Black Bloc-headed Anarchism and the police team up to murder British man

The Black Bloc Anarchists have to be some of the most block-headed people around. It is simply impossible to differentiate between many of them and the police themselves, as both contrive to push innocent people into being victimized by police violence so as later to say that some demonstration or other was ‘radical’ and ‘violent’.

The Black Bloc dominated demonstration is always one of superficiality and most often times centered on petty vandalism and petty loser bouts against the police. Here on film is how the police and Block Bloc teamed up to murder one man, Ian Tomlinson. Ian Tomlinson death: Guardian video reveals police attack on man who died at G20 protest

Who Controls The Black Bloc Anarchists? The press would have us think that it is merely some bozo or other that does. The Evening Standard newspaper in their report ‘Black Bloc’ anarchists to hijack summit protests using shields and truncheons blamed the G20 London Black Bloc group on some individual lunatic named Alessio Lunghi, but the real control of these ‘ultra radical’ dumb-shits might just probably be with the police themselves?

It is important for us in the US to reject completely this type of confrontational idiocy being pushed by the Black Bloc Anarchists and the police. Those who tell us that it is ultra radical and effective as a protest method are just lunatics. What this mindset actually gets us, is smaller and smaller demonstrations, since normal people begin to fear to show up at events where they most likely will be tear gassed, arrested, or hurt in other ways.

JUST SAY NO to deliberate confrontational tactics with the police! It was the police themselves that hijacked the G20 protests, but the Black Bloc Anarchists gave them a helping hand. There is nothing radical about that at all.

The supposedly civilized world’s ‘Sewer rat children’

deported-children.jpg Roman police find sewer children but the USA leads the way in having ‘sewer rat children’ in its fields, jails, and other nooks and crannies. Thousands of Deported Children Abandoned at Mexican Border, and that’s just the Mexican-US Border, but the US also has Mexico doing its dirty work for them at the Mexican-Guatemalan Border, too.

The following is a youtube video of al jazeera’s coverage of the problem …Mexico’s deported children

Informal Denver bloggers convention

Incognito bloggers at Churchill Trial

Academic Press stringerDENVER- Blog wonks filled the courtroom today to witness the closing arguments of Freedom of Speech on trial. The twin Rocky Mountain News fiends were on hand, as were plenty of their blogosphere stringers. Can you help us put names to some of these faces? Confidential emails to editor@notmytribe will serve just fine. We have a most benevolent motive to shed light on nocturnal anti-socials.

Isn’t it awkward, that those in support of Ward Churchill, to draw the battle lines in terms of this trial, have no qualms being represented publically, but those opposed, even as they think themselves to represent the mainstream, are fiercely protective of their anonymity? How weirdly weak of them.

PART DEUX
Alright, it didn’t begin innocently. During the first courtroom break today, I was aiming my camera at the video media grotto, because my earlier photo had been taken with a cellphone, but also so that I might have a pretense to shoot wide and grab an image or two of some heretofore faceless note-takers, when a woman in the vicinity strode over to ask that I not take her picture.

I noted that I was sure her back had been turned, if even she was in the frame, but it mattered not, and she insisted that I show her the picture and then delete it in her presence. I acquiesced reluctantly, only because I had better things to do than argue with a “lawyer” about what right she had to ask me to do anything. But it didn’t end there. When I moved to intercept a friend with whom I urgently needed to speak before the break was over, the woman followed me, insisting that I prove that I hadn’t other exposures in which she was featured. She wouldn’t stop interrupting until I had found others, and deleted them, after which she walked away, her head turned back, facing me with a mock smile and wave, as if to verify that I wasn’t trying to take another picture of her back.

I thought the strange episode was over, until I reentered the courtroom to see the woman point me out to a companion, both of them seated in the front row reserved for the press, from which they alternated giving me cold stares and taking snapshots with a cellphone. WTF? At the finish of that session, the woman approached me again, wanting to apologize for the rude tact she’s taken. I accepted, but it seemed she also wanted to explain.

I had pressing contacts to pursue, but she followed me again, and grew vocally agitated anew, this time that I would not stop to hear her story. By the time we exited the courtroom, her harangue had grown embarrassing. I no longer had her image on my camera, she knew that, what claim did she have to detain me a moment further and impede what little courtroom social time remained?

When I finally turned, I had my camera in hand and began to take flash pictures as I asked her to please leave me alone. Instead she and her friend closed in, trying to block my lens, yelling until you could call it a melee and others were taking our picture, and Ward Churchill was emerging from the courtroom on the sidelines.

Ward Churchill trial

Now I had plenty of head shots, and shouted explanations –coordinated between the two friends– that the original objection was due to her sensitivity about her fat butt, and a fresh request that I show sympathy for her awful complexion. In the light of the crowd’s scrutiny I was able to walk away, but next they sought out the courtroom officer to request that I surrender my photographs. He wasn’t unprincipled enough to assert that I was obligated to do that, and he was satisfied that I wield my camera with more discretion lest I accidentally record an image of a juror, giving cause for a retrial. I accepted his advice, but the two shrews kept up their complaining to him until we left the courthouse for lunch.

her aggressive friendAfter lunch the strange woman kept to the media circles. I’d noticed a lanyard about her neck, but whatever ID hung upon it she’d stuffed into a front pocket, perhaps to conceal an identity, perhaps to pretend it was a press pass. Later in the courtroom I noticed her again, this time beyond the audience area, across the banister, chatting with two courtroom workers.

I’ve no idea her story. Does it strike you odd? Why would anyone presume their photograph was going to end up online. Now, with ample cause, in response to harassment.

Mimi Wesson has um big penis envy

CU Professor Marianne Wesson on her rideDENVER- And it’s a strange lot of penises she covets: there’s Bob Guccione, OJ Simpson, Michael Jackson, Bill Clinton and… Ward Churchill. In a private email in the midst of the CU firestorm over Churchill’s 9/11 essay, Wesson compared the “thoroughly unpleasant” Churchill to a pornographer, wife-batterer-killer, pedophile and cheat –as attorney David Lane reminded us in his closing arguments today. But it wasn’t the email that tipped me off, nor her fiction-writer persona promotional photo on the motorcycle. It was something which Marianne “My friends call me Mimi” did on her first day of testimony, early in the trial. When she left the witness stand, Wesson did not return to her seat, nor to the chairs located by the defense table for CU-aligned witnesses. During her break, Churchill-slayer Mimi Wesson chose the chair directly behind Ward Churchill.

Did anyone else remark on this? Even though Wesson stubbornly tried to project an adult impartiality about the case, as would befit the chairperson of a committee deciding another faculty member’s fate, off the stand Wesson couldn’t resist the urge which it appears drove her to solicit the committee chair position in the first place: to face “male celebrity wrongdoers” and take them down.

In the courtroom Wesson denied agreeing to the committee appointment only with the proviso that she be in charge, but her earlier videotaped deposition recorded otherwise. By her own account, Wesson had asked to be chairperson of the board selected to investigate Churchill. When Wesson blamed a possible stenographer’s error for the inconsistency, Attorney Lane pointed out that the courtroom had just heard her deposition with its own ears.

As a pup fiction writer, and a frequent law commentator on mainstream news programs, it’s clear Wesson welcomes the public eye. During the “All Churchill, all the time” mayhem, maybe she saw an opportunity to pretend to have incited the Churchill lynch mob.

Scrummy leaderI hope Wesson will be remembered for her testimony in this trial, in which the law professor demonstrated she was crafty enough to avoid admitting her prejudice, but couldn’t distance herself from the incriminating grandstanding she’d already done.

The “Wesson Committee” was shown in this trial to have been a hatchet team of academic hacks. Whose foray into Native America Ethnic Studies, purportedly to debunk Ward Churchill’s scolarship, resembled a visit of Ugly Americans to an Indian reservation. With Mimi the Emasculator wanting both to drive and ride shotgun.

Churchill v CU Trial wraps up today

Denver Courthouse in court room sixDENVER- Can it be any easier to be a witness to history? Come to the Denver Courthouse this morning before 9 AM. It’s the large columned building opposite the state capitol. Ascend the imposing steps which rise directly from Civic Center Park. Passing the shortest security line, compared to the four ground floor entrances, take a right and go all the way down the hall. Court Room 6 is where Ward Churchill’s case against the University of Colorado will be put in the jury’s hands today.

Info about the where and how to attend the trial has been sparse, tailored to an audience familiar with Denver court battles perhaps, but do not be deterred. From the address advertised, “1437 Bannock Street,” you could envision any old judicial facility, but this is THE judicial facility, at Denver’s center, and for the last three weeks, the TV News vans give it away.

There is no court employee to answer questions outside. Go in any entrance and from there get to the second floor, and proceed to the NW end. There you’ll see media reporters huddled into a vending machine cranny converted for this occasion into a video feed center. Around the corner is room six.

If court is already in session, there will be nary a peep outside, but don’t hesitate to quietly open the door and circumnavigate the pews. If you still have a hat on, an officer seated directly right of the door will grab you as you enter and let you know to take it off.

The first row is reserved for the media, who spill over into the second row to have access to the power strip. More sit in folding chairs in the rear corners of the room, for the same reason. Laptops abound, and there’s a constant murmur of keyboards clicking. You won’t notice a lull until statements reveal something significant and the keyboardists resume in unison.

Breaks are at 10:30 AM and 3:00 PM or so, with an hour and a half for lunch at noon. Leave a coat to mark your seat, or lose it to whoever returns first. The audience seated in the westward pews have a better view of the witness stand, as from elsewhere you are impeded by the lawyers or their laptops on the podium.

The audience is a largely friendly collection. Most everyone looks like a Churchill supporter, except for the CU representatives who stick to the last SW pew, and the occasional note-taker in the middle and SE rear. The owners of Left Hand Books in Boulder have been there almost everyday, as have Professor Churchill’s family and a number of friends.

