Remembering Pete
One of the worst thing about being a radical lefty back in the 50’s and 60’s was the paranoia and mistrust generated by being constantly surveilled by the Feds and the various local red squads. (No, it didn’t start with 9/11).
The best thing about being a lefty back then was that we were always singing. We sang at meetings, on picket lines, at rallies and, best of all, at summer camp in the country and winter hootenanies in the city.
Pete Seeger was always there, long and lean like a Giacometti sculpture come to life, his battle sword a long-necked Vega. From the first time I saw him when I was probably nine or ten, I was awed. And I’ve stayed that way ever since.
I bought my first banjo, a cheap Kay, because of Pete. I bought my second, a Paramount, because Pete’s book, a booklet really, on how to play the banjo introduced me to Earl Scruggs. Still today, when I pick up the instrument and get ready to play, the first tune that invariably comes out, as if by itself, is “Kisses Sweeter Than Wine.”
It’s because of Pete that I went south to do the folk festivals. The best part of my trip with Dylan was joining voices with what became the Freedom Singers in Atlanta and the students at Tougaloo.
Pete, like my parents, was for a time a big C card-carrying communist. But he was Yankee wayback and my folks were foreign born Croats. In a home where English was a second language, I grew up thinking that reds most likely were foreign agents peddling an alien ideology. Pete, among others, taught me differently. He was probably the most patriotic American I had ever encountered. He was immersed and in love with the music, culture and history of his country. His politics, never harsh or accusatory, were always aimed at getting the people themselves to make their country better.
I’m lucky to have spent my 74 years in the time of two American civic saints. One of them, Ralph Nader, is still raising hell for all of us, whether we appreciate it or not. The other, Pete Seeger, left us on Monday, like his buddy Woody, bound for glory.
Wednesday, January 29, 2014
Friday, January 17, 2014
...it has become increasingly clear that no prominent banker would be prosecuted for fraud in the run-up to the financial crisis.
With the exception of the unfortunate William Henry Harrison, every president has left his mark on history. So far, Barack Obama’s distinction is turning these United States from a plutocracy into a kleptocracy.
While he’s avid about detaining, disappearing and droning whistle blowers, and even terrorists, he remains well disposed to the perpetrators of the biggest financial crimes in history. Rather than prosecuting them, he prefers golfing with them.
Of course, there’s nothing new about the rich getting away with almost everything. But up until Obama that ‘almost’ consisted of some felonious financiers actually getting their comeuppance. In the Great Depression, Richard Whitney, head of the New York Stock Exchange, did three years in the clink. In the big savings and loan scandal in the 80’s, 700 banks went belly up and over a thousand bankers were prosecuted. Bernie Madoff, if you recall, was arrested when Bush was still in the White House. He paid dearly for his scams because he robbed a lot of rich people. And that's not allowed in capitalist America.
But cheating the unrich has become a flagrant business under Obama. Typically, the media reported that Bank of America and its peers openly hired people at $10 bucks an hour to forge mortgage documents. Usury, a crime in the Bible but no longer in America, has become ubiquitous.
Though the wealthiest banksters are obviously immune from criminal prosecution no matter the nature of their crimes, their corporations have been obliged to share a small part of their swag with Uncle Sam. There are loads of lawyers at the Justice Department busily negotiating fines with the culpables. They often announce big numbers, like the $13 billion JP Morgan Chase is supposed to pony up for its predations. Little noted is that many of the penalties are tax deductible or, that after cases quiet down, the Feds reduce or forgive the fines. So the bad guys are sometimes slightly discomfited, but not enough to bother business as usual. That's why their share prices keep rising despite the penalties.
Not surprisingly, we have been treated to a spate of stories recently about how well Wall Street has weathered all the wrist slaps Obama has laid on them. Below are two recent headlines with their links that tell us that we indeed live in a kleptocracy
Steep Penalties Taken in Stride
By JPMorgan Chase
Bank of America Fourth-quarter Profit Rises
As Bank Shakes Off Financial Crisis
I’m no lawyer, but it seems to me that if you commit crimes, the punishment ought to abash you a bit and discourage you from committing others in the future. Crime should not make you richer, fatter and happier--unless, of course, you live in Obamaland.
