors who respond by giving narcotics away like candy. Those of us living outside the mainstream medicate ourselves with alcohol, tobacco, and illegal drugs trying to cope with past abuse, broken childhoods, abandonment, or grief. Our media glorifies unworthy personalities who undergo plastic surgery on a regular basis. Hypocritical politicians persecute homosexuality yet privately have same sex lovers. Internationally, governments espouse democracy and freedom but oppress their citizens and ally with tyrannies. Our world is confusing and duplicitous. There exists a dissonance between what we aspire for and the reality in which we live.

And we acted the same toward Michael. We found hope in his music. And as we judged and scorned his public antics, secretly we could relate to his obvious, yet unspoken torment. The world's greatest entertainer encapsulated all the hope we strive for and the demons we wish to exorcise; he was society's Man In The Mirror.

Effecting Change

2009-06-17T05:45:00.002-04:00

While trolling the web, I came across a post that interested me. The blogger felt that the “left” (Democrats) needed to build a unified base within congress to get “things” through. This is true. Progressives need to prioritize issues and create an agenda with concrete actions for our current systemic failures: financial, social, foreign policy, etc. However, there were two underlying issues that I felt needed highlighting. First, the Democratic Party is part of the problem.

In 2008, the country stood behind Obama for different reasons, the biggest was fear of another Republican in office. The Democrats mistakenly view this as a mandate to do what they want. And unfortunate for us, most Democrats are unprogressive, spineless, parasites that have participated in creating many of the problems we face today.

Second is our electoral process. I'm cynical of our two-party political system (in-depth rant coming soon!), its back room dealings, how money equates to votes, and how stifling it is to progressive voices; but also realize that to effect change help is needed from those within it.

We have bought ourselves 4 years; we must act now. We must seek out and promote insiders who have the outsider’s perspective we desire. There are a few Democrats who honestly encompass many viewpoints shared by those on the progressive left and it is up to us to stand behind them and demand their voices be heard. That won't happen until we disengage from the distracting bickering and narrowly-framed debates of critical issues all too common on corporate media and subsequently discussed on progressive blog sites.

Better Late Than Never?

2009-06-16T06:04:00.002-04:00

"Among other things, the Family Smoking and Tobacco Control Act would give the federal government the power to regulate cigarette ingredients ..."

An industry purposely poisoning its customers, immoral. The regulatory body protecting you complicit in this, criminal. It took our Congress 100 years to correct their mistake, but its better late than never!

When the FDA was created in 1906, nicotine was a regulated substance. Big Tobacco lobbied (read bribe) congress and exceptions were made for nicotine and cigarettes. For a century, Big Tobacco has added 600 ingredients to their products for decades, knowing that when burned a cigarette creates 4000 chemicals, many carcinogens. It wasn't until 1994 that a complete? list disclosed to the public. And even with industry cover-ups and government disregard of the facts, Americans have known that cigarettes were harmful. And as much as I would like to blame corrupt politicians and evil corporations, the brunt fall on us. We sat around and did nothing. We just accepted (ignored) the fact that cigarettes were killing us. I'm not advocating making smoking illegal, far from it. I'm disgusted we allowed an industry to poison our friends and family with 600 toxic chemicals, unregulated and legally!

This is my point. Politicians are our employees; they work for us. Its unacceptible that we continually allow them to lie, cause harm, and commit crimes; ultimately in our name! Its wonderful that we have finally corrected a 100 year old mistake. But how long will we allow continued poisoning of our water, land, air and bodies by dozens of other American industries?

Obama's New Beginning

2009-06-10T05:56:00.002-04:00

I have read and re-read many times the President’s speech in Cairo. Naturally I wanted to discuss each section, tease out hidden meanings. But not today. It’s taken me a few days to formulate my thoughts, and I’ve decided to be positive. Why? Because I have allowed the negative-energy shit-storm called American politics to infect my soul; this is my holistic detox. So here it goes. As Whitney urged her Hillman dorm mates to do, “Relax.. Relate.. Release..”
The tone of his speech was hopeful.
That’s the best I can do. Sorry. After every read, my natural reflex is to cringe at each omission and nuanced falsity. I worry that listeners to this speech may have missed what I’ve read. My advice; before passing judgment on a much hyped speech, I recommend that you read it, for the words almost always betray feelings initially evoked. Just as sailors must beware the sirens song, so too must the world avoid hopeful words spoken from a lawyer’s forked-tongue.
The Cairo speech was about American foreign policy, area where most American’s are deficient, but the arena where the world’s problems will be addressed. And it is important to remember during these perilous times, that our president isn’t a visionary. He has no specific plans for change. Obama is a politician. A centrist American politician. And that’s how he must be viewed. And he won’t effect any changes unless we force him to.
Now that I’ve failed in my attempt at positivity, I’ll end with this. Obama’s the best president we’ve had in the oval office for several decades.