You can’t miss it. Colfax and Civic Center Park.
Denver Courthouse

Right Wing Comments, the gift that keeps on giving…

First we’ll get the indignant denials that the War is against Anybody Arabic or similarly dark-skinned and third world…
or that there’s anything Racist or White Man’s Burden about it…

That we’re really only fighting for their Rights and Freedoms…

Then we get some nudnik admitting that he actually enjoyed killing civilians.
That would be two comments in the Unexpurgated Face of War thread.

They say they “gave” us the right to dissent, but when mention is made of Pig Brutality against demonstrators or anybody else who is beaten, chained, falsely charged… for daring to talk back, and like at the St Paddies Day Massacre two years ago not ONE Uniform Clad person actually stood up for our rights…

Sure as shittin’ some RightWing Nutjob will post a comment that we deserved to get beaten down.

And so it goes.

Maybe some of the ones who whine about how we’re “wrong to criticize the Troops and “OUR” leaders and whatever…” instead of trying to force or coerce or cajole or shame US into being silent or cooperative with the Fascist Agenda, get in contact with your right wing freak buddies when they boast about killing civilians.

All the denials and protestations that “The Troops” never committed any atrocities get shot down not by our voice of reason, but by your Right Wing Heroes.

Kind of like Dr Laura Schlesinger, in order to deflect the ChickenHawk label she actually still deserves, offered her own son up as a sacrifice on the Altar to His Satanic Majesty Bush…

Then he posts youtube videos and pictures on his myspace page, and long rants about all the war crimes he was involved in.

The two Marines who killed a puppy by throwing it over a cliff, things like that.

People who don’t seek out their Big-Mouthed Comrades and order or shame THEM into silence have really no moral prerogative to try to tell us how wrong they think we are for simple stating and restating the facts…

Meanwhile, Right Wing Loose-Lip Loonie-toons, thank you.

Your comments are very much appreciated.

DC March on the Pentagon was fueled by a promising alternative energy: youth

Youth and Student ANSWER Coalition march on the Pentagon March 21
WASHINGTON DC- Speakers were still entertaining an impatient crowd, and coffin carriers were mobilizing for the March to the Pentagon, when from the west came the Black Bloc. Bicycle cops in royal blue lycra scrambled to shepherd the group’s healthy gallop as they appeared from over the hill to kick the parade to a sudden start. They virtually led the parade over the bridge, until organizers prevailed upon the interlopers to allow the veterans groups to resume the lead, as planned. But it would not be the last initiative from the Anarchists.

(Click on image for better quality, wider crop)

1. THE MARCH
ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
Black Bloc gallops into lead position, abruptly starting parade.

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
International Socialist Organization pass Lincoln Memorial

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
Peace groups from Vermont to Georgia

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
Youth and Student A.N.S.W.E.R.

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
West from the Washington Monument

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
Hezbollah crosses Arlington Memorial Bridge

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
Campus Antiwar Network

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
Across the Potomac

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
To the Pentagon

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
Code Pink paraded the parade

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
To military industrial complex in Crystal City

2. INTERRUPTION
ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
At a narrowing of the route at the Boeing building, several students blocked the march with a plastic barrier.

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
Raising questions about the gentrified nature and self-policing demeanor of the event organizers and participants.

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
The Black Bloc honored the picket line, thus the Campus Antiwar Network and following groups were brought to a halt.

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
When the Black Bloc decided to move on to next actions, the march resumed.

2b. INTERRUPTION
ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

Marie Walden, March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

Eric Verlo, March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
At the first hint of misbehavior, stocky 40-something “videographers” in undercover protest garb were pointing their cameras into the noses of the black-clad participants.

3. MESSAGE VARIETY
ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
Why explain? You won’t listen.

4. COUNTER PROTEST
ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
On the Pentagon lawn, near signs pointing to the “Pentagon Memorial,” white folk waited with the usual anti-antiwar slogans.

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
Megaphone versus megaphone.

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
That simple.

5. CONFRONTATION
ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009
Police in riot gear await march destination at KBR.

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

6. COLORADANS FOR PEACE
ANSWER March on the Pentagon 2009

ANSWER March on the Pentagon 2009

Eric Verlo, March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

Eric Verlo, March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

Eric Verlo, March on the Pentagon, Mar 21, 2009

(Still more photos to follow…)

Driving Miss McIntosh

Marjorie K. McintoshDENVER- At first the testimony from a CU committee member who voted to dismiss Ward Churchill seemed utterly damning. Dr. Marjorie McIntosh, retired Distinguished Professor of history, gave her testimony by video because she would be lecturing in England at the time of the Churchill v CU trial. She came across like a wise elder, her scolding kind and maternal. She had me convinced that Ward should be sent to his room, but for an indelible pallor that began to infect her testimony as the retired professor grew tired under scrutiny. And like the history of 14th Century England which was her specialization, it became inescapably evident that Marjorie McIntosh was very, very white.

At face value, Dr. McIntosh’s quiet authoritative demeanor seemed beyond reproach, expressing as she did her support for Ward Churchill’s right to speak. McIntosh described how her father was a dean at U of M who reputedly stood up to Senator McCarthy. She explained her initial reluctance to be party to a Right Wing attempt to “get” Professor Churchill. At first Ms. McIntosh seemed as earnest as your own grandmother, if your grandmother was also a well spoken distinguished academic.

But the cracks in Ms. McIntosh’s maternal concern showed themselves even before the plaintiff’s cross-examination. When Professor McIntosh described herself as “fair and impartial,” it was in contrast, she offered, to Professor Churchill for example, who she understands may not be impartial or neutral.

Partiality
Under cross-examination McIntosh went further. To paraphrase: “Professor Curchill is not a trained historian, he has an MA, he is a scholar who writes on historical subjects. He presents himself as a specialist, but he does not have that training.”

By contrast we are meant to infer, McIntosh is a Distinguished Professor, rewarded for having had a “national impact” on scholarship, and having produced work which has “directed” consequential research.

Questioned about the significance of tenure, McIntosh described the rigorous qualifications which she met. But with a smile she would not vouch for a uniformity of high standards at CU, since, obviously… She held her tongue as if too polite to say it: Ward Churchill was a glaring example of the opposite.

A second indication of Dr. McIntosh’s personal bias might be suggested by how she characterized committee chairwoman Mimi Wesson’s perceived personal agenda: Did she detect any bias on the committee, in particular with Wesson? McIntosh saw no evidence of bias, and she thought Wesson treated Professor Churchill with great respect, both in his presence and after. McIntosh was impressed by Wesson’s professionalism.

Another of McIntosh’s responses hints at a further insincerity. She and her SCRUM colleagues were tasked with investigating one allegation each made against Churchill. McIntosh was “foot soldier” for the Madan Indian Ft Clark episode. Discrepancies in Churchill’s account had been brought to the university’s attention by Arizona professor Lavall, a rival of Churchill’s in the American Indian Movement. McIntosh was asked whether she knew that Lavall’s allegations had been raised six years before being addressed by her committee. Perhaps to dodge the accusation that the timing of their inquest was more related to Churchill’s 9/11 essay, McIntosh replied that she did not know. After of course, delivering the findings of what she presented as an exhaustive review of all available evidence.

Allegation A
Allegation A held that Churchill falsified an account of the 1837 small pox outbreak in North Dakota. McIntosh was charged with verifying Churchill’s claims (1) that small pox was deliberately spread by the US Army using blankets, (2) that said blankets were dispensed from a St Louis small pox infirmary, (3) that the infected Indians were ordered to scatter, (4) that a vaccination was deliberately kept from the indians, and (5) that the dead numbered upwards 400,000.

According to Lavall and the CU committee, Churchill was held to have been negligent in citing sources. While Churchill countered that his accounts came from oral tradition, much of it commonly known, McIntosh encountered none.

While McIntosh concedes that she does shares no heritage with Native Americans, to perhaps have grown up with oral accounts, but she argues that Churchill is similarly neither from the tribal lines from which he would have heard Mandan stories.

Did you give Professor Churchill the benefit of the doubt? Dr. McIntosh was asked?

“I would say we gave him a great big benefit of the doubt” McIntosh replied. Her research found no oral tradition of small pox evidence. “We could have stopped there and found him guilty of fabrication and falsification.” Instead the committee magnanimously contacted Churchill to ask for further evidence. They were surprised when he produced conflicting sources. Most surprising, McIntosh condescended, was not getting a straight-forward answer from Professor Churchill.

McIntosh summarized the generally accepted narrative of the 1837 epidemic: Every summer a fur trading company working along the Missouri River, sent a steamship north from St Louis, to the fortified trading posts lying along the river, at their furthest, 2000 miles north. Only once a year, the “Saint Peter” steamed upriver with trading goods to exchange for furs and hides, and with “annuities” which were gifts for Indian tribes who had signed a treaty with the government. A week into the 1837 voyage, one passenger was showing signs of an illness but the captain decided against forcing a disembarkation. By two weeks, everyone on the boat had contracted what was by then undeniably a small pox outbreak. As each of these travelers got off at the trading posts, small pox spread from every stop. The Mandan Indians lived 300 miles north of Ft Union, the furthest point of the steamboat. At least 90% of their number were killed. That much is undisputed.

About involvement of US soldiers, blankets, an infirmary, a vaccination withheld, and an order to scatter, Ms. McIntosh found absolutely no proof. She conceded that some accounts hint that the outbreak was intentional, a couple of accounts mention blankets. On this point the committee agreed the thesis could have been justified. But St Louis newspaper archives reveal no trace of an infirmary nor of a small pox outbreak. There were no medical records kept at the trading posts, nor even any medical staff. Etc.

And as to Churchill’s numbers… “Churchill cites 100,000, then 125,000, then 250,00 and now as many as 400,000.” Churchill attributes the figures to “as Professor Thornton suggests.” But according to McIntosh, Thornton never gave any numbers.

Disputing the numbers, the means, the details, reminds me of another pattern of denial.

Holocaust Denial
Is this not the very basis of Holocaust Denial? A perpetrator culture, commits a genocide, then quibbles with accusers by pointing to the paucity of evidence. It’s a mobster’s strategem. Leave no witnesses and there’s no one to tie you to a crime. A massacre thoroughly executed leaves no trace. History is written by the victors. The master narrative, in Western Heritage, has always had a white master.

