I know what we can do. It doesn't sound like much, but this is what we can do:
We can use the blackout as an opportunity to encourage the workers on the cleanup sites and send our thanks, either literally or energetically, for their hard work. We can put our energy toward the successful cleanup and healing of the oceans.
We can petition the federal government to reinstate a moratorium on off shore drilling, and explore alternatives to oil. We can buy less stuff, we can drive less often, or carpool.
We can pray. In our time prayers are belittled, like they're cheap. They're not. The universe listens.
Life as we know it has come to an end in the Gulf of Mexico.
A whole fleet of Chevron workers surrounded documentary filmmaker James Fox as he entered a corner store in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. "They're watching me, but they're not interacting with me at all."
"They will even arrest, I was told, off camera, if they are caught talking to a reporter, they are going to jail," Fox told Veritas internet radio show:
CNN has been told by the National Guard to stop filming Animal Response Teams, even though they had been given permission to film by the National Fish and Wildlife Service. Rescue workers have been told they will be fired if they speak to the media:
"Why the silence?" This is probably an attempt to keep people from knowing and therefore speaking out. This is ridiculous! What can we do?
I am so damn sick of hearing about the oil disaster. Really, I am. It's not that I don't care - it's that there isn't really anything any of us can do. Oil will continue to spill out until relief wells are drilled sometime a few months down the road - the pressure must be released before you can stop the leak.
There is one interesting story connected to the gulf that I'm not sick of seeing - the news blackout. That the Federal government has seen fit to kowtow to BP (gee, the US government doing the bidding of a large corporation rather than the will of the people? Shocking, I know), and violate the first amendment of the US constitution, by preventing journalists from getting good shots of the destruction.
The interesting part, for me anyway, is not the current blackout - it's the continued trampling of our constitutional rights.
Amendment 1: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. (emphasis mine)
The "archaic" meaning of abridge (in other words, the word as meant by the writers of the Bill of Rights and Constitution as that is archaic English) is, according the Merriam-Webster dictionary, "to reduce in scope: diminish" (It is fitting that the example of usage displayed is: "attempts to abridge the right of free speech")
Now, this is not a law of congress that allows for a press blackout - it's a decision made outside of any law. That means that our leaders are, directly, violating the very foundation of our laws.
Not new. Not new at all. Hell, you need to get a permit to peaceably assemble (ie to protest. You have to apply for, and pay for a permit to protest - and you can be denied on any grounds - it's entirely up to the city you want to protest in). That sounds like one hell of an abridgment to me.
Now, one could argue for a sort of loophole, seeing as it wasn't Congress that made these laws requiring a permit to protest, but cities and states. However, the Congress, composed of the US Senate and the House of Representatives, has the authority to make laws that effect the entire country (assuming they are constitutionally sound - or, more recently, considering the USA PATRIOT ACT, if they were made after TERRORISTS attacked US [oh noes! scary terrorists! Let's abandon the founding principles of the republic or the terrorists will win!]). Congress does not have the authority to make a law which abridges, in any way, the right to free speech (we will leave to the side cases involving pornography, which the supreme court has said is not protected by the 1st amendment - which is odd, because the 1st amendment makes no exception for expression of depravity).
But anyway, all needlessly complicated paragraphs aside (parenthesis within parenthesis are never a good thing, sorry about that), it is not within the authority of any governing body, City, County, State, or Federal, to make a law which abridges the first amendment - which logically includes any law that requires the use of a permit, as that is an abridgment, a limitation, of said rights. The only way to abridge first amendment rights would require a new constitutional amendment, amending the 1st amendment to something like: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or limiting the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Except cities can demand that people pay them for the right to protest government policy, and the white house can ban the press from taking pictures of bummer stories like massive oil spills or the flag-draped coffins of dead American soldiers - that's OK (only said in overly complicated legalese, as modern laws are written).
So. We have decades-old abridgment of constitutional principles. Big deal, right? We are still allowed to complain, and display discontent in regards to company policies.
Yeah. Big deal. Did you see this last year?
What broadcasted from the sound cannon before the high pitched squeal (cut out of this video - but it is so loud that it can easily damage hearing within seconds)? "By order of the city of Pittsburgh chief (of) police, I hereby declare this to be an unlawful assembly. I order all those assembled to immediately disperse. You must leave the immediate vicinity. If you remain in this immediate vicinity, you will be in violation of the Pennsylvania crimes code..." Blah blah, face arrest and other police action, blah blah.
The Pennsylvania crimes code is in violation of the first amendment. No state law may supersede the constitution (it may supersede Federal law, according to the 10th amendment - of course, if the Federal raids of California's medical marijuana growers are any indication, the 10th amendment is about as valuable as the 1st).
Any crime code that allows for police to arrest people without evidence or probable cause or them having committed a crime (being at a protest is not a crime - being at a protest where some others within the protest may have smashed a shop window is also not a crime) is unconstitutional. It's very simple - an open and shut case.
Our government has been ignoring the parts of the constitution that are supposed to guarantee our rights. This has been going on for years - it wasn't new to the Bush administration (and it certainly hasn't disappeared under Obama). It dates back to the Vietnam era in this country - when the national guard was called down upon protesters - and it's only been getting slowly worse since then. (The national guard wasn't called down because of violence used by protesters, I'll have you know - they were called down because the protests had such strength that they were shutting down public buildings. That's a threat to the establishment, and don't call me conspiratorial - power clings to power, it always has, it always will)
THAT... is what I still find interesting about the situation on the gulf. The continued trampling of our rights.
FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c). Arizona SB1070 Article 8, section B, emphasis mine.
I wonder if anyone else would find this funny. Tea Party attendees typically rant about government interference, calling any form of government interference by it's most extreme forms: Fascism, communism, etc. I'm generalizing here, but it seems true - I'll remind you that I have actually attended a tea party.
What's the tea party response to Arizona's new "Show me your papers" law? Oh, they're all for it. (note: the Arizona tea party has declared that they support it. The rest of the tea parties across the country either support it or are silent on it, and none oppose)
A law that assumes that you are guilty of being a noncitizen if you can't produce your birth certificate or Social Security Card (or some other proof of residency that most people don't carry with them - especially now in the time of identity theft). A law that gives police not only the right but the mandate to stop ANYONE they have contact with and demand papers and arrest them if they do not happen to have papers on them.
