5.28.2005
Some Informative Reading
Not much time to write, to connect the dots between articles; but I'll leave you some interesting reading to consider.
AIPAC Holds National Meeting Amid Spy Scandal Investigation
Israeli Spying:The Mother of all Scandals
Nancy Pelosi Gives a Pep Talk to AIPAC
"There are those who contend that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is all about Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. This is absolute nonsense. In truth, the history of the conflict is not over occupation, and never has been: it is over the fundamental right of Israel to exist.
"The greatest threat to Israel's right to exist, with the prospect of devastating violence, now comes from Iran. For too long, leaders of both political parties in the United States have not done nearly enough to confront the Russians and the Chinese, who have supplied Iran as it has plowed ahead with its nuclear and missile technology.
THE THIRD TEMPLE'S HOLY OF HOLIES: ISRAEL'S NUCLEAR WEAPONS
Warner D. Farr, LTC, U.S. Army, The Counterproliferation Papers,Future Warfare Series No. 2 USAF Counterproliferation Center Air War College Air University Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama September 1999
ISRAEL: Washington backs Middle East’s nuclear outlaw
Israel may well be the world’s fifth-largest nuclear power, ahead of Britain, and could even rival China for fourth place. Estimates of its stockpile range from 200 to more than 400 nuclear weapons, including medium- and long-range nuclear missiles, aircraft-mounted nuclear bombs and submarine-based nuclear cruise missiles, as well as sophisticated low-blast, deadly radiation-producing (“neutron bombs”) nuclear artillery shells and even nuclear land mines.
Israel and Chemical/Biological Weapons: History, Deterrence, and Arms Control Avner Cohen
A comparison with Israel’s nuclear weapons (NW) program highlights this point. Although Israel has not acknowledged possessing NW and has declared that it “will not
be the first to introduce nuclear weapons to the Middle East,” the existence of the Israeli bomb has been the world’s worst kept secret since about 1970.4 That is not
the case, however, for Israel’s other potential non-conventional capabilities, especially biological weapons (BW). To this day, the Israeli government has issued no policy statement on biological arms control, and it has neither signed nor ratified the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention (BWC).
Agreement signed by Arabs not worth paper its written on: Sharon
Sharon: Settlements can expand, despite road map
JERUSALEM -- Prime Minister Ariel Sharon told his Cabinet on Sunday that Israel can keep building Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, despite a construction freeze required by the U.S.-backed road map to Mideast peace.
Sharon said construction should proceed quietly, Israel TV's Channel 1 reported. It said Sharon told the ministers that settlement building "isn't part of the road map, it's my personal commitment
Israeli Settlements (Updated) .pdf
"Between ourselves it must be clear that there is no room for both people in this country…there is no other way than to transfer the Arabs to the neighboring countries, to transfer all of them; not one village, not one tribe should be left."
Yosef Weitz of the Jewish National Fund, diary entry, 1940
IDF troops take over Palestinian family's home to watch soccer
Israel Defense Forces soldiers barged into a Palestinian home and commandeered its television room so they could watch a soccer match, a military source said on Friday after a TV report on the incident.
Footage on Channel 10 TV showed broken furniture and windows in the room of the house in the West Bank city of Hebron where the television station said the troops watched Wednesday's Champions League final between AC Milan and Liverpool.
Anti-AIPAC ad from the NY Times, .pdf
The Franklin Affair: A Spreading Treason
There's more to the AIPAC spy scandal than 'mishandling' classified information
Here are a couple paragraphs from the information heavy article
Rozen, a perceptive reporter who has been following this story from the start, gives us the essential context of the Franklin affair by showing that he was very much a part of a small, tightly-knit network inside the Pentagon dedicated to provoking war not only with Iraq but also igniting a regional conflict including Iran, Syria, Lebanon, and beyond. She does a very good job, in her piece, of showing how Franklin was at the center of this group's covert machinations: he had a penchant, as she puts it, for "showing up at critical and murky junctures of recent history":
"He was part of the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans, which provided much-disputed intelligence on Iraq; he courted controversial Iraqi exile politician Ahmad Chalabi, who contributed much of that hyped and misleading Iraq intelligence; and he participated with a Pentagon colleague and former Iran/contra arms dealer Manucher Ghorbanifar in a controversial December 2001 meeting in Rome – which, in a clear violation of US government protocol, was kept secret from the CIA and the State Department."
"In all these endeavors," Rozen writes, "Franklin … was hardly acting as a lone wolf." These rogue operations were projects of the neoconservative matrix in Washington, which reaches not only into the bowels of the Pentagon but also seems to have gained access to the higher echelons of this administration, and virtually taken over the Vice President's office lock, stock, and barrel.
Douglas Feith, Franklin's boss, is close to Israel's Likud party, and in 1996, he and Richard Perle, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks, Jr, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser prepared a position paper for then-Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, "A Clean Break," that outlined a strategy for extracting Israel from its strategic dilemma: the invasion of Iraq, followed by the elimination of Syria, and the neutralization of Iran, topped their agenda. What they didn't say in the policy paper was that the United States would be doing their dirty work for them, but in retrospect we can see plainly enough that utilizing American military power figured prominently in their plan.
