Sunday, June 27, 2004
Fahrenheit 9/11
Saw the Michael Moore movie last night. We bought tickets on-line Friday for a Saturday night showing since the movie was selling out quickly. The movie was playing on two screens simultaneously and the crowd was lining up an hour in advance of the film to get good seats.
This movie is devastating. There is lots of humor, especially in the first half of the film, but as evidence of supreme incompetence and conflict of interest on the part of Bush add up it was harder and harder for me to laugh. Still there was plenty of snickering and occassional gasps of shock and outrage going on in the theatre until the coverage switched in earnest to graphic scenes of violence in Iraq. Suddenly it was as if the audience had been knocked backwards on it's heals. The theatre was silent for the last 30 minutes or so of the film. The crowd applauded enthusiastically at the end.
As we left a very long line of people were watching our faces trying to read our response to the film. We must have looked like people leaving a funeral. I could hear people saying that they were going to do something, register voters, spread the word, fight to get this bastard out of the White House, etc, etc. My 16 year old daughter was so overcome with emotion over the film that she broke down in tears and had some trouble walking to the car.
There was nothing in this film that was new information to me because I have been following this horrible administration very closely. There was a lot in this film that will be a surprise to audiences. The war scenes and the interview with amputees at Walter Reed Army Hospital have not been seen by most Americans. These scenes are devastating and have clearly been hidden from the American people. One of the most moving scenes was of a soldier visiting Capitol Hill saying that he would go to jail rather than return to Iraq. He said that he would not kill any more poor people who posed no threat to him or his country, that no one could make him do that.
The overwhelming emotion that I felt during the film was anger. I believe that this film will lead to a landslide defeat of Bush in November. I have seen first hand how many people right now are volunteering to get involved in campaigns and donate money to political causes for the first time in their lives. In the county where I live there has been an incredible increase in attendance at Democratic Party events with people volunteering to canvass door to door to elect Democrats in record number. Apathy is no longer an option. The tipping point is nearly at hand. Voters may well punish all Republicans, not just the president for the disaster that has befallen our country.
This movie has the potential to light a fire that will consume the Bush administration. It is that powerful. If any shenanigans are pulled to deny the voice of the people in November we could very well have a revolution in this country, people will simply not stand for it.
To the ballot box. November cannot come soon enough!
Saw the Michael Moore movie last night. We bought tickets on-line Friday for a Saturday night showing since the movie was selling out quickly. The movie was playing on two screens simultaneously and the crowd was lining up an hour in advance of the film to get good seats.
This movie is devastating. There is lots of humor, especially in the first half of the film, but as evidence of supreme incompetence and conflict of interest on the part of Bush add up it was harder and harder for me to laugh. Still there was plenty of snickering and occassional gasps of shock and outrage going on in the theatre until the coverage switched in earnest to graphic scenes of violence in Iraq. Suddenly it was as if the audience had been knocked backwards on it's heals. The theatre was silent for the last 30 minutes or so of the film. The crowd applauded enthusiastically at the end.
As we left a very long line of people were watching our faces trying to read our response to the film. We must have looked like people leaving a funeral. I could hear people saying that they were going to do something, register voters, spread the word, fight to get this bastard out of the White House, etc, etc. My 16 year old daughter was so overcome with emotion over the film that she broke down in tears and had some trouble walking to the car.
There was nothing in this film that was new information to me because I have been following this horrible administration very closely. There was a lot in this film that will be a surprise to audiences. The war scenes and the interview with amputees at Walter Reed Army Hospital have not been seen by most Americans. These scenes are devastating and have clearly been hidden from the American people. One of the most moving scenes was of a soldier visiting Capitol Hill saying that he would go to jail rather than return to Iraq. He said that he would not kill any more poor people who posed no threat to him or his country, that no one could make him do that.
The overwhelming emotion that I felt during the film was anger. I believe that this film will lead to a landslide defeat of Bush in November. I have seen first hand how many people right now are volunteering to get involved in campaigns and donate money to political causes for the first time in their lives. In the county where I live there has been an incredible increase in attendance at Democratic Party events with people volunteering to canvass door to door to elect Democrats in record number. Apathy is no longer an option. The tipping point is nearly at hand. Voters may well punish all Republicans, not just the president for the disaster that has befallen our country.