I wonder, sometimes, if they know anything about Nazi Germany at all. Allow me to remind you: Checkpoints. Papers. Arbitrary arrests. Fear. A society rapidly shifting from open to closed. This should all feel very familiar.
This legislation bears all of the hallmarks of police state authoritarianism. And white people shouldn't feel safe either. Maybe if the Arizona government develops some reason to fear you, whitey, maybe they'll assume that you're an illegal canadian. Papers, please.
It's spreading, too. Legislation is being introduced to bring the same authoritarianism to Utah. FUN!
Have you ever been in an internal border patrol checkpoint? Oh, I have! And I was pulled over and profiled, despite the fact that I'm very white.
It was Texas. Near El Paso. And I looked rather like a hippy at the time (long, wild curly hair). I got pulled from the car. I got screamed at. "WHERE ARE THE DRUGS?" They asked (Answer: Not on me). Detained. Handcuffed. No evidence of any wrongdoing, and especially no evidence of me NOT being a citizen. I was released after about 45 minutes of them searching the car.
Can you understand why I'm opposed to this sort of legislation? Anything that gives a government agency new and sweeping authority to detain anyone they desire is directly in conflict with our liberty.
I don't really give a shit what your views on immigration are, this sort of law is in opposition to liberty.
You want to stop immigration? Well how about bringing the troops home from Iraq, every last one of them, and putting them in the Southwest desert, patrolling the border?
And all you legal immigrants out there? Leave your fucking papers at home. They can't arrest all of you.
Are you sick of your preferred beverages being co-opted by political movements? Tea has been taken by the far right. Coffee by the moderate left.
Does this piss anyone else off? I don't want to think about how so many people don't know what fascism is (and how it differs from socialism) when drinking a cup of oolong tea, dammit! I don't want to think about opening respectful lines of communication with government representatives no matter what I think of their policies when I'm drinking my morning coffee either (coffee time is sacred to me - it's between me and the coffee and the morning sun)
I do not want to have a mental association with a political movement of any kind when I drink a goddamn beverage!
Hence, the Beer Party Movement.
What are the politics of the beer party movement?
Leave that shit at the door. The beer party movement is about enjoying the evening, since the preferred morning beverages have been co-opted by political ideologies.
I believe that beer is neutral. Left, Right, Statist, Libertarian, beer is for everyone. Beer is about the moment. Enjoy it. Live in it. Let's tell some jokes, let's bitch about our jobs (or lack of jobs), let's leave the politics to be discussed another time. Beer is neutral. Let's keep it that way.
Forget your opinions of the Tea Parties for a minute. You should know I'm not the biggest fan of what is essentially the GOP with a megaphone. Yes, ironic, I know - that people are screaming against fascism while working with the most obvious fascists in the Right-wing establishment. I want to make a point here, and the idiocy of the average teabagger (their chosen appellation being only the most obvious idiocy) is entirely irrelevant to the point.
CNN reported on a recent tea party rally in Searchlight, Nevada: “Hundreds of people, at least dozens of people – we haven’t gotten a count of how many people turned out there. We heard Sarah Palin talk about everything about the campaign, to unseat Sen. Reid to what she calls ObamaCare, on the heels of that health care vote and even talking about her definition of her love of America.”
Actual count was 9,000 people at a minimum. 14,000 at high end. CNN says: Dozens or maybe a few hundred.
Remember the Feb 15, 2003 anti-Iraq war rallies? The center of the 800+ city rally was in New York City. New York was chosen as the barometer for the success of the multi-city, multi-nation rally. CNN, FOX News, NPR all reported the turnout was well under 10,000 in New York City.
Accurate counts by protest organizers and NYPD put it at over 100,000. In just that city.
Do you see a correlation here? Any similarities?
The corporate media marginalizes popular movements. Even UNPOPULAR popular movements like the tea party. What does the Anti-Iraq War movement of 2003 have in common with the tea parties of 2009/2010?
Both stand in the way of corporate profits.
In 2003, there were reasons why major media outlets did not cover the protests with any accuracy at all. Anything with NBC affiliation had a direct conflict - NBC is owned by GE, which is among other things a military contractor. NPR receives substantial grants from the federal government. The Federal government wanted in the war (obviously - given that the federal government is largely owned by corporate interests, you can see why they would). FOX News had excellent reason to not run accurate coverage - they sell 2 things: fear and patriotism. The anti-Iraq war movement challenged the patriotic paradigm, while also telling us we had no reason to fear Iraq. Definite conflict of interest with Fox. And CNN's parent company gave 1.6 million dollars in campaign contributions to W's presidential run (which also explains their dismal lack of coverage of the 2000 election theft).
Now, how does the tea party movement stand in the way of corporate profits? Interesting question, since they love to spout off quotes from Ayn Rand books that they've probably never read, and talk about corporate capitalism as if it was endorsed by Jesus... It's a side-effect. We all know that FOX news is the GOP propaganda station. The biggest slice of fear that FOX has been dishing out for the last 2 years is that Obama is the socialist anti-christ Nazi babykiller communist muslim of doom. So anything he does is evil and wrong. And he's doing health care. So health care reform is evil and wrong (never you mind that the United States has the worst health care system in the developed world).
Health care reform was, of course, the first big push of the Obama administration. So, we know the rest - it's the worst thing ever, he'll kill grandma, blah blah blah. (NOTE: I'm not a fan of the health care legislation. For entirely different reasons from the teabaggers)
So the Teabaggers had their enemy: Whoever the republican leadership said was their enemy. Obama and health care are IT. And that is what they protest against.
Interesting... because the final health care bill is actually REALLY good for insurance. Big insurance companies will get MILLIONS of new clients because of the legal obligation to buy insurance. And those that can't afford it will get medicaid or a government subsidy to buy private insurance. It's a GIGANTIC HANDOUT.