Friday, January 3, 2014
At Least, He's Good at Something
"The United States is quietly rushing dozens of Hellfire missiles and low-tech surveillance drones to Iraq to help government forces combat an explosion of violence by a Qaeda-backed insurgency that is gaining territory in both western Iraq and neighboring Syria."
"The new signs of an energized but fragmented jihadist threat, stretching from Mali and Libya in the west to Yemen in the east, have complicated the narrative of a weakened Al Qaeda that President Obama offered in May in a landmark speech heralding the end of the war on terrorism. The leaders of the Senate and House intelligence committees, Senator Dianne Feinstein of California and Representative Mike Rogers of Michigan, raised warnings...when they said that Americans were 'not safer' from terrorist attacks than they were in 2011."
"Baghdad — Radical Sunni militants aligned with Al Qaeda threatened Thursday to seize control of Falluja and Ramadi, two of the most important cities in Iraq, setting fire to police stations, freeing prisoners from jail and occupying mosques, as the government rushed troop reinforcements to the areas."
"Turns out I'm really good at killing people...Didn't know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine".--Barack Obama
As the above quotes reveal, Barack Obama’s self-proclaimed “strong suit for killing” hasn’t added much to the empire’s military prospects. A dozen years after we used 9/11 as an excuse to make futuristic war on the feudal tribes of west Asia, it looks like the tribes are surging while we’re scrambling.
Over this lost decade of faraway fighting, American have learned exotic words like jihad, taliban, Pashtun and al qaeda. But they have forgotten a perfectly common English word named victory. It’s been all but banished from official discourse. The reason is that our leaders, with their stupid scorn of history, have finally learned the hard way that there is rarely victory when you make war between the Levant and the Hindu Kush. Instead, there are constantly shifting alliances, episodes of advantage and disadvantage, and few scorecards. For example, see the currently kissyface Saudis and Israelis worrying that Obama will cut a deal with evil Iran that leaves them in the dumper. Such gallimaufry is as good as it gets.
And so neither Dems nor Reps, libs nor cons call for the impossibility of victory in Iraq, Afghanistan, Waziristan, Yemen, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, etc. In fact, they don’t say much at all about those places. They just keep signing the bills for additional billions in arms and aid to keep the conflicts roiling and the Pentagon's gun runners fat and happy.
Thus here we are a dozen years on, still fighting the same feudal foes with nothing much to show for it--apart, that is, from Barack Obama discovering that he’s far more adept at presiding over real death panels than helping Americans to be healthier
"The United States is quietly rushing dozens of Hellfire missiles and low-tech surveillance drones to Iraq to help government forces combat an explosion of violence by a Qaeda-backed insurgency that is gaining territory in both western Iraq and neighboring Syria."
"The new signs of an energized but fragmented jihadist threat, stretching from Mali and Libya in the west to Yemen in the east, have complicated the narrative of a weakened Al Qaeda that President Obama offered in May in a landmark speech heralding the end of the war on terrorism. The leaders of the Senate and House intelligence committees, Senator Dianne Feinstein of California and Representative Mike Rogers of Michigan, raised warnings...when they said that Americans were 'not safer' from terrorist attacks than they were in 2011."
"Baghdad — Radical Sunni militants aligned with Al Qaeda threatened Thursday to seize control of Falluja and Ramadi, two of the most important cities in Iraq, setting fire to police stations, freeing prisoners from jail and occupying mosques, as the government rushed troop reinforcements to the areas."
"Turns out I'm really good at killing people...Didn't know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine".--Barack Obama
As the above quotes reveal, Barack Obama’s self-proclaimed “strong suit for killing” hasn’t added much to the empire’s military prospects. A dozen years after we used 9/11 as an excuse to make futuristic war on the feudal tribes of west Asia, it looks like the tribes are surging while we’re scrambling.
Over this lost decade of faraway fighting, American have learned exotic words like jihad, taliban, Pashtun and al qaeda. But they have forgotten a perfectly common English word named victory. It’s been all but banished from official discourse. The reason is that our leaders, with their stupid scorn of history, have finally learned the hard way that there is rarely victory when you make war between the Levant and the Hindu Kush. Instead, there are constantly shifting alliances, episodes of advantage and disadvantage, and few scorecards. For example, see the currently kissyface Saudis and Israelis worrying that Obama will cut a deal with evil Iran that leaves them in the dumper. Such gallimaufry is as good as it gets.
