Life During Wartime

2006-07-04T17:49:00.000-07:00

So here I am, 4th of July, big whoop, celebrating a country that every hour of every day is becoming less free and less supportive of freedom by the moment. Every middle or lower class worker has lesser and lesser freedoms and protection from tyranny than they did a moment before. Not an hour, not a day, not a month not a year, but a moment. Think about that. Each of us as individuals are just trying to get by in our day to day lives, trying to squeeze some happiness out of whatever free time we have to ourselves, yet our corporate and governmental masters think this is too much. In other countrys around the world they have shorter work weeks, more holidays, better pay and better living conditions and yet the United States is supposed to be 'The paragon of democracy and freedom'. Horseshit. Horseshit, horseshit, horseshit. Call a stalinist construct what it is, but do not lead others on with the clearly transparent lie that the United States is a 'wunnerful, wunnerful place'. 'Cause it just ain't so.
I learned the hard way myself that depending on unemployment if you're fired from a job under questionable circumstances on the employer's part will work in your favor. It won't. You'll be screwed and you will not have any income. You Will Be Cast Adrift. Excommunicated.
Trust No One. Be True Only To Yourself. Accept No One's Nostrums. 'Oh, democrats/liberalism is good for you. Oh, Republicans/conservatism is good for you.' Horseshit. Always remember this: United We Stand, Divided We Fall. Which party is preaching hardest and longest this divisive and destructive philosophy? It ain't the 'monsters under the bed' liberals. It's the sleazy used care salesmen known as republicans/corporatists/fascists. To believe in them is to be played for a sucker. Why do they hate freedom so much? Why do they hate the Constitution, The Bill of Rights, The Declaration of Independence? Why do they hate our right to privacy? In this whole cocked up bullshit 'War on Terror/War on Drugs' what real and clear victories have they won for us as citizens in our own country? What freedoms and rights have they usurped and told us they have no intention of giving back for a very, very long time in their absolute bald-faced lie of totalitarianism they are shoving down american's (and everyone else's throats)?
To them and their supporters I have nothing but the utmost dirision and rejection and sincere and clear wish for their failure. They are a cancer on humanity, civilization and everything that is decent and right and just that has and will ever exist.

2004-12-05T19:28:00.000-08:00

The days of progressives supporting *either* party are well and truly over.

I was twelve years old when Nixon was impeached, but not imprisoned and I smelled a rat then. Imagine a twelve year old figuring that shit out. Then imagine that twelve year old growing into adulthood seeing things each and every year, each and every election confirming what he had figured out when he was twelve. Can you say 'revolution'? 'Cause that's the only way I see this whole shithouse getting sorted out. And no, I don't propose to go starting this myself, nor am I encouraging others to 'storm Washington D.C.'

But there will certainly have to be some very drastic changes made, changes like no one has seen in this country since the original revolutionary war.

I've always kept very much on top of things like politics, world affairs, international relations and...this country's 'hidden wars'.

As much as I know, I really have no idea of how all this is going to pan out. On one hand we have the 'nation of sheep', who have become so used to having everything handed to them on a plate, getting their house, their car, their big-screen HDTV and home theater system that the thought of losing those things would drive them into a frenzy of servile toady-ism. I think that's what we're seeing now.

A nation of people who were once admired who have morphed into fat, dumb cows being fattened up for ... endentured servitude. Send out the 'welcome to credit-card land' notices, sit back as they happily send in their completed apps not knowing that they will be roped into a financial mess that will follow them around for the rest of their natural lives. And in the process of doing so, the profits that will be realized will be diverted to defense contractors and businesses dedicated to enslaving others while sending the message to this population through it's corporate-owned and unaccountable media that 'all is well, pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.'

That's it, just pay your bill, work on your credit rating so you can *buy more stuff* and keep on feeding this country's perpetual need for generating perpetual fear and intimidation while snatching away freedom from those who dared dream of it someday.

Make them believe we really are a democratic and freedom-loving nation right up until the moment our tanks roll up to their doors, stealing away their husbands and sons, never to be seen again.

Those who identify as 'conservatives' or the 'real voice of America' seem to think that God is on their side. There was another nation of people who thought God was on their side, they even wore it proudly on their belt buckles 'God Is With Us'. Gott Mitt Uns. Look where it got them.

It says in the bible that 'the meek shall inherit the earth' . I see nothing meek about the arrogant self-rightous people who inhabit this land. They all seem very much damned to me. I am sure that if there is a God, he would not want these people in his heaven. No deity would.

2004-11-17T21:00:00.000-08:00

Wednesday Night @ The Flop
It's been three weeks since the national joke called 'The Election' has taken place. The end of the United States of America really and truly ended on that day. Hope was stolen along with the election. The media has tried to cover it up, but all of the inquiries from americans striving to migrate out of the country following the election indicates it was not successfull. Hope is dead. Loyalty is dead. Patriotism is dead for this country. Jingoism thrives though. Arrogance is growing. Stupidity is epidemic. And Nero fiddles while Rome burns.

Mad fools run the most powerful nation on the planet and no one knows how to stop them. God help us all, like you have never helped us before.

The Right is a sick joke, the Left a pathetic joke. What is happening to the world as a whole because of this is a sad joke.

Who will forgive when all are to blame? I don't think the allies were in a very forgiving mood to the townspeople who lived near the concentration camps when they invaded Germany. The troops took great pleasure in making those townspeople dig the graves of those they had let die as they lived in whatever decadence they were able to realize from their suffering.
Perhaps the same will happen here at some point in time. This is a country who's people and instituations could use a good lesson in humility and decency.

2004-10-31T10:58:00.000-08:00

I've been reading a bio on Frank Lloyd Wright lately. My, what an interesting individual. He created all of these memorable architectural designs, went through a few marriages, borrowed money from friends he seldom paid back, lived an extravagant lifestyle while bilking creditors and the houses that resulted from his designs had innumerable structural problems. Yet he's a legend. Amazing. Wish I could be so lucky. Frank Lloyd Wright and Thomas Jefferson are two of the most famous people I've heard of so far to always be on the run from their creditors, yet somehow prosper. I wonder how many similar people are out there today?

2004-10-31T10:56:00.000-08:00

Café Allegro, Sunday, cold and clear, sunny.

Well, I’m down to my last $11.00 and the internet connection at the house is so sporadic as to be pretty much useless. I think that if I go outside and down the steps and sit on top of the garage I might be able to get a signal, but for how long?

I went downtown yesterday to apply at the architectural bookstore. That’s how bad it is, job hunting on a Saturday.

Ana’s in heat again, which is good news seeing as how she hasn’t been in heat for something like a couple of months now and it’s really made me concerned that she got pregnant somehow. The only thing I can think of is that somehow Demitri’s been right there as she goes into heat, drills her, she comes out of it, and everybody’s happy. Apparently he missed his timing this time around. . . I’m also out of his pills for his condition. I just hope what I’ve been able to give him puts it into remission for awhile. Don’t know when I’ll be able to get anymore for him.

The election is coming up and I’m really pretty concerned about it. I look at the postings on the internet and right-wingers are doing victory-dances in preparation for another stolen victory, left-wingers are basically resigned to the fact the election will be stolen and that the only recourse is going to be lots of legal action. Then they will roll over and whine and moan that no one is listening to them or their ‘sock puppets in the street’ nonsense. Sorry folks, we live in an age where actions speak louder than words, and until leftys start using the tactics of the right they will be run over like squishy little toys left in the middle of a freeway. And paid about as much attention.

2004-10-26T10:19:00.000-07:00

Tuesday morning at the Trabie, typing away while I wait for the hours to pass by to the time I have to hop a bus over to Bellevue for another job interview. This one's got some promise, decent wages, a training position, a chance to change society for the better. Let's just hope it all comes together.

In addition to that I've been reading up on architecture to help myself understand more about Seattle's architecture here. I really like the 'arts and crafts' style homes in the area, partly because I live in one. It's not a full on A&C house, none of the 'knees' under the eaves, but still there are aspects of it that are undeniable. The fireplace and chimney, the interior layout, the moulding inside, all say A&C. The house of our neighbor's across the street though, that is a full on A&C house all the way. Nice front porch, intricate woodwork detail on the staircase and mouldings, custom glasswork. Beautiful. Wish I could live there instead of here in the shared house I have now. But all in all it's not bad; this weekend we had Howie the electrician over to completly change out the fuse panel to a breaker box. I'm amazed that he was able to get everything working througout the house considering how much wiring was involved. Yet, when you open the panel there's just a few breakers there. Hardly the load that a contemporary house has. He did miss hooking up the hot water tank, but all things considered a really small omission that he corrected quickly yesterday. It turned out that when he dropped the wires through the original hole to the fuse box to enlarge it for newer wiring the wires for the hot water tank dropped into the pit for the tank. Next weekend he's coming back to move some breakers around and put in some new circuits to balance the load better.

2004-10-19T09:13:00.000-07:00

I got into a pretty big knock down drag out verbal fight with Dan last night re who’s had the tougher childhood and adulthood. What a self-righteous dick. He’s not even thirty yet, I’m fourty-four and listening to him tell about his childhood and working life I’ve got his ass beat on ‘poor, pitiful me’ a thousand times over.

He was telling me about delivering papers with his father as a child, throwing up in the car because of the smell of newsprint and his father’s smoking. I countered with the newspaper delivery dispatch van I had to drive with the fat, overweight chain-smoker that bathed perhaps once a month. In addition to the ‘newsprint smell’.

He talked about having to do construction work. I countered with doing construction work, hauling carpet up several flights of stairs to the point where I was getting regular nosebleeds because the weight of these things put such a strain on one’s body. Then there was hauling the 90 pound bags of flour at the French bakery with the explosive French baker. That one cause me a herniated disc that I still suffer from, and always will. Then there was working as a janitor in an office complex where you had to move so fast so consistently that the first month of the job you finish off at the point of passing out because the aerobic workout was so intense. To say nothing of the strain it puts on one’s ankles, feet and back. I developed bone spurs on my feet, one of which is inoperable. So much for hiking in my beloved mountains anymore because of that one.

That was such a depressing job that towards the end it became an actual physical effort just to breathe. Imagine that. A job so depressing where you have to consciously make an effort to breathe in and out. That wasn’t the only job I’ve had like that.

Oh, and there was the seafood processing job. Fifty pound bricks of frozen fish thrown into a chopping machine, then once that was processed, working on a conveyor belt where you had to not only lift a fifty pound basket of processed fish, then you had to squat, move under the conveyor, stand up, and stack it on the opposite side, then squat, move back under the conveyor and do it all over again. Rinse, repeat for eight hours, sometimes ten. The back problem I had from lifting the flour sacks came back because of that.

Then there was working in a call center. Oh, that sounds nice, sit-down job, no heavy lifting, no aerobic workout that causes you to nearly pass out. Until you talk to person after person after person who wants you to die, die, die and wishes sincerely they could leap through the phone receiver just so they could personally rip your friggin’ guts out. On top of that are all the threats to ‘get you fired’. “I will be sure to do everything in my power to make sure you never work again.” “Do you know who I am?” So you go to your supervisor for support. Hah! Support! “Oh, you better do what the customer wants.” Then you do that. Then a few weeks later is your evaluation. “Oh, you did too much of what the customer wanted and cost the company money! So then, like so many other of your fellow employees you go to a doctor who prescribes anti-depressants just so you can cope with the constant yelling and threats and duplicity. It does nothing but mask the problem, it doesn’t fix it.

The best Dan can come up with is doing some moving jobs, doing some construction jobs, and how, he’s unemployed, doing the minimal work he can to get by, and getting rent money from his mother. I’m unemployed now and tried getting money from my mother last month. The only thing she could come up with was sixty dollars. Sixty friggin’ dollars . . . Pansy whining shite.
Oh, and in addition the bastard gets to go to *college*. Bastard. Doesn't have to work unless he really, really *wants* too, has his brother provide the money for college, has his mother pay for rent, has his 'pretend girlfriend' for . . . whatever. Self-Righteous Dickhead times a million.

2004-10-18T13:44:00.000-07:00

So I just posted a few resumes on Monster, the jobs I posted for all look fairly promising, so hopefully I'll have something soon. So many times I've said that, so many times I've been disappointed.
Still though, I talked to Ashley for the first time today, beyond simple chit-chat anyway. I don't think anything will come of it, but nothing ventured, nothing gained.
With every resume I put out I feel a bit closer to my goal though, to get all my debts addressed and then get out of this stupid, backward, uncivilized country. I can't believe I've let myself be trapped here as long as I have. Quite the little complex, to hate one's country of birth so much. . .
Yet there are the beautiful things here, the landscapes, the historical stories, the advances that have happened with technology. Funny, but there were so many technological advances with the germans during WWII and look what happened to them in the end. . . And look at what happened to them afterwards: a society with more caring, more compassion than many in the world have. A social system of cradle-to-grave care. A decent work week. A high standard of living. Yes, there's the unemployment there now, but that was caused by the Berlin Wall coming down and re-absorbing half of their country back into themselves. A hell of a financial cost. Like absorbing Mexico into the U.S. along with all of it's economic and social problems.

2004-10-18T10:37:00.000-07:00

Monday morning here at Cafe Allegro, posting resumes and hoping for a fish to bite.
I sold the Isuzu last week so if I keep a close eye on funds I should have enough to last me for a couple of months. I just can't get over how lousy this economy is. Like a bad science fiction movie. Everyone who is a 'wage slave' gets treated like crap more than ever, while those who live 'lifes of privelege' are insulated more and more from the suffering they cause to others.
This is such a nihilistic society here in the U.S. "It's not my fault." "It's not my problem." "They're on the other side of the ocean and don't look like us, why should I care?"
If there is ever a comupance for this country that nihilism is going to have to be the first thing to be addressed. It's like german society during WWII when the germans didn't even think about all the jews being killed in the camps just a few blocks away from their village. The smoke drifting into those villages must have told them something bad was happening there, yet after the war they claimed they knew nothing about it. Same thing here. People think that because our military has been murdering people in third world countries or assisting and aiding that murder that somehow they are exempt. I don't think so. I feel that as citizens in the most powerful country on the face of the earth that we have a real duty and responsibility to make sure that power is used wisely, and if it's not being used wisely, then it is our duty to remove that power from the hands of those who would abuse it. Part of that responsibility is making sure that we are fully and completly informed in how that power is being used in order to make mature and responsible decisions. We are failing badly in that responsibility now, and doing so knowingly. And for that, we deserve to be shamed before the world.

2004-10-15T08:23:00.000-07:00

So I got out of bed early today, hobbled off down to

the bus stop with my computer on my back and turned to

watch for the buses.  And there off to my right was

the cutest little asian chick I've seen all year.  She

was tight, tight, tight, wearing this little metallic

burnt red quilted jacket and tight black spandex pants

on clear plastic clogs, with burnt orange hair done up

in a 'dorothy hamill' bob.  I watched her for a bit

and she was kind of waving her hands from side to side

and up and down as if she was gesturing to someone.

Every now and then she would glance down at a sheet of

paper to study it, then go back to the gesturing, and

that's when I figured out she was working on some kind

of dance choreography moves.  Of course I had to check

it out. . .

  So I walked over to the bus sign and asked her if

the "70" had come by yet, expecting snotty attitude.

    She smiled this sweet little innocent smile at me

through those kitten-like eyes, squinted up her nose

and said "70, hmmmm, let me think. . . ."  "Oh, that

comes by in about five minutes." 

 She had this accent, so she's definitly from across

the pond and her open manner indicates not to many

guys from here have had a chance to show her the real

world yet. 

 I went back to waiting for the bus, watching her go

through her little arm waves and hip thrusts until the

bus came.  I sat down opposite her and watched her out

of the corner of my eye as she went through some more

'practice'.  My, she does have the moves. . .

 As the bus stopped it emptied of just about

everyone, except me and her, and I looked across at

her briefly and got a big smile back.  At the next

stop she tottered off on her clogs and I got off at

the next stop.

  I'm going to be getting up earlier more often from

now on.

2004-10-14T10:24:00.000-07:00

Well, last night was the final presidential debate and towards the end it was like watching two guys give each other verbal felattio. Disgusting. Kerry should have whipped out a meat cleaver and just gone at it. Would have made a nice ending, something like 'Caligula'.

Here at Trabant Chai Lounge today, I really like it here, the net connection is like a cool mountain stream, strong, hi-speed, pure . . . I feel like I could download an elephant through this thing.

The weather is a little cooler today, overcast and here I am in my M.I.T. t-shirt, freezing my nips off. WTF? I just checked 'intellicast' and they're saying 'sunny and warm'. Sunny and warm my cold frigid nipples . . . *poink*

It's towards the end of the week now and still no info from my interview with Safeco, although I imagine that if they've done any kind of 'background check' like they say is mandatory I know why. What about a 'background check' for former employers to find out if they're credible? What about *that*? Such rank hypocrisy in the world of employment today. Inexcusable.

I sold my Isuzu on Monday for a friggin' small amount of money, but at least now I can pay rent next month, get a bus pass and pick up important things like laundry soap, bath soap, shaving cream, razor blades and other neccesities not paid for with food stamps. Party in the streets.

2004-10-11T09:58:00.000-07:00

Americans Use to Fight Against Tyranny

2004-10-11T09:40:00.000-07:00

Monday, Monday.
No job, running out of money, depression setting in heavier and heavier . . . What a friggin' bitch.
And now evidence that global warming may be accelerating. Good
. Take out the thankless, arrogant many so that others may live.

I think this country needs a good, hard jolt to wake this country up and keep it waken up. Something where people have no choice but to focus on the immediate task at hand which is: help one another out. Don't be so friggin' greedy or irresponsible. Money doesn't buy everything that you need.

This is such a nihilistic society that it will need the kind of jolt that this would produce. A forty days and forty nights kind of catastrophe, where substantial propertly loss and loss of life occurs, where road systems are unusable, where money doesn't matter any more.
Today I talk to my lawyer about Ford Credit. And paying a tithe to my corporate overlord, my true master, for I am but a slave. There is no hope, there is no hope.
Funny, but I thought America used to be against Tyranny.
In addition to that, I've just about had it with managing a house where no one does anything to keep the place up. All the griping, all the bitching, all the b.s.
Too much crap today. Time to bring this to a close.

2004-10-07T09:30:00.000-07:00

The dream begins: I'm in a big SUV Chevy Suburban thing. Me and some other guys are driving down the street, I'm in the back, looking out at the neighborhood. Old mud-walled huts, arabic women, children, men, walking up and down, seemingly oblivious to our presence. The SUV winds it's way through the narrow streets until it comes to the entrance to a freeway on-ramp, then we accelerate upwards onto the freeway, as empty as if a vehicle has never driven on it.

We're on our way out of Baghdad, heading south to the airfield. About halfway there we pull off underneath an overpass and all get out, and that's when I get a good luck at everyone else. We all wear the same khaki-colored outfit, all have on the same black bullet-proof vests and all wear sunglasses. Weird. But then, it's just a dream.
Me and the other guys are pulled off because this is the location of a particularly brutal firefight when we first came in here, and now it's quiet. Somewhat. All of us feel apprehension on being here and look around carefully, concerned about an ambush. While I wander off, the other guys walk over to one of the concrete piers under the overpass and study blast damage from the battle that took place there.

I look off to one side at a grassy field behind a chain link fence, bushes widely spaced and cut to prevent anyone hiding behind them. I look off in the distance to see if anyone is out there and thankfully see no one. I turn back and everyone gets back in the SUV and we make our way to the airport, and out of Iraq.

The next part of the dream begins with me returning to the city, alone.

I walk through the city, aware of how dangerous it is here. I look up and down the street, checking to see if I'm being watched by anyone. Looking at the shops I see a cafe' and remember some report I've read about these being used as fronts for houses of prostitution. Outside there are some black guys with dreadlocks speaking jamaican slang. I remember from the report that many american blacks came back here to re-settle and took up organized crime here. I enter the store just as a customer goes upstairs, some white guy being pushed up the stairs by one of the proprieters who is telling him about how great the girl is he's about to meet, sight unseen. I get the feeling the 'customer' is about to be knocked over the head and have his wallet stolen.

I walk out of the shop and down the street, coming to a roofed bazaar, hot, dusty, with a large wood multi-leveled dias in the middle. At a desk at the top is a disinterested attendant, a 'tourist information' desk attendant. I have to climb up and swing around to get to the clerk's window, the paint worn off the wood, smoothed down over the years from wear. I look to either side of the booth for anything like maps of the area, something to tell me where all the attractions are. I particularly want to see the Baghdad Museum. The clerk perks up when I mention this, then points off diagonally and says it's two blocks 'that way'.

I am near the Tigris river, turning around to look at the buildings, some modern, some perhaps thousands of years old, all looking worn from to much neglect. Reminds me of Morocco. I take out my camera, wanting to take a picture, something that will make the viewer think that they are looking at just any other city until they spot . . . . that black grating a couple of blocks down the street on the left with the islamic filigree. That would make a nice shot. And off in the distance beyond that the freeway cutting through the city, with a hump just in the middle there. So I set up my shot when I am interupted by a man, close to my age who has a child by his side. He asks for money, anything I can spare for him and his child.

I look around, still concerned about the possibility I might be jumped here and think about being captured and taken away to be held hostage, possibly to be beheaded. It still happens here, I think to myself. It could happen to me.
I put down my daypack and kneel down to dig inside. As I am rooting around I look up again and about six feet away three men have appeared, scowling down at me, all with moustaches, one wearing a tacky burnt-orange suit. I get the impression he's the ringleader. I bring out a traveler's check for $20.00, but as I pull it out it tears and I have to get another one which tears as well. Finally I just write the man a check for $20.00 and put everything back in my pack and walk off, closer to the river.