Don't be fooled: Insurance companies LOVE this bill. It's exactly what they wanted. But the tea partiers are still raging against it, even though it's really good for their beloved corporate America (the same corporate America that has left them impoverished and working at Walmart).
But they still rage against it. The republicans are feeding the flames because they hope to ride the rage to electoral victory in November. Teabaggers are still fighting because they are pissed off. They're not even sure what they're pissed off at, but they are PISSED!
But back to my original point: They were marginalized by the same news media outlets (Except for FOX) that marginalized the 2003 protests. Because they stand in the way of the flow of millions of dollars.
Just an example of the way corporate media plays us. We are an ocean of peasants. They have a grand old time directing the ebb and flow.
The corporate media are like mercenary firms that deal in information and manipulation. Doesn't matter the cause, just the paycheck.
Stop thinking in terms of CNN, MSNBC, FOX. Start thinking in terms of Blackwater and ArmorGroup International. Stop thinking in terms of "is this a liberal or conservative media outlet" and start thinking in terms of "who's bankrolling this?"
The Iraq protesters - Marginalized. Teabaggers - Marginalized. The only points of view you hear are those of "industry experts" who are usually paid consultants from whatever industry they are supposed to be giving an unbiased analysis of. And then you get to hear the latest celebrity gossip.
Turn it off. Especially the crap that panders to you. Conservatives - turn off FOX. Liberals - for fuck's sake, TURN OFF NPR! You are not becoming informed. You are being distracted. Stop letting yourself and others be marginalized.
So yeah. A year since Obama took the office. How are things going? Let's count the change.
Gitmo - still open. Oh, and they're not actually releasing most of the prisoners (you know, those guys that they can't prosecute for lack of evidence). They're just moving them stateside
Iraq - still there (and still planning on keeping those massive military bases. Make no mistake, we are not leaving - there will be an enduring presence - remember, Obama has already broken his campaign promises for a rapid withdrawal... it just kept getting extended as he got closer to winning. Besides, this nation is not fond of tearing down military bases. We still have them in Japan and Germany)
Afghanistan - WORSE!
Pakistan - More drones!
Yemen - Yeah, we're waging an undeclared war against YEMEN now! This brought to you by the 2009 recipient of the Nobel prize for peace.
Health Care - What? No, no, no. You're confused. It's INSURANCE care now, because it will be illegal to NOT own insurance and there is no public option.
No lobbyists in the white house - BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Right. That one didn't hold up more than a WEEK, did it?
Transparency in the White house - *cough, cough* ...No.
I'm not saying he's the exact same as bush. He can speak. He has garnered more respect and cooperation internationally. But... on several key issues, this man has repeatedly NOT changed (or slightly altered for the worse) some of the most damning things about the former administration.
He INCREASED the pentagon's budget (already at world-conquest proportions)
He increased the Federal Reserves power for financial oversight (the federal reserve being one of the organizations that caused the financial crisis to begin with, through 'cheap money' aka VERY low interest rates)
He has not taken any steps to end unconstitutional practices sanctioned by the USA PATRIOT ACT. Warrantless Wiretapping, Anyone?
Now, granted - he may have saved the economy or at least slowed down it's death a bit. Unemployment has ebbed and his stimulus is, at the very least, partially responsible for that.
He Lifted the ban on embryonic stem cell research, which will potentially give us invaluable research that could eventually cure many diseases.
He passed his climate change bill... (but it's mostly Cap and Trade, so it's COMPLETELY FUCKING USELESS - it won't cut back on air pollution or carbon much if at all)
Oh, and we have the first Latina supreme court justice. And she seems pretty damn progressive.
Conclusion: Obama's not all bad, but... he's nowhere NEAR good enough to be what we need. He is, as I've often stated, Clinton pt II - and Clinton just wasn't that great of a president. Remember that 'better than' does not equal 'good'.
On this tackiest of holidays (Patriot Day? Seriously? This was thought up by adults?), we remember the fallen. Those who died in New York, those who died in Washington.
Why stop there? I honor those who die in Iraq, Afghanistan. But why, even, stop there? Remember those who die in south america, Southeast, west, and central asia. Remember those in africa who have met their end, and remember those who have starved to death in an economically raped post-soviet Russia.
What, besides being human, do all these people have in common? Victims, all, of aggressive United States imperialism.
In the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union, the already impoverished former empire was looted by western business interests, transferring wealth to wall street and a few russian oligarchs who assisted in the financial rape of their own country.
All of southern Asia, from Indonesia to Vietnam to Afghanistan to Iraq, has been bombed either monetarily or physically in the name of "Freedom" (freedom here being a poor euphemism for corporate empire - capitalism on steroids).
And back home, on this day 8 years ago, thousands of people died. According to either of the 2 most rational conspiracy theories (and of course, every theory about the events of that day is some form of conspiracy theory), the root of the cause leading to the attacks is the American corporate empire.
Theory one: The most rational form of the official theory. 19 Islamic extremists took control of 4 airliners and turned them into missiles. Their commander was a former CIA asset, recruited for our proxy war against the USSR in Afghanistan. He had become more disgusted with US foreign policy, the way we waged continual war, both physical and economic, against his Islamic part of the world, and decided to wage a guerrilla war against us. This is the "Blowback" theory.
Theory two: It was a false flag operation conducted by the Bush white house, using various deep-cover elements of the State Department, the Pentagon, and the CIA. It was conducted in order for us to wage war against any nation we wish, to secure resources for our country, or, more specifically, Corporate interests within our country. This is the false-flag theory, and there are many deviations on this central theme, from the crackpot ("The Twin Towers collapsed because of focused high energy weapons! Lasers!" "There WERE no planes hitting the towers - it was a holographic image!" "It was shape-shifting inter-dimensional LIZARDS that ordered the operation!"), to the rational (Dr Steven Jones, in a peer reviewed study, published his findings of active thermitic material in 4 WTC dust samples. Former FBI Translator Sybil Edmunds states that the US still had a working relationship with Osama Bin Laden until September 10th. Many of the members of the 9/11 commission now doubt the voracity of their own report).