Do I liken McIntosh to Jessica Tandy’s role in Driving Miss Daisy? If Tandy had quietly not transformed, but instead held tenaciously to her condescending racism. I would be loath to offend those courageous souls who labor to get to the truth about recorded history, but Holocaust Denial is about repudiating mankind’s evil deeds. Where evidence is sparse, because the perpetrators covered their tracks, others come along to cast doubt on the original crime. The details matter less than the crime. Here we have white man’s genocide against the Native Americans. All the details are in dispute. Held together, they deny the whole of what we can plainly see as the truth.

Asked if she was acquainted with Critical Race Theory, McIntosh replied she wasn’t. She professed uncertainty about even the tenure process for Ethnics Studies. She feels those kind of studies are emotional and partisan. Enlish history has debate too, but less resonance in people’s current lives.

Academic disciplines
Dr. McIntosh became combative when challenged about her proficiency with history from taken from oral tradition. In her later scholarship, Ms. McIntosh worked in contemporary Ugandan women’s studies. Oral sources build African history, but not in English history, where archival history preempts oral sources. We are left to question if McIntosh can reconcile how to incorporate oral accounts not from the present.

Was she coming at this subject with a bias? No, she’d never heard of the Mandan small pox epidemic.

Did anyone put pressure on her, to arrive at her findings? “In the first place, it didn’t occur to me that anyone would put pressure on me.” In discussing her apprehension about joining committee, Mcintosh “did not think the University would be critical of me.”

Media coverage of Denver Churchill Trial

Media gather around video feed from Churchill vs CU trial
DENVER- NMT to the rescue. So far we’ve noticed a strange media dyslexia about the Churchill vs CU trial. When we’ve attended, the proceedings look like a rout for truth and the historical record. When we haven’t made it to Denver and are left to rely on the news coverage, by all accounts Churchill is in trouble. Are the reporters freakin’ blind?

While I’ve been content to revel in the excitement of clackering laptop keyboards all about me in the courtroom, I hadn’t snooped over anyone’s shoulder, until this week. On Monday, the Boulder Daily Camera front row regular, after he’d posted his story before the first morning break, busied himself with emails, then watched a video with the Denver Post correspondent perched over his shoulder. Later another media log lump monopolized the last power outlet to play solitaire.

I’m guessing the DU law student project Race to the Bottom blogger is taking the most notes, competing with a would-be law student, not just for proficiency, but also in who takes the most drearily technical view of the proceedings.

I’ve yet been able to assess the coverage by the weekly visitor from the Silver and Gold Record, CU’s faculty publication. Check out the Wednesday account, and three previous: March 16, 14, 12.

Ward Churchill is expected to take the stand today, so I’ve come up to lend insight to the academic goings on. I’m somewhat alarmed at the angle the media is taking. Ward Churchill is not only the leading authority on Native American history, he’s among only a few outspoken academic voices. More spirited than Zinn, or Chomsky, and as result, perhaps more controversial. But I challenge anyone to name many contemporaries who match more luminary.

Next I will provide color commentary for the lesser luminaries who are dogging Churchill and his desecration of idealized Americana.

St Patricks Day Parade photos

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
COLORADO SPRINGS- Peace contingent in St Patrick’s Day parade.

(Click on images to see larger crop.)
St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Devon decorates last minute stand-in for the Bookmobile.

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Assembling at staging area, last position.

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Dancers, as MaryLynn and Dave look on.

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Layla and Andy

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Kat, Debbie and Lily

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Sarah, Dave and Jake on Kazoo.

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Friend of Ryan and Ryan.

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Amanda.

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Distributing the flags

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Mike looks back as we take off.

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
With motorcycle escort.

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Eric and Devon.

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Video grab from Mike Coletta.

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Lead banner. All subsequent photos by Devon.

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Dancers

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Tony leads drumming

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Drummers

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Drummers

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Pattie (three screen grabs from Loring’s video)

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Layla and Andy

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Looking down parade route

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Amanda

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Cheers

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Eric waves Iraq flag

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Amanda rides ahead

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Behind Amanda, are Jonathan, Rita, Loring and Marie.

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
More peace contingent two blocks back.

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Jonathan, tricked out bike, and Don’t Tread On Me.

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Flags of occupied lands.

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Reflection in Plaza of the Rockies.

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
At disbanding point, this police officer suddenly begins shouting MOVE MOVE MOVE!

St. Patricks Day Parade 2009
Patty triumphant.

Boulder Daily Camera editorial and CU campus Colorado Daily are unanimous

Bill Ayers and Ward Churchill
BOULDER- All the Denver TV news vans were standing by as Ward Churchill retook the CU campus podium. Local coverage of the Glenn Miller Ballroom event was front page and immediate, in both the students’ Colorado Daily and the Boulder Daily Camera. The surprise wasn’t just that the articles were unflattering, but that they were the exact same.

I’m sure it’s not news to the CU students that their free campus paper is none other than the reformatted local daily. You might wonder which is the more student-inclined. The news section of the student paper is titled CU AND THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC, as if to differentiate the student body from their “Leftist” township. The same article in the local daily Bill Ayers backs Ward Churchill, was retitled NOTORIOUS DISSENTER BACKS UP EMBATTLED PROF for the kids.

Keep in mind, this is not the work of the students.

While it might look perfectly transparent to publish a student-focused edition, full of campus-life related ads, what would be the purpose of two distinct internet facades for the same content? If not to reinforce the notion that the editorial content was distinct.

Maybe the TWIN DAILIES reporters had time enough only to write their articles before hearing the speeches, because their stories reflected none of the convivial humanism presented by all the guests. The other article published the next morning was: Crowd faces tight security for Ayers, Churchill talk at CU. A follow-up article the next day was more in depth, but not about the subject of Thursday’s event, neo-McCarthyism. The Saturday article redraws the battle lines of the Churchill-CU dispute. If you’d like to judge for yourself, both do have a video of the Thursday Forbidden Education rally.

Pretense of separate publications is dropped when you click Full local coverage of Ward Churchill and his trial against CU, where you get all the accruing coverage courtesy of the BOULDER DAILY CAMERA.

The only real alternative news in Boulder comes through the Boulder Weekly. But neither is it student run.

By its actions against Ward Churchill, and certainly by its grip on student communication, the CU administration appears bent on rotting Boulder’s promise of higher education from its academic core.

I found this looking for something else. (About Mayor Rivera)

I couldn’t embed it but here’s the link to the video.
 
I was looking for something that came up in the inevitable angry political discussion on the City Bus yesterday.

Actually, nobody was angry with or against each other.

We’re all just a little teensy tiny itty bitty small bit P.O.’d about the “Lower Class” being bought and sold like so many hummm… what’s that Minor Piece in a chess game, you know, the ones that always get sacrificed to save or capture a Chessman of higher rank, oh yeah… Pawns…

But it seems Our Illustrious Mayor has once again applied his own foot to his own mouth…

On the subject of cutting bus routes.

The bus in question is to one of the medical districts.

Which is getting a large percentage of Budgetary axe.

The other parties to the conversation were a retired lady and a lady who makes her living as a Teacher.

The Mayor, allegedly (but, for some strange reason, I believe every syllable of it) His Dis-Honor has made what he thought was an unrecorded remark that he doesn’t really care what bus passengers think because “The only people who ride the bus are bums and alcoholics”

This was supposed to be posted to YouTube after having been caught on a cell-phone camera.

I haven’t found it, YET.

Strangely, I have a lot of confidence that I will, and I don’t doubt for a moment that His Dis-Honor said that, simply because he has a long and rich history of making disparaging remarks about the Lower Classes, who, unlike himself, actually do the Labor that provides the wealth of Our Nation and more directly, his own Portfolio.

AND, about the soldiers who came back with pieces missing, both of body and mind, from the War of Conquest which benefits, directly, His Stock Portfolio.

One of the ladies, the schoolteacher, is blind. I had located the information she wanted on the Bus Route and schedule changes she had tried to ask the bus driver about.

The bus is the one she and the other lady use to go between their homes and, well, Everywhere Else.

I, as usual, was going to a doctor’s appointment.

One of the other bus Route Cancellation, 3 of them in fact, involve getting within a half-mile of Peak Vista Health Care, the El Paso County Health Department, and a Memorial Health Systems facility across Parkside Drive from Peak Vista.

In other words, facilities that serve the Disabled and Poor.

It’s not really a coincidence that those two groups merge at several points.

Also, in an entry into Jonah’s Museum of Spectacularly Bad Ideas, it seems the budget crunch was made an order of magnitude Worse by the reversal of the usual order of the Financial Universe,

Instead of issuing Municipal Bonds and having OTHER PEOPLE invest in the City, the City has been using Our Tax Money to GAMBLE errr… “invest” in the Stock Market, under the tutelage of Our Own Resident Pre-Chimpanzee Douglas Bruce.

The one who makes Les Freres Bush et menages look like Intellectual Giants by comparison.

I wonders, yes I does, if these Parasite Class Heroes bought, with our money, a whole bunch of those Mortgage Notes?

They could sue me for “Definition of Character” and if they win they would get everything I own.

At a net loss of the vast majority of the costs of hauling it away.

I guess they’re used to losing investments anyway.

There is much grumbling among the Working Class to the tune of a Recall Election to unseat these vermin.

As usual, Jonah speaks only for Jonah, but I think we should take that idea and run with it.

Ward Churchill: Some People Push Back

British edition titled Reflections on the Justice of Roosting ChickensHere is Ward Churchill’s notorious 9/11 “Little Eichmanns” essay, published online September 12, 2001, presented here for archival purposes lest critics think they can silence one of our nation’s strongest dissenting voices. Churchill later expanded this piece into a book entitled On the Justice of Roosting Chickens: reflections on the consequences of U.S. imperial arrogance and criminality published by AK Press in 2003.