This movie has the potential to light a fire that will consume the Bush administration. It is that powerful. If any shenanigans are pulled to deny the voice of the people in November we could very well have a revolution in this country, people will simply not stand for it.
To the ballot box. November cannot come soon enough!
Friday, June 18, 2004
9/11 Confusion
This is the best article I have seen on 9/11 in a long time. I wonder how long it will take for the public to learn what the airlines and FAA knew and when they knew it that day. Apparently the FBI is keeping a lot of information from the public in order for it to be used as evidence in the so called 20th highjacker trial of Zacarias Moussaoui. Victims families were allowed to listen to tapes of selected cell phone conversations from highjacked planes and cockpit voice recorders but were sworn to secrecy. Apparently these recordings have deeply angered and shocked victims families and led them to believe that at least some of the mayhem of 9/11 was preventable.
It doesn't make a lot of sense to me that a public airing of this information would jeopardize a trial of Moussaoui unless his compatriots were recorded saying - "Boy it is too bad that our good friend Zacarias Moussaoui could not be here as he planned, he would have enjoyed this!" I would be agreeable to withhold airing of such a recording until his trial if that is the case. People who have heard these recordings seem to be of the opinion that it is American Airlines managers who are being protected rather than a prosecution effort.
This is the best article I have seen on 9/11 in a long time. I wonder how long it will take for the public to learn what the airlines and FAA knew and when they knew it that day. Apparently the FBI is keeping a lot of information from the public in order for it to be used as evidence in the so called 20th highjacker trial of Zacarias Moussaoui. Victims families were allowed to listen to tapes of selected cell phone conversations from highjacked planes and cockpit voice recorders but were sworn to secrecy. Apparently these recordings have deeply angered and shocked victims families and led them to believe that at least some of the mayhem of 9/11 was preventable.
It doesn't make a lot of sense to me that a public airing of this information would jeopardize a trial of Moussaoui unless his compatriots were recorded saying - "Boy it is too bad that our good friend Zacarias Moussaoui could not be here as he planned, he would have enjoyed this!" I would be agreeable to withhold airing of such a recording until his trial if that is the case. People who have heard these recordings seem to be of the opinion that it is American Airlines managers who are being protected rather than a prosecution effort.
Monday, June 14, 2004
Barack Obama
Interesting. A leading candidate for a US Senate seat for Illinois challenges his opponent to a series of six debates, reminiscent of the famous Lincoln, Douglas debates.
This guy is apparently not afraid to defend his point of view.
Interesting. A leading candidate for a US Senate seat for Illinois challenges his opponent to a series of six debates, reminiscent of the famous Lincoln, Douglas debates.
This guy is apparently not afraid to defend his point of view.
Thursday, June 10, 2004
Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi
Sunday:
"I express my deep regret because Reagan died before facing justice for his ugly crime that he committed in 1986 against the Libyan children," Qaddafi was quoted as saying by Libya's official news agency Jana. Qaddafi's daughter and 36 other people were killed in the raid.
Thursday:
While the Libyan leader, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, was renouncing terrorism and negotiating the lifting of sanctions last year, his intelligence chiefs ordered a covert operation to assassinate the ruler of Saudi Arabia and destabilize the oil-rich kingdom, according to statements by two participants in the conspiracy.
Those participants, Abdurahman Alamoudi, an American Muslim leader now in jail in Alexandria, Va., and Col. Mohamed Ismael, a Libyan intelligence officer in Saudi custody, have given separate statements to American and Saudi officials outlining the plot.
Here is the telling paragraph:
... The statements of the two conspirators were described by three people with extensive official knowledge of the case who insisted that they not be identified because information about it remains classified in intelligence and law enforcement channels. Senior officials in the American, British and Saudi governments have been aware of the investigation of the assassination plot for several months.
Was the classified information leaked in retaliation for Qaddafi's remarks over Reagan's death?
The NY Times article runs 3 pages. On page 3, if you read that far, the article says of Mr. Alamoudi:
The State Department paid him as a consultant to travel overseas and advocate tolerance and reconciliation among Jews, Christians and Muslims, but was thereafter accused of making statements in support of terrorism.
A person close to Mr. Alamoudi said he believed that Mr. Alamoudi entered into the reported conspiracy because he badly needed money and did not believe that Colonel Qaddafi would carry out the plan to kill Prince Abdullah.
more ...