So 9/11 happened. Decide what you will about how it happened. And what is the reaction? To continue doing what our country had been doing already for decades. Only faster. Identify a country with resources desired. Try to bribe the country's leadership into selling out the resource at the expense of the population. If that fails, overthrow the leadership or wage war on the country. Demonize them. Make it seem as if they are our enemies.
Win the support of the public by pumping them full of, in the words of Hunter S Thompson, fear and loathing. Obfuscate reality. What we say goes. Love your country, right or wrong. Hate our enemy, though they were our allies but a few years ago. In short, this:
It is only a slight exaggeration of the propaganda thrown in our faces every day. Especially on today.
Our nation, after 9/11, became even more filled with lies, with logical fallacies, with smoke and mirrors. All who oppose world corporate monopoly are enemies of civilization. Terrorists. Barbarians at the gate. A vicious, well-organized enemy from without and within. Freedom-haters. Get behind the empire or get trampled by it.
The distractions abound. And 9/11, be it a genuine attack or, as evidence seems to suggest, a contrived event, is a distraction. In the name of 9/11 and defending us from evil terrorists, we have lost Habeas corpus. The first amendment is only a shadow of it's former self (protesters at the RNC get charged with conspiracy to riot. "Free speech zones." Independent journalists get arrested for covering things from a different perspective) The fourth amendment is so tattered and ignored as to be completely meaningless. Every phone in America may be tapped without warrant. Internal checkpoints, run by the border patrol (under the direction of the DHS), can be set up anywhere within 100 miles of the border. And believe me - having passed through them, they are certainly not set up to stop Mexicans from getting into the country.
I would like to hope that these violations of liberty are getting better under Obama. But the truth is, they're not. Obama voted for the revised FISA bill - so now you can't even sue a telecom company if you have been spied on with their assistance. He has done nothing to repeal the patriot act - after all, he voted for the third edition of it. He closes down guantanomo, but rather than ending torture, he merely outsources it to countries like Egypt, via CIA extraordinary rendition.
The sad truth is that though we have a new face in the White House, an eloquent speaker, a highly intelligent man, there has been precious little policy shift. A focus on health care (which, in the words of Dennis Kucinech, is really insurance care), moving troops from Iraq to Afghanistan, and changing the venue where torture takes place is not change. Not really a shift at all. The same people are still in charge of our country.
Remember those who have fallen at the hands of those who think themselves our masters. Who would destroy us for profit, as they have done with countless other peoples.
Remember, and inform. One day this planet will be ours, by which I mean it will truly be controlled by all people. How we get there I don't know. But the first step is to remember. To inform. To see past the smoke and mirrors put forth by the mainstream media, the Federal Government, and all other entities controlled by powerful corporate interests.
It is my solemn wish that on this day, just one more person will wake up and see that though we are still free, there are those that wish to enslave us for the sake of profit.
If I can be a part of waking up a few people to the truth of corporate imperialism, I know I have made the world a better place.
The image brought to mind, for most Americans, is an Arabic man who hates the US or US interests and attacks US Nationals to fight against those interests and powers. A frightening visage of Osama Bin Laden comes to mind.
But let's look at this term logically, shall we? The root of the word is, of course, terror. Terror-ism. "The suffix -ism denotes a distinctive system of beliefs, myth, doctrine or theory that guides a social movement, institution, class or group" - thank you wikipedia.
So, a terrorist is someone who believes that the best way to accomplish their aims is through the use of fear and intimidation, to fill one's enemy with terror.
Thoughts of the Bush Administration come to mind, coupled with thoughts of the new Obama administration. Both use/used well-positioned fear and terror to accomplish political aims. Obama's campaign was largely successful because it was effective at comparing John McCain's positions to George W Bush's disastrous policies, thus inducing in the public a sense of terror that the last 8 years would be extended. It was subtle fearmongering.
Our elected leaders are, and have been for several years now, terrorists. The enemy they terrorize is us. Rather than promising us fantastic dreams and goals (visions of going to the moon with JFK come to mind), they give us dire consequences if we do not do what they say. They exploit the power of the nightmare, rather than the power of the dream.
Ok, I've gone off on a tangent here. But terrorist is a loaded, complex word. There's a lot of places you can go with it.
Another possible definition of terrorist is: a criminal who causes/uses terror. By that definition, what kind of criminal isn't a terrorist? Any violent crime has a feeling of terror associated with it. Bank robbery? Terrorism. Rape? Terrorism. Murder? Terrorism. Forcing an adult to listen to the Jonas Brothers? Definitely terrorism.
A terrorist is a politician who insinuates that horrible things will happen if his opponent is elected. A terrorist is a man who walks into a bank with a gun. A terrorist is a man who straps a bomb to his chest and boards a bus. A terrorist is someone who bombs a third world country that did not, actually, attack his country first. A terrorist is a soldier who performs a midnight raid in a civilian house within the country he is stationed in. A terrorist is a mercenary who opens fire on a crowd of unarmed civilians. A terrorist is someone with no weapons, just a frightening/unorthodox idea. A terrorist is someone who supports a third party candidate (Missouri declared that supporters of Ron Paul and Bob Barr were domestic extremists just a few months back). A terrorist is a schoolyard bully.
A terrorist is you, and a terrorist is me.
Terror is one of the most base emotions a human being can feel. Fear.
We're fighting the war on terror in completely the wrong way - we're bombing countries. This can never solve the problem of terror (of course, stopping terrorism has never been the aim of the war on terror anyway). Terror will be stopped when we stop fearing death. When we open ourselves to the possibilities of the universe. When we realize that all people, Christian, Muslim, Rich, Poor, are essentially the same. Same essential needs and desires. When we realize that the Earth has always been, simultaneously, a frightening and a nurturing place.
The true war on terror is a war to be fought internally, within each of our minds and souls. It cannot be won on the battlefield. Because we are all terrorists, just as we are all loving human beings.
So, Craigslist is now charging $5 per post to people offering services in the adult gigs list.
Nevermind that erotic services are part of the greatness of Craigslist - many women across the country rely on supplemental income from masturbating in front of a camera, and many men across the country rely on dirty videos and photographs for their source of nookie.