Some People Push Back: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens
by Ward Churchill

When queried by reporters concerning his views on the assassination of John F. Kennedy in November 1963, Malcolm X famously – and quite charitably, all things considered – replied that it was merely a case of “chickens coming home to roost.”

On the morning of September 11, 2001, a few more chickens – along with some half-million dead Iraqi children – came home to roost in a very big way at the twin towers of New York’s World Trade Center. Well, actually, a few of them seem to have nestled in at the Pentagon as well.

The Iraqi youngsters, all of them under 12, died as a predictable – in fact, widely predicted – result of the 1991 US “surgical” bombing of their country’s water purification and sewage facilities, as well as other “infrastructural” targets upon which Iraq’s civilian population depends for its very survival.

If the nature of the bombing were not already bad enough – and it should be noted that this sort of “aerial warfare” constitutes a Class I Crime Against humanity, entailing myriad gross violations of international law, as well as every conceivable standard of “civilized” behavior – the death toll has been steadily ratcheted up by US-imposed sanctions for a full decade now. Enforced all the while by a massive military presence and periodic bombing raids, the embargo has greatly impaired the victims’ ability to import the nutrients, medicines and other materials necessary to saving the lives of even their toddlers.

All told, Iraq has a population of about 18 million. The 500,000 kids lost to date thus represent something on the order of 25 percent of their age group. Indisputably, the rest have suffered – are still suffering – a combination of physical debilitation and psychological trauma severe enough to prevent their ever fully recovering. In effect, an entire generation has been obliterated.

The reason for this holocaust was/is rather simple, and stated quite straightforwardly by President George Bush, the 41st “freedom-loving” father of the freedom-lover currently filling the Oval Office, George the 43rd: “The world must learn that what we say, goes,” intoned George the Elder to the enthusiastic applause of freedom-loving Americans everywhere. How Old George conveyed his message was certainly no mystery to the US public. One need only recall the 24-hour-per-day dissemination of bombardment videos on every available TV channel, and the exceedingly high ratings of these telecasts, to gain a sense of how much they knew.

In trying to affix a meaning to such things, we would do well to remember the wave of elation that swept America at reports of what was happening along the so-called Highway of Death: perhaps 100,000 “towel-heads” and “camel jockeys” – or was it “sand niggers” that week? – in full retreat, routed and effectively defenseless, many of them conscripted civilian laborers, slaughtered in a single day by jets firing the most hyper-lethal types of ordnance. It was a performance worthy of the nazis during the early months of their drive into Russia. And it should be borne in mind that Good Germans gleefully cheered that butchery, too. Indeed, support for Hitler suffered no serious erosion among Germany’s “innocent civilians” until the defeat at Stalingrad in 1943.

There may be a real utility to reflecting further, this time upon the fact that it was pious Americans who led the way in assigning the onus of collective guilt to the German people as a whole, not for things they as individuals had done, but for what they had allowed – nay, empowered – their leaders and their soldiers to do in their name.

If the principle was valid then, it remains so now, as applicable to Good Americans as it was the Good Germans. And the price exacted from the Germans for the faultiness of their moral fiber was truly ghastly. Returning now to the children, and to the effects of the post-Gulf War embargo – continued bull force by Bush the Elder’s successors in the Clinton administration as a gesture of its “resolve” to finalize what George himself had dubbed the “New World Order” of American military/economic domination – it should be noted that not one but two high United Nations officials attempting to coordinate delivery of humanitarian aid to Iraq resigned in succession as protests against US policy.

One of them, former U.N. Assistant Secretary General Denis Halladay, repeatedly denounced what was happening as “a systematic program . . . of deliberate genocide.” His statements appeared in the New York Times and other papers during the fall of 1998, so it can hardly be contended that the American public was “unaware” of them. Shortly thereafter, Secretary of State Madeline Albright openly confirmed Halladay’s assessment. Asked during the widely-viewed TV program Meet the Press to respond to his “allegations,” she calmly announced that she’d decided it was “worth the price” to see that U.S. objectives were achieved.

The Politics of a Perpetrator Population
As a whole, the American public greeted these revelations with yawns.. There were, after all, far more pressing things than the unrelenting misery/death of a few hundred thousand Iraqi tikes to be concerned with. Getting “Jeremy” and “Ellington” to their weekly soccer game, for instance, or seeing to it that little “Tiffany” and “Ashley” had just the right roll-neck sweaters to go with their new cords. And, to be sure, there was the yuppie holy war against ashtrays – for “our kids,” no less – as an all-absorbing point of political focus.

In fairness, it must be admitted that there was an infinitesimally small segment of the body politic who expressed opposition to what was/is being done to the children of Iraq. It must also be conceded, however, that those involved by-and-large contented themselves with signing petitions and conducting candle-lit prayer vigils, bearing “moral witness” as vast legions of brown-skinned five-year-olds sat shivering in the dark, wide-eyed in horror, whimpering as they expired in the most agonizing ways imaginable.

Be it said as well, and this is really the crux of it, that the “resistance” expended the bulk of its time and energy harnessed to the systemically-useful task of trying to ensure, as “a principle of moral virtue” that nobody went further than waving signs as a means of “challenging” the patently exterminatory pursuit of Pax Americana. So pure of principle were these “dissidents,” in fact, that they began literally to supplant the police in protecting corporations profiting by the carnage against suffering such retaliatory “violence” as having their windows broken by persons less “enlightened” – or perhaps more outraged – than the self-anointed “peacekeepers.”

Property before people, it seems – or at least the equation of property to people – is a value by no means restricted to America’s boardrooms. And the sanctimony with which such putrid sentiments are enunciated turns out to be nauseatingly similar, whether mouthed by the CEO of Standard Oil or any of the swarm of comfort zone “pacifists” queuing up to condemn the black block after it ever so slightly disturbed the functioning of business-as-usual in Seattle.

Small wonder, all-in-all, that people elsewhere in the world – the Mideast, for instance – began to wonder where, exactly, aside from the streets of the US itself, one was to find the peace America’s purportedly oppositional peacekeepers claimed they were keeping.

The answer, surely, was plain enough to anyone unblinded by the kind of delusions engendered by sheer vanity and self-absorption. So, too, were the implications in terms of anything changing, out there, in America’s free-fire zones.

Tellingly, it was at precisely this point – with the genocide in Iraq officially admitted and a public response demonstrating beyond a shadow of a doubt that there were virtually no Americans, including most of those professing otherwise, doing anything tangible to stop it – that the combat teams which eventually commandeered the aircraft used on September 11 began to infiltrate the United States.

Meet the “Terrorists”
Of the men who came, there are a few things demanding to be said in the face of the unending torrent of disinformational drivel unleashed by George Junior and the corporate “news” media immediately following their successful operation on September 11.

They did not, for starters, “initiate” a war with the US, much less commit “the first acts of war of the new millennium.”

A good case could be made that the war in which they were combatants has been waged more-or-less continuously by the “Christian West” – now proudly emblematized by the United States – against the “Islamic East” since the time of the First Crusade, about 1,000 years ago. More recently, one could argue that the war began when Lyndon Johnson first lent significant support to Israel’s dispossession/displacement of Palestinians during the 1960s, or when George the Elder ordered “Desert Shield” in 1990, or at any of several points in between. Any way you slice it, however, if what the combat teams did to the WTC and the Pentagon can be understood as acts of war – and they can – then the same is true of every US “overflight’ of Iraqi territory since day one. The first acts of war during the current millennium thus occurred on its very first day, and were carried out by U.S. aviators acting under orders from their then-commander-in-chief, Bill Clinton. The most that can honestly be said of those involved on September 11 is that they finally responded in kind to some of what this country has dispensed to their people as a matter of course.

That they waited so long to do so is, notwithstanding the 1993 action at the WTC, more than anything a testament to their patience and restraint.

They did not license themselves to “target innocent civilians.”

There is simply no argument to be made that the Pentagon personnel killed on September 11 fill that bill. The building and those inside comprised military targets, pure and simple. As to those in the World Trade Center . . .

Well, really. Let’s get a grip here, shall we? True enough, they were civilians of a sort. But innocent? Gimme a break. They formed a technocratic corps at the very heart of America’s global financial empire – the “mighty engine of profit” to which the military dimension of U.S. policy has always been enslaved – and they did so both willingly and knowingly. Recourse to “ignorance” – a derivative, after all, of the word “ignore” – counts as less than an excuse among this relatively well-educated elite. To the extent that any of them were unaware of the costs and consequences to others of what they were involved in – and in many cases excelling at – it was because of their absolute refusal to see. More likely, it was because they were too busy braying, incessantly and self-importantly, into their cell phones, arranging power lunches and stock transactions, each of which translated, conveniently out of sight, mind and smelling distance, into the starved and rotting flesh of infants. If there was a better, more effective, or in fact any other way of visiting some penalty befitting their participation upon the little Eichmanns inhabiting the sterile sanctuary of the twin towers, I’d really be interested in hearing about it.

The men who flew the missions against the WTC and Pentagon were not “cowards.” That distinction properly belongs to the “firm-jawed lads” who delighted in flying stealth aircraft through the undefended airspace of Baghdad, dropping payload after payload of bombs on anyone unfortunate enough to be below – including tens of thousands of genuinely innocent civilians – while themselves incurring all the risk one might expect during a visit to the local video arcade. Still more, the word describes all those “fighting men and women” who sat at computer consoles aboard ships in the Persian Gulf, enjoying air-conditioned comfort while launching cruise missiles into neighborhoods filled with random human beings. Whatever else can be said of them, the men who struck on September 11 manifested the courage of their convictions, willingly expending their own lives in attaining their objectives.

Nor were they “fanatics” devoted to “Islamic fundamentalism.”

One might rightly describe their actions as “desperate.” Feelings of desperation, however, are a perfectly reasonable – one is tempted to say “normal” – emotional response among persons confronted by the mass murder of their children, particularly when it appears that nobody else really gives a damn (ask a Jewish survivor about this one, or, even more poignantly, for all the attention paid them, a Gypsy).

