Tag Archives: Corporation

Bleeding Hearted Liberals running small check-list businesses make my heart bleed

Posted on by
Reply

All around America there are bleeding hearted liberals running small businesses… small social service businesses. As a general rule, too, liberals don’t run businesses very well. They’re too damn dumbly soft and sweet, that’s why. So we can begin to understand why all these ‘reform groups’ (like the local area’s Pikes Peak Justice and Peace Commission.. for just one example) don’t make much profit for the people they claim to be serving (even as they keep them out in droves from their social advocacy groups, run as small ‘businesses’).

Here is the type of thing I am talking about,

…from an article appearing in The Nation…
‘Check off the boxes, copy the paragraph from two years ago, mail it in. As an election year approaches, I again face the piles of questionnaires that progressive organizations use to evaluate public officials. Environmentalists, feminists, campaign finance reformers, housing advocates and labor unions have all come to rely on these lists of our positions–often on issues that never even come up for a vote. It should come as no surprise that, for the most part, all we get out of this cumbersome process is a long line of “checklist liberals” who answer correctly but do little to advance the progressive causes that underlie the questionnaires.’

The rest of this article can be found on the liberal’s very own Nation Magazine at Transforming the Liberal Checklist

OK, OK! So the rest of the article is not very good, much like the liberal organizations themselves, and The Nation Magazine is not very good, either. It was still a good and insightful first paragraph of an article at least!

And the commentary reminded me of all those fund raising letters, free stamps with animal pictures on them, and ‘surveys’ to find out my learned opinions, etc. Reminds me of all the wasted time sitting in meetings where bleeding hearted liberals talk about running THEIR small businesses. You see? The bleeding hearted liberals are most always the ‘owners’ of small socially aware businesses calling themselves community’ groups, which these groups having small office staffs then try to run the group like it was a church or tiny corner store of some sort.

Yes, the small office staff always begin to behave as if they were real owners of the store, much in the same way that some convenience store minimum wage workers will try to stop a robber of some sort or other, by risking their own lives over pennies that supposedly belong to the stock owners instead. These small would be owners can snarl and bite quite hard if given an opportunity to do so. They often overpower the petty ‘robbers’ of their unit with their forceful indignations than can border on madness of sorts. Some times they get popped for being so dimwitted, too.

So what to do about all the PEACE and GREEN and SOCIAL JUSTICE groups’ ‘leaders’ acting in our name? They operate much as the Democratic Party does, which is to impede rather than progress the people forward.

The runners of these small businesses calling themselves ‘peace and justice’ outfits, most often see themselves not as an elected group of leaders for exploited workers struggling for justice and peace, but as a group of independent networkers and business operators, forcefully headed for making more profit for their own personal businesses, the social groups. They spend more time being angry at any of the lower levels of the ‘co-ops’ managed by themselves than at the power elites that cause the social injustice they are supposedly fighting against. When angered by the lower elements, their faces can become quite bulldog-like.

Recently a certain word has come into great popularity with this sort of manager owner of social cause… that word being the word SUSTAINABILITY. Why so popular this word, and with these people? It is because it strikes a chord with the small manager/owner and his small manager/owner mindset. They want to know if their small business is SUSTAINABLE and if their position as head of the operation is SUSTAINABLE most of all? SUSTAINABILITY is their biggest goal of them all. And now of course, corporate America wants to help them become SUSTAINABLE.

This sort of group run as a small business with paid staff who think themselves owners is a very huge impediment to any real social action taking place. The main technique of ‘the owners’ who are salaried is simply to eat up other people’s time. They know that they can out last them in energy by simply doing this, and can come out on top when actual decisions are to be made. In other words, they are well positioned to stifle.

Like owners of any corporation, ‘the owners’ of supposed social groups get paid real money for their time while the volunteers do not. Is this the model of a social action group that will get things done? Most certainly not. Unfortunately though, it is the model structure for liberals and their do-nothing liberalism everywhere today in America…. small groups with a paid ‘leader’ or two, spouting ‘good things’, and doing next to nothing besides appearing to be seeminglygood people.

At the recent meeting of the executive board of the Pikes Peak Justice and Peace Commission, it was totally noticeable that nobody there had anything of a working class background. In fact, the idea of justice for workers is totally absent from this group with ‘justice’ in its name. Being so church-like, this group throws the word in as if it were a bone to the lower classes so next to being sweet dogs in the eyes of these nice people. They were about as working class in composition as the ACLU is!… to give an idea of what the meeting was actually like. Nobody was ‘angry’, just sad. Or happy when seemingly a crumb from real power is thrown in their direction. And at this meeting it had been.

The City of Colorado Springs was going to let the group march in the St Pat’s Day Parade! All Hallelujah, Jesus! But that is about more than this little essay can talk about for the time being. Just let it be said, that liberals running small businesses that should be action groups make my heart bleed. Bleeding hearted liberals make poor businessmen and the conservative business men will tear them to part. Antiwar groups should not be run like they are small businesses. Probably enough said at this point.

‘Super Delegates’ make the corporate party super undemocratic

Posted on by
Reply

Corporations have one big problem in controlling political expression in that all they have is money, not numbers. Tons of money get spent on fabricating false images, manipulating sentiment, and plastering everything with advertisements for the top dogs the corporate world has running in the arena.

Still, sometimes the rabble voters get out of hand, and that’s where the so-called ‘super delegates’ come in as the ultimate corporate trump card. American ‘elections’ are not a democratic system at all, and its design is just to appear to be democratic without actually being so. ‘Super delegates’ are mere icing on the cake of undemocracy that we suffer with every 4 years.

Go figure, what’s is democratic about the government financing all the primaries for the 2 corporate parties in the first place? Nothing. As if the corporate world is not already buying the elections before hand, the corporate government moves in with hundreds of millions of corporate dollars to show its favoritism to the 2 official corporatized parties. It is one thing for the government to finance the real election, but the primaries are not that at all since they are just party functions. In short, they are a facade of procedure that the 2 corporate parties (with a big push from the corporate media and corporate government) put out to pretend to being democratic, when in reality they are no such thing at all.

To many, electing a Black American will represent ‘change’. To many, electing a White woman will do so. And to many, just getting George out of office will be all that is needed for them to think that the country is moving forward once again. Wrong. Until we establish a political system that has more than the most pathetic pretense of being functionally democratic, we are all on the super-highway to getting screwed yet even more than Bush has already done to the country. Corporate looting of our nation and to the world as a whole cannot stop without us beginning to construct a democratic system where none now stands. We need a democratic America, and that is not an America led by either the Democratic or Republican parties.

Eye now on undemocratic nature of the Democratic Party

Posted on by
4

Super delegates or not, the public eye will still be turned on the totally undemocratic nature of the Democratic Party, since there is nothing about Barrack Obama that will bring about any real change long term. Still, the question of the moment though is whether the Clinton part of the DLC machine can still manipulate the entire DP or not? The Obama part certainly could… short term.

There is no doubt though that the corporations can manipulate the party since they totally own it. This is no people’s party at all. Rather, The Democratic Party is owned by the military industrial complex every bit as much as the Republican Party.

Nothing will be gained election time with a Barrack Obama as the new president. The only long term gain can only come about when the US population gets angry and totally fed up enough with the corporate 2 parties that act as one con. Unfortunately though, the American people still think that their corporate rulers have some God given right to rule everybody on the planet. Stupid, very stupid. No personality change in the front office will bring about change as long as the American people still are enamored of their country’s nationalism….The Empire.

Europeans and US intervening in Darfur by way of Chad

Posted on by
Reply

After all those nice stories about how ‘something must be done’, the European Union is sending in its troops to Darfur by way of neighboring Chad. In so doing, it will be propping up a French maintained puppet dictator that is so unpopular, that even some of his own relatives are trying to overthrow him along with much of the population at large. Oh, Go blame it on the Arab horsemen and the Chinese, I suppose?