Crown Prince Abdullah is said by two officials to be convinced that Colonel Qaddafi was out to kill him and decapitate the Saudi government. But the Saudi leader is also concerned about playing into the hands of American hardliners who might use the case to call for leadership change in Libya, a step that Saudi Arabia would oppose, officials said.
"We are going to really jam Qaddafi over this, but there is no pretext for regime change," the Saudi official said. "What is in our interest is to keep the caged animal in his cage."
Hmm. Interesting. Keep his oil off the market maybe. Punish the Libyan people with continued sanctions maybe. If this is real why not drag him before the Hague? Don't the Saudi's believe in international law?
If this information was known for several months and possibly since last October why did the US Govt lift trade and investment sanctions on Libya in April? Why have they been using evidence of a repentant and humbled Qaddafi as proof that Bush's new doctrine of pre-emptive attack works if they really had credible information that he was planning the assassination of the Saudi royal family?
Something just does not smell right here. The Times article contained other strange contradictions that don't appear until page 3, of course, that seems to indicate a more vague destabilization plot rather than assassination of leaders. Then you have the statement from the main source of the plot saying he didn't believe the plot would be carried out.
It gets much weirder. Read this.
LISA MYERS, NBC CORRESPONDENT: Keith, tonight federal prosecutors have indicted the founder of the Chaplain Program on charge that he illegally dealt with Libya and laundered money. But, there are even more serious allegations about him in some new documents.
MYERS (voice-over): Abdurahman Alamoudi, a consultant to the Pentagon on the Chaplain Program for more than a decade, now accused of helping Osama bin Laden and Hamas. Court documents filed late last night, claim Alamoudi has provided “financial support to Hamas” and “financial support to fronts for al-Qaeda.” One of the groups allegedly tied to Alamoudi is a charity which gave this Virginia post office as its address. Alamoudi was vice president. Who founded it? Abdullah bin Laden, Osama bin Laden’s nephew. Also ringing alarms, Alamoudi’s palm pilot which the government claims included the names and numbers of six designated global terrorists.
...What Alamoudi and al-Arian have in common is a guy named Grover Norquist. He’s the super lobbyist. Newt Gingrich’s guy, the one the NRA calls on, head of American taxpayers. He is the guy that was hired by Alamoudi to head up the Islamic institute and he’s the registered agent for Alamoudi, personally, and for the Islamic Institute.
Grover Norquist’s best friend is Karl Rove, the White House chief of staff, and apparently Norquist was able to fix things. He got extreme right wing Muslim people to be the gatekeepers in the White House. That’s why moderate Americans couldn’t speak out after 9/11. Moderate Muslims couldn’t get into the White House because Norquist’s friends were blocking their access.
WHAT,WHAT,WHAT ... my head is spinning!
Sunday:
"I express my deep regret because Reagan died before facing justice for his ugly crime that he committed in 1986 against the Libyan children," Qaddafi was quoted as saying by Libya's official news agency Jana. Qaddafi's daughter and 36 other people were killed in the raid.
Thursday:
While the Libyan leader, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, was renouncing terrorism and negotiating the lifting of sanctions last year, his intelligence chiefs ordered a covert operation to assassinate the ruler of Saudi Arabia and destabilize the oil-rich kingdom, according to statements by two participants in the conspiracy.
Those participants, Abdurahman Alamoudi, an American Muslim leader now in jail in Alexandria, Va., and Col. Mohamed Ismael, a Libyan intelligence officer in Saudi custody, have given separate statements to American and Saudi officials outlining the plot.
Here is the telling paragraph:
... The statements of the two conspirators were described by three people with extensive official knowledge of the case who insisted that they not be identified because information about it remains classified in intelligence and law enforcement channels. Senior officials in the American, British and Saudi governments have been aware of the investigation of the assassination plot for several months.
Was the classified information leaked in retaliation for Qaddafi's remarks over Reagan's death?
The NY Times article runs 3 pages. On page 3, if you read that far, the article says of Mr. Alamoudi:
The State Department paid him as a consultant to travel overseas and advocate tolerance and reconciliation among Jews, Christians and Muslims, but was thereafter accused of making statements in support of terrorism.