Nearby is a stable area, two-tiered that resembles an ugly concrete parking garage. I come around the corner and there are more surly looking men, tacky suits, moustaches, malevolent expressions. I turn and go up a ramp into the stable and as I round the corner I see the horses, many of them, all packed close together, saddled and with riders on them, the same type of surly men I have seen before. I turn and move back down the ramp and as I reach the ground I hear a shout and the horses begin galloping around the corner and down the ramp. The dream ends.

2004-10-07T09:24:00.000-07:00

Blogger is really pissing me off. It seems to take forever and a frickin' day to post to the net. Even with a really good wi-fi connection. Even from a desktop with a hard-wired connection. Really pretty pathetic. As soon as I get a job I'm moving everything off this piece-o-crap to something better.

It would be one thing if this was just temporary, but I remember when blogger first started it would have this problem, then 'Life During Wartime' took a long vacation, I came back and started posting again, and gee. . . a year later, still same frikin' problem.

2004-10-07T09:07:00.000-07:00

Thursday at Cafe Allegro

I got a call yesterday from Safeco re a third interview. It's down to me and one other candidate. Whoopee. Notice no exclamation mark on the end of that last one. If I pass muster, they still have to do the 'background check', which means that they find my ugly credit history that makes me look like Osama Bin Laden trying to get a job at the Defense department. What the hell expect with today's economy anyway? "Oh yeah, you should just pull money out of your ass to pay your bills, even though you have no employment insurance and no savings and friends and relatives who are in the same terrible economic situation you are." What absolute and utter crap.

Today I'm taking some time off from job-hunting and camping by the phone all day while waiting for callbacks. Just too much stress, waiting for the phone to ring, searching my e-mail almost constantly looking for responses from jobs I've posted for. Too much friggin' stress.

So, after a short visit to Cafe Allegro I'm off to explore some of the neighborhoods around Seattle and do some photography.

2004-10-02T08:39:00.000-07:00

Blogging on the run this morning, I'm at a net cafe and I forgot to bring my power cord and my laptop says just 32% power. . . Can barely afford a small coffee . . . I guess it's better than paying forty or more a month for cable or DSL . . .

Wi-Fi at the house is a bit of a bitch, low signals from everywhere, only a couple of networks that are open, and very much dependent on the weather.

I've found that the early morning and evening hours are best for accessing the internet there, and I believe it's dependent on the air temperature. Warm air means thicker air that impedes radio signals, cold air means less air density and better signal, so going into winter now we should be getting better signal. We'll have to wait and see. Cloudy days are also problematic, air inversions, turbulence all messin' wit mah signal. Bitch.

Up until a few weeks ago I was using a wi-fi router at the house connected to a housemates cable modem, but he hasn't paid the bill in awhile so they shut the service off and now I'm wondering if he's getting ready to cut out on rent too. . .

Yesterday, in the frustration and anxiety of walking around downstairs trying to find a decent wi-fi connection I took the laptop around to all the downstairs windows, hanging the laptop off the back of the couch seemed to do something, having it at right angles on the kitchen table had some effect, but ultimatly still very spotty, very much a hit and miss thing. One moment the signal will barely be there, the next gone, gone, gone.

After futzing with that for awhile I took the laptop outside and walked west along the sidewalk, refreshing the wi-fi utility to see if there were any changes. I found out that 'default', the connection I depend on most is about a block away, as the crow flies. So, because my broken-down vehicle was parked right at that spot, I sat in the passenger seat and checked e-mails and posted for jobs. Maybe I can get small table in there to hold the laptop better. . .

Moving up and down the street though, everyone's got their wi-fi locked up, which is a good thing I suppose, but damn, give a brother a data pipe for chrisake ! ! !

Battery is down to 25% . . . Fly, magic fingers, fly ! ! !

Today I'm going to walk around Capitol Hill, it's free and I get to look at some great architecture. I bring my camera along to take pics of all the houses I see and whatever comes along like the odd housecat or two. Loves the kitties . . .

Well, time to post this, check the news (blechh) and get out on the road.

2004-10-01T21:36:00.000-07:00

What did I do today?
After yesterday's interview, my knee going out and all the stress from that, running out of money, etc, I decided to sleep in for a bit. I didn't get out of bed 'till 7:30AM. For most that probably isn't sleeping in, for me it's getting major, major rest. I usually wake up around 4 or 4:30 in the morning. Seriously. The first thing that goes through my mind is all the fucking crap I've got to deal with: Mostly the bills. How am I going to deal with all the bills with no job, no benefits, no hope.
Most people have friends and family they can depend on. I'm not most people. I have social anxiety disorder and have had to deal with that for all of my adult life. Imagine having no father, mother, sisters, brothers, you're in a strange country and you don't speak the language or understand the customs. That's social anxiety disorder.
Because of fear of being misunderstood you tend to stay indoors, don't engage in the typical "Hey, let's all get together for beers Friday night." banter most people do. Or do most people? I get the impression from research that most people these days would prefer to while their time away alone and depressed than engage in meaningful social discourse. Certainly describes me.
I would really rather spend time with my cats than a sexy, nubile college co-ed. Less stress, more relaxing, and much more gratifying. Give love, get love. That's what I'm all about. What a sad commentary on society as a whole.
I've lived in this shared house for something like fifteen years now, gone through the stress of sociopaths and various other nutbags, and now, near the end, I have a Guatemalen refugee that is certain that former President Clinton sucks the blood from newborn babies and a young hispanic-american from LA who fancies himself the next Charles Bukowski with a complete and total lack of a narrative voice. I'm sorry, but what a friggin' goob. He also fancies himself something of an amatuer pyschiatrist as well . . . So, what would you think of someone who surrounds themselves with lower-class, mentally deficient individuals who is intimidated by those who are more well-read than he is? I would think it would indicate an inferiority complex, but then again, I'm not a professional. He thinks he is.
I'm not saying this to be mean or anything, but let's use an example here: Josh.
Josh used to live up here in the Seattle area, working in a bakery, behind the counter where he wouldn't offend 'the normals'. Yes, they kept him off in the back, hidden away from the public because Josh was, well a bit 'off'. Josh was simple-minded, just a bit above retarded. Dan kept Josh around like he was one of his best friends. Not because he felt pity for him, but because Josh was a useful foil. "Look at Josh, look at how dumb he is. Look at how smart I am." Same for Rita, a loud, brash obnoxious hispanic-american woman who is socially inept. Socially inept because she can't seem to understand that when she visits a home at 9:30, close to 10:00 PM that ringing the doorbell multiple times, announcing oneself loudly so everyone can hear for several blocks, yelling at someone a foot away somehow might be construed as 'inappropriate'.
I love the cheap rent, really I do, but is it worth it when you have to put up with people like this?
I don't have a bad home here, it's a 1920's former professor's residence, five bedrooms upstairs and a mother-in-law apartment below. All in all, pretty nice digs, kept up fairly okay, but only because I lean on everybody who lives here to clean up after themselves, day in and day out. Wash your dishes. Dry your dishes. Put away your dishes. Don't leave a wet sponge in the sink. Wring it out and put it in the rack. Wipe up the counter after you use it. Clean the bathroom. Clean the tub. Vacuum the floors. Am I their mother? I feel like it. The only thing missing is that I don't get to paddle their bottoms. I have to confess I wish I could. Not for the kink, just because they really, really need to get it through their thick heads that, *hey* there's some responsibility here when you live with others. Geez.
Anyway, I'm off, time to get to bed and get some much-needed rest. It's been a long day and I'm bushed.

2004-10-01T21:12:00.000-07:00

Friday night here at 'The Flop'. Pondering what I'm going to do to get more money to last to the end of the month. I've already sent an e-mail to mumsy to get more than the $60.00 she's already sent. At this point I need a bus pass to fund transport for the next month and I don't have it.
I've already borrowed $100.00 from another housemate, but that's to fund cat food, razor blades, a haircut and laundry soap and laundry, as well as what other neccesities are forthcoming.
I'm putting my car up for sale tomorrow, all $5,000 worth of what broke down. It's a 1994 Isuzu Trooper, power everything, like new interior, cruise control, the works. A really, really great vehicle in so many ways. Yet it is not to be mine. It needs some work on the engine, and perhaps a bit of work on the tranny, but nowhere near the $5,000 that I paid for it. Damn this economy, damn the Bush family and their minions, and damn the U.S. as it is now. Damn it all to hell. Al Qaida my ass. You want to get rid of the terrorists? Get rid of the Republican party, it's lobbyists and it's minions and everything will sort itself out. And no I don't say that out of blind anger, but out of carefully considered thought. Take a look to your left. Look at the bookmarks. Read through them one after one after one. Take some time to digest what you've read. Read some more. Ponder that. Read some more after that. If you have any kind of objective reasoning, any at all, you will come to one conclusion: Power of the rich, for the rich and only for the rich will mean the downfall of us all, and the only way to prevent that is to subjugate them, once and for all, not let them subjugate us.
You want to know why we never went back to the moon after the Apollo missions? Look to the rich and the military industrial complex that they supported.
You want to know why you can't afford health care anymore? Look to the rich and their powerful lobbies.
You want to know why you can't get a decent wage? Why you have no power in the workplace? Look to the rich and how they enslave us all.
The solution, as it has been througout human history since
Spartacus
forward has been to put down the rich and make them do our bidding, instead of the other way around.

2004-09-29T21:14:00.000-07:00

I Hate Housemates
I got home today after going through the hell of the interview, sweating in my interview monkey suit, smoking cigerettes when I usually don't and wished so much I had a place of my own. No b.s. to put up with, no crap. Just me and the cats.
When you have housemates you have to put up with so many issues, especially if you manage the place. I hate having to practically beg someone to do something as simple and reasonable as wring out a fucking sponge and put it away.
Then there are the emotional issues. Let me tell you about one little fucktard who's soon to be history. He's a little Guatemalan/Honduran weirdo named . . . . Pepe.
Pepe's a real piece of work, a superstitious little new age goob with neanderthalian features who sincerly believes former President Clinton had a fetish for sucking the blood out of newborn babies. No, I am not making this up. Clinton = babybloodsucker. Imagine all the fun Ken Starr and his bunch could have had with that one. "Heritic! ! ! Burn the Baby-Sucking Heretic! ! !"
There's more, much much more but I think you get the point. Pepe feels that much of his virility comes from his extra-bushy and overabundant eyebrows. They look like live animals crawling across his forehead. . . I've talked with another housemate about someday tackling Pepe and shaving his eyebrows, just to see if he would shrivel up before our eyes as his virility drains from his body, making him shrivel up like a prune. Worth a try . . .
Today after I left the house I was stressing a major amount because I left Pepe's phone at the bottom of the stairs when I went out to run some errands after the interview. I'm using his phone to receive job interview offers because my phone's been shut off for non-pay, no surprise when you have no job, no benefits, no financial resources whatsoever and $16.00 in the bank.
Pepe loves to give someone a long, drawn out lecture as if he was your father lecturing a child. I fucking hate that. I can handle a pissed-off customer any day of the week at a call center, but when someone starts lecturing me like a child, it's all over folks. Time for me to get some spleen, and it's gonna be yours, bitch.
I cut things short and hopped on the bus, replaying Pepe's little lecture about putting his *fucking* phone back in his room after I'm done using it, over and over again until I was ready to kill Pepe just on principal alone. He would come up to me, tilting his chin back, hissing through his teeth as he drew in his breath like he was deciding whether he was going to give someone a spanking or just a stern lecture, and then I would lose it, scream, tear his shirt open and bite out his spleen. I could see it all so clearly. Pepe. Hissing. Spleen. Blood spurting. My crimson smile as I reveled in the joy of never hearing another of Pepe's stupid, stupid lectures ever, ever again. And then they would come to take me away, oh no ! ! !
I got off the bus and I'm walking up the hill when all of a sudden I see . . . Pepe ! Getting out of his car ! And my ankles are sore, my knee feels like it's about to give out . . . And I run. Up the steps, down the walk, up the steps to the porch and into the house to retrieve the phone, carry it upstairs, put it in his room and close the door, all so Pepe knows that, even though I'm using his phone with his permission, at least I have the courtesy to put it back in his room.
I close the door, run down the stairs, scaring the cats who are watching with much worry, and go into my room and partially close the door. Then Pepe comes in. Oblivious. I lie back in bed and smile, glad to be rid of Pepe and a possible lecture.
The rest of the evening goes by somewhat peacefully, with the exception of my spotty wi-fi connection. Finally I am able to get it back up again, but only by putting the laptop near the couch at an angle. I am in the midst of catching up on my daily netsurfing when Pepe comes through the door. It's dark in the living room as he walks through, the only illumination is the laptop screen, turned down.
Pepe begins to talk. He's had a bad day at work. I guess Pepe's got a job now driving a delivery van and it's not going to well for him. Apparently, pretty much from day one they've had problems with him and he's feeling the stress.
I feel sorry for Pepe, I really do. Poor guy comes up here from . . . wherever, his last shared housing situation the people there hated his friggin' guts (bloodsucking aliens, anyone?), so he moved in here.
So now Pepe unloads, and I become his shoulder to cry on, offering support, telling him it's going to be okay, telling him there will be other jobs and things will be better for him. I almost want to take his shaved, bald head in my hands and kiss it to make him feel better. Or maybe not.
He feels better now. I can tell because he changes the subject to aliens and one-world governments and blood-sucking Clintons.
Then he drops the bombshell. He no longer wants me to use his phone. Period. I cannot receive calls from potential employers, although I've got buttloads of resumes out there with his friggin' callback number on them. All over the fucking town. And he cuts me off the phone cold.
I try to reason with Pepe, bargain with him, tell him that unless I am allowed to use that phone to receive calls that I will be unable to get a job and could end up getting thrown out at the end of the month. He doesn't care. I explain to him that I only need it for the rest of the month. He doesn't care.
Now I don't care about Pepe, and I explode. Boy do I explode. I remind Pepe that as the manager at the shared house that I can terminate his tenancy. He doubts my authority. I tell him to get packing and searching for a new house because he's pretty much just kicked himself out. He doesn't care. Of course, this whole conversation is taking place in UPPER CAPS SO IT IS LIKE I AM YELLING, WHICH I AM.
Finally Pepe exits stage right, and as soon as one of the housemates comes home I explain the situation to him. As luck has it, he has a potential tenant! With check in hand! Ready tomorrow night! Goodbye Pepe!

2004-09-29T20:31:00.000-07:00

Major Fucking Stress
I wake up early this morning to get ready for a job interview at 10:00. It's six-thirty and I lie in bed and think about it, how I hope I don't stress out, say the wrong thing, cough up a lung at the appropriate time, seem like a servile toady just when they want me to. I get out of bed and shower, dress in grubbies 'cause it's so early, then make myself a nice breakfast, 4 eggs, 4 links of sausage, 4 slices of english muffins and a pot of coffee and sit down at my computer to check the news on the net. I've got free wi-fi, courtesy of a neighbor, although intermitent, as it was today.
I watch the time as I eat, making sure I've allowed enough to get dressed, make sure all my notes are ready, references, etc. At around 7:45 I decide I should check my memo pad to make sure I'll make it to the bus on time and discover I've only got 17 minutes to get ready, get on the bus and make my connection at the freeway station. Shit Shit Shit Shit Shit. I scramble and miraculously make it out the door. I miss the bus but it's not that important because I've allowed myself some time in case of this very occurance. So I take a bus to the U-district, catch a connecting bus to the freeway station and within half an hour I'm on my way, arriving at the interview with plenty of time to spare.
I follow the instructions that the HR person gave me the day before, sign in, get my badge and make my way back to the HR department where I fill out a job application, writing down all my sins, noting down past names of supervisors who were so incompetent, so inhumane they should never be allowed above fry cook at a fast food place. Not a McDonald's, they don't even deserve that. Just some shitty backwoods greasy spoon. And I hope they never try to call at least one of those people, 'cause they will make up plenty o' shit about yours truly.
I can't believe how things are today in this country. You work hard, do a good job, tolerate inhuman bastards and bitches that should be shut away in institutions for the mentally ill and now, when you fill out a job application, *you're Charles Manson, Jeffrey Dahmer, Adolf Hitler*. Even if you've lived an honest and honerable life, it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is how badly they want to fuck you as you go out the door, getting away from their shitty, inhumane, demeaning job that you depend on to put food in your mouth, a roof over your head and hopefully, hopefully, a car to drive of your own. Just a car. Any car. And pray to god that it runs for at least a little while. Another source of stress. "Will my car run at the end of the day?" "Will I be able to insure it?" "Should I even bother to insure it, with all the other bills that I have?" When will it all end? Please, take me now.
So I finish the job application, turn it in, go back to my seat and try to find something interesting to read. Company brochure. Blechhh. . . . So I read the company brochure. We are a re-insurer. We insure the insurer. . . . Oughta be money in that. . . . Until you have to pay out a claim. Owned by Warren Buffet. There's somebody who knows how to use money to make money. Wish I was Warren. Then I wouldn't have to worry about the simple things like wondering where cat food is going to come from at the end of the week with no job and $16.00 in the bank and no unemployment. Parents retired, broken by the stock market bubble, bless'em for having faith in the market . . . . Rubes who were fleeced clean, robbing their children of an inheritance. As if that were ever going to happen anyway. I never believed it, not for a moment. I know both of my parents too well.
Finally the HR person comes to see me. "Oh, I'm sorry, I thought we agreed that after checking the schedule today that we would see you tomorrow. Let me see if we have someone available who you could see now." Checks schedule . . . "Nope." At least she agrees to do the pre-interview stuff now, the most important part and let me come back tomorrow. But first she has something she has to do. "Could you come back at 11:00?" So I walk around the Microsoft campus area for almost an hour, wishing I could get a job there instead of the place I'm interviewing at. At least they get all the cool toys. The toys. And major, major fucking stress.
Would you want Bill lopping your balls off in a meeting? I hear the guy is fucking murder. You forget one tiny little detail in a presentation and he will find it, bore in on it, and make your life a living hell that you wonder if you will ever get out of, even though you know the meeting is only half an hour long. But with Bill yelling at you, demeaning you, making you feel like you are absolutly the stupidest, most insignificant, most unworthy human being on the entire planet, if not the universe. And all you want to do is die. Just kill me. Please. Rip out my lungs with a rusty butterknife, I don't care, anything is better than Bill and his maxed out to eleven temper.
I arrive back at the HR department and go in for my interview. This is the worst part, the interview. Cough up a lung. Tell us what your worst mistake in your entire life was on the job so we can use it against you later. Tell us what your worst experience with a manager was. A co-worker. Your mother. Your priest. Your pet. Your shoe. Why exactly should we hire such a pathetic, unworthy, disgusting human being as you? Will you let us rape you in the ass without lube? How often? Will you smile like you enjoy it? Wear sexy clothing that leaves you with an itch? Let us pimp you out to clients for their own sick and demented pleasure? 'Cause if you can do all that, baby you got a job!
But not for too much pay. We want you to be an endentured servant, not the cock-o-the-walk. Take this pathetic wage. We offer it to you on a plate served with cold shit. Then laugh behind your back when you take it up, smile and eat it with a grin.
Finally the interview ends and she asks me to come back for the second part tomorrow. I made it through this far, what else can they do to me? So, tomorrow I go back for more. . .

2004-09-27T22:08:00.000-07:00

This one was so good I just ran it in it's entirety. Thank You for speaking for us all who still have a conscience.
The Unfeeling President

I fault this president for not knowing what death is. He does not suffer the death of our 21-year-olds who wanted to be what they could be. On the eve of D-Day in 1944 General Eisenhower prayed to God for the lives of the young soldiers he knew were going to die. He knew what death was. Even in a justifiable war, a war not of choice but of necessity, a war of survival, the cost was almost more than Eisenhower could bear.

But this president does not know what death is. He hasn't the mind for it. You see him joking with the press, peering under the table for the weapons of mass destruction he can't seem to find, you see him at rallies strutting up to the stage in shirt sleeves to the roar of the carefully screened crowd, smiling and waving, triumphal, a he-man.

He does not mourn. He doesn't understand why he should mourn. He is satisfied during the course of a speech written for him to look solemn for a moment and speak of the brave young Americans who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country.

But you study him, you look into his eyes and know he dissembles an emotion which he does not feel in the depths of his being because he has no capacity for it. He does not feel a personal responsibility for the 1,000 dead young men and women who wanted to be what they could be.

They come to his desk not as youngsters with mothers and fathers or wives and children who will suffer to the end of their days a terribly torn fabric of familial relationships and the inconsolable remembrance of aborted life . . . they come to his desk as a political liability, which is why the press is not permitted to photograph the arrival of their coffins from Iraq.

How then can he mourn? To mourn is to express regret and he regrets nothing. He does not regret that his reason for going to war was, as he knew, unsubstantiated by the facts. He does not regret that his bungled plan for the war's aftermath has made of his mission-accomplished a disaster. He does not regret that, rather than controlling terrorism, his war in Iraq has licensed it. So he never mourns for the dead and crippled youngsters who have fought this war of his choice.

He wanted to go to war and he did. He had not the mind to perceive the costs of war, or to listen to those who knew those costs. He did not understand that you do not go to war when it is one of the options but when it is the only option; you go not because you want to but because you have to.

Yet this president knew it would be difficult for Americans not to cheer the overthrow of a foreign dictator. He knew that much. This president and his supporters would seem to have a mind for only one thing -- to take power, to remain in power, and to use that power for the sake of themselves and their friends.

A war will do that as well as anything. You become a wartime leader. The country gets behind you. Dissent becomes inappropriate. And so he does not drop to his knees, he is not contrite, he does not sit in the church with the grieving parents and wives and children. He is the president who does not feel. He does not feel for the families of the dead, he does not feel for the 35 million of us who live in poverty, he does not feel for the 40 percent who cannot afford health insurance, he does not feel for the miners whose lungs are turning black or for the working people he has deprived of the chance to work overtime at time-and-a-half to pay their bills - it is amazing for how many people in this country this president does not feel.