And so neither Dems nor Reps, libs nor cons call for the impossibility of victory in Iraq, Afghanistan, Waziristan, Yemen, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, etc. In fact, they don’t say much at all about those places. They just keep signing the bills for additional billions in arms and aid to keep the conflicts roiling and the Pentagon's gun runners fat and happy.
Thus here we are a dozen years on, still fighting the same feudal foes with nothing much to show for it--apart, that is, from Barack Obama discovering that he’s far more adept at presiding over real death panels than helping Americans to be healthier
Wednesday, December 18, 2013
Commie Christmas
I grew up in a family and a community in which not being religious was the same as not being Martian. In other words, it was something never contemplated. Both of my parents were born into the Catholic culture of Dalmatia. My father, an easy-going sort, simply ignored religion as a reactionary relic for which he had no need. He called the church the “Black lnternational” as opposed to the “Red International” fathered by Karl Marx.
My mother went sincerely to church from childhood, but in the 1930’s switched to a rival faith called communism. Unlike my father, she was an angry apostate, disillusioned by the cynicism and corruption of the Roman circus.
Despite all that, we celebrated a traditional Christmas every year. We picked out a tree, decorated it, laid presents beneath it, cooked all sorts of Dalmatian goodies, dressed the turkey, and enjoyed a noisy feast populated by cousins, aunts and uncles presided over by the pious and imperious Matija, a grandma among grandmas.
One year, I got a brace of Roy Rogers cap guns with real leather holsters. But the best year was when I got a set of Lional Trains. Just like Ralphie in “The Christmas Story,” I really wanted a Red Ryder BB gun. I never got one because ‘it could put your eye out.’
I married a rootless cosmopolitan like myself and we raised our son without a thought about religion. Nevertheless, we also celebrated a traditional Christmas every year. When my kid was younger we played carols together with him on violin and me on banjo. When we could find them, we enjoyed heritage turkeys (dearer, tougher, more patriotic and far more flavorful than factory birds). In other words, we godless enjoy Xmas a lot--although not enough to do much shopping.
Fox News and the righties demonize atheists like me and mine as being at war with Christmas. As with so many other issues they are simply full of shit.
-------
Note to the NSA and any other official bodies who may surveille this blog: My commie parents have been beyond the reach of repression lo these decades. As for me, I cop to being a not very active Green Party adherent and a member of the Bubble Bath Car Wash Club. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.
I grew up in a family and a community in which not being religious was the same as not being Martian. In other words, it was something never contemplated. Both of my parents were born into the Catholic culture of Dalmatia. My father, an easy-going sort, simply ignored religion as a reactionary relic for which he had no need. He called the church the “Black lnternational” as opposed to the “Red International” fathered by Karl Marx.
My mother went sincerely to church from childhood, but in the 1930’s switched to a rival faith called communism. Unlike my father, she was an angry apostate, disillusioned by the cynicism and corruption of the Roman circus.
Despite all that, we celebrated a traditional Christmas every year. We picked out a tree, decorated it, laid presents beneath it, cooked all sorts of Dalmatian goodies, dressed the turkey, and enjoyed a noisy feast populated by cousins, aunts and uncles presided over by the pious and imperious Matija, a grandma among grandmas.
One year, I got a brace of Roy Rogers cap guns with real leather holsters. But the best year was when I got a set of Lional Trains. Just like Ralphie in “The Christmas Story,” I really wanted a Red Ryder BB gun. I never got one because ‘it could put your eye out.’
I married a rootless cosmopolitan like myself and we raised our son without a thought about religion. Nevertheless, we also celebrated a traditional Christmas every year. When my kid was younger we played carols together with him on violin and me on banjo. When we could find them, we enjoyed heritage turkeys (dearer, tougher, more patriotic and far more flavorful than factory birds). In other words, we godless enjoy Xmas a lot--although not enough to do much shopping.
Fox News and the righties demonize atheists like me and mine as being at war with Christmas. As with so many other issues they are simply full of shit.
-------
Note to the NSA and any other official bodies who may surveille this blog: My commie parents have been beyond the reach of repression lo these decades. As for me, I cop to being a not very active Green Party adherent and a member of the Bubble Bath Car Wash Club. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.