A person close to Mr. Alamoudi said he believed that Mr. Alamoudi entered into the reported conspiracy because he badly needed money and did not believe that Colonel Qaddafi would carry out the plan to kill Prince Abdullah.
more ...
Crown Prince Abdullah is said by two officials to be convinced that Colonel Qaddafi was out to kill him and decapitate the Saudi government. But the Saudi leader is also concerned about playing into the hands of American hardliners who might use the case to call for leadership change in Libya, a step that Saudi Arabia would oppose, officials said.
"We are going to really jam Qaddafi over this, but there is no pretext for regime change," the Saudi official said. "What is in our interest is to keep the caged animal in his cage."
Hmm. Interesting. Keep his oil off the market maybe. Punish the Libyan people with continued sanctions maybe. If this is real why not drag him before the Hague? Don't the Saudi's believe in international law?
If this information was known for several months and possibly since last October why did the US Govt lift trade and investment sanctions on Libya in April? Why have they been using evidence of a repentant and humbled Qaddafi as proof that Bush's new doctrine of pre-emptive attack works if they really had credible information that he was planning the assassination of the Saudi royal family?
Something just does not smell right here. The Times article contained other strange contradictions that don't appear until page 3, of course, that seems to indicate a more vague destabilization plot rather than assassination of leaders. Then you have the statement from the main source of the plot saying he didn't believe the plot would be carried out.
It gets much weirder. Read this.
LISA MYERS, NBC CORRESPONDENT: Keith, tonight federal prosecutors have indicted the founder of the Chaplain Program on charge that he illegally dealt with Libya and laundered money. But, there are even more serious allegations about him in some new documents.
MYERS (voice-over): Abdurahman Alamoudi, a consultant to the Pentagon on the Chaplain Program for more than a decade, now accused of helping Osama bin Laden and Hamas. Court documents filed late last night, claim Alamoudi has provided “financial support to Hamas” and “financial support to fronts for al-Qaeda.” One of the groups allegedly tied to Alamoudi is a charity which gave this Virginia post office as its address. Alamoudi was vice president. Who founded it? Abdullah bin Laden, Osama bin Laden’s nephew. Also ringing alarms, Alamoudi’s palm pilot which the government claims included the names and numbers of six designated global terrorists.
...What Alamoudi and al-Arian have in common is a guy named Grover Norquist. He’s the super lobbyist. Newt Gingrich’s guy, the one the NRA calls on, head of American taxpayers. He is the guy that was hired by Alamoudi to head up the Islamic institute and he’s the registered agent for Alamoudi, personally, and for the Islamic Institute.
Grover Norquist’s best friend is Karl Rove, the White House chief of staff, and apparently Norquist was able to fix things. He got extreme right wing Muslim people to be the gatekeepers in the White House. That’s why moderate Americans couldn’t speak out after 9/11. Moderate Muslims couldn’t get into the White House because Norquist’s friends were blocking their access.
WHAT,WHAT,WHAT ... my head is spinning!
Tuesday, June 08, 2004
The Emperor's New Clothes
One day there was an emperor who surrounded himself with a bunch of big idea type tailors who told him that they could make him an invincible suit that would keep him the emperor forever. It was called the Pre-Emptive Suit.
The suit didn't look quite right but the fashion critics said that it was a bold suit so it seemed rude to most to complain about it. There is no accounting for taste anyway.
In no time someone looked at the emperor and said, "the emperor has no clothes." This strange individual was loudly scorned. Though many took notice.
In a little while tens of millions in far away lands seeing the spectacle of the emperor's unflattering appearance cried out, "that emperor has no clothes!" They were believed to be jealous of the emperor's superior kingdom so they were ignored.
In a little while a few of the employees of the suit makers started saying, "Wake up! The emperor has no clothes!" They had dirty minds and just wanted to write rude books and make money so who could believe them.
The emperor tripped in public many times over his unique clothes. In a little while over 50% of the emperor's people said, "Gross! Look the emperor has no clothes!"
The emperor's tailors whispered to him, "Hey we hate to admit it but you are naked as a jaybird and looking ridiculous." They advised him that if he admitted for even one second that there was the slightest flaw in the wondrous fabric of the Pre-Emptive Suit then his hold on power would be gone. The trick was to never admit to not wearing clothes. Otherwise complete disgrace would be his lot. He would be pants-ed before the world and all would know his shame.