That desperate circumstances generate desperate responses is no mysterious or irrational principle, of the sort motivating fanatics. Less is it one peculiar to Islam. Indeed, even the FBI’s investigative reports on the combat teams’ activities during the months leading up to September 11 make it clear that the members were not fundamentalist Muslims. Rather, it’s pretty obvious at this point that they were secular activists – soldiers, really – who, while undoubtedly enjoying cordial relations with the clerics of their countries, were motivated far more by the grisly realities of the U.S. war against them than by a set of religious beliefs.

And still less were they/their acts “insane.”

Insanity is a condition readily associable with the very American idea that one – or one’s country – holds what amounts to a “divine right” to commit genocide, and thus to forever do so with impunity. The term might also be reasonably applied to anyone suffering genocide without attempting in some material way to bring the process to a halt. Sanity itself, in this frame of reference, might be defined by a willingness to try and destroy the perpetrators and/or the sources of their ability to commit their crimes. (Shall we now discuss the US “strategic bombing campaign” against Germany during World War II, and the mental health of those involved in it?)

Which takes us to official characterizations of the combat teams as an embodiment of “evil.”

Evil – for those inclined to embrace the banality of such a concept – was perfectly incarnated in that malignant toad known as Madeline Albright, squatting in her studio chair like Jaba the Hutt, blandly spewing the news that she’d imposed a collective death sentence upon the unoffending youth of Iraq. Evil was to be heard in that great American hero “Stormin’ Norman” Schwartzkopf’s utterly dehumanizing dismissal of their systematic torture and annihilation as mere “collateral damage.” Evil, moreover, is a term appropriate to describing the mentality of a public that finds such perspectives and the policies attending them acceptable, or even momentarily tolerable.

Had it not been for these evils, the counterattacks of September 11 would never have occurred. And unless “the world is rid of such evil,” to lift a line from George Junior, September 11 may well end up looking like a lark.

There is no reason, after all, to believe that the teams deployed in the assaults on the WTC and the Pentagon were the only such, that the others are composed of “Arabic-looking individuals” – America’s indiscriminately lethal arrogance and psychotic sense of self-entitlement have long since given the great majority of the world’s peoples ample cause to be at war with it – or that they are in any way dependent upon the seizure of civilian airliners to complete their missions.

To the contrary, there is every reason to expect that there are many other teams in place, tasked to employ altogether different tactics in executing operational plans at least as well-crafted as those evident on September 11, and very well equipped for their jobs. This is to say that, since the assaults on the WTC and Pentagon were act of war – not “terrorist incidents” – they must be understood as components in a much broader strategy designed to achieve specific results. From this, it can only be adduced that there are plenty of other components ready to go, and that they will be used, should this become necessary in the eyes of the strategists. It also seems a safe bet that each component is calibrated to inflict damage at a level incrementally higher than the one before (during the 1960s, the Johnson administration employed a similar policy against Vietnam, referred to as “escalation”).

Since implementation of the overall plan began with the WTC/Pentagon assaults, it takes no rocket scientist to decipher what is likely to happen next, should the U.S. attempt a response of the inexcusable variety to which it has long entitled itself.

About Those Boys (and Girls) in the Bureau
There’s another matter begging for comment at this point. The idea that the FBI’s “counterterrorism task forces” can do a thing to prevent what will happen is yet another dimension of America’s delusional pathology.. The fact is that, for all its publicly-financed “image-building” exercises, the Bureau has never shown the least aptitude for anything of the sort.

Oh, yeah, FBI counterintelligence personnel have proven quite adept at framing anarchists, communists and Black Panthers, sometimes murdering them in their beds or the electric chair. The Bureau’s SWAT units have displayed their ability to combat child abuse in Waco by burning babies alive, and its vaunted Crime Lab has been shown to pad its “crime-fighting’ statistics by fabricating evidence against many an alleged car thief. But actual “heavy-duty bad guys” of the sort at issue now? This isn’t a Bruce Willis/Chuck Norris/Sly Stallone movie, after all.. And J. Edgar Hoover doesn’t get to approve either the script or the casting.

The number of spies, saboteurs and bona fide terrorists apprehended, or even detected by the FBI in the course of its long and slimy history could be counted on one’s fingers and toes. On occasion, its agents have even turned out to be the spies, and, in many instances, the terrorists as well.

To be fair once again, if the Bureau functions as at best a carnival of clowns where its “domestic security responsibilities” are concerned, this is because – regardless of official hype – it has none. It is now, as it’s always been, the national political police force, an instrument created and perfected to ensure that all Americans, not just the consenting mass, are “free” to do exactly as they’re told.

The FBI and “cooperating agencies” can be thus relied upon to set about “protecting freedom” by destroying whatever rights and liberties were left to U.S. citizens before September 11 (in fact, they’ve already received authorization to begin). Sheeplike, the great majority of Americans can also be counted upon to bleat their approval, at least in the short run, believing as they always do that the nasty implications of what they’re doing will pertain only to others.

Oh Yeah, and “The Company,” Too

A possibly even sicker joke is the notion, suddenly in vogue, that the CIA will be able to pinpoint “terrorist threats,” “rooting out their infrastructure” where it exists and/or “terminating” it before it can materialize, if only it’s allowed to beef up its “human intelligence gathering capacity” in an unrestrained manner (including full-bore operations inside the US, of course).

Yeah. Right.

Since America has a collective attention-span of about 15 minutes, a little refresher seems in order: “The Company” had something like a quarter-million people serving as “intelligence assets” by feeding it information in Vietnam in 1968, and it couldn’t even predict the Tet Offensive. God knows how many spies it was fielding against the USSR at the height of Ronald Reagan’s version of the Cold War, and it was still caught flatfooted by the collapse of the Soviet Union. As to destroying “terrorist infrastructures,” one would do well to remember Operation Phoenix, another product of its open season in Vietnam. In that one, the CIA enlisted elite US units like the Navy Seals and Army Special Forces, as well as those of friendly countries – the south Vietnamese Rangers, for example, and Australian SAS – to run around “neutralizing” folks targeted by The Company’s legion of snitches as “guerrillas” (as those now known as “terrorists” were then called).

Sound familiar?

Upwards of 40,000 people – mostly bystanders, as it turns out – were murdered by Phoenix hit teams before the guerrillas, stronger than ever, ran the US and its collaborators out of their country altogether. And these are the guys who are gonna save the day, if unleashed to do their thing in North America?

The net impact of all this “counterterrorism” activity upon the combat teams’ ability to do what they came to do, of course, will be nil.

Instead, it’s likely to make it easier for them to operate (it’s worked that way in places like Northern Ireland). And, since denying Americans the luxury of reaping the benefits of genocide in comfort was self-evidently a key objective of the WTC/Pentagon assaults, it can be stated unequivocally that a more overt display of the police state mentality already pervading this country simply confirms the magnitude of their victory.

On Matters of Proportion and Intent
As things stand, including the 1993 detonation at the WTC, “Arab terrorists” have responded to the massive and sustained American terror bombing of Iraq with a total of four assaults by explosives inside the US. That’s about 1% of the 50,000 bombs the Pentagon announced were rained on Baghdad alone during the Gulf War (add in Oklahoma City and you’ll get something nearer an actual 1%).

They’ve managed in the process to kill about 5,000 Americans, or roughly 1% of the dead Iraqi children (the percentage is far smaller if you factor in the killing of adult Iraqi civilians, not to mention troops butchered as/after they’d surrendered and/or after the “war-ending” ceasefire had been announced).

In terms undoubtedly more meaningful to the property/profit-minded American mainstream, they’ve knocked down a half-dozen buildings – albeit some very well-chosen ones – as opposed to the “strategic devastation” visited upon the whole of Iraq, and punched a $100 billion hole in the earnings outlook of major corporate shareholders, as opposed to the U.S. obliteration of Iraq’s entire economy.

With that, they’ve given Americans a tiny dose of their own medicine.. This might be seen as merely a matter of “vengeance” or “retribution,” and, unquestionably, America has earned it, even if it were to add up only to something so ultimately petty.

The problem is that vengeance is usually framed in terms of “getting even,” a concept which is plainly inapplicable in this instance. As the above data indicate, it would require another 49,996 detonations killing 495,000 more Americans, for the “terrorists” to “break even” for the bombing of Baghdad/extermination of Iraqi children alone. And that’s to achieve “real number” parity. To attain an actual proportional parity of damage – the US is about 15 times as large as Iraq in terms of population, even more in terms of territory – they would, at a minimum, have to blow up about 300,000 more buildings and kill something on the order of 7.5 million people.

Were this the intent of those who’ve entered the US to wage war against it, it would remain no less true that America and Americans were only receiving the bill for what they’d already done. Payback, as they say, can be a real motherfucker (ask the Germans). There is, however, no reason to believe that retributive parity is necessarily an item on the agenda of those who planned the WTC/Pentagon operation. If it were, given the virtual certainty that they possessed the capacity to have inflicted far more damage than they did, there would be a lot more American bodies lying about right now.

Hence, it can be concluded that ravings carried by the “news” media since September 11 have contained at least one grain of truth: The peoples of the Mideast “aren’t like” Americans, not least because they don’t “value life’ in the same way. By this, it should be understood that Middle-Easterners, unlike Americans, have no history of exterminating others purely for profit, or on the basis of racial animus. Thus, we can appreciate the fact that they value life – all lives, not just their own – far more highly than do their U.S. counterparts.

The Makings of a Humanitarian Strategy
In sum one can discern a certain optimism – it might even be call humanitarianism – imbedded in the thinking of those who presided over the very limited actions conducted on September 11.

Their logic seems to have devolved upon the notion that the American people have condoned what has been/is being done in their name – indeed, are to a significant extent actively complicit in it – mainly because they have no idea what it feels like to be on the receiving end.

Now they do.

That was the “medicinal” aspect of the attacks.

To all appearances, the idea is now to give the tonic a little time to take effect, jolting Americans into the realization that the sort of pain they’re now experiencing first-hand is no different from – or the least bit more excruciating than – that which they’ve been so cavalier in causing others, and thus to respond appropriately.