Saturday, December 7, 2013
Crocodile Tears
Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger had adopted a policy known as the Tar Baby Option, according to which the US sought to maintain close relations with the white rulers in South Africa. Ronald Reagan continued to support links with South Africa, describing the ANC as "a terrorist organization", but congressional pressure forced increased distance between the two governments.--Wikipedia
If there is a country that has committed unspeakable atrocities in the world it is the United States of America. They don't care for human beings. Who are they now to pretend that they are the policemen of the world, the ones that should decided for the people of Iraq what should be done with their government and their leadership?--Nelson Mandela
It was a CIA tip in 1962 to their buddies in the fascist South African police that put Nelson Mandela in prison for 27 years. And it was only five years ago, long after Mandela had served as president of his country, won the Nobel Peace Prize and had become a universally admired figure, that Washington finally removed him from its terrorist watch list.
Official America and its kept media hated Mandela just as they hated Martin Luther King. To them, Mandela was a communist terrorist, the worst things, apart from also being a Muslim atheist, that anyone could be. (In fact, he was for a time a member of the South African Communist Party.)
In other words, most of the encomiums to Mandela we’ve heard from on top in recent days are, like the Mafia attending the funerals of its victims, obscene exercises in cynicism.
Back when the apartheid regime was at its murderous worst, the pro-Nazi racists who ran it were reassured that the U.S. and Israel*, its two best friends in the world, had its back.
But in time, the forces of freedom won out, sending apartheid rule to hell and inspiring the beaten down across the globe. Washington had to reluctantly join the celebratory crowd, lest it lose propaganda points by mourning or, worse, trying to revive the ancien regime.
Plus there were business opportunities aplenty in the new democratically-ruled South Africa. Calling its president a criminal was obviously not the way to make friends and profits. And so the official U.S. designation of Nelson Mandela as a terrorist was quietly dropped by the Bush administration in 2008. Pols and pundits switched gears as they had done with Chairman Mao back in 1970 and began pretending that Mandela was their hero all along.
Mandela was lucky. If he had remained on the list after 2008, Obama might have droned him.
*See: The Unspoken Alliance: Israel's Secret Relationship with Apartheid South Africa by Sasha Polokow Suransky.
Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger had adopted a policy known as the Tar Baby Option, according to which the US sought to maintain close relations with the white rulers in South Africa. Ronald Reagan continued to support links with South Africa, describing the ANC as "a terrorist organization", but congressional pressure forced increased distance between the two governments.--Wikipedia
If there is a country that has committed unspeakable atrocities in the world it is the United States of America. They don't care for human beings. Who are they now to pretend that they are the policemen of the world, the ones that should decided for the people of Iraq what should be done with their government and their leadership?--Nelson Mandela
It was a CIA tip in 1962 to their buddies in the fascist South African police that put Nelson Mandela in prison for 27 years. And it was only five years ago, long after Mandela had served as president of his country, won the Nobel Peace Prize and had become a universally admired figure, that Washington finally removed him from its terrorist watch list.
Official America and its kept media hated Mandela just as they hated Martin Luther King. To them, Mandela was a communist terrorist, the worst things, apart from also being a Muslim atheist, that anyone could be. (In fact, he was for a time a member of the South African Communist Party.)
In other words, most of the encomiums to Mandela we’ve heard from on top in recent days are, like the Mafia attending the funerals of its victims, obscene exercises in cynicism.
Back when the apartheid regime was at its murderous worst, the pro-Nazi racists who ran it were reassured that the U.S. and Israel*, its two best friends in the world, had its back.
But in time, the forces of freedom won out, sending apartheid rule to hell and inspiring the beaten down across the globe. Washington had to reluctantly join the celebratory crowd, lest it lose propaganda points by mourning or, worse, trying to revive the ancien regime.
Plus there were business opportunities aplenty in the new democratically-ruled South Africa. Calling its president a criminal was obviously not the way to make friends and profits. And so the official U.S. designation of Nelson Mandela as a terrorist was quietly dropped by the Bush administration in 2008. Pols and pundits switched gears as they had done with Chairman Mao back in 1970 and began pretending that Mandela was their hero all along.
Mandela was lucky. If he had remained on the list after 2008, Obama might have droned him.
*See: The Unspoken Alliance: Israel's Secret Relationship with Apartheid South Africa by Sasha Polokow Suransky.