Nevermind that a Supreme Court ruling on Miller v. California defined pornography in such a way that most advertising contains pornographic content, as outlined below:(http://attorneygeneral.utah.gov/851.html#12)
1. Would the average person, applying contemporary community standards find that the material:
when taken as a whole,
appeals to a prurient interest in sex (i.e., an erotic, lascivious, degrading, unhealthy, morbid interest)?
2. Would the average person find the material depicts or describes:
sexual conduct (i.e., ultimate sex acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated, lewd exhibition of the genitals, excretory functions, sadism, and masochism)
in a patently offensive way? AND
3. Would a reasonable person find the material:
as a whole,
lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value?
If you don't agree with me, just turn on you television, or watch this:
I'm not saying we should crack down on sex in advertising, per se. I think marketing as a whole needs to be revamped, but that's for another article. What angers me about this situation is the double standard. Big corporations can get away with lascivious content in their advertising, but individuals who want to make a private video or have sexual photographs taken of them for fun, and to earn a bit of extra cash, have to pay money to post their services, disclosing their credit card information, with no refund if their post is flagged.
It's coming to an end. I know that most of you are excited. It's almost palpable, like an entire nation (or at least 70% of it) waiting to breathe that big sigh of relief. Regardless of your feelings on Obama (my own are mixed), the excitement about this is incredible. I have friends that plan on burning photographs of Bush (including one who's lived under the Rule of a Bush throughout a lot of her lifetime - she's from texas). Big parties planned for late January...
And, in honor of this momentous occasion, a look back at the Bush administration! I promise to do my best to make this entertaining... and keep in mind that this is hardly comprehensive. I'm just trying to stick to the most outrageous and major events of the bush era.
Remember the 2000 GOP primaries? Ah, the salad days (kinda sad that I look back on the late 90's and pre-9/11 2000's as a good time, but by comparison...), our nation finally had a balanced budget, we felt completely secure in our military and financial dominance, and the Republican candidate who seemed the sanest was John McCain (oh, how times change!). Along comes W, boasting a record of bipartisanship in Texas and... not much else. Tax cuts! We'll all get big tax cuts (assuming we make over $250,000!), whee!
So, Bush edges out McCain by pandering to the Religious Right (which McCain, still at the time in possession of some principles, did not do), and running robocalls about his main rival which suggested that McCain had fathered an Illegitimate African-American baby (Karl Rove really is a sadistic bastard, huh?).
On to the big campaign! How to beat Gore? Well, distortion always helps - Gore championed and helped pass a bill that transformed the military computer system ARPAnet into the civilian version, the internet, and claimed his small part in the creation of this communications tool. So... "GORE SAYS HE INVENTED THE INTERNET! Oh, that big fat liar!"
Or at least, something along those lines.
Other ways to beat Gore: be a better debater, and criticize his foreign policy. Bush, in his defense, did a pretty decent job in the debates. He would have kicked his own ass only 4 years later, but let's not get ahead of ourselves... anyway, here's an entertaining video of the George Bush we forgot existed.
But you know what? That was not enough, as we now know. Theft is the surefire way to win an election. This is done by purging voters you are sure will not vote for your candidate. Typically you can tell them by the color of their skin, but that is not the only way to tell if someone is a dirty liberal....
in any case: "If Vice President Al Gore is wondering where his Florida votes went, rather than sift through a pile of chad, he might want to look at a "scrub list" of 173,000 names targeted to be knocked off the Florida voter registry by a division of the office of Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris. A close examination suggests thousands of voters may have lost their right to vote based on a flaw-ridden list that included purported "felons" provided by a private firm with tight Republican ties." http://www.gregpalast.com/floridas-flawed-voter-cleansing-program-saloncoms-politics-story-of-the-year/more-937
Voters were purged en mass in Florida. Because of how our electoral system works, it is not necessary to steal the elections in every state (as there are 50 separate elections when we vote for the President)- just sway it in a few influential swing states. The Bush team did this brilliantly in 2000 with Florida.
Inauguration day, 2001:
The next months were fairly uneventful. Senator James Jeffords switched from Republican to Independent, sighting the "intolerant, rightward thrust" of the GOP in recent years, giving the Democrats a one-seat majority over the Republicans.
Summer, 2001: The FAA recieves 52 seperate warnings of Al-Queda planning to hijack airlines. This is in addition to warnings that the Bush administration recieved from Russia, France, England, Israeli Mossad, and at least 6 other international intelligence agencies.
September 11th, 2001...
...you know the rest.
Within 2 hours of the buildings collapsing, Military and ex-military officials are pointing the finger of blame at Osama Bin Ladin on mainstream news outlets.
Here, I've got to step aside and say: Since when do we know the culprit of a murder within 2 hours of the murder? A simple murder investigation takes much longer, let along the murder of 3,000 people.
As for the rest of 9/11, I'll leave it to section 2 of Zeitgeist.
October, 2001: While Congress is in a panic over the Anthrax scare, the Bush administration pushes through a bill to 'help us combat terrorism.' In a display of what I would call fake patriotism (not to mention childishness), it's called the USA PATRIOT ACT. It restricts many of our constitutional rights and civil liberties (1st amendment - restricted. 4th, 5th amendments - also restricted), and the passage of the bill was almost unanimous (only Senator Russell Feingold was with the terrorists that day, saying that he would like to have time to READ something before voting on it).
The Department of Homeland Security. Another layer of beaurocracy, we are told, will prevent further terrorist acts. Government Agencies such as FEMA now report to the DHS.