Read and reason for yourself. Our tax dollars at work.
5/28/2005
|
5.26.2005
Propaganda ala Bush
An illustration of why we need to, if not be the media ourselves, by highlighting news worthy items missed by a complicit mainstream media, at least read what is available widely and think critically.
President Bush spoke to a group of folks in Greece, New York, outside Rochester. He had this to say while hardselling his plans to privatize Social Security.
See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda. (Applause.)
You'll notice the crowd applauded. He is the President. It is an exciting event to be in his presence. Leader of our country. Here in our small town. But he just admitted that he is using propaganda, for crying out loud. He is in his element though, talking folksy to the people, being "one of us".
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
The Bush administration has gone out of its way to shield us from the truth. Helen Thomas writes
As he travels around the nation to make his pitch that Social Security is in a crisis, the president is limiting his congregation to screened, sanitized audiences. Why does he sermonize on the subject only to carefully selected audiences?
These are people who are vetted to make sure they agree with the president's views. If they pass that test, the local Republican Party or the groups sponsoring the event then issue tickets to the so-called "town meetings" or "conversations with the president."
Asked why the president speaks only to his supporters, White House press secretary Scott McClellan said Bush's intention is to "educate" the people. He probably meant "indoctrinate."
Is this the president of all the people -- or just some of the people who agree with him?
It's bizarre. He's preaching to the choir, hardly the way to "educate" the public.
Controlling his audience was a prime goal of Bush's 2004 presidential campaign, when anti-war protesters were barred from his public appearances. People who openly disagreed with him were hustled out of the hall. We're now seeing the same audience control when Bush speaks about Social Security. The Secret Service and White House aides apparently spend a lot of time trying to handpick those permitted to hear him.
People have been ejected from Bush events due to a bumper sticker. With no disturbance, orderly attendees had this experience:
On March 28, three people ejected from a Social Security town hall meeting in Colorado met with Secret Service officials to find out why. In an e-mail circulated by the National Coalition Against Censorship, three Denver residents described their experience, saying they had obtained tickets to the event from Rep. Bob Beauprey's (R-CO) office. When they entered, "we were told that we had been 'ID'ed' and were warned that any disruption would get us arrested. After being seated in the audience we were forcibly removed before the President [Bush] arrived, even though we had not been disruptive." The Secret Service told the three it was a private event.
In a subsequent meeting the Secret Service told them and their attorney that they were identified by a Republican staffer who saw a bumper sticker on their car that said, "No Blood for Oil." The Secret Service also said that the Republican Party was in charge of ticket distribution and staffing for the event. However, the White House communications office set up the event. The group also reported that a person wearing a Democratic T-shirt was ejected from a similar event in Arizona on the same day.
But let's get back to the meeting in Greece, New York. I find the following quote enlightening. If you read the whole transcript you'll see that the people spoken to agree with Mr Bush, that some talk about teaching their friends about his point of view concerning privatization.
THE PRESIDENT ...Now, you're contributing in to the -- both of you -- payroll tax, aren't you?
MS. McKENNA WEITZEL: Yes, we both currently are.
THE PRESIDENT: Pretty good-size chunk.
MS. RILEY WEITZEL: No, not really.
THE PRESIDENT: No, a pretty good-size chunk of your payroll tax.
MS. RILEY WEITZEL: Oh, of course.
Of course, Ms Weitzel. We bend to authority in our culture. The President corrected you. "No", he said. What, an average Joe-lene is going to contradict the President?
In totalitarian states, persuasion is straightforward. Citizens are simply told what to believe and how to behave. But in democratic nations, governance has nuance, inextricably tethered to divergent principles of individual freedom and mass control.
As scholar Noam Chomsky says: "Propaganda is to democracy what violence is to totalitarianism."
Senator Barbra Boxer makes clear what is going on.
On January 6, 2005, the White House wrote a Social Security memo. Although marked “not for attribution,” fortunately, we have it.
The most telling sentence in the entire memo is this: “For the first time in six decades the Social Security battle is one we can win – and in doing so, we can help transform the political and philosophical landscape of the country.”
Imagine: for six decades – that’s 60 years – the right wing has been after Social Security.
The memo also lays out the first priority for the White House and that is to “establish an important premise; the current system is heading for an iceberg” – thus explaining the use of the words “crisis,” “bankruptcy,” and “collapse.” By the way, he has also used the phrase “train wreck.”
The "he" refered to is Mr Bush.
This is just another instance where the economic and political consequences of Bush Administration actions are being shielded from the people. You'll note in his talk to these people there are no details, details such as this one from Dick Cheney:
Vice President Cheney acknowledged yesterday that the federal government would need to borrow trillions of dollars over the next few decades to cover the cost of the personal retirement accounts at the heart of President Bush's plan to restructure Social Security.