What is all this Chad, Darfur, and Sudan stuff really about to our Western ears? Does our ruling class now have soft hearts and now are turning to stop bad things going on in the big bad, world? Pretty comical notion I think. ‘Save the Blacks! Save the children!’ What noblesse oblige!

Is this the new compassionate conservatism in action? Oh No…. It’s the liberal Democrats once again! Working with Bush and Sarkozy all together! Oh, and it’s to ‘Stop Terrorism’, too. It’s all part of the ‘Global War on Everybody and Everything’, patent pending in Washington DC office (or is it in Alexander, Virginia?). We got such good ol’ soft hearts, we going to save the world once again.

OK, actually the news is keeping the news away from us on this one. Too early to announce yet. We have short attention spans and need to stay focused on CHANGE and DARFUR. Chad is, well it is, politically incorrect to think about. There will be no Chad displays at the local library quite just yet. Hold your breath! And whatever you do, VOTE! The System need you.

Chad president urges EU force to deploy
Chad’s President Urges European Peacekeeping Force to Quickly Deploy; PM Declares Curfew …so many dead… so much suffering. But as Madelyn Albright would say… ‘It’s worth it.’ The European and US corporations must run Africa for themselves.

Spook Steve Recca wants us to feel safe

Posted on by
Reply

Commander Steve Recca, of the new DoD endowed UCCS Center for Homeland Security, told his Shove Chapel audience last night that Homeland Security is about being safe. That means everything to him from keeping his daughter safe at school to keeping the streets safe from excessive snow fall. Does the DHS want a crack at Climate Change?

Recca also explained that Homeland Security is about community. Yes, community: the local community and the global community. Whatever does he think “homeland” refers to? Manitou? Planet Earth? Before Bush and Ashcroft I’m pretty sure “Homeland” had only ever meant Nazi Germany, needing to be kept safe from Fascist-haters like socialists, anarchists, discontents and others who objected to Nazi land grabs. In the Soviet Bloc security would have been about community: the community of neighbors ready to rat on you.

Steve Recca kept Homeland Security affairs out of Greg Mortenson’s presentation until the end. Then, to cap off the questions from the audience, from the darkened anonymity of the public microphone, Recca asked for everyone’s patience while he read an “email from a Marine at an FOB (Forward Operating Base) in Afghanistan.”

In this “email” a soldier explained how protecting one of Mortenson’s schools was the most important goal of his mission, etc, etc.

The inattentive audience may have become too accustomed to visualizing boiler room letter writing sessions assigned to soldiers in the field, or soldiers laid up in VA hospitals with nothing else to do but hand-write form letters dictated to them by military PR specialists. Those Letters to the Editor sent to newspapers across the country, or emails to Dr Greg in this case, may be outsourced to India for all we know. In any case, the Colorado College audience was bored of it.

I’d like to see Recca explain what role propaganda or jingoism plays in Homeland Security.

Commander Steve Recca is a career spook, now pioneering the post-graduate studying of keeping white America safe. I can understand that DHS might require information sharing with the Intelligence Community. Does it have to be part of that community? Is that the “community” Recca was talking about?

Will Homeland Security be training its airport shoe-sniffers to conduct surveillance and torture too? Steve Recca doesn’t bring transportation or border guard experience to his job. His background is entirely about spying.

1983- graduate (with honors) of U.S. Naval Academy
1990- Master of Arts (with distinction) from Naval Postgraduate School
1990 to 1993- tours on USS YORKTOWN, USS TEXAS, USS AMERICA
1993- Staff, Commander Naval Forces Europe (CNE), in London
    Intelligence Watch Officer, Head of the Current Intelligence Branch.
1994- Certificate in International Political Affairs
    from University of Zurich
1995 to 1997- Special Assistant and Speechwriter
    for the Secretary of the Navy
1997 to 1998- Office of the Director of Central Intelligence,
    speech writer, member on Director’s Long-Term Planning Board
1998 to 2001-American Embassy in Oslo, Norway,
    as Assistant Naval Attaché,
    Joint Staff and Office of the Secretary of Defense
2001- Inman Intelligence Chair, Naval Postgraduate School,
    Senior Intelligence Officer and Intelligence Programs Coordinator
2003- Department of Defense Chief Liaison
    to the German Federal Intelligence Service.
2005- United States Northern Command’s Interagency Coordination
    Directorate, policy planning and technology consultant
2007- UCCS Center for Homeland Security

Here is Steve Recca quoted in the August 24, 2007 Colorado Springs Business Journal about a newly formed COLORADO HOMELAND DEFENSE ALLIANCE:

“The whole point behind the alliance is creating partnerships, networking — collaboration with government, military, university and corporations in the aerospace, defense and security industries.”

US preventable deaths can be prevented

Posted on by
Reply

The US leads the industrialized world in killing off its own citizens via its idiotic health miss system. France best, U.S. worst in preventable death ranking That’s right. We lose about 101,000 Fellow Americans per year by allowing our corporations to fuck up health care delivery. And you know what? That is a severe undercount.

So do you really still think that this is the best health care system in the world? Then I’d like to sell you some land in the state of Lousyanna. Why do we allow so many preventable deaths at such a high cost? Don’t we care about things like our aging relatives in the nursing homes, for example? Or our kids that need a doctor or dentist but whose parents have no access to get it for them? Don’t we give a damn?

These preventable deaths can be prevented from happening. All we have to do is look at what other countries are doing right, and then copy them. America is no pace setter in the medical field any more at all. Cuba is. But to be real, all countries in the industrialized world deliver health care more responsibly and efficiently than the US does.

The Propaganda Tsunamis

Posted on by
Reply

The second electoral tsunami wave is due to hit the American population today and unless you take intellectual cover from it, you are likely to drown in total shit. I’m talking about New Hamshire, its coverage, and what passes as analysis of the event.

And nobody is more sunk in this muck than American liberals who are praying for a liberal Saviour once again.

Why do the US ‘elections’ take so long to run? Answer; because the brainwash of the population must be so absolutely intensive and the party events in each state must be done with such fanfare to convince us all that something called democracy is actually occurring. The Big Lie must be pounded and pounded and pounded into each of us, over and over and over again.

In reality what is called democracy in the US is nothing more than the obtaining of the passive acquiescence of the population in ‘the process’… which is the process of being ruled by corporation picked leaders while being numbed into silence and obedience. That’s what is passed off to us as being democracy.

A real democracy would be a process not run for the giant herd of us by a corporate oligarchy. What we have today is a total charade of what the nation’s founders had in mind for the US. True, they wanted their own slave-owning selves firmly planted at the top over the herd but they couldn’t have imagined a society such as our own evolving as it has.

America has never really had much of a democracy, it being as flawed as Greek and Roman democracy ever was. Our present day rulers are firmly against democracy evolving for the common classes, and our neighbors have been bred like passive sheep to bah, bah, bah along with anything the wolves leading the herds might offer them.

I am not talking solely about the Republicans among the general population but also about the liberals that talk up a good song and dance, but then meekly follow the pack as the herd gets moved towards the slaughter house. Barack, Barack, barack…. along now.

The second wave of the propaganda tsunamis is about to hit us tonight. So prepare yourself for a giant wave of bullshit washing your way.

Stealing Muslim women from terrorists

Posted on by
6

What is Greg Mortenson teaching the children of Pakistan?I’m afraid my Neo Liberal roots are showing. Greg Mortenson is delivering a lecture at CC on January 15th and I hardly know how to object. I too believe that the fate of mankind depends on education.