But he will dissemble feeling. He will say in all sincerity he is relieving the wealthiest 1 percent of the population of their tax burden for the sake of the rest of us, and that he is polluting the air we breathe for the sake of our economy, and that he is decreasing the quality of air in coal mines to save the coal miners' jobs, and that he is depriving workers of their time-and-a-half benefits for overtime because this is actually a way to honor them by raising them into the professional class.

And this litany of lies he will versify with reverences for God and the flag and democracy, when just what he and his party are doing to our democracy is choking the life out of it.

But there is one more terribly sad thing about all of this. I remember the millions of people here and around the world who marched against the war. It was extraordinary, that spontaneous aroused oversoul of alarm and protest that transcended national borders. Why did it happen? After all, this was not the only war anyone had ever seen coming. There are little wars all over he world most of the time.

But the cry of protest was the appalled understanding of millions of people that America was ceding its role as the last best hope of mankind. It was their perception that the classic archetype of democracy was morphing into a rogue nation. The greatest democratic republic in history was turning its back on the future, using its extraordinary power and standing not to advance the ideal of a concordance of civilizations but to endorse the kind of tribal combat that originated with the Neanderthals, a people, now extinct, who could imagine ensuring their survival by no other means than pre-emptive war.

The president we get is the country we get. With each president the nation is conformed spiritually. He is the artificer of our malleable national soul. He proposes not only the laws but the kinds of lawlessness that govern our lives and invoke our responses. The people he appoints are cast in his image. The trouble they get into and get us into, is his characteristic trouble.

Finally, the media amplify his character into our moral weather report. He becomes the face of our sky, the conditions that prevail. How can we sustain ourselves as the United States of America given the stupid and ineffective warmaking, the constitutionally insensitive lawgiving, and the monarchal economics of this president? He cannot mourn but is a figure of such moral vacancy as to make us mourn for ourselves.

The novelist E.L. Doctorow has a house in Sag Harbor.

2004-09-27T20:00:00.000-07:00

This is in regards to this story: The enemy is not on the court

Armstrong wanted to wear long pants, sleeves and a scarf while playing because the Islamic code calls for women's skin to be covered. Her teammates didn't mind, but critics screamed that it would open the floodgates for individualized jewelry and clothing to be worn by every player with a distinctive faith.
=======================================================================
My buddy felt she shouldn't be allowed to wear a scarf or warm-ups on the court. I felt it was okay. Here's my response:

Nope, sorry I disagree. Let's look at this: If she's
Amish and is required by her faith to wear that frumpy
old 1800 settler's dress and sun bonnet how many
people would be upset over that? Pretty much no one,
in fact the hard core christians would all be like
'oh, she's living her faith, she's blessed!' I think
the whole issue is just intolerance to a mid-east
religion. I mean really, when teams come out on the
court they're wearing their warmup suits, running
around, passing the ball, grabbing each others nuts,
dry humping and shit, what's the dealeo with her
wearing her warmup suit while she plays? No big deal.
What if she's got lupis and it's a danger for her
skin to be exposed to. . . . harsh lamplight? As far
as wearing a scarf, again, no big deal. She didn't
convert to Islam until *after* she was at school. My
buddy Mohamed, who's muslim has a wife who never wore
the hijab or a scarf, or really pretty much anything
(they're proud islamic nudists.) But a few years ago
she decided to wear a scarf, wear the hijab and he
said it was her decision to do so, he never pressured
her and he supported her either way. If you ever saw
the two of them together you would know he was telling
the truth, I've seldom seen a more equal couple, he
was *always* talking to her about 'Well, do you want
to do this." "What would *you* like to do." "Get me
a malt liquor, bitch!" You know, typical american
family.
As far as 'encouraging others to pimp out their
uniforms.' Bullshit. If dude wants to put on a ton
o' bling bling before he comes out on the court, let
him. I'll dance all over his ass while he's trying to
avoid getting smacked by his 20 pounds worth of
mercedes/porsche/cadillac/pepsi/coke/sprite/tab/
medals and shit. And I don't even play basketball!
'Yeah, come on bitch, come get some.' *smack* Mikey
goes down for the count. . .
Anyway, I guess I've made my point. It's no big
deal, and people shouldn't be getting all nuclear
about *a scarf* ! ! !

2004-09-27T15:54:00.000-07:00

America the Conservative

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. — Whether President Bush is reelected or Sen. John F. Kerry prevails, the United States will be the most conservative developed nation in the world. Its economy will remain the least regulated, its welfare state the smallest, its military the strongest and its citizens the most religious. According to data taken from the World Values Survey in the last decade, 60% of Americans believe that the poor are lazy (only 26% of Europeans share that view), and 30% believe that luck determines income (54% of Europeans say so). About 60% of Europeans say the poor are trapped, while only 29% of Americans believe they are. And roughly 30% of Europeans declare themselves to be left wing, but only 17% of Americans do.

2004-09-27T15:47:00.000-07:00

Progress through civilized behavior, not 'survival of the fittest' barbarism. This country is declining in every possible way and solutions need to be found. Compasionate Conservatism is regressive barbarism. Period.

Poverty Up as Welfare Enrollment Declines

Though the number of welfare recipients continues to decline, poverty rates -- particularly for single mothers and children -- have surged in recent years. Just last month, the government reported that the number of people on welfare had declined by 149,000 at the end of 2003 compared with 2002, while the number in poverty rose by 1.3 million. Those divergent trends offer fresh ammunition to both sides in the debate over whether, eight years after the fact, welfare reform is working.

2004-09-27T15:04:00.000-07:00

Today I've spent waiting around for a callback from a potential employer, I hate this part of things, the not knowing. Will they call? Am I too late? Will they offer a crap wage (almost always yes.)
I've also been looking over some unpaid bills. I've decided to do a better job of archiving these things so that when I finally do have some income I can get them paid off sooner. We are all endentured servants now.
So, mostly I just surf the net, post for jobs, clean up around the house and wish for better times. Somehow I wonder if *that* will ever happen again. At least I don't live in the Walled City of Kowloon
. . .

2004-09-24T20:16:00.000-07:00

I went down to apply for food stamps today, my money is running out and I barely have enough for a bus pass for next month. While I was there I talked to the person behind the counter regarding any changes in people filing for food assitance in the past few months. On the television news they keep giving upbeat forecasts regarding the economy, jobs, etc. Yet in my experience and those I talk to it seems the opposite.
I asked if there has been a decrease in a request for benefits, or whether it has remained pretty much the same, or has there been a substantial increase over the past few months. They said that there had been a substantial increase and that persons she had talked to were very stressed, their hours had been cut back on their jobs, they had been laid off, there were no jobs to be found, etc. There were no words of encouragement on the economy at all. In fact, based on the words of someone who sees the effects of changes in the economy much closer than most of us, it seemed like the economy was getting substantially worse, and those who were saying otherwise were in fact lying. I have not watched the television news in several months now, in fact the first time I've seen CNN in awhile was while I was sitting waiting for my food assistance appointment. Just a bunch of fluffed out press poodles. No substance.
Do yourself a favor. Kill your television. You'll be glad you did.

2004-09-20T13:59:00.000-07:00

Well, here I am on a Monday afternoon at
Trabant Internet Cafe
updating my blog. I've been spending the morning sending out resumes and cleaning up my bookmarks. What a nightmare. Imagine looking into a closet you keep throwing stuff in and it just piles up and piles up, no rhyme or reason to it. Now though, for the most part it actually has some real degree of structure to it.
I can't believe how short summer seemed, and now here it is winter again. Cold, gray, overcast. And yet somehow peaceful. I guess it's because we're in that time of the year for curling up to the fire with a good book and a hot cup o' joe. Ahhhhh.
I wish I could update the blog more frequently, but at this time the house is without internet, and accessing the net from wi-fi from the house is a hit and miss proposition.
Sometimes it's up, most times it's not, and only if I want to put it near the window while stretching over the couch. Very uncomfortable.
Here at Trabi the door's open and it's cold outside. Cold, cold, cold. I'm wearing my black leather jacket (today's a black day, black jeans, boots, shirt and jacket. So chic.) and I'm still a bit chilled. Time for some tea.

2004-09-17T18:57:00.000-07:00

Well, here I am, no job, no benefits, money running out, jamaicans down below in the basement barking like animals and I don't know where I'm going with this. Let's see. . .
So last night I went to the food bank, first time for me, food bank virgin and all that. I went with my buddy Dan, a housemate who thinks of individualism while sucking up to mommy every month for rent money. How many republicans have you heard this same story from? "Oh yeah, I'm a rugged individualist, but mummy and daddy put me through college, and every time I have a financial fuckup I know I can always go crawling back to them. It's because I'm an individualist, I don't need anyone, I depend on myself. Fuck the poor. Fuck the disadvantaged. Fuck them all."
Yeah right, you fucking hypocrit son of a bitch. Fuck you all the way to hell. Which is where all republicans eventually end up. And they do. They know as much about God as devout muslims do about eating pork.
It's raining outside, the rush of the rain on the roof, the rush of cars rocketing by on the express lanes a hundred feet away from the window.
Funds fading fast and no hope on the horizon. No hope. Will I be out on the street in a months time? Will my cats be starving? Will their litterbox be clean?
Rugged individulists. Wanking hypocrits.

I think that at this point in world history the United States of America is the most hypocritical first world nation on the face of the earth. Certainly one of the most hypocritical regardless of first, second or third world status. Instead of trying to alleviate the world's pain, we do what we can to add to it. Then we sit back and demand another Big Mac. And could you supersize those fries? I need more cholestorel to help me into an earlier grave just so I can avoid facing up to the fact that my nation causes so much harm and pain and suffering to all others. It's not my fault. I voted democrat. Now it doesn't matter, black box voting takes care of that for me. Vote democrat? It changes it to the appropriate response: always republican. Always republican. Only a commie or a taliban would vote otherwise. Fucking Liberals. Always ruining the fun. Always insisting I have a 'conscience'. As if my family, father raping my mother, raping my sisters, fucking with my mind would say otherwise. Go U.S.A. ! ! ! Go U.S.A. ! ! ! Wave the flag. Ignore what's going on under the bleachers. It's a family thing. We shouldn't get involved. It's none of *our* business. Move along, nothing to see here. Hmmm, wonder what's on TV tonite? Much better than calling up my friends. Hmmmpphhhh. Friends. Time for another beer. Dull the pain. Dive into oblivion. Suck it down. Suck it up. Be a man. Semper Fi ! ! !
I'm reading the Polyponessian War now, the story of a war that lasted thirty years and led to the downfall of Greece. The dominant thought as I read it? Two thousand years later we still haven't learned that arrogant loudmouths will still be the downfall of us all. Shun the loudmouths. Shut them out. Deny them your company and turn them away. For the good of civilization it's the best thing to do. For the good of all it's the best thing to do. Put down the mad dog. Remember, united we stand, divided we fall. Don't let the sociopaths decide the destiny of all. Shut down Congress. Shut down the Senate. Shut down the White House. Shut down the prisons, the judiciary, the lawyers, the lobbyists. For the good of all. For the good of civilization. Why? They fear civilization. They fear knowledge. They fear democracy. They fear rights for all versus for just a priveleged few. Shut them down. Put them into the McDonald's jobs where they belong. Make them scrub toilets. Teach them some true humility. Make them respect us. Make them respect all.
United we stand, divided we fall. Do not let them divide us. Do not let them divide you against those you need or those who need you.

2004-09-09T21:57:00.000-07:00

Well, I just got back from 'The Vigil', never having been to one before, at least not this kind of vigil. This was a vigil in Westlake Center to mark the passing of the 1,000th soldier killed in Iraq (officially). Of course, those in the know are aware the 1,000th soldier killed was awhile back.

I went out there with my camera to document how many people were out to mark this important event, and my rough head count made it out to about 150'ish. Well, a few americans is better than none. Perhaps when the numbers run into the millions. I've heard that 30,000 Iraqis have now died in the 'liberation' of their country, thanks to our 'smart bombs' that make a nice, neat little crater with minimal 'collateral damage'. Personally I think that is a deliberate underestimate. Funny, if I knew one of those things was being dropped on the house next door I wouldn't stand across the street to watch. How about you? I didn't think so.
I took some photos from the balcony overlooking Westlake Center precisly at eight, and at that point the crowd was under 100. After I went down to the plaza to check everyone out, it seemed that the majority of people gathered were in their late 30's and 40's, very few young or counterculture people out there. After looking around and wishing there were more people there, I became one of them myself and asked for a candle to light and hold with the others. There were a noticable assortment of new agey types though, including one woman who went around the circle of 150'ish, waving a bundle of sage, brushing a large black feather across the face of everyone and saying something about crazy horse or chief joseph or. . . . Who knows, it all went up with the sage. As she went from person to person her sage bundle went out, and each person had to try to re-light it with the candle they were holding for the vigil. Then she came to me and I gave it a really good dose of flame and got that thing really burning. And in the excitement of having a fully functioning smoky bundle o' sage. . . she forgot to give me her contrived native american blessing. Oh well.
There was an Iraqi flag waving close by, something that I had mixed feelings about. It's still the Baathist flag, not a truly independent Iraqi flag. At least they had the current one that says 'God Is Great' in Arabic, instead of the 1992 flag that was held over Saddam's statues head in the faked 'liberation of downtown Baghdad'. You remember that one, don't you? The one that seemed like a crowd had spontaneously come out to tear down the statue of Saddam, yet the only flag they could come up with was one that hadn't been in use since 1992? The one that if you pulled the camera back from the crowd you could see that it was very small, gathered around the american military vehicles very closely? All young men about the same age, no elderly, no women, in spite of Iraq being a very secular country?
After about 45 minutes everyone made a circle and quietly dispersed. I hope that each and every one of you not only remembers the soldiers that have died in this war, but especially the innocent civilians as well. And the children. Never forget the children.

2004-09-09T11:01:00.000-07:00

The neocons and the Israeli lobby
have been engaging in acts against this country for a very long time now. Hopefully the developing scandal that stretches back decades will give officials in our government the spine to finally confront these wrongs and throw out the traitors and imprison the spies. As for me, I feel it's too late. I have no hope in decent, honest government anymore.

2004-09-08T18:45:00.000-07:00

So, in yesterday's post I was contemplating how in spite of the violence of modern warfare, the body counts coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan seem unusually low. There's a reason for that:We're Being Lied To!

Part of what the story discusses is how the Marines don't really tell much of anything, and the Army trys to tell as little as possible. One of the points touched on is that our government has not told anyone about how many soldiers have died after they have left the battlefield from wounds sustained in action. It is true that body armor protects the head and torso, but with IED (Improvised Explosive Devices) it is very conceivable that those soldiers who have their torsos and heads protected still have vulnerable arms and legs and lower abdomens still very vulnerable. There is also little press about the injuries sustained from concussion when explosives go off in close proximity to troops. From what little press I've seen, the most common injuries are those to the brain from concussion, which has left soldiers with severe brain injuries resulting in headaches, depression leading to suicide, impaired mental functioning, etc. But the bottom line is, whether a soldier is killed in action or loses their life while waiting in a hospital or recovers with missing limbs or cognitive impairment, their life is very much over. And no one can tell me that this administration, with it's aggresive cutting away of veteran's benefits is going to be willing to help these people or their families once they come home.

2004-09-07T18:17:00.000-07:00

More about the number 1 story from project censored: The Growing Wealth Inequality Gap.

UN economists blame "free-trade" practices and the neo-liberal policies of international lending institutions like the IMF and WTO, and the industrialized countries that lead them, for much of the damage caused to Third World countries over the past 20 years. Many of these policies are now being implemented in the U.S., allowing for an acceleration of wealth consolidation. And even the IMF has issued a report warning the U.S. about the consequences for its appetite for excess and overspending.

2004-09-07T16:46:00.000-07:00

Here's something from Democrats.com
re poll manipulation
. What? Did you think Bush has really somehow regained his lead in the polls honestly? A snowball has a better chance in hell than the truth does for him and his bunch. Oh, and check out more over at Salon.com
re previous run-ins this guy has had re his deliberatly misleading poll numbers.

2004-09-07T14:16:00.000-07:00

U.S. military deaths in Iraq campaign pass 1,000

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there a few storys about a month ago in a few of the major papers about combat casualties hitting the 1,000 combat dead mark? At this point, I feel like we're in a situation that not only requires 'eternal vigilance' like the founding fathers stated in order to keep one's democracy, but also 'eternal news records keeping' to keep track of all the storys that have been put out, retracted, then denied that they were ever published in the first place.

2004-09-07T11:38:00.000-07:00

Dumbing Down America. The dumber they are, the easier they are to control and manipulate. For years the american educational system has been derided for becoming increasingly mediocre and inept at producing fully equipped graduates. Here's the reason.
'The true purpose of schooling, according to Gatto, is to produce an easily manageable workforce to serve employers in a mass-production economy. Actual education is a secondary and even counterproductive result since educated people tend to be more difficult to control.'
He has won the New York City Teacher of the Year award three times and the New York State Teacher of the Year award once during the final year of his career. In other words, this is someone who knows exactly what they're talking about.

2004-09-07T11:04:00.000-07:00

Some things to think about today: Kleptocracy: rule by theft. Plutocracy: government of the rich, by the rich and for the rich.
So where does 'democracy' or 'democratic republic' figure in any of this? What, it doesn't? Very good, you're catching on. Now, refer to the story about Richard Pearle, one of Lord Blacks good buddies
here.
Makes you feel like democracy is working really well for all of us, huh?

2004-09-06T20:52:00.000-07:00

Check Out This One

Censored!
The 10 big stories the national news media ignore.

1. Wealth inequality in 21st century threatens economy and democracy

As the mainstream news media recite the official line about the nation's supposed economic recovery, a key point has been missing: wealth inequality in the United States has almost doubled over the past 30 years.

2. Ashcroft versus human rights law that holds corporations accountable

For decades the United States has trained right-wing insurgents and torturers, toppled democratically elected governments, and propped up brutal dictatorships abroad – all in the interest of corporate profits. But rarely are the agents of repression ever held accountable for the tens of thousands of deaths and the brutal cycles of poverty, subjugation, environmental destruction, and violence they leave in their wake. Indeed, many foreign tyrants go on to enjoy plush retirement right here in the United States.

3. Bush administration manipulates science and censors scientists

Tampering with data that threatens corporate profits is much more widespread under Bush than we've been led to believe. And the Environmental Protection Agency has emerged as one of the administration's primary targets.

One of the first White House moves – on the day Bush was inaugurated – was to fire engineer Tony Oppegard, the leader of a federal team investigating a 300-million-gallon slurry spill at a coal-mining site in Kentucky. "Black lava-like toxic sludge containing 60 poisonous chemicals choked and sterilized up to 100 miles of rivers and creeks," environmental lawyer Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wrote in the Nation. The EPA dubbed it "the greatest environmental catastrophe in the history of the Eastern United States."

4. High uranium levels found in troops and civilians

Last year Project Censored included the United States' and Great Britain's continued use of depleted-uranium weapons – despite ample evidence of their acute health effects – among its top 10 underreported stories. Almost 10,000 U.S. troops died within 10 years of serving in the first Gulf War, researchers had found. And more than a third of those still alive had filed Gulf War Syndrome-related claims.

In study after study, research pointed to the use of depleted uranium in U.S. and British weaponry as the culprit. But authorities concentrated their efforts into obfuscating the problem – downplaying its reach, discrediting scientists and ailing military personnel, and erecting a smoke screen around the root causes of the "syndrome."

5. Wholesale giveaway of our natural resources

Adam Werbach, executive director of the Common Assets Defense Fund and former Sierra Club president, reviewed the Bush administration's environmental policy record and came to a disturbing conclusion: the record is not only bad – it's "akin to an affirmative action program for corporate polluters," he wrote in In These Times.

Cheney's infamous, secretive, industry-laden energy task force produced what can be boiled down to two main recommendations, "lower the environmental bar and pay corporations to jump over it," Werbach wrote.

For example, Congress has promised $3 billion in tax cuts to mining corporations to help them access natural gas embedded in underground coal deposits in Georgia's Powder River Basin. The Bureau of Land Management has calculated that miners will waste a full 700 million gallons of publicly owned water a year in the process – thereby sucking the region's underground aquifers dry and decimating local farms and wildlife.

6. Sale of electoral politics

The Help America Vote Act required that states submit their blueprints for switching over to electronic voting systems by Jan. 1, 2004, and implement those plans in time for the 2006 elections. Some regions are already using the machines. But those who've bothered to look into the new systems are sending up serious warning flares. Critics say that if Americans don't want a repeat of the 2000 Florida election fiasco – on a much grander scale – the administration's plans must be halted in their tracks.

A switch to electronic voting might seem innocent enough at first – until you look at who's implementing it, and how. Indeed, the transfer represents the privatization of the voting process in the hands of a select few fervent GOP supporters who've insisted on keeping their operating systems and codes a trade secret – meaning they enjoy absolute control over the entire voting process, including ballot counting and oversight. There's no paper trail.

7. Conservative organization drives judicial appointments

Ever since the Reagan administration, the neoconservatives have pursued an aggressive campaign to stack the federal courts with right-wing judges. Their main vehicle: the Federalist Society of Law and Public Policy, an organization founded in 1982 by a small group of radically conservative law students at the University of Chicago.

The effort has been a resounding success. With the help of Republicans in Congress, 85 extra federal judgeships were created under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush; 9 were created under Clinton. Now 7 out of 12 circuit courts are antiabortion. Seven of the 9 Supreme Court justices are Republican appointees – and it's been 11 years since a post has opened up, meaning another right-winger or two could be appointed sometime soon. During Bush Sr.'s tenure, one White House insider boasted that no one who wasn't a Federalist ever received a judicial appointment from the president.

8. Secrets of Cheney's energy task force come to light

As the Bush administration continues to protect the iron wall of secrecy it's erected around Cheney's energy task force, at least two documents confirm long-standing suspicions that the administration's foreign policy is being driven by the dictates of the energy industry.