Friday, November 22, 2013
Murder and Mendacity
I wasn’t going to write anything about the murder of JFK to mark this 50th anniversary. Been there, done that to a fare thee well. But then a certain line of endlessly repeated bullshit by the media this week prompted me to make just one point about that long ago event.
The particular bovine excrement spread by the prosties of the press is that “conspiracy theories” about the killing are born of a refusal by Americans to believe that such an awesome crime was committed by a lonesome nobody.
In truth, the DNA-proven father of “conspiracy theories” is the ongoing refusal of those in power to supply coherent and plausible accounts of the Kennedy and Oswald killings.
By now there’s a library full of books dealing in painstaking detail with the facts and forensics of the case. It is the official finding of the House Special Committee on Assassinations that there was, in fact, a conspiracy. Among the serious and honest, the report of the Warren Commission attributing sole guilt to Oswald has long since been relegated to the fiction shelves.
That our media sluts repeat nonsense about Oswald being a solitary screwball shows them to be lazy at best and corrupt at worst. If they had a shred of integrity, they could show it by demanding that the CIA open its still secret files on Oswald and, in particular, release his income tax returns for the years before the shooting. Let's see who he was working for. After half a century, I’m not holding my breath.
PS--If all the ballyhoo has gotten you interested in the case, a good place to start is with two of the early books that carefully examined the official evidence: Sylvia Meagher's Accessories After The Fact and Mark Lane's Rush To Judgment.
Straight Skinny on Obamacare
On a totally different subject, I just read what I consider the best single piece on what Obamacare is all about. Click this LINK if you're interested.
I wasn’t going to write anything about the murder of JFK to mark this 50th anniversary. Been there, done that to a fare thee well. But then a certain line of endlessly repeated bullshit by the media this week prompted me to make just one point about that long ago event.
The particular bovine excrement spread by the prosties of the press is that “conspiracy theories” about the killing are born of a refusal by Americans to believe that such an awesome crime was committed by a lonesome nobody.
In truth, the DNA-proven father of “conspiracy theories” is the ongoing refusal of those in power to supply coherent and plausible accounts of the Kennedy and Oswald killings.
By now there’s a library full of books dealing in painstaking detail with the facts and forensics of the case. It is the official finding of the House Special Committee on Assassinations that there was, in fact, a conspiracy. Among the serious and honest, the report of the Warren Commission attributing sole guilt to Oswald has long since been relegated to the fiction shelves.
That our media sluts repeat nonsense about Oswald being a solitary screwball shows them to be lazy at best and corrupt at worst. If they had a shred of integrity, they could show it by demanding that the CIA open its still secret files on Oswald and, in particular, release his income tax returns for the years before the shooting. Let's see who he was working for. After half a century, I’m not holding my breath.
PS--If all the ballyhoo has gotten you interested in the case, a good place to start is with two of the early books that carefully examined the official evidence: Sylvia Meagher's Accessories After The Fact and Mark Lane's Rush To Judgment.
Straight Skinny on Obamacare
On a totally different subject, I just read what I consider the best single piece on what Obamacare is all about. Click this LINK if you're interested.
Monday, November 4, 2013
Enemy Index
It’s been a while since we moseyed over to the threat board and adumbrated our adversaries. We found something different this time. Instead of a country like Iran, a clan like the Pushtuns or a creed like Islam, our list of dreaded enemies is now topped by an individual human being.
Of course, it’s Edward Snowden. Scouring my memory and that of Wiki, I’ve yet to find a single person who has made a bigger dent in modern history simply by dint of taking his work home with him.
Thanks to Snowden millions of Americans have learned that their government is just as megalomaniacal when it comes to invading our privacy as our military is about invading countries that have done us no harm.
At the same time, hundreds of millions of foreigners have learned that there is more to Yankee imperialism than simply suffering its diktats. The empire also aims to be a global Stasi, snooping on everyone everywhere about everything.
It looks like Snowden’s store of secrets will just keep flowing into the indefinite future. I can foresee two revelations that would bring on the biggest political mess since the failure of the Articles of Confederation. The fit would hit the shan with proof that the NSA was spying on our elected politicos. And all heck would break loose on evidence that the White House or some other executive branchlet was using the NSA to surveil Congress.