Appearing on "Fox News Sunday," Cheney said the government would have to borrow $754 billion over the next 10 years, and conceded that the price tag would involve borrowing trillions of dollars more in subsequent decades.
"That's right. Trillions more after that," Cheney said in response to a question.
I realise I'm rambling, having started with wanting to highlight the fact that Mr Bush admits employing "The Big Lie" technique of propaganda as explained by Nazi Josef Goebbels; now talking about Social Security privatization. The GOP is working to change the cultural, political and philosophical nature of our nation. Bringing down Social Security is just one facet of their enterprise.
Bush, in the weeks before September 11, pledged to honor the sanctity of the Social Security lockbox except in the event of recession, war, or a national emergency. But after "everything changed" on 9/11, he reportedly gloated to his budget director, Mitch Daniels, "Lucky me--I hit the trifecta!"
I caught the propaganda quote at American Samizdat, posted by Dr. Menlo.
5/26/2005
|
5.25.2005
Blogging, the FEC and Us
I'll offer you some links shedding light on the fact that the Federal Election Commission is considering regulating political blogging; the window of oppurtunity for public comments ends June 3rd- so I guess if you are concerned, as I am, you'll want to get a move on.
You can reach the FEC here: internet@fec.gov
You must include your name and postal address for your thoughts to be considered.
The Center for Technology and Democracy offers a set of "principals" that they and The Institute for Politics, Democracy and the Internet have worked up a sort of guideline for the FEC and Congress concerning online political speech. They also offer you a chance to answer some question about how you use the World Wide Web to help the FEC folks get a handle on the blogosphere.
Daily Kos has more info, please give it a look over.
5/25/2005
|
5.24.2005
Some Polls
54% of Americans polled think Mr Bush is doing an overall crappy job as President according to a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll. 60% say he is doing a badjob with the U.S economy, 67% say his scheming to privatize Social Security is wrongheaded. 60% disagree with how he is handling Iraq. Check out the link offered to see more, including some polling on our legislators
Maybe I'm to much of a thinker, but what is with this statement:
On a separate question asked of half the respondents, 48 percent said they favored the Democrats in the dispute and 40 percent favored the GOP.
How about giving us the question asked? Even in a short article it seems sensible- especially since odds are "On a separate question asked" uses more space than transparently stating the subject of the question...
George Mason University’s History News Network has found that eight in ten historians responding see the Bush presidency an overall failure.
Of 415 historians who expressed a view of President Bush’s administration to this point as a success or failure, 338 classified it as a failure and 77 as a success. (Moreover, it seems likely that at least eight of those who said it is a success were being sarcastic, since seven said Bush’s presidency is only the best since Clinton’s and one named Millard Fillmore.) Twelve percent of all the historians who responded rate the current presidency the worst in all of American history, not too far behind the 19 percent who see it at this point as an overall success.
I see the Bush presidency as a miserable failure, I feel the facts bear me out.
What do you think? Participate in an unscientific comment box poll.
5/24/2005
|
5.23.2005
America: Land of the Free?
A senior congressman, James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), is working quietly but efficiently to turn the entire United States population into informants--by force.
Sensenbrenner, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee Chairman, has introduced legislation that would essentially draft every American into the war on drugs. H.R. 1528, cynically named "Safe Access to Drug Treatment and Child Protection Act," would compel people to spy on their family members and neighbors, and even go undercover and wear a wire if needed. If a person resisted, he or she would face mandatory incarceration.
Here's how the "spy" section of the legislation works: If you "witness" certain drug offenses taking place or "learn" about them, you must report the offenses to law enforcement within 24 hours and provide "full assistance in the investigation, apprehension and prosecution" of the people involved. Failure to do so would be a crime punishable by a mandatory minimum two-year prison sentence, and a maximum sentence of 10 years.
Read More...
Interesting fellow, this Sensenbrenner:
Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner III, R-Wis., told cable industry executives attending the National Cable & Telecommunications Assn. conference here on Monday that criminal prosecution would be a more efficient way to enforce the indecency regulations.
"I'd prefer using the criminal process rather than the regulatory process," Sensenbrenner told the executives.
Mr Sensenbrenner also brought us the Real ID Act- at least the proposal creating immigration enforcement private bounty hunters was removed before it was tacked onto $82 billion appropriations bill to further fund Mr Bush's war on Iraq.
“Democrats have been completely shut out of the backroom negotiations
that I understand have taken place this week about the REAL ID Act,” Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said.
Hiding the Act in a bill concerning appropriations supporting our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan forced the Democrats hand, "not supporting our troops" financially would be spun hard in the next elections. I'm disappointed that "We the People" seem to lack the faculties of critical reasoning to question both the Real ID Act and the why it was slipped into the "emergency" appropriation bill, avoiding debate in the Senate.
Before we can escape from prison, we must know we are in one.
edited, material added 5.24.05
5/23/2005
|
|
|