When Bush took office in January 2001, he said tackling the country's energy crisis would be a top priority. The United States faced nationwide oil and natural gas shortages, and a series of electrical blackouts were rolling across California. The president established the National Energy Policy Development Group and appointed former Halliburton CEO Cheney as its head.

9. Widow brings RICO case against U.S. government for 9/11

As the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States, also known as the 9/11 Commission, completed its first year, Ellen Mariani and her attorney held a press conference on the steps of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to announce her own startling conclusions. Mariani, wife of Louis Neil Mariani, who died when terrorists flew United Airlines Flight 175 into the World Trade Center's south tower, had come to believe top American officials – including Bush, Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and others – had foreknowledge of the attacks, purposefully failed to prevent them, and had since taken pains to cover up the truth.

10. New nuke plants: taxpayers support, industry profits

If you thought nuclear energy was dead, think again: the Bush administration's energy bill – yet another product of Cheney's industry-stacked energy task force – provides taxpayer cash for companies that build new nukes.

A secretly crafted provision of the bill, released late on a Saturday night in November, offers energy companies as much as $7.5 billion in tax credits to build six nuclear reactors. This is in addition to almost $4 billion set aside for other nuclear energy programs.

"Nuclear power already has had 50 years of subsidy totaling over $140 billion," Nuclear Information and Resource Service's Cindy Folkers reported.

2004-09-06T16:10:00.000-07:00

US recovery 'not helping workers'

Many working families still feel no benefit from the US economic recovery, the Economic Policy Institute says.

While business is improving, average wages have fallen, job satisfaction has declined and the rich-poor gap widened, says a report by the US think tank.

And in terms of recouping jobs since the start of the recession, the US is in a worse position "than any business cycle since the 1930s", it added.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- No Shit. I have run into so many people over the past few months that say that not only are jobs out there crap, but they are so bad that even with this poor economy and no prospect of collecting unemployment benefits that I and my legion of fellow employed/unemployed co-workers would rather depend on our meals from a food bank than work under the conditions we have to work under. No F**king Shit. That is how bad it really and truly is. I would rather face poverty and losing a roof over my head than work for you. And so would many, many others out there across this country and across the world. The gift of a job that corporations and businesses offer is so repulsive we would rather die than take it.

2004-09-06T15:31:00.000-07:00

The Curse of Dick Cheney

The ever-canny Ronald Reagan was the only Republican president since Eisenhower who managed to serve two full terms. He is also the only one not to have appointed Dick Cheney to office.

This pattern of misplaced confidence in Cheney, followed by disastrous results, runs throughout his life -- from his days as a dropout at Yale to the geopolitical chaos he has helped create in Baghdad. Once you get to know his history, the cycle becomes clear: First, Cheney impresses someone rich or powerful, who causes unearned wealth and power to be conferred on him. Then, when things go wrong, he blames others and moves on to a new situation even more advantageous to himself.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Read on to get the whole poop and nothing but the poop on the most disasterous federal official ever to inhabit an office. If an average worker screwed up as badly as Cheney has throughout his career, we would be unable to work as anything but janitors.

===================================================================

What there are more incompetent, arrogant theiving neo-cons? Why yes, there's *millions* of 'em. Check out this article here
about Richard Pearle.

Mr. Perle's position, both in the corporate world and in policy circles, has been shaken.

In the Hollinger case, regulators are preparing to seek an order barring him and Lord Black from serving on boards of public companies, and the Justice Department has opened an inquiry to examine whether any criminal laws were violated.

The report suggests in one passage that Lord Black ultimately agreed to permit Hollinger to make a $2.5 million investment in Trireme to get Mr. Perle to resign as head of Hollinger Digital, telling three top Hollinger executives by e-mail messages that he was "well aware of Richard's shortcomings" and another that he was "well aware of what a trimmer and a sharper Richard is at times."

2004-09-02T21:51:00.000-07:00

Suppresion of Free Speech

2004-09-02T13:34:00.000-07:00

Commentary I put up on Seeing The Forest
re editing troll posts on comment sections in blogs:

I go along with the comment that offensive posts should be banned. The argument that I make is this: In a totalitarian society they want to make you feel as bad about yourself as they possibly can. Like it or not, this country is becoming that society. Face up to it. Accept it. Black Box Voting. Free Speech Zones. Trolls on blog posts. Fight back and don't be naive' about 'suppressing someone else's free speech rights.' The other side doesn't care about *your* free speech, they only want to disenfranchise it and shut it down. The sooner everyone acknowledges that they need to fight back, and fight back using their tactics, as repulsive as they may be, the sooner we can get this country back on track. The bottom line is: they don't play fair, they know they don't have to, the only thing they know is how to lie, cheat, steal, sucker punch and everything else out there that is dispicable, repulsive and obnoxious. We do not live in a 'decent society' anymore. Accept it, Fight It.

2004-09-02T11:10:00.000-07:00

Something to back up what I said earlier re voter apathy and disconnection from the political and social process here

Excerpts:

It may also be true that in the age of television, music videos and modern technological entertainment, many Americans are simply too distracted to heavily engage in politics and other forms of civic life, said John Judis, a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

This day and age finds many Americans increasingly withdrawn from various forms of social interaction, including politics, some experts say.

In his 2000 book, Bowling Alone, Putnam documented what he called America's plummeting "social capital", the decreasing participation of citizens in social networks ranging from neighbourhood watch programmes and church groups to political party meetings.

A new study conducted by the American Political Science Association titled American Democracy in an Age of Rising Inequality, reported that America increasingly is comprised of two "classes of citizenship" in which the affluent sector has far more access to political leaders than the low-income sector.

The report said the two major political parties spend most of their time "recruiting" assistance from those "who are already the most privileged and involved", and that the economic imbalances in the US are becoming more severe than in most other democratic countries.

These developments have most likely dissuaded some poorer American citizens from joining the political system, the report said.

"What we are witnessing now is not only low voter participation among the disenfranchised in this country," said Lawrence Jacobs, one of the authors of the report. "There is also a growing sense of powerlessness that is tearing at the heart of democracy itself."

2004-09-02T09:30:00.000-07:00

This is a reply to a friend who sent me an article by Greg Palast on Florida's ongoing voting issues.
You can read Greg's story here: http://www.gregpalast.com/index.cfm

Sorry I sent that one back to you, I saw the story in

'Bushwatch' (something that you should really

subscribe to if you haven't already) and missed

reading it.  I should have come back to read that

article, very important indeed.  I don't know if

you've read Greg Palast's stuff, but he's very, very

good at what he does, in other words being a

dependable, muckraking journalist. 

  I don't mean to sound pessimistic, but there really

is no point in anyone believing there is any hope for

change in this country, democrat or repugnican.  When

you think of both parties, a more accurate description

would be 'ultra-conservative' and 'conservative'.

Third partys?  Not in this lifetime.  As Doctor Smith

would say in 'Lost in Space' "Doomed, we're all

Doomed."

 Oh, and if you vote by absentee ballot, you will

notice the requirement to state party affiliation so

they can more quickly screen who they do and do not

want to accept votes from.  Welcome to an Orwellian

Amerika.  Also, these absentee ballots are counted by

a 'central tabulator' with all the faults that occur

in the touch-screen machines that are so

controversial.  In other words, the central tabulator

is 'fixable' with back-door access to manipulate votes

and no means of detecting whether that vote is fixed

or not.

 As for me, you can see my sentiments with the

attached poster.  I may go out and start posting it on

lampposts for all the good it will do in this MTV

generation u.s.  

 Have you been watching the New York protests?

Ineffectual comes to mind.  I've been keeping track on

the NY Indymedia website as well.  Those who are out

there protesting are just shouting inside an empty

room.  Nobody's home.  They don't seem to realize the

era of marching sock puppets around died with the

sixties and when people see that now they may as well

be watching a civil war re-enactment. 

 My feeling is they would be much more effective in a

'guerilla warfare' environment where they put on

business suits, got haircuts, and started their own

lobbying organizations.  It wouldn't hurt if they

started reading republican literature on how to be

effective in local and national governemnt.  I don't

like the republicans at all, but they have certainly

put a lot of thought into how to take over a country.

The CIA and Special Forces weren't afraid to read Che

Guevara's 'Guerilla Warfare', and ultimatly that's how

they got him.  Perhaps it's time the left did the same

when it comes to reaching out to the public and

pulling them in where it counts.

2004-09-01T20:58:00.000-07:00

Yeah, so another farkin' day in the dull, boring cat-ate-my-shorts city of Seattle. Somebody drive an icepick through my brain *please*.
I spent part of the day posting for jobs in the worst economy since the great depression, playing with my cats, and surfing the net before running away screaming at all the news and history being made today. Bad, bad, all bad. Remember this one, burn it into your brain, never forget it: 'Those Who Fail To Learn From History's Mistakes Are Doomed To Repeat Them." Rinse, repeat. I truly think we are in one of the low points of human history, you know, the one where in the future they all look back and think. "Wow, did the entire country have like some bad bowel blockage of the mind or something?" Me, I think it's all the food additives and pollutants that have leached into the soil over the years of poor stewardship. It's all coming back to haunt us. Seriously, have you seen what the population looks like these days? We're all either fat as hogs or if they're teens (girls, specifically) they have these weird little bird like legs, paunchy guts and vacous, dull expressions. Then again, has anyone seen the inside of a school cafeteria lately? Hormones in the food, soda machines every five feet, advertising for 'crap o' the day' everywhere you turn. How are kids supposed to get a decent education with distractions like that around? I weep for tomorrow.
I used to be worried about one of these walking chemical landfills being my boss, but my guess is with all the anti-depressents wrongfully prescribed, hormone-saturated food, bad education and poor healthcare they'll be lucky to make it past thirty. Through no fault of their own, mind you, who could fend off a constant marketing assault 24-7 like people are being subjected to these days? As for me, I finally just said 'To Hell With It' and cut off the cable TV. Let me repeat that so you can recover. I Cut Off My Cable TV. My hair didn't fall out, my vision improved, I can actually follow a conversation (and contribute to it.) Most important of all. I actually read to obtain information. Yes. Read to obtain information. Scary, I'n it? Now, the few times I bother to turn on the telly anymore I am almost instantly repulsed by how shallow and vacous it is. No more shallow Faux News commentary. No MSNBC blather. No local news boobs and press poodles (yap, yap, yap, yap, yappity-yap) Bliss. Serenity. A Higher Place. All because I shut off the boob tube. No more tabloid shows. No 'reality TV' (reality? Is it reality to be shut up inside a lucite box with a nest of scorpians for a few bucks?) No nonsense.
Well, okay, theres Fark.com. But I just browse, I just browse! Nuthin the matter with jus' browsin. Move along now, nothing to see here. . .

2004-09-01T11:27:00.000-07:00

Well, time to get the old blog rolling. I just stopped by to add a paypal logo onto the site at the advice of a friend, so anyone out there who would like to send me money just for being here, now's the time to do it. Please send money. Lots of money. I dance, I sing, I fart.

2003-12-03T14:34:00.000-08:00

I've been away for far to long now, I'll see if I can put up some posts, maybe a mix of newsfeed and personal commentary. Does anyone actually read this thing?

2003-04-25T09:29:00.000-07:00

Thomas Paine said it best.

"It has been thought," he wrote in The Rights of Man in 1791, "...that government is a compact between those who govern and those who are governed; but this cannot be true, because it is putting the effect before the cause; for as man must have existed before governments existed, there necessarily was a time when governments did not exist, and consequently there could originally exist no governors to form such a compact with. The fact therefore must be, that the individuals themselves, each in his own personal and sovereign right, entered into a compact with each other to produce a government: And this is the only mode in which governments have a right to arise, and the only principle on which they have a right to exist."

2003-04-22T12:30:00.000-07:00

Empire vs. Republic

George W. Bush’s doctrine of preemptive wars is creating a new deep divide in U.S. politics. On one side, Bush and his backers see the Iraq War as the start of an American global empire built around unparalleled military power. On the other, a scattered grouping of skeptics dig in for what they see as a fight for the soul of the American republic.

Without doubt, the Bush side now owns the strategic high ground, asserting vindication in the U.S. ouster of Iraq’s dictator Saddam Hussein. Bush also can claim near total mastery of a U.S. news media that shed any pretense of “objectivity” as it flooded the nation with heroic images of American soldiers and heart-warming scenes of grateful Iraqis, while downplaying civilian dead and growing signs that many Iraqis resent the U.S. occupation.

The anti-empire side finds itself pinned down, too, by accusations that its opposition to the three-week war was naïve and even disloyal. Plus, it's a disorganized mix of political interests, ranging from old-time conservatives to traditional liberals, from the likes of Pat Buchanan to Howard Dean. Yet as imbalanced as this struggle now appears, both sides agree that it holds in its outcome the future of the American democratic experiment.

The pro-empire side argues that only a militarily assertive United States can address what Bush calls “gathering dangers” facing the nation – even if that means tighter constraints on liberty at home and freer use of U.S. troops abroad. The pro-republic forces say Bush’s imperial strategy is a sham – false security that cedes life-and-death national decisions to the dictates of one man.

Shallow Media

To the pro-republic side, part of the price for empire is the increasingly shallow U.S. news media that largely sanitized the war. Rather than troubling Americans with gruesome images of mangled and dismembered Iraqi bodies, including many children, the cable networks, in particular, edited the war in ways that helped avoid negativity and gave advertisers the feel-good content that plays best around their products.

Fox News may have pioneered this concept of casting the war in the gauzy light of heroic imagery, where Iraqi soldiers were “goons” and interviews with Americans at war were packaged with the Battle Hymn of the Republic as the soundtrack.

But the supposedly less ideological MSNBC may have carried the idea to even greater lengths with Madison-Avenue-style montages of the Iraq war. One showed U.S. troops in heroic postures moving through Iraq. The segment ended with an American boy surrounded by yellow ribbons for his father at war, and the concluding slogan, “Home of the Brave.”

Another MSNBC montage showed happy Iraqis welcoming U.S. troops as liberators and rejoicing at the toppling of Hussein. These stirring pictures ended with the slogan, “Let Freedom Ring.”

Left out of these “news” montages were any images of death and destruction. For instance, there was no scene of a newly orphaned 12-year-old Iraqi boy waving the stump of what’s left of his arms. No sense either of the unspeakable pain of a father who was injured in a U.S. bombing and was about to learn that his three young daughters, who were the center of his life, were dead.

The happy montages also sanitized out the horror of a mother who found her 20-year-old daughter in the ruins of a bombed-out restaurant, first her torso and then her head. The U.S. had bombed the restaurant in a residential area thinking Hussein was there.

Cable news also downplayed evidence that many Iraqis, while glad to see Hussein gone, were angered by the U.S. invasion and its aftermath, which brought widespread destruction, arson and looting, including the loss of priceless antiquities of Mesopotamia dating back more than 5,000 years. The reaction to the U.S. occupation has included marches by thousands of Iraqis demanding withdrawal of U.S. troops and calling for an Iran-like Islamic state.

The Wall Street Journal took note of the dueling coverage presented by domestic CNN and its CNNI Networks, which broadcasts to international viewers. While domestic CNN focused on happy stories, such as the rescue of U.S. prisoner-of-war Jessica Lynch, CNNI carried more scenes of wounded civilians overflowing Iraqi hospitals.

“During the Gulf War in 1991, [CNN] presented a uniform global feed that showed the war largely through American eyes,” the Journal reported. “Since then, CNN has developed several overseas networks that increasingly cater their programming to regional audiences and advertisers.” [WSJ, April 11, 2003]

Left unsaid by the Journal’s formulation of how CNN’s overseas affiliates “cater” to foreign audiences was the flip side of that coin, that domestic CNN is freer to shape a version of the news that is more satisfying to Americans and to U.S. advertisers.

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2003/042103a.html

2003-04-22T12:26:00.000-07:00

A nation lost

By James Carroll, 4/22/2003

EVEN BEFORE conclusions can be drawn about the war in Iraq (Saddam? Weapons of mass destruction? Iraqi stability? Cost to civilians? Syria?) a home front consensus is jelling around a radical revision of America's meaning in the world.

Centered on coercive unilateralism, the new doctrine assumes that the United States not only stands apart from other countries but above them. The primitive tribalism of boys at football games -- ''We're number one!'' -- has been transformed into an axiom of strategy. Military force has replaced democratic idealism as the main source of US influence.

Formerly conceived of as essentially defensive, US armed services are now unapologetically on the offense. Aggression is prevention. Diplomacy is reduced to making the case for impending war and then putting the best face on war's denouement. The aim of all this is not world dominance but world order. That world order in the new age requires American dominance is an unintended consequence of America's power-altruism. That ''We're number one'' makes the world safe for everybody -- if only they accept it.

This new vision is clear, its advocates are powerful, and with Iraq its main blocks are in place, with obvious implications for countries as geographically dispersed as Iran and North Korea. What are the elements of an alternative vision? In a world traumatized by terrorist threat, weapons proliferation, and the sensationalism of Fox and CNN, disruption is infinitely magnified.

When such horror strikes, whether from twin towers collapsing or twin snipers shooting strangers, can human beings put faith in something other than overwhelming force? What strategies should critics of the new US doctrine of coercive unilateralism employ in opposing it? Learning from the past, I think of several:

Don't cede the language of morality to the right wing. Manichaean bipolarity oversimplifies good and evil, banalizing both. Still, some things should be done because they are right or opposed because they are wrong.

Critics of the intended new Pax Americana should not hesitate to say that long-agreed ethical principles are being violated. It is wrong to break treaties, as the United States is doing in its treatment of POWs in Cuba. It is wrong to wage aggressive war, as the United States now openly does. To make decisions for or against such policies on supposedly pragmatic grounds is to break the crucial link between means and ends, as if an outcome (''regime change'') can justify whatever was done to accomplish it. In the long run, the only truly pragmatic act is the moral act.

Be skeptical of ''homeland security.'' The American tradition prefers the risks associated with liberty to the risks associated with bureaucratic control. The new homeland security state threatens the kind of excess that came with the national security state after World War II. It was the National Security Act of 1947, after all, that laid the groundwork for the univocal bureaucratizing of government based in the Pentagon that marginalized debate and eliminated the natural checks of multiple power centers.

''National security,'' defined by anti-Communist paranoia at home and abroad, was false security. ''Homeland security'' promises to be a paranoid reprise.

Be suspicious of foreign policy based on ''worst case'' thinking. During the Cold War, the United States made fearful assessments of Soviet capabilities and intentions that turned out to be entirely false -- assessments that shaped policy. Low-level intelligence estimates regularly reported mere possibilities of hostile threat, which, reported up the chain of command, were transformed into certain facts. Thus, Soviet troop strength was wildly overestimated in the beginning of the era; Soviet missile strength was overestimated in the middle; Soviet political strength was overestimated at the end. The result was a US-driven nuclear arms race, the effects of which still threaten the world.

The worst case for the Soviet Union existed only in Washington's fantasy. And now it seems that the Saddam worst case resides in the same place. A nation that is so driven by fear will always find things to be afraid of. That nation's gravest threat arises, of course, from what it then does to defend itself.

Beware of war as an organizing principle of society. It should be a source of alarm, not pride, that the United States is drawing such cohesive sustenance from the war in Iraq.

Photographic celebrations of our young warriors, glorifications of released American prisoners, heroic rituals of the war dead all take on the character of crass exploitation of the men and women in uniform. First they were forced into a dubious circumstance, and now they are themselves being mythologized as its main post-facto justification -- as if the United States went to Iraq not to seize Saddam (disappeared), or to dispose of weapons of mass destruction (missing), or to save the Iraqi people (chaos), but ''to support the troops.'' War thus becomes its own justification. Such confusion on this grave point, as on the others, signifies a nation lost.

James Carroll's column appears regularly in the Globe.

This story ran on page A15 of the Boston Globe on 4/22/2003.

http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/112/oped/A_nation_lost+.shtml

2003-04-22T12:20:00.000-07:00

Sacrifice?

Ask not what you can do ...

VICE PRESIDENT Dick Cheney still receives paychecks from Halliburton. This money is “deferred compensation” from his time as the conglomerate’s CEO. Apparently, taking deferred compensation when he resigned, instead of a lump sum, offered “tax advantages.”

No one likes paying taxes. And lots of people use creative means to lower their tax bite. But there is something unseemly about the vice president of the United States remaining on the payroll of a private company in order to elude taxes — especially considering that Cheney is awash in money after his rocky tenure at Halliburton.

He made $10 million in salary and bonuses, plus something like $30 million in stock options. That’s for five years of work. You’d think Cheney could afford to share a little of that wealth with the government he’s helping to lead, especially to avoid the ethically questionable situation of remaining on the payroll of a company that gets billions of dollars in government contracts.

We’ve come a long, long way from “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.”

Then again, under Cheney’s leadership, Halliburton found plenty of “tax advantages.” The number of Halliburton subsidiaries establishing offshore headquarters to evade federal taxes increased from nine to 44 during Cheney’s five years.

The company went from paying $302 million in taxes in 1998 to receiving an $85 million rebate in 1999. Meanwhile, much of the income Halliburton didn’t pay taxes on was coming from billions of dollars in government contracts Cheney helped secure.

Halliburton isn’t the only company sneaking offshore to ease or erase its tax burden. The IRS estimates that eliminating the offshore loophole would bring in $70 billion annually. Coincidentally, that’s almost enough to pay for President Bush’s war in Iraq.

Legislation to outlaw this practice, called the “Corporate Patriot Enforcement Act,” is going nowhere, perhaps because so many of these companies use a small fraction of their ill-gotten gains to shower money on Congress.

Republicans in Congress even derailed an attempt to simply prevent corporate “ex-patriots” from winning homeland security contracts.