Meanwhile, as the revelations pour out, Snowden’s stock rises while that of Obama and the quasi-Stazi state he presides over sinks. Abroad, even old allies are saying suffit to Washington's increasingly absurd 'leadership,' while at home lefties and rightwing libertarians are finding that they finally agree on something: reining our self-destructive propensity to snoop and strafe the planet. So far, this is, for a change, all to the good.
I’ll catch up with the other culprits on the old threat board with my next blog.
It’s been a while since we moseyed over to the threat board and adumbrated our adversaries. We found something different this time. Instead of a country like Iran, a clan like the Pushtuns or a creed like Islam, our list of dreaded enemies is now topped by an individual human being.
Of course, it’s Edward Snowden. Scouring my memory and that of Wiki, I’ve yet to find a single person who has made a bigger dent in modern history simply by dint of taking his work home with him.
Thanks to Snowden millions of Americans have learned that their government is just as megalomaniacal when it comes to invading our privacy as our military is about invading countries that have done us no harm.
At the same time, hundreds of millions of foreigners have learned that there is more to Yankee imperialism than simply suffering its diktats. The empire also aims to be a global Stasi, snooping on everyone everywhere about everything.
It looks like Snowden’s store of secrets will just keep flowing into the indefinite future. I can foresee two revelations that would bring on the biggest political mess since the failure of the Articles of Confederation. The fit would hit the shan with proof that the NSA was spying on our elected politicos. And all heck would break loose on evidence that the White House or some other executive branchlet was using the NSA to surveil Congress.
Meanwhile, as the revelations pour out, Snowden’s stock rises while that of Obama and the quasi-Stazi state he presides over sinks. Abroad, even old allies are saying suffit to Washington's increasingly absurd 'leadership,' while at home lefties and rightwing libertarians are finding that they finally agree on something: reining our self-destructive propensity to snoop and strafe the planet. So far, this is, for a change, all to the good.
I’ll catch up with the other culprits on the old threat board with my next blog.
Monday, September 16, 2013
Our Secret Syria
Revolt and civil war. A government that poisons its rural population with chemical agents and directs death squads to deal with the political opposition. Hundreds of thousands of dead. Millions of internal refugees and more hundreds of thousands who have fled to neighboring countries.
Syria?
No. It’s our bloody best buddy Colombia, the Syria just to the south of us.
As opposed to the endless news reports from that distant Arab country, coverage of the horrors that go on in Colombia range from miniscule to non-existent. Instead, what we’re told about Colombia is that it’s a ‘developing’ democracy and our best ally in Latin America. If pressed, our leaders admit that Colombia could do a tad better when it comes to human rights. But don’t worry, they’re working on it.
There are lots of reasons for our media blackout on Colombia. One is that Washington doesn’t want the truth out about its sponsorship by way of billions in weapons, training and direction of what other Latins call a “death squad democracy.” It doesn’t fit with our pretense of being a champion of freedom.
Another reason is that to acknowledge the millions of Colombian refugees is to admit to the enormity of the evils being committed there. It also turns our propaganda upside down. We are supposed to believe that people are fleeing from leftist countries like Ecuador and Venezuela. How do we explain hundreds of thousands flocking into those countries to escape Washington-sponsored ‘democracy?’
Thankfully, the latest news from Columbia isn’t all bad. The current president, Santos, is a shade more reasonable than his murderous predecessor Uribe. And there are peace talks going on in Havana between the rebels (who have been at it for 60 years) and the government. But still atrocities go on as in Catatumbo.
Revolt and civil war. A government that poisons its rural population with chemical agents and directs death squads to deal with the political opposition. Hundreds of thousands of dead. Millions of internal refugees and more hundreds of thousands who have fled to neighboring countries.
Syria?
No. It’s our bloody best buddy Colombia, the Syria just to the south of us.
As opposed to the endless news reports from that distant Arab country, coverage of the horrors that go on in Colombia range from miniscule to non-existent. Instead, what we’re told about Colombia is that it’s a ‘developing’ democracy and our best ally in Latin America. If pressed, our leaders admit that Colombia could do a tad better when it comes to human rights. But don’t worry, they’re working on it.
There are lots of reasons for our media blackout on Colombia. One is that Washington doesn’t want the truth out about its sponsorship by way of billions in weapons, training and direction of what other Latins call a “death squad democracy.” It doesn’t fit with our pretense of being a champion of freedom.