Pretend dignity was preferable to no dignity at all.
The End
One day there was an emperor who surrounded himself with a bunch of big idea type tailors who told him that they could make him an invincible suit that would keep him the emperor forever. It was called the Pre-Emptive Suit.
The suit didn't look quite right but the fashion critics said that it was a bold suit so it seemed rude to most to complain about it. There is no accounting for taste anyway.
In no time someone looked at the emperor and said, "the emperor has no clothes." This strange individual was loudly scorned. Though many took notice.
In a little while tens of millions in far away lands seeing the spectacle of the emperor's unflattering appearance cried out, "that emperor has no clothes!" They were believed to be jealous of the emperor's superior kingdom so they were ignored.
In a little while a few of the employees of the suit makers started saying, "Wake up! The emperor has no clothes!" They had dirty minds and just wanted to write rude books and make money so who could believe them.
The emperor tripped in public many times over his unique clothes. In a little while over 50% of the emperor's people said, "Gross! Look the emperor has no clothes!"
The emperor's tailors whispered to him, "Hey we hate to admit it but you are naked as a jaybird and looking ridiculous." They advised him that if he admitted for even one second that there was the slightest flaw in the wondrous fabric of the Pre-Emptive Suit then his hold on power would be gone. The trick was to never admit to not wearing clothes. Otherwise complete disgrace would be his lot. He would be pants-ed before the world and all would know his shame.
Pretend dignity was preferable to no dignity at all.
The End
Monday, June 07, 2004
Bush Speaks
Bush being interviewed by Tom Brokaw at Normandy on 6/6/04:
Bush: “It's not easy work to take a country from tyranny to a free society. And we'd been there a little over a year. And it's-- you might recall if you're looking for parallels in World War II, it took about four years to get an active reconstruction effort going.
Wow when this guy started this war under what have now proven to be false pretenses, he said it was going to be a cake walk and that the reconstruction would be paid for by Iraqi oil. He said we would be greeted as liberators. He told us that the mission was accomplished over a year ago in his fetching flight suit. Now its World War II. Damn.
This part is very revealing:
Brokaw: “If you're a member of the American public, and you're looking at what's going on in Iraq with Americans being killed almost every day by this continuing insurgency, and no weapons of mass destruction have been found, and George Tenet, the director of the CIA, has quit in the middle of this war, and Ahkmed Chalabi, who was a principal source of information to the United States now has been removed, and he is under investigation, would you as an ordinary citizen out there in America say, ‘Man, I don't know what's going on here, but I don't like it at all?’”
Bush: “If I didn't see a positive end, I would be thinking that. Whereas if all I thought was happening is-- was that there was, you know, civil war -- perhaps civil war … And I would be saying, you know, what's going on here? On the other hand, the American people are beginning to see that there is a positive end.
“And the end is a free Iraq. And the American people have got to understand that part of winning the war on terror is to encourage the habits of liberty in parts of the world that need the habits of liberty. I mean, winning the war on terror requires more than just doing in al-Qaida, which we are actively doing, by the way. We're searching and finding.
“But it also means installing governments that don't necessarily look like America. They won't look like America, but that our government that has embraced the habits of freedom in places like Afghanistan and in Iraq, which will in turn, strengthen places like Pakistan and Turkey.”
“These are vital missions, Tom. Because they're-- these are the countries that represent the beginnings of massive change in the greater Middle East. Now, I agree. Some won't think that's possible. I do. But had we taken that tack, by the way, that's, you know, a country can't be a democratic country after World War II, it's very conceivable that Japan would not have been our close ally today. Other words, there were some cynics and pessimists that said well, Japan can't possibly be a free society because of the nature of the people.
"Fortunately, some of our forefathers refused to buy into that. And now, Japan is one of our strongest allies in keeping the peace. I think 60 years from now, people are going to look back and say, "Thank goodness America stood the line and worked for democracy in Iraq, which served as a catalyst for change in the greater Middle East, which is now a more peaceful place than it would've been.’
“The other ambition of the terrorist is to drive us out of the greater Middle East so that they can have not only safe haven, but perhaps controlled government that have got past the energy resources and/or weapons, which would be a grave danger to America. And it's why it's important that we complete this mission, and I'm confident we will.”