More bluntly, the hope was – and maybe still is – that Americans, stripped of their presumed immunity from incurring any real consequences for their behavior, would comprehend and act upon a formulation as uncomplicated as “stop killing our kids, if you want your own to be safe.”

Either way, it’s a kind of “reality therapy” approach, designed to afford the American people a chance to finally “do the right thing” on their own, without further coaxing.

Were the opportunity acted upon in some reasonably good faith fashion – a sufficiently large number of Americans rising up and doing whatever is necessary to force an immediate lifting of the sanctions on Iraq, for instance, or maybe hanging a few of America’s abundant supply of major war criminals (Henry Kissinger comes quickly to mind, as do Madeline Albright, Colin Powell, Bill Clinton and George the Elder) – there is every reason to expect that military operations against the US on its domestic front would be immediately suspended.

Whether they would remain so would of course be contingent upon follow-up. By that, it may be assumed that American acceptance of onsite inspections by international observers to verify destruction of its weapons of mass destruction (as well as dismantlement of all facilities in which more might be manufactured), Nuremberg-style trials in which a few thousand US military/corporate personnel could be properly adjudicated and punished for their Crimes Against humanity, and payment of reparations to the array of nations/peoples whose assets the US has plundered over the years, would suffice.

Since they’ve shown no sign of being unreasonable or vindictive, it may even be anticipated that, after a suitable period of adjustment and reeducation (mainly to allow them to acquire the skills necessary to living within their means), those restored to control over their own destinies by the gallant sacrifices of the combat teams the WTC and Pentagon will eventually (re)admit Americans to the global circle of civilized societies. Stranger things have happened.

In the Alternative
Unfortunately, noble as they may have been, such humanitarian aspirations were always doomed to remain unfulfilled. For it to have been otherwise, a far higher quality of character and intellect would have to prevail among average Americans than is actually the case. Perhaps the strategists underestimated the impact a couple of generations-worth of media indoctrination can produce in terms of demolishing the capacity of human beings to form coherent thoughts. Maybe they forgot to factor in the mind-numbing effects of the indoctrination passed off as education in the US. Then, again, it’s entirely possible they were aware that a decisive majority of American adults have been reduced by this point to a level much closer to the kind of immediate self-gratification entailed in Pavlovian stimulus/response patterns than anything accessible by appeals to higher logic, and still felt morally obliged to offer the dolts an option to quit while they were ahead.

What the hell? It was worth a try.

But it’s becoming increasingly apparent that the dosage of medicine administered was entirely insufficient to accomplish its purpose.

Although there are undoubtedly exceptions, Americans for the most part still don’t get it.

Already, they’ve desecrated the temporary tomb of those killed in the WTC, staging a veritable pep rally atop the mangled remains of those they profess to honor, treating the whole affair as if it were some bizarre breed of contact sport. And, of course, there are the inevitable pom-poms shaped like American flags, the school colors worn as little red-white-and-blue ribbons affixed to labels, sportscasters in the form of “counterterrorism experts” drooling mindless color commentary during the pregame warm-up.

Refusing the realization that the world has suddenly shifted its axis, and that they are therefore no longer “in charge,” they have by-and-large reverted instantly to type, working themselves into their usual bloodlust on the now obsolete premise that the bloodletting will “naturally” occur elsewhere and to someone else.

“Patriotism,” a wise man once observed, “is the last refuge of scoundrels.”

And the braided, he might of added.

Braided Scoundrel-in-Chief, George Junior, lacking even the sense to be careful what he wished for, has teamed up with a gaggle of fundamentalist Christian clerics like Billy Graham to proclaim a “New Crusade” called “Infinite Justice” aimed at “ridding the world of evil.”

One could easily make light of such rhetoric, remarking upon how unseemly it is for a son to threaten his father in such fashion – or a president to so publicly contemplate the murder/suicide of himself and his cabinet – but the matter is deadly serious.

They are preparing once again to sally forth for the purpose of roasting brown-skinned children by the scores of thousands. Already, the B-1 bombers and the aircraft carriers and the missile frigates are en route, the airborne divisions are gearing up to go.

To where? Afghanistan?

The Sudan?

Iraq, again (or still)?

How about Grenada (that was fun)?

Any of them or all. It doesn’t matter.

The desire to pummel the helpless runs rabid as ever.

Only, this time it’s different.

The time the helpless aren’t, or at least are not so helpless as they were.

This time, somewhere, perhaps in an Afghani mountain cave, possibly in a Brooklyn basement, maybe another local altogether – but somewhere, all the same – there’s a grim-visaged (wo)man wearing a Clint Eastwood smile.

“Go ahead, punks,” s/he’s saying, “Make my day.”

And when they do, when they launch these airstrikes abroad – or may a little later; it will be at a time conforming to the “terrorists”‘ own schedule, and at a place of their choosing – the next more intensive dose of medicine administered here “at home.”

Of what will it consist this time? Anthrax? Mustard gas? Sarin? A tactical nuclear device?

That, too, is their choice to make.

Looking back, it will seem to future generations inexplicable why Americans were unable on their own, and in time to save themselves, to accept a rule of nature so basic that it could be mouthed by an actor, Lawrence Fishburn, in a movie, The Cotton Club.

“You’ve got to learn, ” the line went, “that when you push people around, some people push back.”

As they should.

As they must.

And as they undoubtedly will.

There is justice in such symmetry.

ADDENDUM
The preceding was a “first take” reading, more a stream-of-consciousness interpretive reaction to the September 11 counterattack than a finished piece on the topic. Hence, I’ll readily admit that I’ve been far less than thorough, and quite likely wrong about a number of things.

For instance, it may not have been (only) the ghosts of Iraqi children who made their appearance that day. It could as easily have been some or all of their butchered Palestinian cousins.

Or maybe it was some or all of the at least 3.2 million Indochinese who perished as a result of America’s sustained and genocidal assault on Southeast Asia (1959-1975), not to mention the millions more who’ve died because of the sanctions imposed thereafter.

Perhaps there were a few of the Korean civilians massacred by US troops at places like No Gun Ri during the early ‘50s, or the hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians ruthlessly incinerated in the ghastly fire raids of World War II (only at Dresden did America bomb Germany in a similar manner).

And, of course, it could have been those vaporized in the militarily pointless nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

There are others, as well, a vast and silent queue of faceless victims, stretching from the million-odd Filipinos slaughtered during America’s “Indian War” in their islands at the beginning of the twentieth century, through the real Indians, America’s own, massacred wholesale at places like Horseshoe Bend and the Bad Axe, Sand Creek and Wounded Knee, the Washita, Bear River, and the Marias.

Was it those who expired along the Cherokee Trial of Tears of the Long Walk of the Navajo?

Those murdered by smallpox at Fort Clark in 1836?

Starved to death in the concentration camp at Bosque Redondo during the 1860s?

Maybe those native people claimed for scalp bounty in all 48 of the continental US states? Or the Raritans whose severed heads were kicked for sport along the streets of what was then called New Amsterdam, at the very site where the WTC once stood?

One hears, too, the whispers of those lost on the Middle Passage, and of those whose very flesh was sold in the slave market outside the human kennel from whence Wall Street takes its name. And of coolie laborers, imported by the gross-dozen to lay the tracks of empire across scorching desert sands, none of them allotted “a Chinaman’s chance” of surviving.

The list is too long, too awful to go on.

No matter what its eventual fate, America will have gotten off very, very cheap.

The full measure of its guilt can never be fully balanced or atoned for.

In response to criticism, Churchill issued this press release January 31, 2005:

PRESS RELEASE

In the last few days there has been widespread and grossly inaccurate media coverage concerning my analysis of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, coverage that has resulted in defamation of my character and threats against my life. What I actually said has been lost, indeed turned into the opposite of itself, and I hope the following facts will be reported at least to the same extent that the fabrications have been.

* The piece circulating on the internet was developed into a book, On the Justice of Roosting Chickens. Most of the book is a detailed chronology of U.S. military interventions since 1776 and U.S. violations of international law since World War II. My point is that we cannot allow the U.S. government, acting in our name, to engage in massive violations of international law and fundamental human rights and not expect to reap the consequences.

* I am not a “defender”of the September 11 attacks, but simply pointing out that if U.S. foreign policy results in massive death and destruction abroad, we cannot feign innocence when some of that destruction is returned. I have never said that people “should” engage in armed attacks on the United States, but that such attacks are a natural and unavoidable consequence of unlawful U.S. policy. As Martin Luther King, quoting Robert F. Kennedy, said, “Those who make peaceful change impossible make violent change inevitable.”

* This is not to say that I advocate violence; as a U.S. soldier in Vietnam I witnessed and participated in more violence than I ever wish to see. What I am saying is that if we want an end to violence, especially that perpetrated against civilians, we must take the responsibility for halting the slaughter perpetrated by the United States around the world. My feelings are reflected in Dr. King’s April 1967 Riverside speech, where, when asked about the wave of urban rebellions in U.S. cities, he said, “I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed . . . without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today — my own government.”

* In 1996 Madeleine Albright, then Ambassador to the UN and soon to be U.S. Secretary of State, did not dispute that 500,000 Iraqi children had died as a result of economic sanctions, but stated on national television that “we” had decided it was “worth the cost.” I mourn the victims of the September 11 attacks, just as I mourn the deaths of those Iraqi children, the more than 3 million people killed in the war in Indochina, those who died in the U.S. invasions of Grenada, Panama and elsewhere in Central America, the victims of the transatlantic slave trade, and the indigenous peoples still subjected to genocidal policies. If we respond with callous disregard to the deaths of others, we can only expect equal callousness to American deaths.

* Finally, I have never characterized all the September 11 victims as “Nazis.” What I said was that the “technocrats of empire” working in the World Trade Center were the equivalent of “little Eichmanns.” Adolf Eichmann was not charged with direct killing but with ensuring the smooth running of the infrastructure that enabled the Nazi genocide. Similarly, German industrialists were legitimately targeted by the Allies.