Another reason is that to acknowledge the millions of Colombian refugees is to admit to the enormity of the evils being committed there. It also turns our propaganda upside down. We are supposed to believe that people are fleeing from leftist countries like Ecuador and Venezuela. How do we explain hundreds of thousands flocking into those countries to escape Washington-sponsored ‘democracy?’
Thankfully, the latest news from Columbia isn’t all bad. The current president, Santos, is a shade more reasonable than his murderous predecessor Uribe. And there are peace talks going on in Havana between the rebels (who have been at it for 60 years) and the government. But still atrocities go on as in Catatumbo.
Wednesday, August 28, 2013
Gasus Belli
vv
I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not necessary to use only the most deadly gasses: gasses can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects on most of those affected.--Winston Churchill, 1919
Old Winston was cogitating about the most effective ways to punish Iraqis (nee Mesopotamians) who had the impertinence to rise up against rule by Perfidious Albion.
Back in the day, it was permissible for colonial powers to use any weapon. no matter how horrible, to teach the wogs a lesson. We gringos, for example, pioneered dive bombing back in the 1920s. Our targets were refractory Nicaraguan peasants. The Nazis adopted the technique as a central element of their Blitzkrieg strategy.
In Indochina we ended or extended the misery of millions of Vietnamese with the chemical Agent Orange. Then we helped our erstwhile ally Saddam Hussein gas Iranians and Kurds back in the ‘80s. And all of our recent wars have included the use of depleted uranium weapons.
So it should be difficult for Washington to threaten war over alleged Syrian gas attacks on civilians with a straight face. But, then again, who in Washington has a straight face?
I have no idea about why such a self-destructive decision was made, but it appeared a couple of days ago that Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama was on the verge of making war on Syria, yet another distant country that has done us no harm.
It seemed so because the media, in place of the usual political drivel, started rolling out the warhawks to salivate about weapons and tactics. Their jingoism was tempered this time by the worry that Syria may have means to defend itself. Picking fights with those who can fight back has long been a no-no for the Pentagon and its contractors.
Yesterday, Tuesday, the media was announcing war by tomorrow, Thursday. Now they seem to be backing off a bit. There’s talk of giving the UN inspectors more time. A NY Times headline finds the U.S case for war “muddied” by the refusal of the Arab League to endorse an attack on Syria.
After a dozen years of blood-letting in Iraq and Afghanistan, the world’s most powerful empire only managed to make everything worse. It's all but guaranteed that a more awful result will result from a war on Syria. But, hey, the Pentagon contractors make a ton of bucks every time we fire off a million dollar cruise missile. So it's not all bad.
vv
I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not necessary to use only the most deadly gasses: gasses can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects on most of those affected.--Winston Churchill, 1919
Old Winston was cogitating about the most effective ways to punish Iraqis (nee Mesopotamians) who had the impertinence to rise up against rule by Perfidious Albion.
Back in the day, it was permissible for colonial powers to use any weapon. no matter how horrible, to teach the wogs a lesson. We gringos, for example, pioneered dive bombing back in the 1920s. Our targets were refractory Nicaraguan peasants. The Nazis adopted the technique as a central element of their Blitzkrieg strategy.
In Indochina we ended or extended the misery of millions of Vietnamese with the chemical Agent Orange. Then we helped our erstwhile ally Saddam Hussein gas Iranians and Kurds back in the ‘80s. And all of our recent wars have included the use of depleted uranium weapons.
So it should be difficult for Washington to threaten war over alleged Syrian gas attacks on civilians with a straight face. But, then again, who in Washington has a straight face?
I have no idea about why such a self-destructive decision was made, but it appeared a couple of days ago that Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama was on the verge of making war on Syria, yet another distant country that has done us no harm.
It seemed so because the media, in place of the usual political drivel, started rolling out the warhawks to salivate about weapons and tactics. Their jingoism was tempered this time by the worry that Syria may have means to defend itself. Picking fights with those who can fight back has long been a no-no for the Pentagon and its contractors.
Yesterday, Tuesday, the media was announcing war by tomorrow, Thursday. Now they seem to be backing off a bit. There’s talk of giving the UN inspectors more time. A NY Times headline finds the U.S case for war “muddied” by the refusal of the Arab League to endorse an attack on Syria.