However, where have I the right to hold such a belief system, mine, above others? You can call Islam a religion for uneducated poor people, and be mostly right, as indeed the same applies to all fundamentalist absolutists. But that is only to regard education in the liberal sense, with its belief that a secular utopia awaits man’s bettering himself through progress. Technology, medical advances, and the celebration of the individual lead mankind where exactly? To a healthier, more antiseptic life certainly, civil discourse often, but to chaos and nihilism so far, quickly.

Fundamentalist Luddite religious systems may not take man to the moon, but they do ensure spiritually grounded lives, full families, and the same for all foreseeable descendants. Which model is likely the more sustainable? If we posit that the greater percentage of mankind need such intellectual tethers, to whom do you entrust their guidance? Allah or Coca Cola?

The West may think it offers salvation to the women of Islam, but is it true? Are the middle class advocates of women’s rights prepared to take in their rescuees? A Muslim wife’s life is at the mercy of Muslim males, and we’ve been treated to horrific accounts. How do they compare to what capitalism has to offer? Those liberated from the Koran can look forward to the certainty of exploitation by globalization bosses be they man or woman, regulated by amoral corporations and corrupt officials, now without the comfort of leading lives of spiritual purpose.

Isn’t the jury still out on the West’s liberated women? They’re having fewer children, that’s for certain.

White knights like Mr. Mortenson offer a gift horse that indeed cannot deliver. Meanwhile of course our soldiers and free trade carpetbaggers quietly pile on inside. Mortenson’s book Three Cups of Tea has been requisitioned by the Defense Department and issued to our counter-insurgency forces, probably to teach the Hearts and Minds lingo, hopefully not worse.

Mortenson’s visit to Colorado Springs is being sponsored by a new department of UCCS, the Center for Homeland Security, I kid you not! It’s a major now offered by UCCS, established with funding from the Pentagon, staffed with retired military instructors, and chaired by career CIA officer Steve Recca. Look him up, his name is tied completely to CIA activities. As they say in the intelligence biz, he’s totally “mobbed up.”

The tag line to Mortenson’s book tour is to use education outreach as an alternative means to combat terrorism. While it is a refreshing change-up to our direct war making against terrorism, I can’t imagine behaving cavalierly toward Islam is going to endear us greatly. Osama didn’t want US feet on the ground in Saudi Arabia. Do Muslims in general want westerners building schools for their girls in Afghanistan and Pakistan? Could stealing their young women be seen as anything but a provocation for a terrorist response?

The iron fist of the marketplace

Posted on by
Reply

Burmese priests protestThink you’re the only one who’s come to the conclusion that the average person can be relied upon only as far as you can drag him by the ear? Do you lament that the common sense of common heads put together adds up to a hill of beans?

If you think you know better, your challenge might be to cajole or inform, in hopes of motivating the herd, where others high on the food chain would simply ride roughshod.

Burmese monks leave their sandals behindI find it odd to use animal kingdom analogies to explain human behavior when Homo Sapiens comprise neither competing species, genus, class or phyla stalking each other.

Of the nurture versus nature, I mean carrot versus stick herd management option, which approach do you observe governments most often employ? In public schools it’s authoritarian, on the streets it’s civility so long as people submit appropriately to their fleecing. But as recent events have shown, dissent has meant government reaction with black gloves, masks, armor padding, truncheons, and low tech brutality. Every aspect something you’d expect more from those traditional masters of persuasive communication, the mobsters.

The people most alarmed by totalitarian repression are the educated class who over the centuries have fought for every liberty their overlords were forced to yield. The working classes represented the leverage used to negotiate each concession, and thus came along for the ride. But its muscled ranks have always served as the labor pool for the thugs the governors would use to fight any progressive reformers.

Your police departments all have riot gear to don in the event of civil disturbances. Can you say you’ve approved of their harsh measures in the event of your getting hysterical? That equipment isn’t for soccer hooligans, it’s to break strikes and beat back political assemblies.

We’ve seen police around the world fire on crowds assembled peaceably in Burma, Mexico, Tibet and Iraq. In New Orleans we’ve seen police taser crowds of people just like us, who wanted to protest a public meeting where the decision was being made to condemn their houses.

If you think massacres are beyond the pale for our corporate overlord class, think again. If they can do it without inciting a mass rebellion, they will. The independent minded people of East Timor were massacred with US weapons and the tacit complicity of a media which let it happen off camera. So long as you don’t see it, it doesn’t bother anyone’s conscience apparently. Children labor as slaves in Bangladesh, Africa and Asia for our corporations. You don’t see it, so it’s not a problem. For the profit-mongers all corporate genocide is OK, be it by economic starvation, accident, contamination, or pollution. If you could understood the depravity inherent in their exploitation of world poverty and its resources, can you doubt they’d hesitate to fire live rounds into a crowd who threatened their rule?

The Lysol toilet bowl game

Posted on by
1

You probably know that I’m a big sports fan. I grew up watching football with my dad and cut my teeth on the traditions, the rivalries, the pageantry of college football. Rose Bowl corporate logoSome of my fondest memories are of college bowl games that were played during the holiday season. Bowl games presented matchups that were not seen in the regular season. From the weary television console came team histories, funny mascots, famous coaches, bright college colors, and excited pennant-waving crowds. It seemed to me that life came to a halt while the entire world focused on football for a few days.

The Tournament of Roses game, now known as the Rose Bowl, started in 1902. It was a classic East-West battle, and was the only bowl game held outside of the South until 1971. Paired with the beautiful early morning parade, it has been part of every New Year’s Day that I can remember.

In 1933, the first Orange Bowl game was played. Its purpose was to draw attention to the unknown city of Miami and help build a tourism
industry. Next came the Sugar Bowl (1935, New Orleans), the Sun Bowl (1936, El Paso), the Cotton Bowl (1937, Dallas), and the Gator Bowl (1946, Jacksonville).

The associations behind these bowl games had altruistic beginnings. Most benefited charities, many which were recently formed to help people in the wake of the Great Depression. Today they still have 501(c)(3) status but their exempt purpose is fuzzier, bringing economic impact to a particular area. Most current bowls still contribute a large portion of revenue to worthy causes. For example, the Gator Bowl gives 75% of game revenue to support educational pursuits in Jacksonville. Of course they do, and I’m sure the money is put to good use. But if hard truth be told, I’ll bet that much of the money given to charity is a payout to preserve their nonprofit status, to keep the IRS at bay.

The late 1950s saw a proliferation of new bowl games hoping to make money from television coverage. The first bowl game to sell corporate naming rights was the US F&G Sugar Bowl in 1988. The move generated an adverse reaction from the public. No matter, it has now become commonplace. I personally loathe each and every corporation that co-opts tradition in the name of profit. Naming rights are even sold for half-time reports. The most memorable was an attempt to reach out to female viewers, the Stayfree Maxi-pad Half-time Report. At least that one made me laugh. I can’t say the same for my dad who quickly left to stir the chili.

I suppose I should be more understanding. With competition from the new bandwagon bowl games, which offer team payouts in the millions, the old timers have to play by the same rules. After all, bowls can’t make money if the teams don’t show up. And the impoverished state-sponsored universities aren’t willing to be pawns in someone else’s money-maker.

As with so many of our cherished cultural traditions, all has been reduced to greed. Corporate greed, state-supported university greed, individual greed.

It’s said that money is the root of all evil. I don’t think so. Money can do much good as the original intent of college bowl series illustrates. The Lockheed Martin Holy Bible actually says that the love of money is the root of all evil. The perversion of college bowls is but a small and insignificant example of what’s become a global truth.

The names have been changed to expose the guilty:
Rose Bowl presented by Citi
FedEx Orange Bowl
Allstate Sugar Bowl
Brut Sun Bowl
AT & T Cotton Bowl
Konica Minolta Gator Bowl
Capital One Bowl (formerly the Citrus Bowl)

After Tony Blair?