The assault on Afghanistan begins. NBC news reported in May 2002 that a formal National Security Presidential Directive submitted two days before September 11, 2001 had outlined essentially the same war plan that the White House, the CIA and the Pentagon put into action after the Sept. 11 attacks. The plan dealt with all aspects of a war against al-Qaida, ranging from diplomatic initiatives to military operations in Afghanistan, including outlines to persuade Afghanistan's Taliban government to turn al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden over to the United States, with provisions to use military force if it refused. (Source: Wikipedia. Yeah, I was lazy on this one)
Interesting Side note on afghanistan - before the Soviet-Afghan war, it produced none of the world's heroin supply. By the late 80's, after the CIA/ISI trained Mujahadeen had victory, they produced 40%. By 1999, 80%. Then the taliban rose to power, and they were vicious and brutal, a regular medival army, but they destroyed 94% of the poppy fields in Afghanistan. After the US invasion, Afghanistan is once again producing over 80% of the world's opium supply. Interestingly, planting season for opium poppies is November - when we succeeded in "liberating" the nation... Opium production levels vastly increased after the US invasion http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2361453.stm Opium production is one of the easiest ways to make money in that country http://opioids.com/afghanistan/opium-economy.html
Guantanamo Bay: starting shortly after the invasion of afghanistan "enemy combatants" are housed in a prison of the Naval base at guantanamo bay, cuba. Enhanced interrogation techniques such as waterboarding take place starting in 2002. Bush claims that Geneva convention regulations on the treatment of prisoners do not apply to enemy combatants.
January, 2002: Bush Signs No Child Left Behind into law. More accurately titled "No Child's Behind Left." Bush Blocks public inquiry into the attacks of 9/11. Reason? We don't want the terrorists to know how we gather information.
Also in January - The John Yoo Torture memo! John Yoo, Deputy Assistant Attorney General (now a Professor at UC Berkeley, which refuses to fire him despite public outcry) writes a memo which says the 4th amendment does not apply to the war on terror. He also states that the President can authorize any action at all as commander-in-chief in wartime.
March, 2002 - NSA Warrantless Wiretapping program begins
September, 2002: Iraq: the new Vietnam. Condoleeza Rice says we don't want the smoking gun of evidence in regards to Iraqi WMDs to come in the form of a mushroom cloud. Faulty intelligence in regards to what Iraq is doing: Colin Powell claims that metal cyllanders are clear evidence that saddam is building WMDs.
November, 2002: Bush finally allows an investigation into 9/11, though hardly an independent one. Initial budget: $3 million. Original proposed head of 9/11 Investigation: Henry Kissinger (you know, that guy that helped overthrow the democratically elected President of Chili on September 11, 1973). Kissinger resigns after it is discovered that his firm, Kissinger and Associates, represents members of the Bin Ladin family. http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/12/13/kissinger.resigns/
2003: "Nigerian Yellowcake." "There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein is trying to reconstitute Nuclear Weapons." UN Inspectors beg for more time to search. Denied. Bombing begins in March - "Shock and Awe"
March 2003-Present: Construction Companies such as Halliburton reap massive profits off of "No-Bid" contracts, with "Cost-Plus" incentives - meaning that for whatever they buy, the government will pay the entire bill plus give them a percentage of the cost. Now THAT'S a deal! But they only did high quality projects, right?
....hmmm.... maybe not.
May - "Mission Accomplished." End of Major Combat Operations!
July - Insurgency. Mission Un-Accomplished? Bush seems unruffled: "Bring em on." Joseph Wilson blows whistle on WMD claims. His wife, Valarie Plame, is outed as an undercover CIA officer. Controversy ensues - "Scooter" to take the fall for it, but that comes later. I think this is the last I'll mention of it, however.
August to the new year - Insurgency rages on. Apparently, people don't like occupying armies, no matter how bad their former leaders were. Who knew?
April, 2004: Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse comes to light
People see these photos and start to wonder about Guantanomo bay a little bit more.
October, 2004 - Debates with Presidential Contender John Kerry. Kerry supporters say he whoops Bush. Bush supporters say otherwise. Kerry manages to somehow be more dull and robotic than Al Gore was in 2000.
November, 2004 - Ohio is 'Floridated.' Voter purging, caging lists, a lack of voting machines in heavily liberal districts, extremely hackable voting machines, etc. 4 to 8 Hour lines to vote. Bush declares victory...
To Be Continued in Pt II: Drive the country like you stole it (2004-2008)
Dec. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper suspended the country’s legislature for more than seven weeks in a bid to stave off a challenge from opposition parties seeking to bring down his government.
Harper, re-elected in October, said Governor General Michaelle Jean, who acts as the country’s head of state, agreed to his request to close Parliament until Jan. 26. The government’s first order of business will be a budget scheduled for Jan. 27, Harper said, calling on the opposition to work with his administration on a “stimulus” package for the ailing economy...
President-elect Barack Obama introduced his principal national-security Cabinet selections to the world Monday and left no doubt that he intends to start his administration on a war footing. Perhaps the least well known among them is retired Marine Gen. James Jones, Obama’s pick for national security adviser. The position is crucial—think of the power that Henry Kissinger wielded in Richard Nixon’s White House. A look into who James Jones is sheds a little light on the Obama campaign’s promise of “Change We Can Believe In.”
Jones is the former supreme allied commander of NATO. He is president and chief executive of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Institute for 21st Century Energy. The institute has been criticized by environmental groups for, among other things, calling for the immediate expansion of domestic oil and gas production and issuing reports that challenged the use of the Clean Air Act to combat global warming.
Recently retired from the military, Jones has parlayed his 40-year military career into several corporate directorships. Among them is Cross Match Technologies, which makes biometric identification equipment. More germane to Jones’ forthcoming role in Obama’s inner circle, though, might be Jones’ seat as a director of Boeing, a weapons manufacturer, and as a director of Chevron, an oil giant.
Chevron has already sent one of its directors to the White House: Condoleezza Rice. As a member of that California-based oil giant’s board, she actually had a Chevron oil tanker named after her, the Condoleezza Rice. The tanker’s name was changed, after some embarrassment, when Rice joined the Bush administration as national security adviser. So now Chevron has a new person at the highest level of the executive branch. With Robert Gates also keeping his job as secretary of defense, maybe Obama should change his slogan to “Continuity We Can Believe In.”