Tax cheats shouldn’t get government contracts. And a person more interested in “tax advantages” than in honorably, honestly and ethically serving his country shouldn’t be vice president of the United States.

http://www.wvgazette.com/section/Editorials/200304201/

2003-04-22T12:12:00.000-07:00

Our Ignorance, Their Want

by Maureen Farrell

"Oh, man, look here. Look, look, down here," exclaimed the ghost.

They were a boy and a girl. Yellow, meager, ragged, scowling, wolfish; but prostrate, too, in their humility. Where graceful youth should have filled their features out and touched them with its freshest tints, a stale and shriveled hand, like that of age, had pinched, and twisted them, and pulled them into shreds. Where angels might have sat enthroned, devils lurked, and glared out menacing. No change, no degradation, no perversion of humanity, in any grade, through all the mysteries of wonderful creation, has monsters half so horrible and dreaded.

Scrooge started back, appalled. Having them shown to him in this way, he tried to say they were fine children, but the words choked themselves, rather than be parties to a lie of such enormous magnitude.

'Spirit, are they yours?' Scrooge could say no more.

'They are Man's,' said the Spirit, looking down upon them. 'And they cling to me, appealing from their fathers. This boy is Ignorance. This girl is Want. Beware them both, and all of their degree, but most of all beware this boy, for on his brow I see that written which is Doom. . . ." -- Charles Dickens

* * *

By now, many are familiar with Operation Northwoods, the U.S. plan to wage terrorist attacks against American citizens and blame Fidel Castro as a pretext for war. "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," the document read. "Casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation," it continued. Developed through the far-right stewardship of General Lyman L. Lemnitzer, in an early '60s atmosphere of anti-Communist paranoia, Operation Northwoods was approved by all Joint Chiefs of Staff, but nixed by the civilian leadership. "The whole point of a democracy is to have leaders responding to the public will," Body of Secrets author James Bamford told ABC News "and here this is the complete reverse, the military trying to trick the American people into a war that they want but that nobody else wants."
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/jointchiefs_010501.html

Sound familiar? Just wait.

Though President Kennedy assured Lemnitzer that America would never overtly attack Cuba, military ideologues met one month after submitting Northwoods and wrote a memo to Robert McNamara claiming that the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who saw "no prospect" of Castro being overthrown through "internal uprising or external political, economic or psychological pressures," felt that "military interventions [would] be required to overthrow the present Communist regime." The memo indicated that the Joint Chiefs believed that this could be "accomplished rapidly enough to minimize communist opportunity for solicitation of U.N. action" and that after U.S. forces assured "rapid essential control of Cuba, continued police action would be required." In other words, they would bypass the U.N. and America's military would keep Cuba's peace. "[W]hat Lemnitzer was suggesting," Bamford wrote, "was not freeing the Cuban people, who were largely in support of Castro, but imprisoning them in a U.S.-controlled police state."

Our Ignorance, Their Want

by Maureen Farrell

"Oh, man, look here. Look, look, down here," exclaimed the ghost.

They were a boy and a girl. Yellow, meager, ragged, scowling, wolfish; but prostrate, too, in their humility. Where graceful youth should have filled their features out and touched them with its freshest tints, a stale and shriveled hand, like that of age, had pinched, and twisted them, and pulled them into shreds. Where angels might have sat enthroned, devils lurked, and glared out menacing. No change, no degradation, no perversion of humanity, in any grade, through all the mysteries of wonderful creation, has monsters half so horrible and dreaded.

Scrooge started back, appalled. Having them shown to him in this way, he tried to say they were fine children, but the words choked themselves, rather than be parties to a lie of such enormous magnitude.

'Spirit, are they yours?' Scrooge could say no more.

'They are Man's,' said the Spirit, looking down upon them. 'And they cling to me, appealing from their fathers. This boy is Ignorance. This girl is Want. Beware them both, and all of their degree, but most of all beware this boy, for on his brow I see that written which is Doom. . . ." -- Charles Dickens

* * *

By now, many are familiar with Operation Northwoods, the U.S. plan to wage terrorist attacks against American citizens and blame Fidel Castro as a pretext for war. "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," the document read. "Casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation," it continued. Developed through the far-right stewardship of General Lyman L. Lemnitzer, in an early '60s atmosphere of anti-Communist paranoia, Operation Northwoods was approved by all Joint Chiefs of Staff, but nixed by the civilian leadership. "The whole point of a democracy is to have leaders responding to the public will," Body of Secrets author James Bamford told ABC News "and here this is the complete reverse, the military trying to trick the American people into a war that they want but that nobody else wants."
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/jointchiefs_010501.html

Sound familiar? Just wait.

Though President Kennedy assured Lemnitzer that America would never overtly attack Cuba, military ideologues met one month after submitting Northwoods and wrote a memo to Robert McNamara claiming that the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who saw "no prospect" of Castro being overthrown through "internal uprising or external political, economic or psychological pressures," felt that "military interventions [would] be required to overthrow the present Communist regime." The memo indicated that the Joint Chiefs believed that this could be "accomplished rapidly enough to minimize communist opportunity for solicitation of U.N. action" and that after U.S. forces assured "rapid essential control of Cuba, continued police action would be required." In other words, they would bypass the U.N. and America's military would keep Cuba's peace. "[W]hat Lemnitzer was suggesting," Bamford wrote, "was not freeing the Cuban people, who were largely in support of Castro, but imprisoning them in a U.S.-controlled police state."

2003-02-27T06:57:00.000-08:00

We were Soldiers Once?
The Bush War Record

2003-02-27T06:45:00.000-08:00

Disarming the Bush Administration

As the 2000 Presidential Campaign drew to a close, the Bush Campaign confidently promised a foreign policy that would call upon seasoned veterans of the diplomatic corps, many of them old hands that had served back as far as the Nixon/Ford Administration. Things were going to be different. No more of those ill-defined "nation building" or "peace keeping" missions in countries we'd never heard of.

The grown-ups were going to be back in charge of foreign policy.

What we've seen so far is a foreign policy that is stunningly reckless, one which may yet cause the United States, the nominal leader of the free world and sole remaining super power, to become an international pariah. The Administration's "won't take 'no' for an answer" stance on war with Iraq will damage our standing in the world community for a generation – and that's only if we somehow manage to avoid an invasion. War with Iraq could have dangerous repercussions.

The Bush Administration dug its own grave in many respects. It started by rejecting the Kyoto Accords on the global environment and by repudiating the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty that the United States signed nearly thirty years ago. The Administration also rejected an international ban on land mines, a pact to limit the sales of small arms in Third World countries, and the International Criminal Court.

Even a momentary flood of international sympathy for the United States after the World Trade Center attack couldn't erase the basic belief among our allies that the Bush Administration was going to go its own way. Signing treaties and cooperating across national boundaries were not a priority for the Bush Administration.

When the West Bank erupted into violence in the fall of 2001, the Bush Administration did nothing. It wasn't until the body count had reached levels too high too ignore that Secretary of State Colin Powell made a belated – and completely ineffectual – visit to the region. Since both sides knew that the Bush Administration was not going to spend political capital on finding a peaceful solution, it was time to lock and load the minute Powell's plane went wheels up from Tel Aviv.

The most telling moment in the Bush Administration's foreign policy came when the UN Human Rights Commission voted to boot the United States off the panel. The U.S. was restored to the Commission the following year, but only after the Bush Administration threatened to withhold a quarter billion dollars in funding from the perennially cash-strapped United Nations.

2003-02-27T06:13:00.000-08:00

How the Mass Slaughter of a Group of Iraqis Went Unreported

'What I saw was a bunch of filled-in trenches with people's arms and legs sticking out of them. For all I know, we could have killed thousands'

On February 25 1991 the war correspondent Leon Daniel arrived at a battlefield at the tip of the neutral zone between Iraq and Saudi Arabia. Daniel was one of a pool of journalists who had been held back from witnessing action the previous day, when Desert Storm's ground war had been launched. There, right where he was standing, 8,400 soldiers of the US First Infantry Division - known as the Big Red One - had attacked an estimated 8,000 Iraqis with 3,000 Abrams main battle tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles, Humvees and armoured personnel carriers.

Daniel had seen the aftermath of modest firefights in Vietnam. "The bodies would be stacked up like cordwood," he recalled. Yet this ferocious attack had not produced a single visible body. It was a battlefield without the stench of urine, faeces, blood and bits of flesh. Daniel wondered what happened to the estimated 6,000 Iraqi defenders who had vanished. "Where are the bodies?" he finally asked the First Division's public affairs officer, an army major. "What bodies?" the major replied.

Months later, Daniel and the world would learn why the dead had eluded eyewitnesses, cameras and video footage. Thousands of Iraqi soldiers, some of them firing their weapons from first world war-style trenches, had been buried by ploughs mounted on Abrams tanks. The tanks had flanked the lines so that tons of sand from the plough spoil had funnelled into the trenches. Just behind the tanks, straddling the trench line, came Bradleys pumping machine-gun bullets into Iraqi troops.

"I came through right after the lead company," said Colonel Anthony Moreno. "What you saw was a bunch of buried trenches with people's arms and legs sticking out of them. For all I know, we could have killed thousands."

Two other brigades used the same tank-mounted ploughs and Bradleys to obliterate an estimated 70 miles of defensive trenches. They moved swiftly. The operation had been rehearsed repeatedly, weeks before, on a mile-long trench line built according to satellite photographs. The finishing touches were made by armoured combat earth-movers (ACEs). These massive bulldozers, with armoured cockpits impervious to small-arms fire, smoothed away any hint of the carnage. "A lot of guys were scared, but I enjoyed it," said PFC Joe Queen, an ACE driver awarded a Bronze Star for his performance in the battle.

2003-02-26T15:22:00.000-08:00

Shock and Yawn
Plan could kill millions in 48 hours -- why don't Americans care?

Exactly a month ago Pentagon planner Harlan Ullman, in a CBS-TV interview, publicly revealed for the first time the Pentagon's "Shock and Awe" plan for its assault upon Iraq, should (or when) George W. Bush orders it.
Ullman's information was subsequently confirmed by a number of sources; it's for real. Here is what I wrote about it in my column of January 30:

"The plan includes simultaneous ground invasions from north and south... It also includes a sudden decimation of Baghdad by raining down on its people, in two days, over 800 cruise missiles -- more than were used in the entire Gulf War. Ullman... characterized the Baghdad assault thusly: `You have this simultaneous effect, rather like the nuclear weapons of Hiroshima, not taking days or weeks but minutes.' It would be a firestorm, a Dresden or Tokyo with 60 years of new technology. It would be a war crime of quick and staggering proportions.

"Such a plan, of course, makes a mockery of Donald Rumsfeld's ritual insistence that the Pentagon takes enormous care to avoid civilian casualties; the plan apparently is to kill a staggering percentage of Baghdad's civilian population in the first day alone. ... The name refers to the demoralizing effect such an attack would have on Iraqis, an effect, presumably, similar to the instant (although already planned) surrender of Japan after the gratuitous bombing of Hiroshima (and even more gratuitous bombing of Nagasaki. But those were, both military and diplomatically, demonstration attacks -- suggesting what could be done to the imperial rulers themselves and to Tokyo, a city far more valuable and populous than Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.

2003-02-26T14:57:00.000-08:00

Perpetual Death From America

"If they had killed us once, it would not be so bad. But what the Americans have brought upon us is not only depriving us but our future generations of our basic god given human right, the right to live. They will be killing us for generations to come" (An Afghan Victim of US-UK bombing)
In Afghanistan, elders used to cite an ancient saying "we are made for death and death is made for us" to point to the inescapable reality of facing death sooner or later. However, when this natural phenomenon changes form from its natural course to one tailored by humans, it becomes a tool of life deprivation. This tailored and forced deprivation of life on millions of people took a form of its own when used for cleansing generations of people of their basic human right, their right to live. Specifically, for millions in Afghanistan, their natural course of life and death took a sharp turn when US-UK military used uranium based weapons. This violation of immense proportion transformed the natural process of birth, growth and death into the inescapable horrors of perpetual death.
Perpetual death is characterized by continuous murder of people of a community, state or nation. It takes several forms. It could be exercised by conventional means of imposing war and destruction on people. The Russians have institutionalized this horror in Afghanistan by its invasion of the country in 1979 and sustained perpetual death there by planting millions of mines scattered all over country. The United States government also shares this responsibility after it abandoned the Afghans, leaving them to death and despair and refused to help them by clearing the millions of mines left behind after the Sovietsí retreat. These mines have been maiming and killing Afghans daily since the early 1980s.
However, the form that is exercised currently is the indiscriminate use of the Weapons of Mass Destruction, namely the usage of uranium based weapons. This mode of the perpetual death lives up to its name because it continues to foster deaths of thousands silently and indiscriminately. In fact, the usage of the Weapons of Mass Destruction alters the texture of the ecosystem wherein the victims reside. This ultimately condemns the people living there and future generations to death, and deprives them of their fundamental human right, the right to live.
The perpetrators of this horrible crime are the governments of the United States and that of the United Kingdom. The US and the UK are the only two countries used these horrible weapons indiscriminately in Iraq during the Gulf War and Balkans in the 1990s and in Afghanistan from October 7th, 2001 onward. Meanwhile, based on past experiences with victims of the US-UK bombing in Iraq and the Balkans, every informed source suspected to have similar situation in Afghanistan. Tragically, the US-UK armed forces have used three times more uranium based weapons in Afghanistan than they did in Iraq or in the Balkans. In fact, the types of Weapons of Mass Destruction used in Afghanistan are more potent than those used in Iraq.

2003-02-26T13:48:00.000-08:00

Gaining An Empire,
Losing Democracy?

LOS ANGELES -- There is a subtext to what the Bushites are doing as they prepare for war in Iraq. My hypothesis is that President George W. Bush and many conservatives have come to the conclusion that the only way they can save America and get if off its present downslope is to become a regime with a greater military presence and drive toward empire. My fear is that Americans might lose their democracy in the process.

By downslope I'm referring not only to the corporate scandals, the church scandals and the FBI scandals. The country has gone kind of crazy in the eyes of conservatives. Also, kids can't read anymore. Especially for conservatives, the culture has become too sexual.

Iraq is the excuse for moving in an imperial direction. War with Iraq, as they originally conceived it, would be a quick, dramatic step that would enable them to control the Near East as a powerful base - not least because of the oil there, as well as the water supplies from the Tigris and Euphrates rivers - to build a world empire.

The Bushites also expect to bring democracy to the region and believe that in itself will help to diminish terrorism. But I expect the opposite will happen: terrorists are not impressed by democracy. They loathe it. They are fundamentalists of the most basic kind. The more successful democracy is in the Near East - not likely in my view - the more terrorism it will generate.

The only outstanding obstacle to the drive toward empire in the Bushites' minds is China. Indeed, one of the great fears in the Bush administration about America's downslope is that the "stem studies" such as science, technology and engineering are all faring poorly in U.S. universities. The number of American doctorates is going down and down. But the number of Asians obtaining doctorates in those same stem studies are increasing at a great rate.

Looking 20 years ahead, the administration perceives that there will come a time when China will have technology superior to America's. When that time comes, America might well say to China that "we can work together," we will be as the Romans to you Greeks. You will be our extraordinary, well-cultivated slaves. But don't try to dominate us. That would be your disaster. This is the scenario that some of the brightest neoconservatives are thinking about. (I use Rome as a metaphor, because metaphors are usually much closer to the truth than facts).

What has happened, of course, is that the Bushites have run into much more opposition than they thought they would from other countries and among the home population. It may well end up that we won't have a war, but a new strategy to contain Iraq and wear Saddam down. If that occurs, Bush is in terrible trouble.

2003-02-26T13:45:00.000-08:00

Healthcare Reveals Real "Conservative" Agenda - Drown Democracy In A Bathtub

They're hoping Americans won't notice.

Indeed, in late February a "senior administration official" presented The New York Times with a masterpiece of obfuscation and avoidance of responsibility. Speaking of the administration's plans to push users of Medicare and Medicaid into the hands of for-profit corporations, this "official" said, "We're looking at two programs that have worked, that have provided health coverage to people who need it, and we want to help them work better."

Ted Kennedy was more straightforward in his objection to the Bush scheme. "Medicare is a firm commitment to every elderly American," Kennedy said, "not a profit center for H.M.O.s and other private insurance plans."

Robin Toner and Robert Pear of The New York Times wrote in an understated tone that, "The magnitude of the Bush proposals is only gradually dawning on members of Congress."

It's also dawning on mainstream Americans.

When you look closely, you discover that what so many are calling the "conservative agenda" would be shocking and alien to historic conservatives like Republicans Teddy Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, and Barry Goldwater. It really has nothing to do with conservative or liberal, left or right, war or peace. It doesn't care about abortion, prayer, or flags, although these are useful props to bring in fringe groups to "fill the big tent." It's not even about liberty, freedom, or prosperity.

Today's so-called "conservative agenda" is, very simply, about ownership.

Specifically, ownership of the assets of the United States of America - things previously owned by "We, The People." And, ultimately, ownership of the United States government itself.

2003-02-26T10:46:00.000-08:00

Out of the wreckage

The men who run the world are democrats at home and dictators abroad. They came to power by means of national elections which possess, at least, the potential to represent the will of their people. Their citizens can dismiss them without bloodshed, and challenge their policies in the expectation that, if enough people join in, they will be obliged to listen.
Internationally, they rule by brute force. They and the global institutions they run exercise greater economic and political control over the people of the poor world than its own governments do. But those people can no sooner challenge or replace them than the citizens of the Soviet Union could vote Stalin out of office. Their global governance is, by all the classic political definitions, tyrannical.

But while citizens' means of overthrowing this tyranny are limited, it seems to be creating some of the conditions for its own destruction. Over the past week, the US government has threatened to dismantle two of the institutions which have, until recently, best served its global interests.

On Saturday, President Bush warned the UN security council that accepting a new resolution authorising a war with Iraq was its "last chance" to prove "its relevance". Four days before, a leaked document from the Pentagon showed that this final opportunity might already have passed. The US is planning to build a new generation of nuclear weapons in order to enhance its ability to launch a pre-emptive attack. This policy threatens both the comprehensive test ban treaty and the nuclear non-proliferation treaty - two of the principal instruments of global security - while endangering the international compact that the UN exists to sustain. The security council, which, despite constant disruption, survived the cold war, is beginning to look brittle in its aftermath.

On Wednesday, the US took a decisive step towards the destruction of the World Trade Organisation. The WTO's current trade round collapsed in Seattle in 1999 because the poor nations perceived that it offered them nothing, while granting new rights to the rich world's corporations. It was relaunched in Qatar in 2001 only because those nations were promised two concessions: they could override the patents on expensive drugs and import cheaper copies when public health was threatened, and they could expect a major reduction in the rich world's agricultural subsidies. At the WTO meeting in Geneva last week, the US flatly reneged on both promises.

The Republicans' victory in the mid-term elections last November was secured with the help of $60m from America's big drug firms. This appears to have been a straightforward deal: we will buy the elections for you if you abandon the concession you made in Qatar. The agri-business lobbies in both the US and Europe appear to have been almost as successful: the poor nations have been forced to discuss a draft document which effectively permits the rich world to continue dumping its subsidised products in their markets.

2003-02-26T09:59:00.000-08:00

2003-02-26T08:48:00.000-08:00

The war on Iraq:
Conceived in Israel

In a lengthy article in The American Conservative criticizing the rationale for the projected U.S. attack on Iraq, the veteran diplomatic historian Paul W. Schroeder noted (only in passing) "what is possibly the unacknowledged real reason and motive behind the policy — security for Israel." If Israel's security were indeed the real American motive for war, Schroeder wrote,

It would represent something to my knowledge unique in history. It is common for great powers to try to fight wars by proxy, getting smaller powers to fight for their interests. This would be the first instance I know where a great power (in fact, a superpower) would do the fighting as the proxy of a small client state. [1]
Is there any evidence that Israel and her supporters have managed to get the United States to fight for their interests?

To unearth the real motives for the projected war on Iraq, one must ask the critical question: How did the 9/11 terrorist attack lead to the planned war on Iraq, even though there is no real evidence that Iraq was involved in 9/11? From the time of the 9/11 attack, neoconservatives, of primarily (though not exclusively) Jewish ethnicity and right-wing Zionist persuasion, have tried to make use of 9/11 to foment a broad war against Islamic terrorism, the targets of which would coincide with the enemies of Israel.

Although the term neoconservative is in common usage, a brief description of the group might be helpful. Many of the first-generation neocons originally were liberal Democrats, or even socialists and Marxists, often Trotskyites. They drifted to the right in the 1960s and 1970s as the Democratic Party moved to the antiwar McGovernite left. And concern for Israel loomed large in that rightward drift. As political scientist Benjamin Ginsberg puts it:

One major factor that drew them inexorably to the right was their attachment to Israel and their growing frustration during the 1960s with a Democratic party that was becoming increasingly opposed to American military preparedness and increasingly enamored of Third World causes [e.g., Palestinian rights]. In the Reaganite right's hard-line anti-communism, commitment to American military strength, and willingness to intervene politically and militarily in the affairs of other nations to promote democratic values (and American interests), neocons found a political movement that would guarantee Israel's security. [2]

2003-02-26T07:32:00.000-08:00

WHEN SHARON SAYS JUMP
BUSH SAYS HOW HIGH?

This article is going to be about Jews. So if you're uncomfortable with the subject I suggest you bail out right now.

Several months ago I wrote an article for our daily newspaper that I shouldn't have written if I were promoting my career.

It seems that I had the unmitigated gall to question what America was getting in return for the 3 to 5 billion dollars we are "investing" in Israel every year.

The article got me blackballed. Well, not exactly blackballed. But along with being demonized as an anti-Semitic, the paper never accepted any further articles I wrote. Naïve me, I couldn't understand what I had done wrong. Now I know better.

So let's connect a few dots.

A short while back I read a report that at a Knesset meeting Ariel Sharon had said to his deputy, Shimon Peres---Don't worry about the Americans. We own America. And all along I thought WE owned it.