Posted on by
Reply

The whole English speaking world breathed a sigh of relief when Tony Blair finally was replaced by Gordon Brown. Gone was a toady for the US neocon Bush regime and in was….?

Well, a British Hillary Clinton perhaps? At least it was thought, that Brown would move to get British troops out of Iraq and the corporate media has tried to give the impression that this was the actual case. But is it so really?

What seems to be happening is that British troops are merely being redeployed as support platoons for the Pentagon. See AFP report Troops enter Taliban-held town as British PM visits 10/12/2007 They are being pulled out of Southern Iraq step by step, but then are being sent into Afghanistan!

There seems to be a division of labor developing, where the US does Iraq, and the British do Afghanistan. Hey! And who gets Pakistan then? Musharaf still gets last use from Bush maybe? And Jewish Israel certainly is doing their part by continuing to eagerly subjugate the Palestinians for the US and their ownselves. It’s an ethnic cleansing on a mass scale led by D.C. and the Pentagon.

What we have are new lines being drawn in the US made regional war for regime changes in the Middle East-Iran-Pakistan-Afghanistan chain of Muslim countries. Gordon Brown is not retreating from Tony Blair’s melding of the British as junior partners for the US neocon imperialist game plan. Instead, he is continuing that relationship in full.

In short, after Tony Blair we get more of the same, not any real change. And that will be what we get with a Democratic Party President, too. More imperialistic colonialism so that the US-Brit governments continue to control their supply of oil. Lots of corporations are depending on them to do just that.

Climate Change -who benefits?

Posted on by
Reply

Are “Climate Change” and “Global Warming” a rather convenient way for the large investment companies (now that they’re all jumping on the bandwagon) to step forward, in lock step with the Congress, and find the ways in which they can become the “players” in the unfolding “crisis” and have a new tax that will, of course as always, be a burden most on those who can least afford it?

Or are they really concerned about the planet? Was Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” more of an investment talk aimed at these owners of capital getting in on a carbon tax and trading scheme, rather than a real debate that gave time to the dissenting scientific view? And, is the dogma now that CO2 and greenhouse effect are really driving the race toward ownership of emerging large alternative energy companies in which the corporations will likely win? Calling CO2 a pollutant is deception. It is what trees and plants thrive on.

Ethanol has now become the new “savior” in our effort of curbing the import of foreign oil. But ethanol is net-energy. That is, it takes more energy to create it than it gives back, besides the agricultural mess it will lead us to. How is it in past earth warming cycles, man’s absence was a causation? Seemingly impossible. Is the Solar cycle part of a natural global warming process? Why aren’t we moving instead to form citizen owned solar and wind utilities that will help the vast majority to utilize these energies without the huge up front costs usually associated? Or unless implemented immediately and widely, would it be all for naught as the worlds energy needs will never be affected by alternative energies? In other words, how do you replace the 85 million barrels of oil a day the planet uses? Not to mention the tons of coal and millions of cubic feet of natural gas?

Gore’s 7 good foot soldiers steps to reduce Co2 “pollution” is almost Hitlarian. Don’t think, just do what I say …from a spineless politician who wouldn’t stand up (and told others not to) for an investigation into the 2000 stolen election.

Capitalism will overtake any real discussion of problems we face and destroy dissenters who offer up real solutions to energy use that are owned by the populace at large. And once they’ve taxed us for carbon they will figure out a way to tax the sun or wind for those who take advantage of it for their homes. Yes, reduce your use of oil, gas, coal, etc… but beware who really benefits from this mostly un-debated scare of global warming.

What do we get for behaving as they want us to? A cleaner world? But no monetary gain for us? If our government was really serious about this the tax incentives would come back as in the 70’s and much bigger this time. And in all states. But that would hurt the oil-energy companies.

Some interesting articles and comments for your consideration:

Denial
By Frank Furedi, Spiked Online

“The charge of denial has become a secular form of blasphemy … The heretic is condemned because he has dared to question an authority that must never be questioned. Here, ‘overwhelming evidence’ serves as the equivalent of revealed religious truth, and those who question ‘scientists of unquestioned reputation’ — that is, the new priestly caste — are guilty of blasphemy … ‘Denial’ has become part of a secular inquisition that stigmatizes free thinking.”

Preaching the Climate Catechism
By Lorne Gunter, National Post

“Since 2003, the upper layer of the Atlantic has lost 25% of the extra heat it had built up in the past three decades…The broad consensus among solar scientists is that the Earth’s warming is almost entirely explicable by increased solar activity that began about 100 years ago, and which will end around 2020…But these inconvenient truths would be bad for the cause…”

Lehman Brothers contemplate and study profitability of Climate Change

Austrailian carbon credit purchase. Who owns the wind farm in China? Not the citizens.

Is carbon tax a shelter for the rich?

A Progressive state of mind

Posted on by
Reply

My friend belongs to the Pikes Peak Inter-Religious Clergy Alliance. The members are from a diversity of denominations, but feel united by their common stand on social issues. Progressive issues actually. “We would have included Progressive in the name except for its connotation of Palestine-Israel advocacy.”
 
I love it.

Here’s what Wikipedia describes as the tenets of progressivism, a political movement started at the dawn of the last century, and its accomplishments:

Democracy
. Ballot initiative
. Direct primary
. Direct election of U.S. Senators
. Referendum
. Recall
. Secret ballot
. Women’s suffrage

Efficiency
. Professional administrators
. Centralization of decision-making process
. Movements to eliminate governmental corruption

Regulation of large corporations and monopolies
. Trust-busting
. Regulation
. Socialism
. Laissez-Faire

Social justice
. Development of professional social workers
. The building of Settlement Houses
. The enactment of child labor laws
. Support for the goals of organized labor
. Prohibition laws

Environmentalism
. National parks and wildlife refuges

Neo-liberal regime in France hits hard road block

Posted on by
Reply

France doesn’t want the neo-liberal program that its government is trying to shove down its throat. Nicolas Sarkozy was elected in May as France’s president, and it is clear that he was the French corporate candidate of choice. France gripped by massive strike

Those corporations want him to destroy the social benefits that the French currently receive and to break all opposition to corporate control over everything in French society.

The French Labor Movement is battling back, and unlike the British and American Labor Movement, the French working class still has some punch left in it. The Battle For France involves more than just the French though. Neo-liberal needs to be delivered a death blow, and the French workers just like the Iraqi population as a whole, are doing their very best to fight back. We wish both the best in their struggles against the common evil we all should be struggling against. That common evil is corporate control over all society against the will of those underneath corporate yoke.

Why?

Posted on by
1

Black Americans are getting sick and fed up with the entire racist criminal injustice system of the US. Still fresh in memory is the picture of White cops with guns turning back Blacks trying to cross the Mississippi Bridge to get out of New Orleans. In mind, too, is the new blatantly open use of torture not only of American military held POWs, but also of Black common folk held in US prisons around the country.

Thousands marched against racial profiling this week In D.C., their protest fed by the movement to defend the Jena Six. Why?

Why? is the question that was asked in Miami this week, too, and got a young man shot down by the police there. Why? too another taser death, not just in Canada, but in Miami that same week, this time of a Black man? Why? Black Agenda Report reports these stories of the Miami events. Executed ‘Walking While Black’ in Miami

Why? The answer is simple. We live in a world ruled by corporations run by Whites of privilege. They control and run a police and judicial system run and controlled by Whites of privilege, too. We live in a US privleged White world where a White privileged and dominated system arrests and tortures prisoners of color without any sense of the human indecency of their actions, fed by an even larger White community that cheers this on. We live in a racist US society.

Nothing that much has changed from the past. MLK’s ‘dream’ is still a dream and not any reality. That is the answer to Why?