But what of a Chevron director high up in the West Wing? Obama’s attacks on John McCain during the campaign included a daily refrain about the massive profits of ExxonMobil, as if that was the only oil company out there. Chevron, too, has posted mammoth profits. Chevron was also a defendant in a federal court case in San Francisco related to the murder, 10 years ago, of two unarmed, peaceful activists in the oil-rich Niger Delta region of Nigeria. On May 28, 1998, three Chevron helicopters ferried Nigerian military and police to the remote section of the Delta known as Ilajeland, where protesters had occupied a Chevron offshore drilling platform to protest Chevron’s role in the destruction of the local environment. The troops opened fired on the protesters. Two were killed, others were injured. (Rice was in charge of the Chevron board’s public policy committee when it fought off shareholder resolutions demanding that Chevron improve its human rights and environmental record in Nigeria.)
One of those shot was Larry Bowoto, who, along with the family members of those killed, filed suit in California against Chevron for its role in the attack. Just after Jones was named Obama’s national security adviser Monday, a jury acquitted Chevron. Bowoto told me: “I was disappointed in the judgment by the jury. I believe personally the struggle continues. I believe the attorney representing us will not stay put. He will take the initiative in going to the court of appeals.” I met Bowoto in 1998, just months after he was shot. He showed me his bullet wounds when I interviewed him in the Niger Delta. I also met Omoyele Sowore, who has since come to the U.S. and started the news Web site SaharaReporters.com.
Sowore has followed the case closely. Though disappointed, he said: “We have achieved one major victory: Chevron’s underbelly was exposed in this town. ... Also there is Nigeria: Protesters won’t give up. ... This will not discourage anybody who wants to make sure Chevron gives up violence as a way of doing business. American citizens are increasingly protective of their economy. ... Chevron played into fears of ... the jurors, saying these are people [the Nigerian protesters] who made oil prices go through the roof. This was a pyrrhic victory for Chevron. If I was in their shoes, I wouldn’t be popping champagne.”
Nigerians know well the power of the military-industrial complex in their own country. While Obama was swept into office promising change, his choice of Marine Gen. James Jones as national security adviser probably has U.S. corporate titans breathing easy, leaving the poor of the Niger Delta with the acrid air and oil-slicked water that lie behind Chevron’s profits.
Denis Moynihan contributed research to this column.
Amy Goodman is the host of “Democracy Now!,” a daily international TV/radio news hour airing on more than 700 stations in North America. She has been awarded the 2008 Right Livelihood Award, dubbed the “Alternative Nobel” prize, and will receive the award in the Swedish Parliament in December.
The Council on Foreign Relations runs a think tank called the David Rockefeller Studies Program. This program was started by David Rockefeller, a patriarch of a strong American family with strong American values. John D. Rockefeller became the richest man in history by building up an oil empire, but he gave some wealth back to the people in the form of foundations, funding for the arts, colleges, and even a private research university. Today you can here his name nearly every day on the "liberal radio station" NPR.
Wait a second, did I say American values? I meant to say, self-serving capitalist values.
Jay Rockefeller (one of John D. Rockefeller's many great-grandsons) personally supports "granting the President new warrantless eavesdropping powers and granting immunity to lawbreaking telecoms" (http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/01/24/rockefeller/).
Keep in mind, this is just one of the richest families in the world. There are several families using their wealth and power in similar ways with the end goal of controlling the US economy and indirectly the people involved in that economy.
The same family worked to pass the Rockefeller Drug Laws in the state of New York (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockefeller_drug_laws) that have increased New York's inmate population by over 400% since their passage. According to drugpolicy.org "As of 2008, approximately 14,000 people are locked up for drug offenses in New York State prisons, representing nearly 38% of the prison population and costing New Yorkers hundreds of millions of dollars every year." (http://www.drugpolicy.org/statebystate/newyork/rockefellerd/)
this article makes assertions and presents evidence that George H.W. Bush was directly connected to the assassination of President Kennedy.
President John F. Kennedy has often been lauded as the 20th century's best U.S. president. He was taken down, not by a magic bullet, but by a hired assassin, who was not Oswald.
Could it have been because he proposed a non-debt based currency? Quite possibly.
This country, this nation, this flag once freedom-founded, truth-based, independence-loving, now intimidates wage slaves for life blood. Where people must adapt their sanity to an insane world, would you imagine those spreading hidden knowledge are crazy? What are you, insane? That’ll never stand in court.
MK Ultra: never ended, just renamed, all the stuff’s the same, the media loves to play this game since corporate interests hand over some riches. Together, they will crush world currencies, establish four more continental unions! Goodbye, Operation Paper Clip, hello Operation RFID Chip. This sounds like a conspiracy theory.
Reported from Sheep on a Mission, state terror persists sans admission, as the ones who tell of the buildings that fell, never say “controlled demolition.” Those who speak truth are off their handle, out of touch. Loony. Alarmist. Our government would never work to harm us, they protect our freedoms.
Presidential Candidate number 5 preaches to his flock. “Their will be other wars than these, say sorry,” he bleats while blurry blizzards of tv screen snow cut in with popup ads and subliminal messages to undermine our confidence leading us to continual consumption. Didn’t you see the new product x commercial though? That was so cool!
Insanity is presuming America has a protected Democracy, when our own government threatens Democracy everywhere else. They instate dictators, falsify two elections, lie our way into warring always, and we expect all of a sudden they will stop? Concede? Bush never even apologized, let alone admitted his lies, laying blame on faulty intelligence. Oops. Heh-heh-heh-heh.
We seek to bring this evidence to light, that our government is taking us all for a ride across the Accountant-sea to sell US into slavery to the banks, the loan sharks, the hedge fund wizards. It’s time to reclaim our stake in Democracy. Let the important people make important decisions.
Somehow, still, Americans think withdrawing our troops and calling halt to the slaughter will paint us yellow head to toe. “We’re number one!” goes the new Jingo pop/rock anthem. It’s taking over the charts for an H-bomb hit wonder. Meanwhile our economy falls in on itself and the House of the Red Shield tightens its grip... Those events are unrelated! Why do you hate America?
This has been reposted from The Financial Times. I had to share this with all the readers out there as it truly pinpoints the aspect of our culture that is driven by the code of profit-while-you-can.