Not willing to accept that at face value, I contacted a reporter in Hebron to try to verify Sharon's outburst. Sure enough, the reporter told me that news of Sharon's offhand remark had, in fact, been broadcast from an Israeli radio station, and that both Israelis and Palestinians had heard it and were talking about it.

Are the dots connecting?

And now, it was just reported by Aluf Benn and Sharon Sadeh, correspondents for Israel's Haaratz newspaper, that Sharon told a delegation of American congressmen that Iran, Libya and Syria should also be stripped of their weapons, after we deal with Iraq.

"These are irresponsible states," cooed Sharon, "which must be disarmed of its weapons of mass destruction, and a successful American move in Iraq will make that easier to achieve."

The dots are forming a picture.

Some time later, Sharon told a certain Mr. Bolten that Israel was concerned about the security threat posed by Iran, and thought it important to deal with Iran even while America's attention was focused on Iraq.

For a minute, I thought Bush was our president.. Mr. Bolten mentioned in a meeting with Israeli officials, that there was no doubt that America would attack Iraq, and that it would be necessary thereafter to deal with threats from Iran, Syria and North Korea. You heard right, North Korea.

To get everybody in the loop, Mr. Bolton also met with Israel's Foreign Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Natan Sharansky, Housing and Construction Minister.

Not to discuss the price of concrete, I'm sure.

And who is this mysterious Mr. Bolten that is so cozy with Sharon and other Israeli officials that he has no qualms about sinking America deeper into the Middle East quagmire, and even designating where American troops will have to fight after Iraq is defeated?

Is he an Israeli power broker? I'm afraid not. He is Joshua B. Bolten, President Bush's Deputy Chief of Staff, policy director for the Bush 2000 campaign, and one of about 25 Jews in the highest offices in the Bush administration. One of YOUR esteemed government officials.

The dots have produced an ugly picture.

You may have heard that Israel is calling the shots in Americas foreign policy, and have asked yourself, why are there so many Jews in the Bush administration, and what are they doing there?

Historian Paul W. Schroeder probably wondered that too when he wrote: "If Israel's security were indeed the real American motive for war, it would represent something to my knowledge unique in history. It is common for great powers to try to fight by proxy, getting smaller powers to fight for their interests. This would be the first instance I know where a great power (in fact, a superpower) would do the fighting as the proxy of a small client state."

Is that a classic switch or what?

2003-02-26T07:28:00.000-08:00

The Madness of Empire

Recently the novelist John le Carré wrote in the Times of London that the United States has entered a “period of madness” that dwarfs McCarthyism or the Vietnam intervention in intensity. One generally would not pay much attention to the cynical British spy-tale weaver, never especially friendly to America. But concern about America’s mental health is more broadly in the air, spreading well beyond the usual professional anti-Americans. It is now pervasive in Europe, and growing in Asia, and when Matt Drudge posted le Carré’s piece prominently on his website, it got passed around and talked about here in ways it never would have five years ago.

The proximate cause of le Carré’s diagnosis is Washington’s plan for a pre-emptive war against Iraq, a nation whose weapons pose no threat to the United States and that has no substantial links to al-Qaeda or 9/11. The U.S. would fight this war virtually without allies, though a few countries might be dragged into the fray against the will of their populations. But mad or not, this drive toward war is not mania of sudden onset but ratification of a neo-imperialist strategy that has been germinating in neoconservative circles since the end of the Cold War.

A new war against Iraq was a gleam in the eye of a small but influential group long before 9/11. In 1998, the newly established Project for a New American Century (PNAC), an advocacy group chaired by Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol, began sending open letters from prominent foreign policy hawks. First, it wrote to the Clinton administration calling upon the United States to “remove Saddam’s regime.” When its advice was ignored, PNAC asked Republican Congressional leaders to push for war. The signatories included Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz (now number two at the Pentagon), Elliott Abrams (recently appointed to the National Security Council as a director of Mid-East policy), William Bennett, John Bolton (now Undersecretary of State), and the ubiquitous Richard Perle, chairman of the Defense Policy Board and often considered the central figure the interlocking web of neoconservative think tanks.

2003-02-26T07:26:00.000-08:00

When U.S. Foreign Policy Meets Biblical Prophecy

Does the Bible foretell regime change in Iraq? Did God establish Israel's boundaries millennia ago? Is the United Nations a forerunner of a satanic world order?

For millions of Americans, the answer to all those questions is a resounding yes. For many believers in biblical prophecy, the Bush administration's go-it-alone foreign policy, hands-off attitude toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and proposed war on Iraq are not simply actions in the national self-interest or an extension of the war on terrorism, but part of an unfolding divine plan.

Evangelical Christians have long complained that "people of faith" do not get sufficient respect, and that religious belief is trivialized in our public discourse. So argues Stephen L. Carter, a Yale University law professor and an evangelical Christian, in his 1993 "The Culture of Disbelief." Carter has a point, at least with reference to my own field of American history. With notable exceptions, cultural historians have long underplayed the importance of religion in the United States, particularly in the modern era. Church historians have produced good work, but somewhat in isolation, cut off from the larger currents of cultural and intellectual history. That is changing, as evidenced by Mark A. Noll's magisterial "America's God: From Jonathan Edwards to Abraham Lincoln" (2002). But, over all, the critics are on target.

However, I would vigorously challenge Carter's related complaint that religious belief plays little role in shaping public policy. In fact, religion has always had an enormous, if indirect and underrecognized, role in policy formation.

And that is especially true today, as is illustrated by the shadowy but vital way that belief in biblical prophecy is helping mold grassroots attitudes toward current U.S. foreign policy. As the nation debates a march toward war in the Middle East, all of us would do well to pay attention to the beliefs of the vast company of Americans who read the headlines and watch the news through a filter of prophetic belief

2003-02-26T06:34:00.000-08:00

PATRIOT Act II takes care of the rest of your pesky civil liberties

February 20, 2003—A Washington-based watchdog group uncovered recently proposed legislation authored by the sociopaths in the Bush administration that would steal even more of the nation's civil liberties.

A Georgetown University Law professor and author of "Terrorism and the Constitution," Dr. David Cole, said the legislation, called the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003, "raises a lot of serious concerns. It's troubling that they (the Justice Department) have gotten this far along, and they've been telling people there is nothing in the works."

Cole warned that this proposed law "would radically expand law enforcement and intelligence authorities, reduce or eliminate judicial oversight over surveillance, authorize secret arrests, create a DNA database based on unchecked executive suspicion, create new death penalties and even seek to take American citizenship away from persons who belong to or support disfavored political groups."

The Center for Public Integrity (CPI), the Washington-based watchdog group, obtained a draft of what analysts call a sequel to the USA PATRIOT Act or PATRIOT II. The Bush administration rammed the onerous USA PATRIOT Act down the throat of a spineless Congress in the hysteria that followed the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Most of the lawmakers never even read the lengthy bill that civil libertarians warned compromises the nation's 215-year-old constitution.

2003-02-26T06:32:00.000-08:00

Retired Air Force general takes Bush to task on Iraq

LAKE OSWEGO — Tony McPeak, a four-star general who headed the U.S. Air Force during Desert Storm, believes that President Bush should publicly admit personal failure and restart diplomatic negotiations for a possible war against Iraq.

McPeak, who retired to Oregon in 1995, says Bush has botched the crucial process of building a coalition, of enlisting the United Nations and of rebuilding Afghanistan as a model of reconstruction.

“The world would breathe a sigh of relief, and we’d go back and do it right” if Bush admitted failure, says the 67-year-old McPeak. “I mean, the world would fall in love with this guy. It’s not that hard to fix.”

McPeak served four years on the Joint Chiefs of Staff advising Bush’s father and then President Clinton after flying 269 Vietnam combat missions and participating in the Thunderbirds, the elite aerobatic team. He is also a graduate of Grants Pass High School.

Despite his military career, McPeak questions Bush’s priorities as the president confronts terrorism, North Korea and Saddam Hussein. It makes him worry about a return to federal budget deficits and about declining goodwill toward the United States since Sept. 11, 2001.

“I pray that America will last another thousand years, and during all of that time we’re a pre-eminent power,” says McPeak. “To do that, you have to understand the world in a more sophisticated way. You make your friends many and your enemies few.”

As chief of staff from 1990 to 1994, McPeak accomplished the biggest reorganization of the Air Force in its history. He believes Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld should be dramatically transforming the military to confront the new terrorist threat, slashing redundancy and cutting heavy Army divisions in favor of agile special forces.

Guarding the Washington Monument with Stinger missiles, McPeak says, is “amateur hour.”

McPeak thinks U.S. forces may well encounter biological weapons in Iraq but not chemical munitions, which are difficult to deploy.

Airstrikes would wipe out Baghdad’s communications system again, McPeak says.

Close combat in Baghdad would be stupid, he says, despite what Army generals may advocate.

“We’ve already radicalized 99 percent of the Arabs in the world,” he said. “We’ll get the holdouts if we start doing hand-to-hand combat in Baghdad.”

2003-02-26T05:50:00.000-08:00

STARTLING ACCUSATION FROM A GULF WAR VET GROUP

FEBRUARY 25. The American Gulf War Veterans Association, led by Joyce Riley, has issued a press release that accuses US forces of setting huge oil fires in Kuwait at the end of Gulf War One.

At the time, those fires---blamed on Saddam---burned a billion barrels of oil over a seven-month period and raised a poisonous lingering cloud over the Persian Gulf nations.

The ecological/health disaster persists to this day (see a story posted by CNN on Jan.3, 2003).

From Riley’s release: “One [US] veteran has now stepped forward and given a detailed account of how he and others in special teams moved forward of the front…and then set charges on the [Kuwait oil] well heads.”

This veteran, as yet unnamed, states, “We were mustered into the briefing tent at which point a gentleman who I first had thought to be an American began to brief us on the operation [to burn the oil fields]. I was concerned because he was not wearing a US uniform and insignias.”

2003-02-26T05:46:00.000-08:00

How the news will be censored in this war
A new CNN system of 'script approval' suggests the Pentagon will have nothing to worry about

Already, the American press is expressing its approval of the coverage of American forces which the US military intends to allow its reporters in the next Gulf war. The boys from CNN, CBS, ABC and The New York Times will be "embedded" among the US marines and infantry. The degree of censorship hasn't quite been worked out. But it doesn't matter how much the Pentagon cuts from the reporters' dispatches. A new CNN system of "script approval" – the iniquitous instruction to reporters that they have to send all their copy to anonymous officials in Atlanta to ensure it is suitably sanitised – suggests that the Pentagon and the Department of State have nothing to worry about. Nor do the Israelis.

Indeed, reading a new CNN document, "Reminder of Script Approval Policy", fairly takes the breath away. "All reporters preparing package scripts must submit the scripts for approval," it says. "Packages may not be edited until the scripts are approved... All packages originating outside Washington, LA (Los Angeles) or NY (New York), including all international bureaus, must come to the ROW in Atlanta for approval."

2002-10-30T08:28:00.000-08:00

THE (POSSIBLE) ASSASSINATION OF PAUL WELLSTONE

George W. Bush's Legacy of Cynicism and Contempt

George W. Bush and his henchmen stole the presidency. They threw thousands of innocent people into prison without even charging them with a crime. They're gearing up to invade Iraq without bothering to come up with a substantial justification. Now some Democrats and progressive Americans are asking the unthinkable about an administration they increasingly believe to be ruled by thugs and renegades. Did government gangsters murder the United States' most liberal legislator?

Talk of foul play began hours after Senator Paul Wellstone's plane went down over northeastern Minnesota on Oct. 25, killing him, his wife and his daughter, along with three staffers and two pilots. "Please tell me I'm wrong to be thinking what I'm thinking," a self-described "liberal Democrat" from St. Paul e-mailed me that evening. "I want to be wrong, but I wouldn't put it past the Republicans--THESE Republicans--to sabotage Wellstone's plane." Internet discussion groups and e-mail in-boxes quickly echoed her sentiment.

People expressed similar fears after Commerce Secretary Ron Brown and Missouri Governor Mel Carnahan (news - web sites) died in plane crashes--the latter weeks before facing an election challenge from future Bush Attorney General John Ashcroft (news - web sites)--but the whispers of assassination following the Wellstone tragedy are more widespread and gaining mainstream currency far beyond the usual conspiracy nuts.

2002-10-30T06:08:00.000-08:00

Arafat extends the olive branch to Israel

Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat called yesterday for "reconciliation" with Israel and renewed his condemnation of attacks on civilians in a special session of parliament.

"I extend my hand in reconciliation to the Israelis to resume the peace process launched in Madrid in 1991," said Arafat, who has frequently called for a resumption of talks.

He likewise called for Israel and the Palestinians to be "good neighbours".

"We want to live as neighbours. Let us find a common ground for the security we desire, which you desire, for our common security," the Palestinian leader said.

The veteran leader, looking serious as he read out his speech before MPs in the West Bank town of Ramallah, also condemned attacks on civilians "anywhere in the world".

"I condemn terrorist operations against civilians anywhere in the world," he said.

Israel and the Palestinians have been locked in a cycle of bloodshed since a Palestinian uprising for independence began in September 2000.

Mr Arafat made his remarks in a speech announcing a new cabinet.

His previous cabinet quit last month after sensing it would lose a confidence vote in the reform-minded Palestinian Legislative Council which has criticised Arafat's government amid the uprising.

The new cabinet, if approved by parliament next week, will serve until presidential and legislative elections on January 20, 2003.

Meanwhile the Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, faced a deepening rift with his main co-alition partner over funding for Jewish settlements on Monday, raising the prospect he will be forced to call early elections.

The impasse with the Labour Party was Mr Sharon's most serious political challenge since he came to power 19 months ago in the early stages of a Palestinian up-rising that he has failed to quell de-spite campaign pledges to restore security.

The Labour leader and De-fence Minister, Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, said this week his centre-left party was certain to vote against Israel's 2003 budget un-less Mr Sharon shifted some money earmarked for settle-ments to social programs.

2002-10-30T06:00:00.000-08:00

US intensifies Iraq build-up

The US military is continuing to move men and equipment towards Iraq as the Bush administration signals that the time for diplomacy at the United Nations is fast running out.
Air strikes against Iraqi missile batteries and radars said to be threatening US and British aircraft patrolling the air exclusion zones over northern and southern Iraq have become more frequent.

All the signs are that the military build-up could accelerate dramatically over the next few months if the US administration decides upon military action against Iraq.

Whatever may have been happening at the UN, the US military has been working to a pre-determined timeline - one that envisages a potential conflict with Iraq early in 2003.

2002-10-30T05:55:00.000-08:00

Anti-Terrorism: a History of Abuses

Terrorism and the Constitution: Sacrificing Civil Liberties in the Name of National Security, David Cole and James X. Dempsey, (New Press 2002)

In 1999, Georgetown University Law professor David Cole and the Center for Democracy and Technology's James Dempsey published the first edition of their work Terrorism and the Constitution: Sacrificing Civil Liberties in the Name of National Security. It detailed the enactment of the 1996 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act--which, at the time, was famous not so much for its terrorism provision, but rather for its draconian pro-death penalty and anti-habeas corpus provisions.

This year brings the book's second edition--updated to account for recent developments in the "war on terrorism." The authors detail the Clinton administration's use of the Antiterrorism Act and examine the enactment and scope of the USA PATRIOT Act--a hastily enacted, post-9/11 law that gives the government wide-sweeping surveillance powers over American citizens.

Throughout Terrorism and the Constitution, Cole and Dempsey diverge from popular opinion by insisting that civil liberties, far from being a threat to national security, are the essence of America. What are we "fighting" for in this war on terrorism, they ask, if not to protect our way of life--which has personal liberty at its very core?

2002-10-30T05:54:00.000-08:00

Neohawks: Leftists Who Love the War Too Much

Greil Marcus is a discerning radical humanist. So it was a shock to pick up the progressive paper First of the Month and find him dissing leftist intellectuals for their skepticism about the war on terror. Marcus is not the only member of the counterculturati to find the hawk within. Dan Savage, the shoot-from-the-hip sex columnist, has lately become hip to the shoot. Then there's Christopher Hitchens, the ex-socialist who has found an occasion in 9-11 to revise his ideological profile. He is now a latter-day incarnation of the Cold War liberal. Hitchens's recent homage to George Orwell includes a remarkable defense of his work for the British government during the McCarthy era, when Orwell supplied lists of suspected com-symps, dutifully noting who was homosexual—or Jewish. Hey, says Hitchens, Orwell wasn't lying.

2002-10-09T20:14:00.000-07:00

Democrats: Fire SEC Chairman Pitt

WASHINGTON -- Democratic leaders on Wednesday asked President Bush to remove Harvey Pitt, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, whom they accuse of opposing a tough candidate to head a new oversight board at the accounting industry's behest.

The White House called the accusations politically motivated. The call for Pitt's resignation came from Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., and House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt, D-Mo., at a news conference on Social Security in which they tried to switch the dominant political focus away from possible war with Iraq.

Daschle and Gephardt told Bush in a letter that Pitt's "repeated insensitivity suggests an arrogant indifference to the appearance of conflicts of interest."

Pitt is "giving the accounting industry a veto over who will head the new board," Daschle told reporters. "This is exactly the kind of abuse the new board was created to prevent."

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer dismissed the charges.

"It's an old, tired cry," Fleischer said, citing what he said was the SEC's record number of enforcement actions and its confiscation of corrupt executives' illicitly earned money. "I think it's a political charge that has no merit and substance," he said.

Daschle and other Democrats already had called for Pitt to resign earlier this year, but so did a leading Republican, Sen. John McCain of Arizona.

Rep. Michael Oxley, R-Ohio, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, was blunter, calling Daschle and Gephardt's letter to Bush "amazingly hypocritical."

Oxley, who has been identified as the key GOP lawmaker allied with the accounting industry in opposing John Biggs to head the new board, said the Democrats "actively promote the candidacy of one individual."

Bush, who appointed Pitt in spring 2001 to head the market watchdog agency, has stood by him.

Pitt, who previously represented Wall Street's big players and all Big Five auditing firms as a private securities lawyer, is back in the hot seat in a year of corporate accounting scandals that started with the collapse of Enron Corp.

He was criticized last spring for meeting privately with the heads of companies under investigation by the SEC, and the watchdog group Common Cause demanded his resignation.

2002-10-09T20:02:00.000-07:00

HARKEN COVER-UP
COLLAPSES

Dubya Approved Insider Trading, Market Manipulation

Covert Bail Out By Poppy Oil Backer And Hussein Crony

White House Stonewall Breached

George W. Bush has consistently told the press and the American people that everything they need to know about his shady dealings with the Harken Energy Corporation are well-established matters of record. The Securities and Exchange Commission, Bush has asserted, "fully looked into the matter, they looked at all aspects of it, and they did so in a very thorough way, and the people that looked into it said there is no case." Bush’s own S.E.C. Chairman, Harvey Pitt, has agreed, and has refused to reopen the S.E.C.’s suspended investigation into Harken or release files on the case, because, he says, there is nothing new.

“Unless there is a reason to reopen ancient history,” Pitt said on Meet the Press, “we should move on with the future and start helping today’s investors.”

But now, according to major reports in the Wall Street Journal and the Boston Globe, the White House cover-up on Harken has begun to collapse. There is plenty that is new.

These reports document how a long-time Bush family political supporter, Robert J. Stone, Jr., in league with the Cabot family oil interests, manipulated the Harvard Management Company to invest millions in Harken in an off-the books arrangement that bailed the failing company out of a liquidity crisis, kept hidden from Harken investors and the S.E.C., in 1990.

The reports further show that the financial guarantor of the deal was none other than Robert Abboud of First City Boston -- the one-time head of the U.S.-Iraq Business Forum, a close political supporter of Bush’s father, a personal friend of Saddam Hussein, and a figure with a longtime history of dubious financial and political dealings.

Finally, the reports show that George W. Bush, as a member of Harken’s audit committee, personally signed off on the secret deals, the deception of investors, and the manipulation of Harken’s stock price.

As a result of that manipulation, the S.E.C. then justified its suspension of its investigation into possible fraud in the younger Bush’s earlier Harken dealings – an investigation whose files still remain under lock and key thanks to Harvey Pitt.

“It seems to be a simple case of Aeneas [Harvard Management Company’s venture capital arm] bailing out Harken,” Dala Bharan, the accounting expert consulted by the Wall Street Journal, said.

The timing of that bail-out is all-important – coming at a time that salvaged George W. Bush’s sinking reputation as a businessman and fended off official federal investigations.

So are the off-the-books methods, which are almost identical to the kinds of arrangements that the thieves at Enron indulged in.

And the persons involved make the reports all the more alarming.

Why has Robert J. Stone refused for two months to return the phone calls of the Wall Street Journal? What did he get in exchange for his largesse?

And what did Robert Abboud – a name that sticks out like a sore thumb – get out of the deal?

Will the Media Whores question Ari Fleischer about Bush’s pattern of false and misleading statements about his Harken dealings and his continuing cover-up?

Will they ask Harvey Pitt whether he will noe reopen the S.E.C. investigation into Harken?

Will they follow up on the roles played by Robert J. Stone, Jr., the Bush political contributor who manipulated Harvard Management Company to save Dubya; and Robert Abboud, former presdent the U.S.-Iraq Business Forum, who sealed the deal for Dubya?

Developing slickly...

2002-10-09T13:40:00.000-07:00

Sticking Up for the 'Dirty Bomber'

Donna Newman is the sort of person America's folksy President might like. She's been happily married for 34 years, raised two children, and built a solid law practice on humble roots and cheery grit. Like George W. Bush, she's gym-fit and quick to quip, with her own hometown drawl, Brooklyn style, and a penchant for talking complex law in lay lingo. ("Kinda cute," she calls one procedural twist.)
But since June she's been putting in 15-hour days for weeks at a stretch, trying to prove the president dead wrong. He broke the law, she claims, in labeling American Jose Padilla—the so-called dirty bomber—an "enemy combatant" and ordering him into indefinite military detention.