For Black Americans especially there is no national security under the so-called national security state. Instead, it is a state of criminal injustice Blacks live under and promises of change for the better cannot be fed when all the recent changes have been for the worse. Racial injustice cannot be disappeared, when class injustice is the norm.

Greens and the energy companies

Posted on by
Reply

Everybody says they’re for helping out the environment these days, and yet nobody seems to be for protecting the environment that much. After all, who is going to say they are for dumping a pile of personal refuse into the middle of the city park, so to speak?

The most prolific talkers about the need to save the environment are the supporters of the world wide Green Party Movement. This political movement was formed because neither the Marxists nor the capitalists of the world seemed to take the issue seriously enough. Still, today the real issue is, does the Green Movement itself take saving the environment all that seriously? Unfortunately I think that the answer is really… NO, it does not. Why is that conclusion warranted?

Let’s take a look at the energy companies and the Green Movement, for example, and what do all the Green supporters always seem to advocate? They basically seem to advocate nothing. They usually talk about finding new non-polluting energy sources and turning to that as replacement for oil, coal, and nuclear. They advocate that individuals use less energy personally. They advocate less personal consumerism, but they don’t advocate much any real change in the structure of who runs the energy businesses, which is in private hands.
Is that really advocating for protecting the environment in a serious manner?

These energy companies are monstrous in size and are the major multi-nationals in the world. Can their structure just be allowed to stay as it is now, and the earth can be protected by that? Are these energy companies in private hands going to respond to reason and turn to ‘clean’ fuels in lesser amounts? We have to keep in mind that the rest of the multi-nationals demand humongous amounts of energy to be supplied to them for production, transportation, and sales.

Demanding that individuals reduce personal consumption while humongous multi-nationals should merely remain organized as they are is not a serious plan to combat ecological disintegration. Where is the Green Movement’s call to take these companies out of private hands and control their management so that profit making is not their single orientation? Have we missed something here, because allowing private ownership of multi-national energy corporations is not going to conserve Earth?

The Greens have to do what many countries have had to do in the past to be a movement that can seriously change the world. Many countries when confronted by huge multi-nationals that wanted to merely loot national resources and make a profit off that, nationalized these companies. They took them over and took back some of the loot taken into private hands by the super rich. It was necessary to do so, just as it is still necessary to do this with today’s humongous energy conglomerates. In short, the Green Movement must stop just making demands that individual peons change their consumer habits, and demand that energy multi-nationals be nationalized.

The Green Movement, to save Earth’s ecology, has to change from being a group of nice individuals talking intellectually about good things, and become a Movement that has serious demands that can actually effect serious change if implemented. Nationalize the energy multi-nationals now!

Think that costs too much in the long run? Then think some about how these companies have directed the spending of $2 1/2 trillion dollars PLUS into occupying Iraq and Afghanistan? Save some money and help save the planet from non-sustainable production directed by private owners looting Earth for private profit.

Bio-fuels destroy land

Posted on by
1

We are living the end of cheap oil, and bio-fuels are being proposed by multinational corporations and the Pentagon as an ecologically sound alternative to fossil fuels. But are they really?

When we factor in the conditions of the already degraded landscape of modern industrial agriculture we can see that bio-fuels will accelerate the destruction of land without being able to put a significant dent in energy needs.

George Monbiot addresses this issue some in his commentary The Western Appetite for Biofuels Is Causing Starvation in the Poor World Or check out this United Nations report.

We must be careful when the mass wasters of natural resources get behind a supposedly GREEN ‘solution’. We must ask ourselves if their ‘reforms’ and solutions’ actually improve things, or will they just lead us deeper into the abyss of economic and ecological collapse the world now faces?

Silencers

Posted on by
2

Did Blackwater sneak silencers into Iraq? That’s a good question, because silencers are used mainly by snipers. Is this the true face of bringing ‘democracy’ to Iraq?

Is sniping using silencers done by a private Pentagon- contracted corporation of death squad personnel what Iraq is all about for the US government at this point? Yes, it is certainly so. What else can one expect from a government that loves ‘water-boarding’ its captives so?

That and rendering. Dictionary meaning of ‘to render’ is ‘to try out oil from fat, blubber, etc., by melting.’ ‘Rendering’, a favorite phrase for US government death squad work. Yes, the US government, Pentagon, and Blackwater would be using silencers, too. America’s face to the world.

Darfur

Posted on by
1

Darfur AID not sanctionsYesterday’s Colorado College rally (October 29) by the interventionist group, ‘Save Darfur’, was quite an educational event. There, we got to see a train load of comfortable American speakers demand that we begin an economic war against a Fourth World country, Sudan, to be carried out by US corporations and the US government.

How could anybody be against that, their puzzled faces questioned those few of us that were there with signs against the increasing US military presence in Africa? Don’t you want to help the people of Darfur? As a matter of fact, we do, and that is precisely why we oppose groups like ‘Save Darfur’. They do not advocate economic assistance to Africans, but rather they advocate ‘policing’ them and dominating them from Washington D.C.

Not a word was said about opposing AFICICOM, the new Pentagon intervenionist command center designed to terrorize Africa. Not a word was said about the US use of Ethiopian troops to invade Somalia and overthrow the government there. The Eritrean government is predicting an attack on their country backed by the US government since they opposed, and continue to oppose, US actions against the people of Somalia. Not a word was said against US military aggression in Africa at the rally.

The mention of the US genocide against the Iraqi people met a shout from the crowd to ‘stay on focus’ about Darfur. Nobody talked about the need to end the US occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq by the Pentagon. Nobody talked about the genocide of the Palestinians by the combined US and Israeli governments’ aggression. Not a word was said against the what is being done in Gaza and Lebanon, Pakistan and Iran by current US foreign policy. Not a word was said in opposition to the so called ‘War on Terror’, a made-in-the-US war that breeds terror, and celebrates terror and torture everywhere. Not a word was said against US government torture and rendition of POWs to be tortured by other countries.

Instead, we were exhorted by the speakers to begin a campaign to blame China for African bloodshed! This campaign is to be brought to bear on the Sudanese government and China from the countries that have terrorized Africans for centuries! Nobody in the pro interventionist rally crowd seemed to see anything much wrong with this? Instead they acted as if their actions were some how saintly and divine.

They talked about genocide a lot, though even Jimmy Carter has just declared most recently that the killings in Sudan do not meet the defintion of being a genocide. We agree. See the Christiian Science Monitor report ‘Elders’ criticize West’s response to situation in Darfur…Brahimi says West ‘pampered’ rebels, while Carter calls US’s use of term ‘genocide’ to describe violence ‘unhelpful.’ We too want to see the civil war and bloodshed in Sudan to come to an end, but do not agree with the activities of the group ‘Save Darfur’.

The US has spent at least $2.5 trillion in tearing apart Iraq and Afghanistan. We call on the US to spend that sort of money to end poverty, war, and disease in Africa. Why isn’t ‘Save Darfur’ doing the same? Instead they are calling for troops to be sent in, economic war to be begun against an impoverished country, and blame to be cast on the developing country of China. We find this to be shameful, and say that the Peace Movement should not put its stamp of approval on this campaign by the misnamed ‘Save Darfur’.

Peace Now. Spend the war budget on human needs. End the bloodshed by holding our own government responsible, instead of calling for it to increase its intervention into other countries’ affairs. We demand that the US start an economic aid package, without strings attached, that gives billions of dollars of reparations for the crimes that our government has done to Africans over several centuries. Forgive all of Africa’s foreign debt now. That’s how you help the people of Darfur, not by urging US power plays to control African resources.

Pikes Peak Justice and Peace Commission must demand no more US intervention into the affairs of other nations.