Get Paid For Murder, Legally?

2009-05-30T04:46:00.002-04:00

The NY Times needs to make a new section for Unintentional Humor.

A Miami judge awarded more than $1 billion in damages to a Cuban-American who was involved in the 1967 capture and killing of the revolutionary Che Guevara. The judge, Peter Adrien, said he was sending a signal to the Cuban government. Such a large award may be impossible to collect, but lawyers involved in the case insist they will try. The award came in a lawsuit filed by Gustavo Villoldo, who blamed Guevara, Fidel Castro and others for his father’s 1959 suicide in Cuba. The family fled to the United States, and Mr. Villoldo later took part in the Bay of Pigs invasion and was involved in capturing Guevara in Bolivia. Cuba’s government refused to respond to the lawsuit.

Where do I start? The son of a man, openly involved in the capture and killing of another human being, is awarded $1 billion dollars damages because the murder victim is responsible for the murderers subsequent suicide?! Why doesn't Jeffrey Dahmer's parents sue for damages because the cannibal's victims are culpable for his murder in jail? I had to reread this item several times to ensure I wasn't hallucinating.
This highlights the obsessive and irrational compulsion America has with Cuba. I'm no lawyer, but I'm sure this ruling has no basis in law or common sense. In addition, it speaks volumes about the psyche and / or psychosis endemic in south Florida's Cuban / Cuban-American population. And at time when so much media energy is focused on Judge Sotomayor, a most blatant episode of judicial activism is ignored.

Obama National Security Pt. 2

2009-05-25T05:58:00.002-04:00

“Unfortunately, faced with an uncertain threat, our government made a series of hasty decisions..based on fear rather than foresight..[so I] called for a new approach -- one that rejected torture and one that recognized the imperative of closing the prison at Guantanamo Bay.”

Why is Guantanamo Bay prison so unique? It surely is not the only prison created during the War on Terror, nor is it where the worst atrocities were committed. But when he says this, we’re impressed nonetheless. Obama promised this. “I argued that is should be closed throughout my campaign, and that is why I ordered it closed within one year.” He simultaneously placates and castrates progressives by invoking fulfilled campaign promises and conveniently avoiding the real problems: Abu Ghraib, mercenaries, extraordinary rendition, etc. President Obama is surgical with the English language.
He continues on theme saying Guantanamo “is a rallying cry for our enemies.” I’d assume the more effective rallying cry would relate to foreigners invading their country, occupying their nation, removing its government, and installing a puppet government in its place. Besides being great motivators, these actions are very imperial. Obama deftly prevents that question from entering your mind; “Fidelity to our values is the reason why the United States of America grew from a small string of colonies under the writ of an empire to the strongest nation in the world.” He invokes the taboo “E” word to describe Great Britain a few hundred years ago, but not the country he represents today.

President Obama doesn’t believe in dwelling in the past, near or ancient. He had to address the current nuclear dilemma that is Pakistan, and indirectly Iran.

“We have re-energized a global non-proliferation regime to deny the world's most dangerous people access to the world's deadliest weapons. And we've launched an effort to secure all loose nuclear materials within four years.”

I’m not denying that there are crazies that want nuclear weapons. It’s a fact. But we’ve created a situation of rewarding illegal nuclear powers (India, Israel, Pakistan) with legitimacy, giving motivation for rouge states to acquire nuclear technology. Appearing as nuclear hypocrite doesn’t help our global image. And speaking of image, he touches on the dreaded torture photos.

When talking about the torture photos he refuses to release Obama says,

“It was my judgment – informed by my national security team -- that releasing these photos would inflame anti-American opinion and allow our enemies to paint U.S. troops with a broad, damning, and inaccurate brush, thereby endangering them in theaters of war.”

Are you serious, looking at photos (of widely known criminal acts) will suddenly tarnish our glowing reputation in Iraq? Washington doesn’t want to show the photos because they fear what Americans will think or do in response. This has nothing to do with the rest of the world. The world knows of these abuses and have formed opinions long ago. And when does the perpetrator of crimes determine what happens to evidence? Why don’t we ask the victims in these photos if they want the world to see them?

Some wonder why Obama refuses to allow an investigation into the previous administrations war crimes, it’s because he’s continuing them.