She has wrestled with Bush's lawyers in a series of court filings that U.S. District Court Chief Judge Michael Mukasey has waited to review as a whole before ruling, which he's expected to do within the month. Previously an obscure if successful criminal defense lawyer, she has recently appeared on national television and seen her name—and age, to her horror—blown up in headline type in the pages of Time. It is not too great a stretch to imagine that she is heading for her first appearance before the U.S. Supreme Court.

The whirlwind began on June 9, when the commander in chief ordered that Padilla be transferred from a regular prison in Manhattan into military custody. Until then, Padilla had been held as a noncriminal witness in the ongoing September 11 probe, having been arrested May 8 in Chicago and taken to New York for questioning. Newman, who like many private practitioners elects to serve periodically as a $90-an-hour court-appointed defender, was assigned to Padilla then.

The day after the president issued his order, Attorney General John Ashcroft, via television from Moscow, accused Padilla of meeting with senior Al Qaeda officials and "exploring a plan to build and explode a radiological dispersion device, or dirty bomb, in the United States."

Newman received no notice of Padilla's transfer to military custody. When a government lawyer finally called her with the news, she thought he was kidding. "Just because he's a prosecutor doesn't mean he can't have a sense of humor."

But the government had thrust her into a quite serious fight. Padilla is the only American civilian ever to be arrested on U.S. soil and held by the military without a charge, a court hearing, or access to his lawyer. Unlike Yaser Hamdi, the other U.S. citizen imprisoned under similar restrictions, or "American Taliban" John Walker Lindh, Padilla was not captured in a war zone aligned with enemy forces. He was arrested at Chicago's O'Hare airport, disembarking from a commercial flight he had taken with his real passport. Newman claims he was on his way to visit his son.

While Padilla—a jailhouse Muslim convert with a rap sheet listing murder—is hardly America's sweetheart, his fate carries implications for all Americans. Newman has largely avoided saying so, fearful of grandstanding. But in an interview last week, she voiced the stakes that have prompted the ACLU and other civil rights groups to file papers in Padilla's name.

To the average American, says Newman, a Bush win would mean: "You can be locked up for the rest of your natural years based on [the president's] say-so. Based on your neighbor, who doesn't like you and reports you. Based on a combination of circumstances that together don't look too good. And you wouldn't have a chance to say, 'Hey, wait a minute. Let me explain.' "

Two days after the military seized Padilla, Newman launched a habeas corpus bid that, no matter how it ends, is going down in history. Along with co-counsel Andrew Patel, whom the judge appointed to share the monstrous workload, she scrambled to master aspects of constitutional, international, and martial law, calling scholars around the country and consulting every defense veteran she knew. Her aim: to get Padilla charged (and therefore into court), or released.

2002-10-09T13:12:00.000-07:00

Screw you!
You -- with the 401(k). Yeah, I'm talking to you.

AUSTIN, Texas -- We just lost the whole ballgame on corporate reform -- without the news even making it to the front page. The sick, sad tidings were tucked away discreetly on the business pages: "SEC Chief Hedges on Accounting Regulator." Now there's a sexy headline.
All of you who were shafted by Enron, shucked by Worldcom, jived by Global Crossing, everyone whose 401(k) is now a 201(k) (I think that's Paul Begala's line), you just got screwed again. They're not going to fix it.

They've already called off the reform effort; it's over. Corporate muscle showed up and shut it down. Forget expensing options, independent directors, going after offshore shams, derivatives regulation. For that matter, forget even basic reforms like separating the auditing and consulting functions of accounting firms and rotating accounting firms every few years. Bottom line: It's all going to happen again. We learned zip from the entire financial collapse. Our political system is too bought-off to respond intelligently.

Even the normally impeccable Lou Dobbs had taken to referring to SEC Chairman Harvey Pitt as "a reformer," a usage that stretches the language. Pitt, President Bush's appointee to the chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission and a career-long mercenary for the securities industry, is the lawyer who memorably advised in one law journal article: If you get in trouble, shred the evidence. He came in promising to make the SEC "a kinder, gentler place for accountants." This unpromising champion of reform -- appointed to keep the corporations happy -- came under such heavy political fire during the financial collapse that he was suddenly out there flirting with Paul Volcker, Arthur Levitt and other genuinely concerned citizens with actual ideas about how to fix this ghastly mess.

No mas. According to The New York Times: "Harvey L. Pitt, under pressure from Republicans and former clients in the accounting industry, is backing away from the choice he and other members of the SEC favored to lead the new federal agency that will oversee the industry. Industry executives and at least one prominent Republican lawmaker complained that the top choice, John H. Biggs, was too tough on the industry."

2002-10-09T12:59:00.000-07:00

And pigs will fly

You know the feeling you get when your darned checkbook just won't seem to balance. Multiply by a few zillions, and you have some idea of the way Washington is running things these days. It's not just a nightmare; it's that old familiar nightmare we thought we had shaken off years ago: A ballooning federal deficit and its evil twin, a widening trade gap, threaten the U.S. dollar, our financial markets, and our monetary policy. For the first time since 1997, our budget this year will show a deficit probably in excess of $160 billion, in sharp contrast with a $127 billion surplus last year. This dizzying swing–$287 billion–is the largest on record.

Why the big change? The drop in tax revenue this year, of over $130 billion, is the sharpest in 56 years, much of it due to layoffs, pay cuts, pay freezes, fewer exercised stock options, and a fall in capital gains. What's more, the reduction of tax rates for upper-income households enacted last year means that when the economy does finally pick up steam, Washington won't see a commensurate pickup in tax revenue.

The projected 10-year federal budget surplus had already shrunk by nearly 95 percent, from $5.6 trillion to $336 billion. But even that number is wildly overoptimistic. It doesn't include the costs of a prescription drug program for seniors, estimated to cost at least $300 billion over the next decade. It also doesn't include appropriate costs for military and homeland defense spending. And it assumes that discretionary spending will rise at the rate of inflation, a pipe dream. If government spending continues to increase at its current rate of 8.5 percent, we will add an additional $2.9 trillion in debt over the next decade.

Spree. Think it won't happen? Just look at discretionary spending this year. It's up by almost 14 percent, the biggest government spending spree in a generation. In fact, for the first time in over 30 years, annually appropriated programs controlled by Congress and the president have grown faster than formula-driven entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare. Only a third of the entire $91 billion increase in annually appropriated funds has been spent on homeland security and national defense; the rest goes for everything from highway construction to farm subsidies.

2002-10-09T12:45:00.000-07:00

SEC is blasted in Enron fraud

WASHINGTON -- A Senate panel investigating Enron Corp.'s collapse said the Securities and Exchange Commission missed early signs of financial abuses at the energy giant, raising questions about whether the agency is "effectively functioning as the lead market watchdog that it is meant to be."

The investigation by the Governmental Affairs Committee, led by Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., found a "systemic and catastrophic failure" by those charged with protecting investors -- including stock analysts, credit-rating agencies and the SEC, according to the committee's report, which is to be released today.

Some of the harshest words were directed at the SEC, whose chairman, Harvey Pitt, has been criticized for not being more aggressive in rooting out corporate wrongdoing -- although many of the shortcomings highlighted in the committee's report date to before Pitt took over as chairman in August 2001.

"The SEC, with its relatively small staff, does not, and is not set up to, directly perform many of the tasks necessary to root out corporate fraud," the report says. In a list of suggested reforms, the report recommends that the agency dramatically upgrade its oversight of corporate finances, including performing random corporate audits.

Enron's descent into bankruptcy last December, after disclosures that it used off-the-books partnerships to hide debt, spawned a frenzy of congressional hearings; contributed to passage of sweeping accounting reforms; and culminated last week in the arrest of Andrew Fastow, Enron's former chief financial officer, on charges of fraud.

Enron also faces two separate investigations by federal grand juries: one in Houston that is looking into the company's financial collapse; and another, out of San Francisco, that is investigating the role played by Enron and other electricity marketers in the California energy crisis.

The Senate committee investigation focused on whether the government and private-sector watchdogs could have done more to prevent Enron's collapse and the loss of billions of dollars by its investors, including its employees' retirement savings.

2002-10-09T12:38:00.000-07:00

Bleeding us with more leeches: Big Insurance parasites dig deeper -- Oregon reaches for the salt

Here in Washington State, amidst the port shutdown and the Great War Debate, a different story slipped through the news last week: Premera Blue Cross wants to become a for-profit company.
Uh-oh.

Our state's largest health insurer wants to raise money by selling shares, and the state government is salivating at the chance to collect extra taxes (back and future) from a for-profit corporation. Democratic Gov. Gary Locke and lots of Olympia legislators love the idea, just like they did when the state's second-largest insurer, Regence Blue Shield, proposed the same thing a few months back. Nobody will suffer but us customers -- which is to say, everyone who needs health care at one time or another -- which is to say, most everyone.

That's not the official line, of course, which enthuses about improved service and rates and blah blah blah. Bullfeathers. As with most privatization schemes, this has been a trend sweeping the country, and it's been a disaster everywhere it's been tried. On this score, consider those flaming Bolshies, the Washington State Medical Association. WSMA's CEO, Tom Curry, notes dryly of the idea that "We're not aware of any place in the country where these conversions have improved things for plan subscribers, patients, doctors, or hospitals... The experience nationally is that plans that convert to investor-based operations use their capital to acquire other plans."

2002-10-09T12:35:00.000-07:00

Tribulation Worketh Patience

We may soon find out, if W. David Hager becomes chairman of the powerful Food and Drug Administration panel on women's health policy. His résumé seems more impressive for theology than gynecology.

"Jesus stood up for women at a time when women were second-class citizens," Dr. Hager says. "I often say, if you are liberated, a woman's libber, you can thank Jesus for that."

A professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Kentucky, he has a considerable body of work about Jesus' role in healing women, and last summer he helped the Christian Medical Association with a "citizens' petition" calling on the F.D.A. to reverse its approval of RU-486, the "abortion pill," claiming it puts women at risk. (RU-486 or RU-4Jesus?)

Karen Tumulty reports in Time that the F.D.A. senior associate commissioner, Linda Arey Skladany, a former drug-industry lobbyist with Bush family ties, has rejected doctors proposed by F.D.A. staffers and is pushing Dr. Hager.

The policy panel, which helped get RU-486 approved, will lead the study on the hot issue of hormone replacement therapy for menopausal women. As Time notes: "Some conservatives are trying to use doubts about such therapy to discredit the use of birth control pills, which contain similar compounds."

Dr. Hager wrote "As Jesus Cared for Women," blending biblical accounts of Christ healing women with case studies from his own practice. "Jesus still longs to bring wholeness to women today," the jacket says.

He writes about a young patient named Sparkle who gets a job at a strip joint in Kentucky and becomes promiscuous and gets several sexually transmitted diseases. Sparkle reminds him of "a woman Jesus met who was generally known in her town as a sinner, but whom Jesus saw through eyes of love."

With his wife, Linda, he wrote "Stress and the Woman's Body," which puts "an emphasis on the restorative power of Jesus Christ in one's life" and recommends Scripture readings to treat headaches (Matthew 13:44-46); eating disorders (Corinthians II, 10:2-5) and premenstrual syndrome (Romans 5:1-11, "Tribulation worketh patience.")

To exorcise affairs, the Hagers suggest a spiritual exercise: "Picture Jesus coming into the room. He walks over to you and folds you gently into his arms. He tousles your hair and kisses you gently on the cheek. . . . Let this love begin to heal you from the inside out."

Dr. Hager is also an editor of "The Reproduction Revolution: A Christian Appraisal of Sexuality, Reproductive Technologies, and the Family." One of the pieces, "Using the Birth Control Pill is Ethically Unacceptable," says scientific data show that the pill causes abortions.

Dr. Hager said he disagreed with that piece. He says he prefers not to prescribe contraceptives to single women, but will if they insist and reject his advice to abstain.

2002-10-09T12:03:00.000-07:00

The 'C' word: One magic word that might diffuse the public-opinion dumb bom

Gathering dust on a desk somewhere in the Pentagon is a computer printout listing projected American casualties for a range of Iraq invasion scenarios. Unfortunately, these vital figures are the only numbers that haven't been part of the war debate.
All together now: Casualties.

We've heard all kinds of estimates about how much the war is going to cost -- including Ari Fleischer's ultra-macho Bullet to Saddam's Head discount special -- how many troops will be deployed, how much the price of oil may go up, and the over-under on how long our forces will have to remain in Iraq. We've been given headcounts of Iraq's fractious Kurds and Shiites, reference numbers for security council resolutions defied, and been frequently reminded that Saddam has remained in power for 34 years, 11 of them since the last time we tried to send him and his mustache packing.

But no one in the Bush administration is talking about how many of our soldiers will be sent home in body bags. And not a single reporter has stood up at a press conference -- or at one of the president's countless fundraising appearances -- and asked, "Mr. President, how many young Americans are going to die?"

Will the deaths number in the hundreds, as was the case in Desert Storm and as would be again if Saddam collapsed like a cheap umbrella? Or will they be closer to the 10,000 to 50,000 some experts have predicted? And is Saddam the clear and present danger that would justify asking our sons and daughters to give up their lives for their country?

2002-10-09T10:40:00.000-07:00

Edwards to Criticize Bush Foreign Policy

Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.), who has been one of the most outspoken supporters of military action against Iraq, will today distance himself from the administration with a speech in which he accuses President Bush of conducting a foreign policy of "arrogance without purpose" that is marked by "gratuitous unilateralism."

Edwards, a prospective 2004 presidential candidate, also will call for the creation of a new domestic intelligence agency to supplant the work of the FBI, a change that he argues would do a better job of protecting domestic security while providing greater protections for civil liberties during the war on terrorism.

Edwards is a sponsor of an administration-backed resolution in the Senate authorizing Bush to go to war against Iraq, but in today's speech he will condemn the administration for treating U.S. allies with contempt, for seeing military action as a "first resort" and for confusing leadership with wanting to go it alone.

"Instead of demonstrating 'purpose without arrogance' as the president promised in his inaugural address, the administration's foreign policy projects the opposite: arrogance without purpose," Edwards says in a draft of the speech that was made available to The Washington Post yesterday. "We seem determined to act alone for the sake of acting alone, which may be the easy way to achieve our short-term ends, but will never result in long-term security."

Edwards will deliver the speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies a few hours before Bush speaks to the nation about the threat posed by Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

Edwards, along with two other possible presidential candidates, House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) and Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.), the Democrats' 2000 vice presidential nominee, has been among the strongest allies in Bush's effort to gain congressional authorization for military action against Iraq, even if the United Nations balks.

But the bulk of his prepared remarks focuses on sharp differences with the administration's overall approach to foreign policy. He challenges Bush's newly enunciated doctrine of preemption, arguing that it has been "damaging and distracting" to the administration's effort to rally international support for a war against Iraq.

2002-10-09T10:34:00.000-07:00

REMAIN UNTIL CONGRESS VOTES ON WAR POWERS

Hours from now, a historic bill will be voted on in Congress which will shift war powers from the Congress to the Executive Branch, giving the president "authorization to use Armed Forces of the US as he determines necessary". Whether you are a Republican or a Democrat, for the war or against, too much is at stake for this nation to transfer war powers from Congress to a single person. What can you do?

It is important to activate the nation in the hours remaining. Once this upcoming vote has been passed, our civil and legislative input on this conflict will be vastly muted. As the hours slip past, many of our nations leaders are finding the bravery to voice their concerns despite the short term concerns of the impending elections. It is up to you to recognize this as a critical moment in our nation's history and act now. Our best defense is to FILIBUSTER (measure used in Senate to delay a vote) in hopes to give this pivotal bill the debate it deserves. The press states that the President has urged Congress to pass this bill with out delay despite the building public outcry now overwhelming Senate offices. Headlines report the vote will pass overwhelmingly...but there are many brave Senators whom this coverage fails to account for. Senator Byrd has not released information on filibuster coalition though this possibility seems active. We still have a few hours to wake Congress up!

2002-10-09T10:33:00.000-07:00

Dawn raids stoke fires of resentment

It was night when the American military helicopters landed in the dry cornfields around the village of Aab Khiel. Within minutes dozens of soldiers surrounded the small cluster of mud and brick homes, and the house-to-house search began.
"When they came to my house they didn't knock on the door, they just forced their way in," said Qarimullah, 28, a young farmer in the village, recalling last week's raid. "They broke the locks on the doors and our safe boxes. They took my camera and they threw all our clothes on the floor. They said they were looking for al-Qaida but why did they come into our houses like this? This is not right."

When America began Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan a year ago it was largely welcomed. At last the west was promising to bring peace and reconstruction to a country run by warlords and ravaged by drought and 20 years of conflict.

But slowly Afghans have grown resentful of the thousands of US troops. The bitterness is especially deep in the southern Pashtun tribal lands, where the Stars and Stripes flies above isolated and heavily fortified bases in areas that were once the Taliban's heartland. Many Afghans, including powerful commanders, want them out.

Complaints of US army patrols becoming heavy handed in the past month have come from several villages in the south-east, particularly around the towns of Khost and Gardez. They say the soldiers have confiscated satellite telephones, passports, house and car documents and even family photographs.

No one was arrested Aab Khiel last week and no trace of al-Qaida was found. The operation succeeded only in turning the village solidly against the US military presence.

2002-10-09T10:28:00.000-07:00

New Jersey Redraws Party Lines

Senator Robert G. Torricelli's withdrawal from the New Jersey race last week could mean defeat for the state's Democrats. Not only did they lose the advantage of incumbency, but the legal and political battles over his replacement could linger through the remainder of the campaign.

Yet unless the United States Supreme Court reverses the New Jersey Supreme Court's decision allowing the Democratic Party to replace Mr. Torricelli on the ballot with former Senator Frank Lautenberg, the Democrats stand a good chance of winning the election. That's because New Jersey, which voted for Republican presidential candidates from 1968 through 1988, is part of a nationwide swing — particularly strong in the Northeast, Far West and parts of the Midwest —toward the Democratic Party.

The first and most obvious reason for this trend is that the parties have changed. The New Jersey Republican Party used to be dominated by New Deal liberals, but since the late 70's conservatives have played a growing role. Republicans would nominate some moderates like former governors Thomas H. Kean and Christie Whitman, but they would also regularly back conservative candidates like gubernatorial nominees Jim Courter and Bret D. Schundler, whom Democrats easily defeated. Meanwhile, after voters denied re-election to Gov. Jim Florio, a Democrat, in 1993, largely because of his tax increases, New Jersey Democrats have moved to the political center. Gov. James E. McGreevey was the chairman of the centrist Democratic Leadership Council in New Jersey and is fiscally cautious.

But the state's electorate has also changed dramatically. New Jersey used to be known for its heavy industry and its midsized immigrant cities, but it has become the nation's pre-eminent suburban, postindustrial state. It's a leader in financial and commercial services; it still makes goods, but many of them, like pharmaceuticals, are the products of extensive research and design. Professionals make up almost a quarter of New Jersey's work force, compared to 15 percent nationally.

In the 1950's, professionals voted Republican. But since the 1960's they have come to care more about clean air and water, women's rights, gun control and campaign finance reform. Many professionals, like doctors, worry that the quality of their work is being undermined by market forces. They don't like budget deficits and are leery of big spending programs, but they are concerned about inequality and injustice. And they increasingly vote Democratic.

2002-10-09T10:27:00.000-07:00

Illusions Of Iraqi Democracy

In its effort to garner domestic and international support for a military campaign to disarm Iraq and topple Saddam Hussein's regime, the Bush administration has promised to bring democracy into the country and strategically transform the whole region. President Bush and his senior aides note that liberating Baghdad would usher in a peaceful, democratic dawn in Iraq that would spill over into other authoritarian Arab states. It is a tall and ambitious order for the Middle East. But as America moves closer to war with Iraq, the policy debates have focused on procedural issues, not on the internal conditions in Iraq that will determine the likelihood of a peaceful, democratic state after Hussein's departure.

Iraq's fragmented society and blood-soaked political history should make anyone wary of predicting the swift creation of a viable democracy there. The U.S. establishment does not seem to appreciate how deeply entrenched are sectarian, tribal and ethnic loyalties and how complex would be the job of reconnecting Iraqi communities, estranged from one another by decades of divisive official policies.

Iraq always has been difficult to manage and govern. Hastily glued together by Britain in the 1920s to serve its imperial interests, it was placed under the Hashemite monarchy, brought from nearby Hijaz (today's Saudi Arabia), which lacked public legitimacy because of its close ties with colonial Britain and its narrow social base of support. The Hashemites were detached from everyday life; state and society remained separate. Reliance on the army for its hold on power meant that it was only a matter of time before "the man on horseback" would overthrow the monarchy and rule Iraq with an iron fist. Ambitious army officers were in a hurry to do away with the old order and to remake Iraq in their own image: hierarchical, rigid and authoritarian.

Abdul Karim Qasim's brutal 1958 coup inaugurated a new militaristic era in Iraq and sowed the seeds of perpetual power struggles and bloodshed. Between 1958 and 1968, army officers turned their guns against one another and terrorized Iraqis into submission. Their rivalry, along nationalist-communist lines, mirrored that of Iraqi society and was resolved mostly by physical elimination and exclusion. The mentality of the mob prevailed and both groups committed atrocities and massacres that resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of activists and innocent civilians. Iraq became the most violent and volatile country in the region.

Mohamed Heikal, an astute observer of Arab politics, has asserted: "Iraq has always been a border state between civilizations and a place where empires collided and armies clashed. Violence has become ingrained in the Iraqi character."