We need to do this again- together we must win!

Posted on by
Reply

Thirty eight years ago the US had its largest demonstration ever and we need to do this again. Two million marched to demand an end to the Vietnam War on October 15. It was The Vietnam Moratorium of 1969

Like then just like now, Americans demonstrating in the streets will not alone be enough. Ultimately it is the resistance of the Iraqis like it was with the resistance of the Vietnamese that will force the US to desist, and finally to withdraw. Today, we salute the heroes of the Iraqi Resistance. You will win the independence of the Iraqi nation from US government control through your sacrifices.

We as Americans owe a huge debt to the Iraqi people as we do to the Vietnamese people. We have allowed tyranny to once again prevail inside the US, our own country, and you have suffered disproportionately because of it.

Your struggle on your own behalf works for our own behalf, too. Thank you. We owe you, the Iraqi people, more than we can ever repay you. From your Resistance we will build our own Resistance, and we shall eventually together stop our corporations from destroying the entire planet. Together we must win!

The Woolseys- a Mom and Pop War Profiteering Team

Posted on by
1

Suzanne Woolsey is vice chair of the Colorado College Board of Directors. Her husband will be speaking this Thursday at the school, and all three of their kids graduated from there. The following opinion piece by Evelyn Pringle is reprinted in whole below.

January 17, 2005
Mom & Pop War Profiteering Team – Woolseys
By Evelyn Pringle
Miamisburg, Ohio

The Defense Policy Board (DPB) is a hand-picked group of 30 people that advises Bush administration officials on matters such as whether and when to go to war, or not. The current group was selected by Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Douglas Feith, and approved by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. Everyone who is anyone in the arms and defense industry knows that palling up to DPB members is the ticket to getting a Pentagon contract.

Shortly after the war in Iraq began, the April 10, 2003 New York Times pointed out that several board members stood to benefit financially from the war. It reported that the Center for Public Integrity (CPI) documented that 9 of the members were “linked to companies that have won more than $76 billion in defense contracts in 2001 and 2002.”

Promote War & Garner Positions For Profits

One of the members mentioned who stood to profit was R. James Woolsey. In addition to being a member of the DPB, Woolsey also sits on Navy and CIA advisory boards; and he is also a founding member of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq (CLI), a private group that was specifically set up by Bush in 2002, to find ways to increase public support for a war against Iraq.

Let me say right here and now that I think bold lines are crossed when people like Woolsey, who promote a specific war, financially benefit from their successful promotion. There should be a law that requires a standard recusal from all war profits by any policy advisor who advocates sending our young men and women off to die in that same war.

And I don’t know about anybody else, but I’ve never heard of our government forming a group of promoters to rally support for a war before. I dare anyone to try and convince me that this war profiteering scheme wasn’t well planned and managed from the get-go.

Mom & Pop Team Of War Profiteers

I would rate the husband and wife team of James and Suzanne Woolsey up there as one of the most blatant examples of war profiting that I‘ve ever seen. They both remain policy advisors on Iraq, even though they both work for private firms that do business there. James has long wanted to use US military might to transform the Middle East. “And he has pushed for war with Iraq as hard as anyone, even before the terrorist attacks of Sep 11, 2001,” according to the April 8, 2003 Global Policy Forum.

That’s right – long before 9/11. In January 1998, James signed the now infamous letter to Clinton from the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) calling for regime change in Iraq (which Clinton trashed). In 1998, he also successfully lobbied to pass the Iraq Liberation Act (ILA), which allocated nearly $100 million for the Iraqi opposition, mainly the Iraq National Congress (INC), headed by none other than Ahmed Chalabi.

9/11 – Gift To Profiteering Team

The lobby for the war in Iraq immediately moved into high gear after 9/11. Within days, the DPB convened to discuss how they could use 9/11 to justify a war in Iraq. James was sent overseas to try to find a link between Saddam and bin Laden. He returned with the tale that an unnamed source had told the Czech intelligence that in April, 2001, he had observed a meeting between the lead 9/11 skyjacker and an Iraqi agent in Prague.

Even though the tale was deemed not credible by US, British, Israeli, and French, intelligence agencies, it became the basis of a major neo-con disinformation campaign against Saddam on cable news shows and editorial pages in major US newspapers.

James himself wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal that said a foreign state had aided Al Qaeda in preparing the 9/11 attacks and pointed to Iraq as the prime suspect. In fact, James even went so far to allege that Saddam was behind the 1993 WTC bombing and the anthrax letters sent out after 9/11. In large part, the propaganda campaign was successful. A poll conducted in late 2002, showed that over half of those polled believed that Saddam was somehow linked to 9/11.

Woolsey & Chalabi – Secret Long-Time Buddies

Just when I think I have seen every dirty filthy angle by which money can be made in the war profiteering trade, something else turns up. I recently discovered a little tid-bit that I was unaware of. In addition to getting $100 million tax dollars allocated for the INC and Ahmed Chalabi in 1998, James also became lawyer and adviser to Iraq’s “President in Waiting” in the same year.

With the help of the media, James must have forgot to mention this obvious conflict of interest while he was alleging collusion in 9/11 between Chalabi’s enemy Saddam and bin Laden. This relationship definitely should have been made public before the war began because of its relevance to the truth or falsity of the justification given for waging war in Iraq to begin with.

Back in 1998, Chalabi sought legal help from Woolsey to secure the release of 6 of his INC associates from the detention center in Guam, even though the CIA said they were threats to US interests. James successfully freed Chalabi’s minions and mowed a path for the so-called Iraqi defectors to feed bogus information to US intelligence teams.

The false information about WMDs and collusion between Saddam and bin Laden, that originated from the relationship of Chalabi and Woolsey, along with the resulting diversion of financial and military resources to Iraq, and away from the real terrorist bin Laden, has left the US with a limited ability to project military power anywhere else in the world. Any unexpected conflict would be a disaster with the military so overstretched in Iraq, and it looks like in large part, we can thank Woolsey and Chalabi for this predicament.

And as it turns out the CIA was right. One of men Woolsey freed, Aras Habib Karim, went on to become Chalabi’s Chief of Intelligence, and has since leaked classified information to Iran, and is currently under investigation by the FBI. I wonder if James is representing the guy now?

James & Booz Allen Hamilton

At the same time that they were advocating for war in Iraq, its more than obvious that James and Suzanne Woolsey were positioning themselves for a future in defense-related firms, with an eye on the anticipated war profits.

James is a shining example of how the revolving door policy works in Washington. Although he left his position as director of the CIA in 1995, he remained a senior advisor on intelligence and national security policies.

And he also now works for several private firms that do business in Iraq. According to Citizens for Public Integrity, in July, 2002, James joined Booz Allen Hamilton, a consulting firm that “had contracts worth more than $680 million” that year.

In May, 2003, in his capacity as a vice president of Booz Allen Hamilton, James was a featured speaker at a seminar entitled “Companies on the Ground: The Challenge for Business in Rebuilding Iraq.” He spoke of the potential business opportunities in the reconstruction of Iraq and how Bush planned to steer the contracts to US companies. Approximately 80 corporate executives paid $1100 to listen to what he had to say.

May, 2003 was only 2 months after the war began. If not for his advisory positions in the Bush administration, how would James possibly be able to put together a investor seminar with information on how to make money in Iraq?

In addition, “Booz Allen is a subcontractor for a $75-million telecommunications project in Iraq. The company does extensive work for the Defense Department as well. Recently, the Navy awarded it $14 million in contracts,” according to the Aug 15, 2004 LA Times. In true Dick Cheney style, James said in an interview that “he had not been involved in Booz Allen’s Iraq contracts,” the Times reports. But then it really doesn’t matter whether he was involved in a particular contract or not, because as a Vice President of the firm, he benefits from profits resulting from all contracts.