Obama National Security Pt. 1

2009-05-24T05:57:00.003-04:00

Now that you’ve enjoyed the fallout from Obama-Cheney Duel 2009, I want to depress.
As usual, the President’s delivery of his recent National Security speech met expectations. His oratory skills seldom disappoint. As for his competition, Nostra-Dick-us Cheney, predictor of future disasters and purveyor of fear, what can be said that hasn’t been already. He is so dense with evil and hatred that he implodes within his own gravity fusing together to radiate loathing and fear across the galaxy, like a bizarro sun. But back to Obama. I’ve sampled a few quotes from his eloquent speech which I find disturbing.

“For the first time since 2002, we're providing the necessary resources and strategic direction to take the fight to the extremists who attacked us on 9/11 in Afghanistan and Pakistan.”

I’m not naïve and I understand that hijackers or suicide murders operate within groups. They have associates complicit in their crimes. But how large is this group that 8 years and 200,000 US soldiers cannot find them? I gather Osama bin laden, 6’ 4”, dragging a dialysis unit through the hills of Afghanistan remains untraceable, totally understandable. So who else did we invade a sovereign nation for? And how do we distinguish between 9/11 conspirators and John Q. Pashtun pissed off America invaded, killed his neighbors, and continues to occupy his country? This is a very important fact that no one in Washington, Pentagon, nor the media want to address.

“We're building new partnerships around the world to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda and its affiliates.”

Whats the deal with this phrase “Al Qaeda and its affiliates” or enemy combatant, insurgent, or whatever vaguery du jour used to group together religious fanatics, rebels, kooks, crazies, and unlucky innocents? Actually there is a scientific process for defining who is an affiliate. I heard CIA is running an algorithm, 6 Degrees of bin Laden. I believe I'm on the list because I rode the bus next to the guy who works with the lady who emailed her cousin who pumps the gas for the dialysis repair guy who works for bin Laden. You better look out.

“We are indeed at war with Al Qaeda and its affiliates.”

He said it again, “its affiliates”. The affiliates are “enemies who did not abide by any law of war” necessitating “that our government would need new tools to protect the American people, and that these tools would have to allow us to prevent attacks instead of simply prosecuting those who try to carry them out.” Very noble, the idea of preventing crime and murder. I didn’t think it possible until I searched the web and found that Obama enlisted Tom Cruise and 3 drugged psychics, floating in a Jacuzzi to predict future terrorist acts? Or was that Jacuzzi actually a waterboard apparatus? Oh, who cares. Honestly, I know Obama had nothing to do with torture (yet). But didn't we hear a lot about new tools in the last administration?
Drones? Got ‘em.
Torture, sorry Enhanced Interogation Techniques? Check.
Extraordinary Rendition? Still using that.
Maybe Obama is thinking of PATRIOT Act 3000 to further erode our civil liberties. And as for this war, its one that we started, better yet created. War On Terror. Could something more vague be used as an excuse for senseless violence and death? This war is vague. Hence the enemy and his location are vague. How do we handle vague nondescript criminals? We need new vague laws of course! Bullshit. Sadly Obama is starting to remind me of his predecessor, except with brains. This could be very dangerous.
Part II coming soon.

The Other Afghanistan

2009-05-20T07:35:00.002-04:00

“More than a dozen Ethiopian military trucks crossed the border into Somalia on Tuesday morning, officials said. The Ethiopian military set up a checkpoint at Kalabeyrka, according to the governor of the Hiran region, Sheik Abdirahman Ibrahim Macow. The Ethiopian troops, who had withdrawn from Somalia in January, returned days after a hard-line Islamist militia took over three towns, expanding its control over a large part of the country.” NY Times May 19

A very benign blurb and misleading. A little clarity, not much, can be gained by reading Al Jazeera from the same day.

“Ethiopian troops originally entered the country in 2006 to restore the UN-backed government to power in Mogadishu, which Islamist fighters had seized along with much of southern Somalia.”
“There have been sporadic reports of Ethiopian troops crossing the border since they pulled out of Somalia at the start of 2009 as part of a peace deal.”

Somalia was pulled into George Bush’s Crusade, oh um, War on Islam, oh I’m sorry, War on Terror for well, because the Islamic Courts wanted to establish Shar'ia law. I'm no fan of oppressive fundamentalist religion in any form, but if a country plagued with decades of violence finds peace through a sharia government, go for it.
Ethiopia has been acting not only as proxy for, but in concert with US military since early 2007. This is disturbing not only because it goes largely unnoticed, but that Pres "Change" is continuing W's folly. And because a government, of Ethiopian loyalists, was established with UN blessing doesn't Somalis can't see it for what it is, a puppet regime.

And similar to other countries affected by America’s War on Terror and weak puppet regimes (Iraq and Afghanistan), the true victims are the noncombatants maimed by errant bombs and bullets. The living also suffer; one quarter million Somalis have fled to neighboring Kenya, where they live in under-supplied over-crowded camps where they lack adequate food, water and shelter.