In this last paragraph Bush is saying, in very broken English, that the reason why "its important" to stay in Iraq is because of oil (i.e. energy resources).
His whole answer can be summed up as follows:
It's important for the US to install friendly governments in order to prevent our country's life blood, oil, from being under the control of anyone that we do not trust.
The "don't necessarily look like America" part means that they may be dictatorships but they will be dictatorships installed by us.
This is not about democracy, "installing governments" in a foreign country is not democracy!
Bush being interviewed by Tom Brokaw at Normandy on 6/6/04:
Bush: “It's not easy work to take a country from tyranny to a free society. And we'd been there a little over a year. And it's-- you might recall if you're looking for parallels in World War II, it took about four years to get an active reconstruction effort going.
Wow when this guy started this war under what have now proven to be false pretenses, he said it was going to be a cake walk and that the reconstruction would be paid for by Iraqi oil. He said we would be greeted as liberators. He told us that the mission was accomplished over a year ago in his fetching flight suit. Now its World War II. Damn.
This part is very revealing:
Brokaw: “If you're a member of the American public, and you're looking at what's going on in Iraq with Americans being killed almost every day by this continuing insurgency, and no weapons of mass destruction have been found, and George Tenet, the director of the CIA, has quit in the middle of this war, and Ahkmed Chalabi, who was a principal source of information to the United States now has been removed, and he is under investigation, would you as an ordinary citizen out there in America say, ‘Man, I don't know what's going on here, but I don't like it at all?’”
Bush: “If I didn't see a positive end, I would be thinking that. Whereas if all I thought was happening is-- was that there was, you know, civil war -- perhaps civil war … And I would be saying, you know, what's going on here? On the other hand, the American people are beginning to see that there is a positive end.
“And the end is a free Iraq. And the American people have got to understand that part of winning the war on terror is to encourage the habits of liberty in parts of the world that need the habits of liberty. I mean, winning the war on terror requires more than just doing in al-Qaida, which we are actively doing, by the way. We're searching and finding.
“But it also means installing governments that don't necessarily look like America. They won't look like America, but that our government that has embraced the habits of freedom in places like Afghanistan and in Iraq, which will in turn, strengthen places like Pakistan and Turkey.”
“These are vital missions, Tom. Because they're-- these are the countries that represent the beginnings of massive change in the greater Middle East. Now, I agree. Some won't think that's possible. I do. But had we taken that tack, by the way, that's, you know, a country can't be a democratic country after World War II, it's very conceivable that Japan would not have been our close ally today. Other words, there were some cynics and pessimists that said well, Japan can't possibly be a free society because of the nature of the people.
"Fortunately, some of our forefathers refused to buy into that. And now, Japan is one of our strongest allies in keeping the peace. I think 60 years from now, people are going to look back and say, "Thank goodness America stood the line and worked for democracy in Iraq, which served as a catalyst for change in the greater Middle East, which is now a more peaceful place than it would've been.’
“The other ambition of the terrorist is to drive us out of the greater Middle East so that they can have not only safe haven, but perhaps controlled government that have got past the energy resources and/or weapons, which would be a grave danger to America. And it's why it's important that we complete this mission, and I'm confident we will.”
In this last paragraph Bush is saying, in very broken English, that the reason why "its important" to stay in Iraq is because of oil (i.e. energy resources).
His whole answer can be summed up as follows:
It's important for the US to install friendly governments in order to prevent our country's life blood, oil, from being under the control of anyone that we do not trust.
The "don't necessarily look like America" part means that they may be dictatorships but they will be dictatorships installed by us.
This is not about democracy, "installing governments" in a foreign country is not democracy!
Sunday, June 06, 2004
Reagan
Most candidates for President open their campaigns in historically significant places - Liberty Hall in Philadelphia, the site of the Boston Massacre, Monticello etc.
Ronald Reagan opened his campaign in 1980 in Philadelphia, Miss. The theme of his remarks that day was State's rights.
What is the significance of Philadelphia, Miss?
Civil rights workers Andrew Goodman, Michael Schwerner and James Cheney disappeared there and were later found to be brutally murdered and buried in a shallow grave.