Besides his recent statement to the Times belies the title of his own May, 2003 seminar which was: “Companies on the Ground: The Challenge for Business in Rebuilding Iraq.” What is he trying to say? That he never got paid for speaking at that seminar? That none of the 80 executives that attended ever contacted Booz work in Iraq? Yea right. James & Paladin Capital Group

James positioned himself all over the map. He is now a principal in the Paladin Capital Group, another defense-related firm. In part, here is how the firm describes itself on its web site, Paladin Homeland Security Fund, L.P. Investment Strategy

As widely reported in public media, billions of dollars are being appropriated by the United States and foreign governments for replenishment of military stockpiles, deployment of new means to create more secure societies and creation of new standards, equipment, technologies and policies for coping with and recovering from the myriad forms of terrorism and attack. … the General Partner believes that the Federal and State governments … and indeed governments throughout the world, will look to … private enterprise to address these issues. The General Partner believes that the private sector thus will look to expend billions of dollars to execute defense and security plans for security in the public sector and to deploy growth equity to produce the products and services that non-governmental organizations will require.

Fund Management

Operation of the Fund starts with an experienced management team. … additional individuals who have prominent and distinguished records in relevant fields, including security, defense and information and technology sciences, have associated with Paladin Capital in connection with the Fund. These additional principals of the Fund include R. James Woolsey, …

The Fund’s Principals have extensive domestic and international experience in fund investments and in originating, underwriting, closing, monitoring and exiting investments similar to those that are proposed for the Fund. The additional Principals, including Mr. Woolsey, … have extensive and distinguished track records in service within the security, defense and related fields.

Investment Guidelines Characteristics

Small to medium-sized, worker-friendly companies with the following characteristics: Must relate to defense, prevention, coping or recovery from disaster. Dual use: commercial and government applicability for products and services.

Surely no one could ever allege a possible conflict of interest between James serving on 3 defense-related boards (Navy, DPB, & CIA) with the US government and his involvement with this firm.

Global Options – James & DPB Member Livingstone

James is also plugged into Global Options, which is headed by his fellow DPB member Neil Livingstone. In addition to sitting on the DPB, Livingstone has served as a Pentagon and State Department advisor and has long called for overthrowing Saddam.

Livingstone was already promoting war against Iraq back in 1993, when he wrote an editorial for Newsday that said the US “should launch a massive covert program designed to remove Hussein.” Well 11 years later, it looks like he finally got his wish, and just like his pal James, Livingstone is a regular speaker at investment seminars on Iraq.

Global Options provides contacts and consulting services to firms doing business in Iraq and “offers a wide range of security and risk management services,” according to its website. Although James admits that he is a paid advisor at Global Options, he again says the work he does at the firm does not involve Iraq. And of course I believe him (not).

Suzanne – Better Half Of Profiteering Team

From 1993 – 2003, Suzanne was an executive with the National Academies, an institution that advises the government on science, engineering, and medicine. There’s probably no big money to be made in that position and that’s probably what motivated Suzanne seek a more potentially profitable government position.

And she sure found one. According to the Aug 15, 2004 LA Times, Suzanne is a trustee of a little-known arms consulting group that had access to senior Pentagon leaders directing the Iraq war.

Although she had zero experience with military or national security matters, in 2000 she became a trustee at the Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA), a nonprofit corporation paid to do research for the Pentagon. During the attack against Iraq, the IDA provided senior Pentagon officials with assessments of the operation.

Through this position, Suzanne had unlimited insider access to valuable information. For instance, the Times reported that in a June 3, 2003, briefing, Brigadier General Robert Cone of the Army, described the group‘s operation. ”This team did business” within the Army Central Command ”on a daily basis, by observing meeting and planning sessions, attending command updates, watching key decisions being made, watching problems being solved, and generally being provided unrestricted access to the business of the conduct of this war,” Cone said, according to a transcript of the session.

The question is did Suzanne use the info to benefit the family business? I’ll let the reader be the judge. She was appointed to “Fluor’s board in January 2004, while Fluor and a partner, AMEC, were competing for two federal contracts to do reconstruction work in Iraq. A little more than a month after she was named, Fluor and AMEC got both contracts, with a combined value of $1.6 billion,” according to the LA Times.

Although a Fluor official refused to discuss why Suzanne was chosen for the job, the official confirmed SEC filings that show, “Fluor pays outside directors (like Suzanne) $40,000 a year, plus stock options and additional fees for attending meetings,” the Times reports.

As for the financial worth of her stock in the company, its looking good. Fluor’s stock has risen steadily since the war in Iraq began. The Times reports that in August, 2004, it was $45 a share, up from a little more than $30 a share in March 2003. Reports filed with the SEC show Suzanne owns 1,500 shares of Fluor stock.

With Fluor making a bundle, it only stands to reason that all the more money can be funneled back into the Woolsey piggy bank. SEC filings show that Fluor reported that its revenue for the first quarter of the current fiscal year from work in Iraq totaled ”approximately $190 million. There was no work in Iraq in the comparable period in 2003,” reports the Times.

I would be willing to bet that any defense related firm would have given an arm and a leg to find out what was being said during those IDA meetings and war planning sessions. Oh of course I’m not suggesting that Suzanne was feeding Fluor information before she came on board and that‘s why she was hired. But at the same time, its sure difficult to think of any other reason why she would be hired.

Here’s another profiteering trick that I would never have thought of. Suzanne even managed to get paid while she gathered the insider information. Tax records show that in 2003, she was paid $11,500 for serving on the IDA. Who wouldn’t want this gal on their team?

The overlapping public and private associations of the Woolsey’s are merely 2 examples of the all too familiar pattern in the Bush administration, in which people who play key roles in advising officials on policies, are involving themselves financially with firms in related fields. And it should be noted that the profiteering is certainly not limited to war policies. Its rampant in every area of policy within the Bush administration.

Long-Term War – Thriving Family Business

Hands down, James should be awarded a plaque for being the #1 Iraq War Monger, and it should say: “What could be more sickening than a war-hungry non-combatant? A war-hungry non-combatant reaping profit from the blood of slaughtered women, children and men of Iraq,” (Bill Berkowitz).

War-hungry James is still hard at it; promoting war for as far as the eye can see. On August 15, 2004, the LA Times reported that, “Last month, Woolsey appeared at a … news conference to announce the creation of a group called the Committee of the Present Danger, which he said would attempt to focus public attention on the threat ”to the US and the civilized world from Islamic terrorism.”

On September 29, 2004 he participated in a forum entitled: “World War IV: Why We Fight, Whom We Fight, How We Fight,” sponsored by the Committee on Present Danger and the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. I wonder how many people who went to the polls on Nov 2, 2004, realized that a vote for Bush meant rubber-stamping more of World War IV?

Plan To Destroy and Conquer Iraq

The Iraqi citizens had no say-so in the Bush administration’s decision to bomb the hell out of their country and the Iraqi people, now suffering the most as a result of the war, are not allowed to be involved in making decisions about the reconstruction of Iraq.

In comments that could have been made yesterday, Naomi Klein described what would happen to the Iraqis under Bush’s war plan in the April 14, 2003 issue of the Guardian, “A people, starved and sickened by sanctions, then pulverized by war, is going to emerge from this trauma to find that their country had been sold out from under them. They will also discover that their new-found “freedom” – for which so many of their loved ones perished – comes pre-shackled by irreversible economic decisions that were made in boardrooms while the bombs were still falling. They will then be told to vote for their new leaders, and welcomed to the wonderful world of democracy. ”

Every one of her predictions has come true and Iraqis may be worse off than we realize. Klein reports that on October 13, 2004, Iraq’s “health ministry issued a harrowing report on its post-invasion health crisis, including outbreaks of typhoid and tuberculosis and soaring child and mother mortality rates,” while at the same time the “State Department announced that $3.5 billion for water, sanitation and electricity projects was being shifted to security.”