2002-10-09T10:26:00.000-07:00

The West's battle for oil

Five months before September 11, the US advocated using force against Iraq ... to secure control of its oil. Neil Mackay on the document which casts doubt on the hawks

IT is a document that fundamentally questions the motives behind the Bush administration's desire to take out Saddam Hussein and go to war with Iraq.
Strategic Energy Policy Challenges For The 21st Century describes how America is facing the biggest energy crisis in its history. It targets Saddam as a threat to American interests because of his control of Iraqi oilfields and recommends the use of 'military intervention' as a means to fix the US energy crisis.

The report is linked to a veritable who's who of US hawks, oilmen and corporate bigwigs. It was commissioned by James Baker, the former US Secretary of State under George Bush Snr, and submitted to Vice-President Dick Cheney in April 2001 -- a full five months before September 11. Yet it advocates a policy of using military force against an enemy such as Iraq to secure US access to, and control of, Middle Eastern oil fields.

One of the most telling passages in the document reads: 'Iraq remains a destabilising influence to ... the flow of oil to international markets from the Middle East. Saddam Hussein has also demonstrated a willingness to threaten to use the oil weapon and to use his own export programme to manipulate oil markets.

'This would display his personal power, enhance his image as a pan-Arab leader ... and pressure others for a lifting of economic sanctions against his regime. The United States should conduct an immediate policy review toward Iraq including military, energy, economic and political/diplomatic assessments.

'The United States should then develop an integrated strategy with key allies in Europe and Asia, and with key countries in the Middle East, to restate goals with respect to Iraqi policy and to restore a cohesive coalition of key allies.'

At the moment, UN sanctions allow Iraq to export some oil. Indeed, the US imports almost a million barrels of Iraqi oil a day, even though American firms are forbidden from direct involvement with the regime's oil industry. In 1999, Iraq was exporting around 2.5 million barrels a day across the world.

The US document recommends using UN weapons inspectors as a means of controlling Iraqi oil. On one hand, 'military intervention' is supported; but the report also backs 'de-fanging' Saddam through weapons inspectors and then moving in to take control of Iraqi oil.

2002-10-09T10:24:00.000-07:00

Republicans, Corporate Players Make the Voting Machines

The story is not about allegations of fraud — it's about an appearance of impropriety that is stunning in its magnitude.

Unfettered by any disclosure regulations about ownership or political affiliations, just a few companies create and control almost all the voting machines in the U.S.

Election Systems & Software, the firm whose machines were involved in the 2002 flubbed Florida primary election — and the company that now makes the voting machines for most of America — is a private company that does not like to tell the public who owns it. But at least one major shareholder is Michael R. McCarthy, who runs the McCarthy Group. The McCarthy Group has been a primary owner of Election Systems & Software, including its predecessor, American Information Systems for more than a decade. Michael R. McCarthy is the current campaign Treasurer for Republican senator Chuck Hagel. [See Hagel and McCarthy Documents] Prior to his election, Republican Senator Hagel was president of McCarthy & Company. In fact, he was first elected while his own company was making the vote-counting machines!

Before the 2002 Election, let's get disclosure from the handful of companies who make the voting machines that count our votes. These companies have nothing to hide (right?) so they should do this voluntarily. Then, Senator Hagel will lead the charge (won't he?) and he'll protect us from a situation that is, frankly, dangerous to Democracy, by getting some regulations in place:

(1) Require that any company who makes voting machines publicly disclose identities and political activities. And while we're at it, maybe criminal background checks are a nice idea, because if Republicans can control the big corporations that make the voting machines, just think what would happen if some crooks got into it. But I repeat myself.

(2) Require that all voting machines produce tamper-proof audit trails — and that means retaining a paper trail — using transparent computer code so that independent experts can investigate allegations of election tampering whenever needed.

2002-10-09T06:09:00.001-07:00

''Democracy sucks''

(YellowTimes.org) – This article was prompted by an e-mail exchange I had with a reader who had written to me about one of my earlier columns (it doesn't matter which one; this reader doesn't like any of them). After a few messages between us, our reader finally concluded by saying that YellowTimes.org promotes anti-Americanism, that our funding all comes from places like Teheran and Beirut, and that we actively discourage democracy. As I would hope you all understand, none of this is true but his final accusation caught my attention. How exactly do we discourage democracy? In our view, we are fervently hoping that people will once again participate in democracy and we are trying to engage them to do so.

We've all heard variations on the statement, usually ascribed to Winston Churchill, that democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others. But somebody define democracy for me. The Oxford Dictionary of Current English (1992 pocket edition) says it is: "1. government by the whole population, usually through elected representatives; 2. classless and tolerant society." Anybody know where I can find one of those? Does everyone agree that's what makes a democracy?

A few years ago, a very bright Canadian journalist by the name of Patrick Watson got intrigued by the question of just what is a democracy. He noted that, for instance, the United States has a formal constitution and a whole set of laws and rules for how its version of democracy works. Countries following the English parliamentary tradition don't follow the same rules as the U.S., but most folks would agree they are democracies. Many other nations follow neither of those models but still describe themselves as democracies. Is any one of these models the "real" democracy? Or are they variations of the same thing and thus equally entitled to think of themselves as democracies?

Watson produced a multi-segment documentary on the struggle for democracy and part of what had intrigued him was the variety of manifestations around the world of countries claiming to have democracies although they bore no resemblance to each other. In the course of his research, he was quite surprised to discover a number of countries who considered themselves to be democratic that would astonish most of us in the West: countries such as Libya, the former USSR, and China. How could they think of themselves as democracies? Because we are smug in our self-assurance and they are the bad guys, our natural tendency is to simply dismiss them as liars. But let's try to examine what democracy really is.

2002-10-09T06:09:00.000-07:00

U.S. units on deck for Iraq

NEW YORK, Oct. 8 — As implausible as it sounds, the United States may yet reach some negotiated settlement with Iraq. But against the likelihood that there will not be a peaceful end to the Iraqi regime, the military has for some time been taking steps to ensure that any conflict will end on its terms.

AS DIPLOMATIC maneuvering continues, more concrete maneuvers are underway to get the U.S. military prepared for a conflict that would be fought in four distinct phases.

PHASE I: PREPARING THE GROUND
Employing satellite imagery, airborne reconnaissance, radio intercept and special operations forces, the United States already is trying to locate Scud missiles and warheads, command and control installations, and troop concentrations.
U.S. drone aircraft are being used to locate anti-aircraft missile sites and their controlling radars, destroying them with increasing frequency. So far this month alone, American forces have struck locations around al-Kut, about 100 miles southeast of Baghdad, six times.
In addition, it is fair to assume that Kurds in the north and Shiites in the south already are being trained by U.S. special operations forces in small unit tactics like patrolling, ambushes and raids. This will enable them to fight if necessary and to help control their areas in the aftermath of an Iraqi surrender.

At the same time, the United States is moving the advance party elements of combat and support units into the region. Already, the U.S. has installations in Turkey, Kuwait, Afghanistan and Bahrain; the Marines are conducting exercises in Jordan. Some 6,000 U.S. airmen remain in Saudi Arabia, and United States Central Command or CENTCOM, which will be responsible for commanding the troops in any such war, already has moved elements of its headquarters to the tiny Persian Gulf state of Qatar.

2002-10-09T06:07:00.001-07:00

Chemical Weapons Tests by US in 60s

The United States held open-air biological and chemical weapons tests in at least four states — Alaska, Hawaii, Maryland and Florida — during the 1960s in an effort to develop defenses against such weapons, according to Pentagon (news - web sites) documents.

A series of tests in Alaska from 1965-67 used artillery shells and bombs filled with the nerve agents sarin and VX, the records show.

The Defense Department planned to release summaries of 28 chemical and biological weapons tests at a House Veterans Affairs Committee hearing Wednesday. The Associated Press obtained the summaries Tuesday.

The documents did not say whether any civilians had been exposed to the poisons. Military personnel exposed to weapons agents would have worn protective gear, the Pentagon says.

The Pentagon previously acknowledged that it had conducted biological and chemical tests, but this was the first time it disclosed that some tests were conducted over land and not out at sea.

The tests were part of Project 112, a military program in the 1960s and 1970s to test chemical and biological weapons and defenses against them. Parts of the testing program done on Navy ships were called Project SHAD, or Shipboard Hazard and Defense.

The tests were directed from the Deseret Test Center, part of a biological and chemical weapons complex in the Utah desert.

Some of those involved in the tests say they now suffer health problems linked to their exposure to dangerous chemicals and germs. They are pressing the Veterans Affairs Department to compensate them and the Defense Department to release more information about the tests.

In response to pressure from veterans and Congress, the Pentagon began releasing details of the tests last year. Earlier this year, the Defense Department acknowledged for the first time that some of the 1960s tests used real chemical and biological weapons, not just benign stand-ins.

"The Cold War era experiments of Project SHAD, which we are now learning used live toxins and chemical poisons on American servicemen on American soil, must be aggressively investigated in as open and transparent a manner as possible," said the House Veterans Affairs Committee chairman, Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J. "Our focus must be on quickly identifying those veterans who were involved, assessing whether they suffered any negative health consequences and, if warranted, providing them with adequate health care and compensation for their service."

The Defense Department has identified nearly 3,000 soldiers involved in tests disclosed earlier, but the VA has sent letters to fewer than half of them. VA and Pentagon officials acknowledged at a July hearing that finding the soldiers has been difficult.

2002-10-09T06:07:00.000-07:00

Reservists call on PM to stop sending them to illegal outposts

Dozens of soldiers, most of them reservists in an elite unit, have signed a petition in recent days which is to be sent to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his government, and which demands the evacuation of all illegal settlement outposts in the West Bank.

The signatories are calling on Sharon to cease sending soldiers to protect these outposts and to dismantle them.

Amit Harel, one of the organizers of the petition, told Ha'aretz that the initiative was born after the unit took part in Operation Defensive Shield in April earlier this year. Since then members of the unit have taken part in various protest actions emphasizing the need for separation between Israel and the Palestinians.

Those signing the petition have made it clear that they are not refusing to serve in the territories and that they will continue to do reserve duty, regardless of their political opinions. The group plans to demonstrate opposite the Defense Ministry in Tel Aviv on Friday.

Meretz MK Mossi Raz, who serves in the unit, also signed the petition.

In the coming weeks, the issue of the illegal settlement outposts is likely to be back in the spotlight, especially with Defense Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer planning to dismantle dozens of the outposts across the West Bank.

2002-10-09T06:06:00.000-07:00

Straw fails to secure Arab support for UN resolution

Britain was rebuffed by Arab leaders yesterday as the Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, attempted to drum up international support for a new United Nations resolution on Iraq that could pave the way for a military invasion.

Egypt and Jordan insisted that Saddam Hussein's acceptance of the return of weapons inspectors meant the standoff could be resolved under existing UN resolutions.

However as negotiations continued among the UN Security Council powers on a new resolution, it appeared that key states were narrowing their differences on the need to open up all suspect weapons sites to the inspectors – including presidential compounds. The major focus of the negotiations is on the trigger for military action, on which Russia and France have strong reservations.

Under the American draft, backed by Britain, any UN member could launch a military strike if it concluded Iraq had violated new Security Council demands relating to its suspected weapons of mass destruction.Mr Straw, who is on a four-day tour of Arab capitals, was told by the Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Maher in Cairo that there was no need to "rewrite the rules in the middle of the game".

In both Egypt and Jordan, Mr Straw was told that the priority should be the early return of the inspectors, not military action to overthrow President Saddam.

King Abdullah of Jordan said: "Jordan hopes that the acceptance by Iraq of the return of the inspectors will lead to the implementation of all UN decisions linked to the Gulf War and will contribute to lower the tension and avoid a new conflict in the region."

Echoing the words of US President George Bush, who outlined his Iraq strategy in a speech on US television on Monday, Mr Straw said: "Use of force in Iraq is not inevitable. President Bush made that crystal clear in his speech yesterday, which I greatly welcome." President Bush, in his 25-minute speech in Cincinnati, called President Saddam a "homicidal dictator" and said that his "nuclear holy warriors" could have developed a nuclear weapon within a year.

Iraq dismissed the speech, in which Mr Bush said Iraq may be planning to attack the US with biological or chemical weapons, as "lies". The Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri said: "The speech contained misleading information through which Bush is trying to justify an illogical and illegitimate attack on Iraq."

2002-10-09T06:05:00.000-07:00

Looking Behind Ha'aretz's Liberal Image

A new Israeli web-site, supported by two major settlers' sites from the West Bank and Gaza Strip, is dedicated to the holy cause of "encouraging and supporting the employment of Jews only". It is already listing dozens of Israeli firms that do not employ "Gentiles". In the first months of the Intifada, Israeli racists initiated a boycott of Arab shops and restaurants; now, employment of Arabs is targeted. Let's keep the inevitable historical analogies for another time; the point I want to make now is, that most of you haven't heard of this web-site. Right?

The site is neither confidential nor is it my discovery: I simply read about it in the Hebrew Ha'aretz a few days ago (24.9.02). But most of you could not. Why? Because this item was left out of Haaretzdaily.com, the English version of Ha'aretz.

Haaretzdaily.com is not Ha'aretz

Is this a mistake? An exception? No it is not. Ha'aretzdaily.com is not a full translation of the Hebrew paper; it's a selection. It often omits certain items, certain columns, that Ha'aretz does not find "suitable" for foreign eyes, like the report I just mentioned.

Another way to achieve the same hidden bias is by "nationalistically correct" translations. For example, when Hebrew Ha'aretz read (2.7.02): "Recent reports about Egyptian intentions to develop nuclear weaponry WERE APPARENTLY THE RESULT OF ISRAELI PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE AND do not match intelligence information in Jerusalem, according to a senior Israeli official", the English translation simply omitted the words I've capitalised.

Or, quoting an Israeli officer on the use of Palestinians as "human shields", the English version read (16.8.02): "Before the search [in a Palestinian house] we go to a neighbour, take him out of his house and tell him to call the people we want out of the next door house. [...] The neighbour does not have the option to refuse to do it. He shouts, knocks on the door and says the army's here. If nobody answers, he comes back and we go to work." Sounds pretty harmless? – Just because the last sentence is a "nationalistically correct" translation of the following Hebrew sentence: "If nobody answers, we have to tell the neighbour that he will be killed if no one comes out."

2002-10-09T06:03:00.000-07:00

Profiteers of the Warfare State

Larry Ellison has an idea. The relentlessly self-promoting CEO of Oracle Corp., a Silicon Valley software company famous for its ability to grab government contracts, envisions post-September 11 America as a country where everyone walks around with a "smart card." Days after the terrorist attacks, the opportunistic Ellison was all over the media claiming that "We need a national ID card with our photograph and thumbprint digitized and embedded in the ID card."

Naturally, it would all be backed up by an Oracle database. And, of course, he will do it for free—at least until the first inevitable "upgrade."

The only way to protect ourselves from terrorists is to "ensure that all the information in myriad government databases was integrated into a single national file," says Ellison. Oh, and we should not worry about the government intruding where it is not supposed to, because privacy is so pre-September 11: "Well, this privacy you're concerned about is largely an illusion," Ellison told news anchor Hank Plante of San Francisco's KPIX-TV shortly after September 11. "All you have to give up is your illusions, not any of your privacy. Right now, you can go onto the Internet and get a credit report about your neighbor and find out where your neighbor works, how much they [sic] earn and if they [sic] had a late mortgage payment and tons of other information."

We are all serfs now, anyway, so why not wear the slave collar and be done with it? It is an interesting argument to make, and oddly compelling—but not to real Americans, who never were serfs and never will be.

We have been so busy worrying about Big Brother snooping, says Ellison, that "we've made it impossible for the government to protect us." That's right: It is our fault that the FBI obstructed its own terror investigation and failed to detect a terrorist plot more than five years in the making. Besides, all this anxiety about such archaic abstractions as "liberty" and "privacy" is rather dated. "Two hundred years ago, Thomas Jefferson warned us that our liberties were at risk unless we exercised 'eternal vigilance,'" writes Ellison in the War Street Journal—but "Jefferson lived in an age of aristocrats and monarchs."

We, on the other hand, live in a age of yuppies and demagogues, when such old-fashioned niceties as individual liberty and the right to be left alone have long since ceased to exist. Welcome to the new world, the world according to Larry Ellison; and please, put on your slave bracelet—it is for your own protection.

2002-10-09T06:02:00.000-07:00

Vets Group Wants Rumsfeld Out Over Alleged Shipment to Iraq

CNSNews.com) - The American Gulf War Veterans Association (AGWVA) is calling for the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for his reported denial that he knew anything about U.S. shipments of chemical and biological agents to Iraq in the 1980s.

If the defense secretary is unaware or in denial of the sale of biological materials to a country the United States is preparing to attack, then he represents a danger to the lives of service members, said Joyce Riley vonKleist, a spokeswoman for ANGWA.

"As a result of the actions of the secretary of defense, we have now called for Mr. Rumsfeld's resignation or dismissal from his office. This is absolutely unconscionable," vonKleist said.

In response to questioning by Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Sept. 19, Rumsfeld "quickly and flatly denied" any knowledge that the United States helped Iraq acquire biological weapons during the Iran-Iraq war, Byrd stated in a Sept. 20 press release.

Rumsfeld, however, told Byrd he would review Pentagon records on the issue.

Byrd, citing a 1995 letter from David Satcher, the former director of the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said the United States in fact provided nearly two dozen viral and bacterial samples to Iraqi scientists in the mid-1980s, "samples that included the plague, botulism, and anthrax, among other deadly diseases," according to Byrd.

A Senate report on U.S. dual-use exports to Iraq, dated May 1994, made clear the United States shipped anthrax and the West Nile virus to Saddam Hussein's nation in the 1980s with the knowledge and approval of the Commerce Department and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, vonKleist charged.

Rumsfeld should be up-to-date with information about the military capabilities of a potential enemy, she added.

A defense official had no comment on the veteran group's demand for Rumsfeld's resignation. Lt. Col. Cynthia Colin, a Defense Department spokeswoman, said a review of Pentagon records to date indicated, however, that the department had not supplied germs or other toxins to Iraq.

Rumsfeld's testimony has become a controversial subject with Gulf War veterans who have comrades who died of unexplained deaths or suffer illnesses the veterans believe they contacted in the Gulf in 1990-91.

Of 697,000 service members who deployed, 400,000 are suffering some form of illness related to the conflict, said vonKleist, who served as a medical crew director aboard a C-130 at the rank of captain in the Air Force in 1991.

According to an April 2002 report from the Department of Veterans Affairs, nearly 7,800 Desert Storm veterans have died since the end of the conflict and nearly 200,000 filed claims with the VA for medical problems.

Gulf War veterans suffered from exposure to biological and chemical weapons, depleted uranium in ammunition, and smoke from oil well fires, veterans' groups report. VonKleist said the Defense Department has not fully investigated the effects of various vaccines service members were required to take, including inoculations for anthrax.

2002-10-09T05:59:00.000-07:00

Pinprick attacks on US forces mount worldwide

AMMAN, JORDAN – A shooting attack on US Marines during a live-fire exercise in Kuwait Tuesday is the latest in a string of pinprick strikes against expanding American forces abroad – even in nations that welcome the US presence.
One US Marine died and another was wounded as about 1,000 US Marines and Navy sailors took part in the annual Kuwait-US war game, Eager Mace. Two unknown assailants – reportedly civilians – pulled up in a pickup truck, got out, and opened fire. US troops returned fire and killed the two.

Since it was liberated from Iraqi occupation by a US-led coalition in the 1991 Gulf War, Kuwait has been the Middle East nation most genuinely sympathetic toward American policy in the Gulf, and the most hospitable, providing military bases, training and support.

Unlike in Saudi Arabia, extreme Islamist sentiment in Kuwait is rarely directed at the US; Al Qaeda operatives have never been tolerated there.

But as the US gears up to expand Washington's "war on terror" to Iraq, a series of fresh attacks against US forces – even in nations where the majority support the US presence – underscores the risk to growing US military deployments.

From Kuwait and Afghanistan to South Korea and the Philippines, US forces have been recently targeted in ways that seem to bear out, even if partially, fresh promises by Al Qaeda and its supporters to continue their war against America.

2002-10-09T05:54:00.001-07:00

20,000 UK troops destined for Iraq

TONY Blair is to authorise the sending of an expeditionary force of up to 20,000 servicemen and women to the Middle East for a US-led war against Iraq.

Senior Whitehall sources said the Prime Minister’s decision, expected at the end of the month, comes amid growing concern among defence chiefs at the lack of strategic direction from the government to allow them to prepare troops for any mission to Iraq.

Mr Blair kept war planning within a small group of civil servants and military officers working in the Cabinet Office to prevent leaks prior to the Labour Party conference.

"Now the conference is out of the way, the Prime Minister feels more confident to start winding up military preparations," said one source. "Up to now, the line has been that no decisions have been made about war. This will start to change ."

Last month, Geoff Hoon, the Defence Secretary, visited Donald Rumsfeld, his US counterpart, to offer British troops for an Iraqi campaign. However, defence sources said that since then, there had been little feedback from the US on what type of troops they want and how they would be used.

The sources said a prompt decision from the government was needed to allow the army to begin training for desert warfare. The "big" British contribution would involve heavy armoured forces to fight alongside US divisions currently gathering in Kuwait.

An enlarged armoured brigade with Challenger 2 tanks and Warrior troop carriers will be the core of the UK force. Most of the units will be drawn from the 1st Armoured Division and 7th Armoured Brigade, based in Germany.

Two Scottish regiments, the Black Watch and Scots Dragoon Guards, are currently assigned to the Desert Rats Brigade and will play a key role in any desert deployment. Up until last month, they were on stand-by for firefighting duty, but were then told to return to normal military training. Military sources described this ring-fencing of Germany-based combat units as prudent contingency planning to allow initial preparations to be made in the run-up to Mr Blair’s deployment announcement.

A strong RAF contingent is also expected to be sent to the Middle East to join Tornado squadrons from RAF Lossiemouth, in Morayshire, and RAF Leuchers, in Fife, that are already in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia on no-fly zone patrol duty.