After a dozen years of blood-letting in Iraq and Afghanistan, the world’s most powerful empire only managed to make everything worse. It's all but guaranteed that a more awful result will result from a war on Syria. But, hey, the Pentagon contractors make a ton of bucks every time we fire off a million dollar cruise missile. So it's not all bad.
Tuesday, August 6, 2013
Tales of Terror
WASHINGTON — The United States intercepted electronic communications this week among senior operatives of Al Qaeda [since identified as Ayman al-Zawahri, who succeeded Osama bin Laden as the head of the global terrorist group, and Nasser al-Wuhayshi, the head of the Yemen-based Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula] in which the terrorists discussed attacks against American interests in the Middle East and North Africa...
The above lede from the NY Times raises some questions. For instance:
It’s been 12 years since the world’s most powerful military, informed by the world’s most expensive intelligence apparat, began waging relentless war on Al Qaeda. Yet this latest alert implies that the longest war in our history hasn’t accomplished much. Washington is tacitly admitting that, after all those drone strikes and special ops, Al Qaeda still has “senior operatives” able to plan wide-ranging attacks by way of conference calls.
Were these Al Qaeda confabs conducted in clear or in code? If it was the former, Al Qaeda executives are among the stupidest terrorists ever. If they were in code, then U.S. intelligence operatives are the stupidest counterterrorists ever for revealing by their alert that they had broken Al Qaeda’s code.
And why, 12 years after 9/11, do the terrorists still “chatter” about their plans even though they know they’re being listened to? Why do they alert Washington by increasing that chatter whenever an attack is said to be imminent? You think they should have learned better by now.
Popular fiction about terrorism tends to be far more plausible than the nonsensical stuff put out by Washington. Would that our leaders could rise to the level of the writers for Chuck Norris movies. Then again, why should they when their tired old tales still work? Consider that it’s been 34 years, a third of a century, since Washington started warning us that Iran was on the verge of developing a nuke? And that inveracity remains serviceable to this day.
Meanwhile, the Times did not completely give itself over to the terror tattlers. It reported deep in the same story cited above that, “Some analysts and Congressional officials suggested Friday that emphasizing a terrorist threat now was a good way to divert attention from the uproar over the NSA's data-collection programs, and that if it showed the intercepts had uncovered a possible plot, even better.”
That’s a take I can take.
WASHINGTON — The United States intercepted electronic communications this week among senior operatives of Al Qaeda [since identified as Ayman al-Zawahri, who succeeded Osama bin Laden as the head of the global terrorist group, and Nasser al-Wuhayshi, the head of the Yemen-based Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula] in which the terrorists discussed attacks against American interests in the Middle East and North Africa...
The above lede from the NY Times raises some questions. For instance:
It’s been 12 years since the world’s most powerful military, informed by the world’s most expensive intelligence apparat, began waging relentless war on Al Qaeda. Yet this latest alert implies that the longest war in our history hasn’t accomplished much. Washington is tacitly admitting that, after all those drone strikes and special ops, Al Qaeda still has “senior operatives” able to plan wide-ranging attacks by way of conference calls.
Were these Al Qaeda confabs conducted in clear or in code? If it was the former, Al Qaeda executives are among the stupidest terrorists ever. If they were in code, then U.S. intelligence operatives are the stupidest counterterrorists ever for revealing by their alert that they had broken Al Qaeda’s code.
And why, 12 years after 9/11, do the terrorists still “chatter” about their plans even though they know they’re being listened to? Why do they alert Washington by increasing that chatter whenever an attack is said to be imminent? You think they should have learned better by now.
Popular fiction about terrorism tends to be far more plausible than the nonsensical stuff put out by Washington. Would that our leaders could rise to the level of the writers for Chuck Norris movies. Then again, why should they when their tired old tales still work? Consider that it’s been 34 years, a third of a century, since Washington started warning us that Iran was on the verge of developing a nuke? And that inveracity remains serviceable to this day.
Meanwhile, the Times did not completely give itself over to the terror tattlers. It reported deep in the same story cited above that, “Some analysts and Congressional officials suggested Friday that emphasizing a terrorist threat now was a good way to divert attention from the uproar over the NSA's data-collection programs, and that if it showed the intercepts had uncovered a possible plot, even better.”
That’s a take I can take.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