How can anybody in their right mind expect the Iraqi people to be grateful to America for all this good fortune?

Stop The War Profiteering

It seems to me that we’ve taken our eye off the ball here. Granted, the web of corruption is bad enough in itself, but too little consideration is being given to the Iraqi lives at stake. Every profiteering dollar bilked or wasted is a dollar that could be spent on improving Iraq’s basic living conditions like getting water, sanitation and electricity up and running again, or training Iraqi police and military forces, or developing jobs for Iraqis.

Instead our tax dollars are being funneled back to profiteers like the Woolseys, over the backs of not only our dead soldiers; but over 100,000 dead Iraqis as well. The administration had the chance to rebuild Iraq, and at the same time earn the trust of the Iraqi people, but instead it chose to rape and torture innocent Iraqi prisoners, raid the reconstruction fund, and deprive the Iraqis of everything essential to normal human life. The blatant acts of corruption by the occupational authority and US contractors have given the Iraqis every reason under the sun to mistrust the motives of Americans who say they want to help rebuild their country. And how can we expect their opinions to change as long as the obvious corruption continues?

If we ever expect to regain the trust of Iraqis, we have to stop the Woolseys, and others like them, who engage in this filthy, disgusting trade. For starters, I say all Bush war profiteers should be given 2 options: they can either recuse themselves from advising government officials on any matter of national security period, or they can donate all profits made through affiliations with defense-related companies to soldiers wounded in the war and families of soldiers killed in the war.

While this would definitely be a good first step, I won’t hold my breath while waiting to see which option the greedy war-mongers choose.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0501/S00107.htm

Stop Them From Beginning a Terrorist War Against Iran!

Posted on by
3

Woolsey was eight of clubs in the Neocon deck of villainsThis Thursday at Shove Memorial Chapel, a terrorist will be addressing Colorado College students, for that’s what R. James Woolsey is.
 
This ex-director of the CIA and now current Chair of The Committee on the Present Danger (CPD) is one of the leading architects of the Iraq War and Occupation, and is perhaps the most prominent advocate for spreading this American-made disaster into Syria and Iran. In short, he advocates, and has advocated for the longest time, a continual regional war to help better loot Middle East oil for American corporations.

The Committee on the Present Danger is a Right Wing neo-con advocacy group made up from major business and political players in the military-industrial complex. Other infamous co-Chairs of the CPD are George Schultz and Joe Lieberman. It has a long record of supporting continuous warfare based supposedly on ideology, but more so on corrupt commercial and political self interest.

There is a lot of money to be made from The War, and the CPD has backed continual warfare since even when the Cold War was first begun 6 decades ago. Today, it wants us to engage in a ‘Holy War’ with the Muslim World to hide away their own military-industrial machine profit making.

Students, your Colorado College by inviting James Woolsey to address you, is encouraging you to accept the Iraq War, a new war with Iran, and the idea that a nuclear war is winnable under the leadership of the American corporate bloc. They are encouraging you to think that the advocacy of torture and terrorism is perfectly acceptable as real guidelines for American foreign policy.

We urge you to reject these ideas and to demonstrate with us against the presence of this war monger on your campus. We urge you to reject a regional extension of the Iraqi War into neighboring countries.

US out of Iraq and Afghanistan!
No War Against Iran!
Stop spreading US terrorism through a phony ‘war on terrorism!
Bring the Troops Home Now!
R. James Woolsey, Get Off This Campus!

Something that CAN be done about Blackwater

Posted on by
1

A class action suit filed in federal court by US soldiers whose lives are recklessly endangered by the corporation.

Don’t know if anything has been started on that, but it is a workaround,

Also other US civilians working in Iraq.

Since the Bushiites have built an army in Iraq which is immune to American law, immune to Iraqi law, and immune to the UCMJ, that leaves Civil Law. Soldiers are forbidden from suing the Army, at all ever peiriod.

If the Pentagoons say that’s not true, they lie once again. They have “legal remedies” that would have you filling out papers for years before you could file a single civil court motion. But they can hide behind that process and say, “Look, we DO have a process for the soldiers to file suit, all they have to do is roll this boulder up this hill or stand in the middle of the river Lethes and drink a mouthful of water, just the rock is going to roll all the way down to the bottom just before you get it to the top and the river is going to lower in level every time you try to bend down”

But Blackwater, just chock full of people who were US military before, and had each therefore taken that Oath to Uphold and Defend the Constitution Of The United States, against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic”, … Imagine, if you will, the CEO being required to take the stand. And explain how his actions and those of his subordinates were actually legal under any set of laws, OR, conform to that oath in any way.

Even Mr Bush’s directive of June 17, when he said he had unitary authority to freeze any bank account and seize any property of any person or CORPORATION in the world who impeded the rebuilding of Iraq, can be used against them.

US Civilians in Iraq can file the same type of action, include the soldiers in their action, AND name Bush and Cheney and the Pentagoons as co-defendants.

James Woolsey is CIA, not a Green

Posted on by
Reply

James Woolsey, ex CIA director under Clinton, is the managing director of Paladin Capital Group, which has multi Pentagon contracts supplying surveillance and military equipment.

They push themselves off as being eco friendly via company investment in the production of ethanol. See Go Ethanol.

You can get an idea of the type of pap that Woolsey will be spouting this week at Colorado College from this article, An interview with geo-green James Woolsey, former head of CIA. Woolsey and Paladin Capital Group is just the latest of the corporate fad where really odious corporations try to pass themselves off as being eco-friendly when they are the complete opposite. Continue reading →

Beware of Hillary Care!

Posted on by
Reply

The local business idiots’ rag here in Colorado Springs (The Gazette) has been warning us all about something they call “Hillary Care’. It’s socialized medicine they scream!

The editors of the Right Wing chain mislabeled ‘Freedom Publications’ of which The Gazette is one sheet of, even hate enrolling the poorer of the nation’s children into a government paid health care plan. That would be the first step toward a World Communist government in their opinion. But just what is Hillary Care anyway? In fact, it’s the same thing it was the first time around, or in other words, it’s a sucker punch to the general public.

The original health care proposals by Bill Clinton and wide were a band aid meant to get infected, and infected the American public’s wound became. Things just got worse and the Clintons walked away playing like they were visionaries before their time. Hardly. What their proposals did was set into motion yet further cannibalization of American medical and nursing care by the insurance companies. And they sat by and sat by and sat by.

Hillary has no plan for a single payer system guaranteed by the government such as today vets and some senior citizens get, and a few kids under Chips programs, too. She is not going to propose that the nation be put under one umbrella of equal care equally applied. She is just as much for tiered care under corporate control as George W. Bush is. But she is running her campaign as if this were not true.

Do not get sucker punched by the Clintons again. If you vote for her thinking that at least she will reform the way medical care is delivered in the US you will be voting for change, all the while guaranteeing that it will not come in a way you will like or want. She wants insurance control over your health, not taking away their control over you and your family.

Here is a well written article about the Clintons’ proposals. What went wrong with the Clinton plan? Health Care non-reform the last time The answer is that nothing really went wrong from ‘the vision’ that the Clintons had back then. The insurance companies kept running the entire show.

After opposition to reform quickened as surely it had to, while still in office they dropped any opposition to the big medical corporations they might have ever had, just like it was one big hot potato for them. Hillary is not about to oppose the insurance companies today any more than back then, and is a poor, poor choice to hang hopes on for even the most meager reform of the US Lack of Health System. Vote for her if you want a dirty band aid to be applied while actually wanting and needing major surgery. Hillary is quite a little sugar pill.