Washington needs to call back its goons, allow an indigenous and domestic stabilizing force to bring peace to this troubled nation.
And for the believers of this War on Terror, I’m not buying it here. No excuses of "Nukes" or imminent threat from impoverish Somalia.

Irony legalizing marijuana now

2009-05-19T07:16:00.002-04:00

America is ready to discuss the legalization of marijuana. Why now? $$$$ of course! Because it makes fiscal sense. Corporations, banks, and investors (Wall Street) are still asking for more trillion dollar bailouts; Washington continues to operate under deficits and the current administration is planning on adding its own trillions to the national debt. Legalization of drugs would be an enormous profit maker for government. It has always been in America’s economic interests, unless you’re Nino Brown or the CIA (see Mike Ruppert). So let me ask a deeper question, “WHY-NOW?” Maybe because the poor no longer have the monopoly on suffering?
America’s biggest experiment with control of social vices, Prohibition, was a tragedy. Making alcohol illegal did not stop alcohol consumption. It did create an environment of destruction, murder, and profitability for organized crime. Our current “experiment”, the War on Drugs, has been waged unsuccessfully for decades. Unfortunately, from marijuana to crack cocaine, social (sometimes racial) prejudices are behind the demonization and subsequent legal treatment of those involved. And similar to the era of Prohibition, the lure of easy drug money and limited legal employment opportunities creates an atmosphere of desperation and murder. Mothers have cried over young lives cut short and fathers screamed about the destruction of families, neighborhoods, and entire generations. Their pleas have fallen on deaf ears. But when Wall Street whimpers for help; legalizing drugs will miraculously alleviate their pain.
Poor people dying for decades because of oppressive social paradigms isn’t worthy enough to foster debate on drug legalization, but heaven forbid some corporatist loses his billion dollar portfolio gambling on wall street; marijuana please come to the rescue. The irony sickens me. I don’t condone the abuse of psychoactive substances, but if legalization means one less senseless murder, I’m all for it. I pray that this long delayed debate on marijuana leads to its legalization. But I don't want us to ignore the underlying prejudices that underlie our discriminatory drug policy. Unless we honestly address social ills of our culture, the symptoms will reappear somewhere. Where next will America get its oppressive fix. Further neglect and deterioration of our public school system? Invading and colonizing more developing countries? More control of women’s bodies?

New Direction Afghanistan

2009-05-13T06:35:00.000-04:00

What is Obama doing bringing in a new commander for Afghanistan? This is not the time to be changing leadership; its time to get the hell out of there. Someone needs to tell our President that Iraq is not the only unjustified war we’re fighting.
He constantly remarks that this is where the war on terror should have been waged shortly after 9/11. But that isn’t exactly correct. We were going after Osama bin Laden, not Afghanistan. The Taliban simply asked for proof, any proof of bin Laden’s connection, and they would hand him over. Instead of giving them proof (does it exist?), we invaded. We bombed. We droned. What we did give them was death, death to everyone but to whom the invasion was based.

When did we stop discussing the oil pipeline in the northern Afghanistan? You remember, the one started under Unocal. The Unocal who’s former consultant is president of Afghanistan. Or maybe we never started that discussion.
Obama is supposed to bring change. Empire continues forging forward. Deficit spending, corporate and military welfare continues, while the middle class suffers and the investor class gets to readjust their ledgers.

Could Obama really believe the need to continue in Afghanistan? Not that I’m surprised, listening to him on the stump. But damn, I was praying Afghanistan would be a campaign promise he would renege.

Shrinking Economy

2009-04-30T06:57:00.002-04:00

Headlines read “US Economy shrinks 6.3%”.
As the US economy continues to shrink, Congress debates trillion dollar budgets, and the Treasury Department sweetens it offers to carmaker Chrysler's debt holders. My question, when did gambling in the stock market become a risk-free investment? Because that’s how Washington has treated recent losers on Wall Street. Bailout after bailout and the working class sees no benefits. Billions and trillions spent and the economy continues to fall. Our elected officials debate where to spend borrowed trillions, yet none want to save billions spent daily on war mongering.

What is the benefit of having these car companies stay solvent? Yeah, I've heard the argument about related industries and millions of jobs; but so what. These companies have not and will not be competitive; they will fail in the near future. The bailouts only ensure that corporate elites maintain their lavish lifestyles at the expense of the middle class. How long will we be silent spectators watching Washington take not only ours, also our children's money and give it to risk-taking, greedy capitalists?

The US economy has been sliding for decades; we don't need monthly headlines to remind us. The only headlines I want to see are, "President Says No to Future Corporate Bailouts", and "New Industries Create Millions of Jobs".