* It is not disputed that the Pentagon was a military target, or that a CIA office was situated in the World Trade Center. Following the logic by which U.S. Defense Department spokespersons have consistently sought to justify target selection in places like Baghdad, this placement of an element of the American “command and control infrastructure” in an ostensibly civilian facility converted the Trade Center itself into a “legitimate” target. Again following U.S. military doctrine, as announced in briefing after briefing, those who did not work for the CIA but were nonetheless killed in the attack amounted to no more than “collateral damage.” If the U.S. public is prepared to accept these “standards” when the are routinely applied to other people, they should be not be surprised when the same standards are applied to them.

* It should be emphasized that I applied the “little Eichmanns” characterization only to those described as “technicians.” Thus, it was obviously not directed to the children, janitors, food service workers, firemen and random passers-by killed in the 9-1-1 attack. According to Pentagon logic, were simply part of the collateral damage. Ugly? Yes. Hurtful? Yes. And that’s my point. It’s no less ugly, painful or dehumanizing a description when applied to Iraqis, Palestinians, or anyone else. If we ourselves do not want to be treated in this fashion, we must refuse to allow others to be similarly devalued and dehumanized in our name.

* The bottom line of my argument is that the best and perhaps only way to prevent 9-1-1-style attacks on the U.S. is for American citizens to compel their government to comply with the rule of law. The lesson of Nuremberg is that this is not only our right, but our obligation. To the extent we shirk this responsibility, we, like the “Good Germans” of the 1930s and ’40s, are complicit in its actions and have no legitimate basis for complaint when we suffer the consequences. This, of course, includes me, personally, as well as my family, no less than anyone else.

* These points are clearly stated and documented in my book, On the Justice of Roosting Chickens, which recently won Honorary Mention for the Gustavus Myer Human Rights Award. for best writing on human rights. Some people will, of course, disagree with my analysis, but it presents questions that must be addressed in academic and public debate if we are to find a real solution to the violence that pervades today’s world. The gross distortions of what I actually said can only be viewed as an attempt to distract the public from the real issues at hand and to further stifle freedom of speech and academic debate in this country.

Ward Churchill
Boulder, Colorado
January 31, 2005

Obama presidential address to Congress addressed to dueling teleprompters

Obama addresses tele-prompters instead of Congress
I’m sorry, but I can no longer be awed by Barack Obama’s unfaltering eloquence, I’m too distracted. When our impressive speaker in chief addresses an audience, he looks from side to side, but never in between. Have you noticed that? We think he’s politely avoiding looking into the camera, but everyone sitting directly in front of him must feel like chopped liver, struck by how enamored he is of the teleprompters.

I’m beginning to wonder if Obama spoke this way from the start at the 2004 DNC, because now it seems he never doesn’t.

Press conference
Even at his first presidential press conference a couple weeks ago, Obama’s head swiveled from side to side, his eyes never panned. From other television camera angles we could see the reporters were arrayed right in front of him. Can you imagine sitting across the table from a dinner companion who can’t stop talking to his knife and fork?

A friend of mine was impressed that Obama’s answers were nine minutes long. I was starting to wonder at the inconsistency of the president choosing questions from reporters in the center, but then proceeding to mimic what I can only presume was a campaign whistle stop posture, speaking from the back of a train caboose, alternately addressing people on one side of the track, then the other.

Address to Congress
The image above, by the way, is grabbed from a network broadcast of last night’s address to Congress. This angle wasn’t shown on the White House streamed video, nor that of C-Span. Every TV director’s cut of our new president’s speech featured plenty of his DC audience, rising and clapping repeatedly, but the official version completely avoided this specific vantage point. As far as I could tell, it was the only angle they excluded.

Care to imagine why? I’m thinking it’s why I insisted on finding the sequence to illustrate this post. I caught sight of the tell-tale spectacle on an evening news recap, and then hunted until late for the footage. Throughout the address, from plenty of angles, the teleprompters were plainly evident. It’s not like the cameras avoided them. But this was the only view which showed Obama’s line of sight.

This shot makes plain what Obama was looking at, juxtaposed against the mass of legislators, cabinet members, and Supreme Court justices, at whom he wasn’t.

I’ll leave it to another time to question why the networks supplemented their coverage with this shot, three times, instead of going with the official feed.

It could owe also to the non-novelty of everything Obama is saying, but I’m just bored. Now his mechanical turning to and fro compels me to think we’re both watching a slow-motion tennis match. And instead of following the ball, our eyes linger on the players, as if the goal of this game is to compare what the players are wearing to determine whose tennis white socks were the ones bleached with Clorox and whose were not.

Teleprompters

President Obama’s gaze was bouncing back and forth between the teleprompters obviously. And what’s wrong with reading a speech anyway? That Obama was reading was obvious by the occasional false starts he made. I noted the omission of a consonant which produced an incongruous word choice, and a missed punctuation, among others. Neither would be errors made in extemporized locution or a recitation of memorized text.

We can see the smoky plexi-glass plates on stands positioned at each side of the podium. Angled at 45 degree to the floor, they reflect whatever is transcripted from projectors below, without blocking the view of the audience, and creating the illusion that the speaker is looking through the glass. The panels bookend the podium at something like 60 degrees to either side of the speaker, which means his head has an approximate 120 degree range of motion, except really only at the two extremes. The entire panorama in between, as Obama’s quick head turns suggest, remains perilously unprompted.

Does it seem to you like Obama retrieves only a solitary phrase from each side? As near as I can measure, Obama turns his head with the same frequency that George Bush used to take a pause. Bush started to make fewer gaffs when he stuck to: short phrase, breath, short phrase, breath. Now it looks like Obama could have served as Bush’s metronome. At least Obama’s delivery demonstrates a stronger lung capacity; and I think we’re all thrilled with the more sophisticated grammar. But has the new president as limited an audio-memory as our previous idiot in chief? I’m afraid to think it.

I am still impressed by President Obama’s projected confidence, and I am not about to confuse him for a moron, but that first press conference worried me. Why is it, and how is it, that Obama would be fielding questions with the aid of a teleprompter?

Remember when simpleton Dubya was stumped by an unexpected question and told the correspondent that he wished he’d received his “written question beforehand?” It’s not difficult to imagine that questions are submitted ahead of time, nor might it be so unreasonable, when the Free World hangs on a US president’s every utterance. But I did imagine that Obama was up to the task of responding with an answer. He needn’t improvise one, but you’d think he could trusted to remember it.

Are the teleprompters there to assist the president with his phrasing, or are they there to enforce that his answers, like the correspondents’ questions, stick to the script?

The Dimona Israel nuclear plant, a strategic disaster waiting to happen

Israeli nuclear program
Let’s take a quick look at the national nuclear industry that is never mentioned in the Western corporate media. Doesn’t the Israeli nuclear industry and the Israeli possession of nuclear weaponry pose the danger of a small group of zealots from the Jewish State, to use their own lingo, starting an atomic Holocaust as ‘they try to drive the Arabs/ Muslims into the sea’? …See the video Dimona Israel Problems at Nuclear Reactor

The Gaza Zoo massacre- a look at Israeli military propagandist version of events?

gaza zooIsrael blew up a lot of schools in Gaza and destroyed the Gaza Zoo killing many of the animals there with gratuitous gunfire and not just gratuitous bombs. Here is what the Israeli military told the Jewish State back home about why they did this. See Hamas Booby Trapped School and Zoo …As one can see, it is essentially a variation of the old time worn out excuse by both the US and Israeli militaries, that the opposition forces were cowardly and hiding themselves behind children, and in this case of the Israeli Gaza Zoo rampage hiding themselves behind even zoo animals!

In the Vietnam War, the US government used this as its excuse for why they bombed villagers in Vietnamese held areas with napalm. They didn’t mean to hurt anyone that was innocent they always said, but the bad guys were hiding themselves behind women and children and using poor folk as screens! In Iraq, the excuse for destroying places like Fallujah was much the same and now the Israeli military is using the same rationale behind its recent rampages of destruction through Lebanon and Gaza. Same lies, just new uses for them in new places.

Here is another video about this wanton destruction by the Israeli military. IDF kills Gaza Zoo animals ~ destroys children’s theatre… Whose video explanation do you buy? Perhaps the Israeli military version of the Zoo massacre? It certainly has been seen by a lot more people than has the video of the Palestinian zoo keeper.

But let’s go back and think about the Israeli version of events some, shall we? What did the military spokesman tell and show us in the beginning of the video? He showed us a detonator (in the zoo) and started walking alongside some wires. He mentioned that each and every animal in the zoo was booby trapped to kill Israeli soldiers, as the camera pointed to some birds! He claimed that the detonator led out of the zoo and across to a school, one only of 67 destroyed by Israel in Gaza. He didn’t show us the wires leading to the other 66 schools but I guess that was certainly implied as to why it was also so seemingly necessary to destroy all those other 66 schools, too. Soldier safety issues! Good ol’ Israel. They don’t want to do it, but they have to!

But look again! Those wires are just lying out in the open, aren’t they? So is the detonator! How convenient that must be for the Israeli soldiers! Certainly convenient for the Israeli propagandist, that is.

Those stupid idiotic Hamas! They forgot to hide the detonator and wiring away from camera view! Amazing! I thought it was a booby trap, didn’t you? But it’s just sitting there underneath a picnic table in full view!

Check that video out again! Maybe the wires and detonator are NOW out in the open simply because they were uncovered by some strenuous digging by alert Israeli military men? See anything there? No? No digging? No rubble? All out in the open and no obvious areas from where these wires and detonator were dug out? Remarkable!

The Hamas people are evidently soo, soo stupid, that they forgot to hide away their booby trap, their detonator and the wires that led away from it from under the picnic table going down some totally clear passageways all undisturbed by any shovel, and now seen by our so vigilant and alert IDF soldier propaganda guy in uniform! They left all this in plain view for us all now to discover? How nice of them!