We as a people are experiencing a huge disconnect right now between what should be and what is. We dismiss the possibility of creating a better world by ditching the Federal Reserve. We have so far collectively refused action because we are held up by the perceived differences between cultural, racial, and political groups. If a few of us do not pay our taxes, we will be sent to jail. If millions of us across the nation simultaneously refuse to pay our taxes, we can shut this organization down, and rebuild a system that does not have openings for people to rob others legally. We need to take down the CIA and remove people from power in every single government agency, reinstating people with no history of for example supporting MK Ultra (Oliver North), working with the Nazis (Bush), or the CFR (Clintons, Bushes, Obama, Biden, etc.).
I will continue posting information on these findings until I am shut up.
Letter: Andrew Lahde, Lahde Capital Management By Andrew Lahde Friday Oct 17 2008 13:15
October 17, 2008
Today I write not to gloat. Given the pain that nearly everyone is experiencing, that would be entirely inappropriate. Nor am I writing to make further predictions, as most of my forecasts in previous letters have unfolded or are in the process of unfolding. Instead, I am writing to say goodbye.
Recently, on the front page of Section C of the Wall Street Journal, a hedge fund manager who was also closing up shop (a $300 million fund), was quoted as saying, "What I have learned about the hedge fund business is that I hate it." I could not agree more with that statement. I was in this game for the money. The low hanging fruit, i.e. idiots whose parents paid for prep school, Yale, and then the Harvard MBA, was there for the taking. These people who were (often) truly not worthy of the education they received (or supposedly received) rose to the top of companies such as AIG, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers and all levels of our government. All of this behavior supporting the Aristocracy only ended up making it easier for me to find people stupid enough to take the other side of my trades. God bless America.
There are far too many people for me to sincerely thank for my success. However, I do not want to sound like a Hollywood actor accepting an award. The money was reward enough. Furthermore, the endless list of those deserving thanks know who they are.
I will no longer manage money for other people or institutions. I have enough of my own wealth to manage. Some people, who think they have arrived at a reasonable estimate of my net worth, might be surprised that I would call it quits with such a small war chest. That is fine; I am content with my rewards. Moreover, I will let others try to amass nine, ten or eleven figure net worths. Meanwhile, their lives suck. Appointments back to back, booked solid for the next three months, they lookforward to their two week vacation in January during which they will likely be glued to their Blackberries or other such devices. What is the point? They will all be forgotten in fifty years anyway. Steve Balmer, Steven Cohen, and Larry Ellison will all be forgotten. I do not understand the legacy thing. Nearly everyone will be forgotten. Give up on leaving your mark. Throw the Blackberry away and enjoy life.
So this is it. With all due respect, I am dropping out. Please do not expect any type of reply to emails or voicemails within normal time frames or at all. Andy Springer and his company will be handling the dissolution of the fund. And don't worry about my employees, they were always employed by Mr. Springer's company and only one (who has been well-rewarded) will lose his job.
I have no interest in any deals in which anyone would like me to participate. I truly do not have a strong opinion about any market right now, other than to say that things will continue to get worse for some time, probably years. I am content sitting on the sidelines and waiting. After all, sitting and waiting is how we made money from the subprime debacle. I now have time to repair my health, which was destroyed by the stress I layered onto myself over the past two years, as well as my entire life - where I had to compete for spaces in universities and graduate schools, jobs and assets under management - with those who had all the advantages (rich parents) that I did not. May meritocracy be part of a new form of government, which needs to be established.
On the issue of the U.S. Government, I would like to make a modest proposal. First, I point out the obvious flaws, whereby legislation was repeatedly brought forth to Congress over the past eight years, which would have reigned in the predatory lending practices of now mostly defunct institutions. These institutions regularly filled the coffers of both parties in return for voting down all of this legislation designed to protect the common citizen. This is an outrage, yet no one seems to know or care about it. Since Thomas Jefferson and Adam Smith passed, I would argue that there has been a dearth of worthy philosophers in this country, at least ones focused on improving government. Capitalism worked for two hundred years, but times change, and systems become corrupt. George Soros, a man of staggering wealth, has stated that he would like to be remembered as a philosopher. My suggestion is that this great man start and sponsor a forum for great minds to come together to create a new system of government that truly represents the common man's interest, while at the same time creating rewards great enough to attract the best and brightest minds to serve in government roles without having to rely on corruption to further their interests or lifestyles. This forum could be similar to the one used to create the operating system, Linux, which competes with Microsoft's near monopoly. I believe there is an answer, but for now the system is clearly broken.
Lastly, while I still have an audience, I would like to bring attention to an alternative food and energy source. You won't see it included in BP's, "Feel good. We are working on sustainable solutions," television commercials, nor is it mentioned in ADM's similar commercials. But hemp has been used for at least 5,000 years for cloth and food, as well as just about everything that is produced from petroleum products. Hemp is not marijuana and vice versa. Hemp is the male plant and it grows like a weed, hence the slang term. The original American flag was made of hemp fiber and our Constitution was printed on paper made of hemp. It was used as recently as World War II by the U.S. Government, and then promptly made illegal after the war was won. At a time when rhetoric is flying about becoming more self-sufficient in terms of energy, why is it illegal to grow this plant in this country? Ah, the female. The evil female plant - marijuana. It gets you high, it makes you laugh, it does not produce a hangover. Unlike alcohol, it does not result in bar fights or wife beating. So, why is this innocuous plant illegal? Is it a gateway drug? No, that would be alcohol, which is so heavily advertised in this country. My only conclusion as to why it is illegal, is that Corporate America, which owns Congress, would rather sell you Paxil, Zoloft, Xanax and other addictive drugs, than allow you to grow a plant in your home without some of the profits going into their coffers. This policy is ludicrous. It has surely contributed to our dependency on foreign energy sources. Our policies have other countries literally laughing at our stupidity, most notably Canada, as well as several European nations (both Eastern and Western). You would not know this by paying attention to U.S. media sources though, as they tend not to elaborate on who is laughing at the United States this week. Please people, let's stop the rhetoric and start thinking about how we can truly become self-sufficient.
Posts