Two northern Jews and a black had dared to come to Mississippi in 1964 as part of "Freedom Summer" to help register blacks to vote. The good white folks of Mississippi argued that segregation was allowed based on the principle of "States Rights". The legal community of Phila., MI conspired to cover up this heinous crime.
Sixteen years later Reagan's message could not be clearer to southern racists. "I am one of you" he was saying. "I will protect you from the niggers and the Jews". It was a brilliant strategy and the kindly grandfatherly Reagan won the south as a direct result of this divide and conquer technique.
This is who Reagan was. I will not turn my TV on for a week (except to watch Calgary win game 7 of the Stanley Cup final) for fear of flying into a rage over the impending Reagan beatification.
Most candidates for President open their campaigns in historically significant places - Liberty Hall in Philadelphia, the site of the Boston Massacre, Monticello etc.
Ronald Reagan opened his campaign in 1980 in Philadelphia, Miss. The theme of his remarks that day was State's rights.
What is the significance of Philadelphia, Miss?
Civil rights workers Andrew Goodman, Michael Schwerner and James Cheney disappeared there and were later found to be brutally murdered and buried in a shallow grave.
Two northern Jews and a black had dared to come to Mississippi in 1964 as part of "Freedom Summer" to help register blacks to vote. The good white folks of Mississippi argued that segregation was allowed based on the principle of "States Rights". The legal community of Phila., MI conspired to cover up this heinous crime.
Sixteen years later Reagan's message could not be clearer to southern racists. "I am one of you" he was saying. "I will protect you from the niggers and the Jews". It was a brilliant strategy and the kindly grandfatherly Reagan won the south as a direct result of this divide and conquer technique.
This is who Reagan was. I will not turn my TV on for a week (except to watch Calgary win game 7 of the Stanley Cup final) for fear of flying into a rage over the impending Reagan beatification.
Tuesday, June 01, 2004
A Policy of Dominance
Its good to know the enemy. The Project for a New American Century wrote the referenced report back in Sept. 2000. Read the whole 80 pages if you can stand it. Here is a gem from page 51 of their report:
Control of space and cyberspace. Much as control of the high seas – and the protection of international commerce – defined global powers in the past, so will control of the new “international commons” be a key to world power in the future. An America incapable of protecting its interests or that of its allies in space or the “infosphere” will find it difficult to exert global political leadership.
Is this what Gore was referring to when he spoke of a policy of Dominance. Makes you feel all warm and squishy and safe don't it?
Who are the founding members of this fringe group? Here they are:
Elliott Abrams, Gary Bauer, William J. Bennett, Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney, Eliot A. Cohen, Midge Decter, Paula Dobriansky, Steve Forbes, Aaron Friedberg, Francis Fukuyama, Frank Gaffney, Fred C. Ikle, Donald Kagan, Zalmay Khalilzad, I. "Scooter" Lewis Libby, Norman Podhoretz, Dan Quayle, Peter W. Rodman, Stephen P. Rosen, Henry S. Rowen, Donald Rumsfeld, Vin Weber, George Weigel and Paul Wolfowitz
Wow a virtual who's who of Bush administration thugs. Do you think they have any pull?
Its good to know the enemy. The Project for a New American Century wrote the referenced report back in Sept. 2000. Read the whole 80 pages if you can stand it. Here is a gem from page 51 of their report:
Control of space and cyberspace. Much as control of the high seas – and the protection of international commerce – defined global powers in the past, so will control of the new “international commons” be a key to world power in the future. An America incapable of protecting its interests or that of its allies in space or the “infosphere” will find it difficult to exert global political leadership.
Is this what Gore was referring to when he spoke of a policy of Dominance. Makes you feel all warm and squishy and safe don't it?
Who are the founding members of this fringe group? Here they are:
Elliott Abrams, Gary Bauer, William J. Bennett, Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney, Eliot A. Cohen, Midge Decter, Paula Dobriansky, Steve Forbes, Aaron Friedberg, Francis Fukuyama, Frank Gaffney, Fred C. Ikle, Donald Kagan, Zalmay Khalilzad, I. "Scooter" Lewis Libby, Norman Podhoretz, Dan Quayle, Peter W. Rodman, Stephen P. Rosen, Henry S. Rowen, Donald Rumsfeld, Vin Weber, George Weigel and Paul Wolfowitz
Wow a virtual who's who of Bush administration thugs. Do you think they have any pull?