So why does the Israeli propaganda team make up such an easy to see fiction? ANSWER- They were selling it merely to a group of fans for the Home Team, that’s why. They know that these folk are not going to question it, and not going to question even such an obvious fiction and pretense by the Israeli military. So they just laid out heir own detonator fully in the open, laid out their own wires lying fully in the open, and began to talk away! No need for anybody to excavate any earth to make it seem plausible to all of us. We’re True believers We Are! We’re for the Home Team, The Jewish State! Who’s amongst us is going to question ‘our troops’? Nobody!

Well, here we are actually questioning this video right now? It just does not add up all that well, does it?

‘Honey, have another falafel with the kids, and I’ll just lay my detonator down underneath the picnic table in case??? Oh, and let me walk down through the wild bird section with the wire and over to the school. I’ll be back in a second. Insha’Allah’ Those dumb Hamas people! Or is it actually the other way around? You decide? Can it just be another Jewish State lie to help hide their meaningful and wanton destruction of other people’s lives? The military lies a lot, you know? I hope so by now….

Video: UK Jewish MP: Israel acting like Nazis in Gaza

Video: UK Jewish MP: Israel acting like Nazis in Gaza…. Sir Gerald Kaufman, Veteran Labour Member of UK Parliament speaking January 16, 2009.

Youtube is now carrying many videos like the following ones… This Palestinian Girl a Victim of Israeli crimes Against Humanity and The 60 Seconds Hate Crime video and Zionists attack Christian tourists visiting the holy land

If Americans Knew more about Palestine/ Israel and American government support for antiArab racism carried out with US funds

Torture is a Violent Sex Crime

To Clarify My Statement About Cheney

It’s an Extreme manifestation of Sadism, the perverts who do the waterboarding, AND THOSE WHO, LIKE BUSH AND CHENEY, SUPPORT IT, are more than just Technically or Figuratively Rapists.

They become aroused by the infliction of pain, especially on other persons.
It’s a symptom also of Sociopathy.
So is using fireworks to kill frogs, which George Bush laughingly admitted.
So is Shooting Tame Animals For Pleasure, which is what Richard Cheney was doing when he and his equally perverted drunken corrupt lawyer friend were doing when he shot the guy in the face.

His “friend” /slash/sex partner, like a good little Masochist, apologized for being shot.

The only people who can effectively and efficiently use torture are people who Enjoy Doing It.

Like Cheney.
Such people are Emotionally Unstable to say the very least, and DEFINITELY NOT the type of person or persons who should be placed in any position of trust, any position of power, and most certainly not in a position of National Defense.

Instead of condemning such horrendous crimes, one of our “special friends” threatened to Report Me to the FBI for condemning Cheney’s Perverted Cowardly Torture Fetish for what it truly is.

Cowards run in packs.

Maybe Cheney will invite him to a screening of the video of ME being tortured.

Let him lick the floor afterward.

Cheney says torture necessary to prevent attack.

Maybe he’ll die a fitting death, LIKE IF…
his pacemaker freaks out and causes him painfully violent spasms for several days after masturbating to the Torture Videos.
That’s the most likely scenario, his own Freakish Insane Perversion doing what the so-called “Justice Department” refuse to do.

What would be really cool would be to obtain the videos of THAT and sell copies to our Troll Friends.

I could become filthy stinkin’ rich,

As opposed to, you know, being merely filthy and stinkin’.

Zionism is Nazism with a yarmulke

Israel plans propaganda offensive, to convince the world that they were the victims of the Gaza genocide!

Visualize Nuremberg. Israel warns top military officers not to travel abroad, as they might be subject to arrest for war crimes and crimes against humanity over the genocide in Gaza.

NeoNazi Zionist rally in NYC calls for “wiping out” the Palestinian people. The only real difference between Israel and Nazi Germany, is Nazi Germany only lasted 12 years.

Should the US Pull the Plug on Israel? by Chuck Spinney

They hanged Mussolini, didn’t they? If Obama ignores the crimes of the past, the GOP will just repeat them in 8 years. [video]

“An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it.”
–Mohandas Gandhi

I was tempted to headline today’s page with WE SURVIVED GEORGE W. BUSH, but sadly there are all too many of us just barely hanging on. How many of us will survive the disastrous course of the Bush administration remains to be seen. I’m cynical about Obama (having once been fooled into believing in Bill Clinton), but secretly I do desperately hope that he can change American politics.

w-years-comic

Excerpts from Thomas McCullock’s Jan 20 notes, thomasmc.com.

One would think the IDF would welcome the press…

If in fact they were committing lawful actions.

Instead we have multiple incidents of the Independent Reporting, as in not the reporters embedded into the IDF, being met with IDF gunfire.

The one incident which makes the point the clearest about the
Restrictions On Reporting From Gaza

* The Israeli authorities are not allowing foreign journalists free entry into Gaza.
* The Foreign Press Association recently held a lottery for the first eight foreign media organisations to be given access to Gaza. Sky did not win a ticket in this first round.
* Sky News, like other foreign media outlets, is relying on local Palestinian freelancers inside Gaza to give us the latest information.
* Some military details may be subject to censorship by the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF). This is standard for all media organisations operating out of Israel.

…is the one in which 3 Palestinian children who were Murdered by the IDF because their father dared to report from Gaza things that the Israeli Propaganda Ministry, some of whom have been posting rather heavily on this forum, Did Not Want Published.

Incidentally, the woman who reported this in the Pittsburgh paper is Jewish.

Voice of Palestinians loses 3 daughters to Israeli shell[/b]
Saturday, January 17, 2009
By Sadie Gurman, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

For weeks, Ezzeldeen Abu al-Aish watched war devastate his town in northern Gaza, huddling at home with his eight children as shells exploded and fire roared just outside their door.

From his home in Jebalia via speakerphone, Dr. Abu al-Aish shared his fears Thursday evening with a Squirrel Hill audience. “Today, Gaza was completely dark because of the flames from the explosions and the destruction,” he told the crowd gathered at the Jewish Community Center to voice concern over the ongoing fighting.

YouTube Video of Israeli TV speaking with Dr. Ezzeldeen Abu al-Aish

He said he lives in constant worry for the safety of his family. “I am sitting helpless, looking in my children’s eyes, while they’re wondering which one of us will be lost. … I am helpless in front of my children. If I lost them, what would be my life?”

Hours after connecting with his Pittsburgh audience, Dr. Abu al-Aish’s home was hammered by an Israeli artillery shell, killing three of his daughters and a niece and severely injuring two daughters. Eighteen of his relatives were in the home at the time.

Israeli TV said initial reports indicated that a sniper had fired either from the family’s building — which friends quoted on TV said they doubted — or from nearby. The Israeli infantry responded with a tank shell.

Throughout the 21-day war, Dr. Abu al-Aish has been providing Israeli TV viewers with updates on the medical crisis unfolding in Gaza. For many, he is the voice of Palestinian suffering. But yesterday, his report was different.

“I want to know why my daughters were harmed,” he said on TV. “This should haunt [Israeli Prime Minister Ehud] Olmert his entire life.”

Dr. Abu al-Aish was able to arrange transfer of his two injured daughters to Israeli hospitals, a rarity in this conflict. The Israeli army for the first time allowed a Palestinian ambulance to travel straight to the Erez border crossing, where the injured were transferred to Israeli ambulances. From there, they were taken by helicopter to Tel Hashomer hospital in Tel Aviv.

Gazan officials identified Dr. Abu al-Aish’s daughters fatally injured as Bisan, 22; Mayer, 15; and Aya, 14. His dead niece was Nour Abu al-Aish, also 14.

Dr. Abu al-Aish, 55, is a longtime peace activist who has promoted joint Israeli-Palestinian projects and studied the war’s affects on children. “What is happening is not the right way, from both sides,” he said Thursday night to his Squirrel Hill audience. The tragedy stunned those who took part in the Jewish Community Center discussion.

“When you know people, it makes a big difference,” said Nancy Bernstein. “We happened to hear this man, with his children around him, and now, his children are dead. It’s very shocking.”

Others said the deaths underscored the need for a swift end to the violence. “If the Israeli government had announced a cease-fire this morning, Ezzeldeen’s kids would be alive,” said Dr. Naftali Kaminski, a UPMC associate professor of medicine and pathology and longtime friend of the Palestinian doctor. He said he learned of the deaths from a nephew in Israel.

“This is a guy who, all of his life, was dedicated to two things: One is peace and reconciliation between Jews and Palestinians, and the other one is taking care of his patients,” Dr. Kaminski said. “This is devastating.”

There was also a 22 year old woman murdered in the attack.

I put in emphasis and Extra Emphasis on certain key elements in the story, because I know the IDF supporters habit of hiding behind the “Anti-Semitism” argument to deflect criticism.

Perhaps here I should point out that same Scriptural “right of return” touted loudly by the Knesset would also apply to the Palestinians in equal measure.

Because the Samaritans are Israel too…

Either the Scriptures are false, in which case Israel doesn’t exist, or they’re true, in which case both Israel AND Palestine have equal rights to exist.

Jewish Americans close down Israeli Consulate in Los Angeles

Protesters Block Entrances to Israeli Consulate [VIDEO] This is coverage from The Jewish Journal. The same video can also be seen on youtube video Protesters block entrances to Israeli Consulate – Los Angeles, Jan. 14, 2009

More news at the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network

ISRAEL IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY

israel
Even Nazi Germany couldn’t last forever. Israel exists only due to the largess of the American taxpayer, and with the American economy being what it is, I’m sure there will soon come an end to Israeli parasitism.

Nazis attack UN compound in Gaza.

Nazis now bombing hospitals in Gaza.

Nazi troops using unarmed Palestinians as human shields.

Boycott Starbucks, a supporter of Zionist war crimes.

Robber Barron Heist: Fed chair flat out refuses to tell Congress who they gave $1.2 TRILLION to. [video]

Why is Obama pulling a Bush, and putting one of the creeps responsible for the economic collapse in charge of the Treasury?

“Foreign aid is when the poor people of a rich country give money to the rich people of a poor country.”
–Johnny Hart, BC Comic Strip

Excerpts from Thomas McCullock’s Jan 15 notes, thomasmc.com.