Home

What Was it All For? Veterans Have Finally Turned On America’s Endless Wars

Leave a comment

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“So consider this a plea to Congress, to the corporate media establishment, and to all of youwhen even traditionally more conservative and martial military veterans raise the antiwar alarm – listen! And next time the American war drums beat, and they undoubtedly will, consider this article encouragement to do what Keith and I promised way back when.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

(Antiwar) It is undoubtedly my favorite part of every wedding. That awkward, but strangely forthright moment when the preacher asks the crowd for any objections to the couple’s marriage. No one ever objects, of course, but it’s still a raw, if tense, moment. I just love it.

I suppose we had that ubiquitous ritual in mind back in 2007 when Keith – a close buddy and fellow officer – and I crafted our own plan of objection. The setting was Baghdad, Iraq, at the start of the “surge” and the climax of the bloody civil war the U.S. invasion had unleashed. Just twenty three years old and only eighteen months out of the academy, my clique of officers had already decided the war was a mess, shouldn’t have been fought, and couldn’t be won.

Me and Keith, though, were undoubtedly the most radical. We both just hated how our squadron’s colonel would hijack the memorial ceremonies held for dead troopers – including three of my own – and use the occasion of his inescapable speech to encourage we mourners to use the latest death as a reason to “rededicate ourselves to the mission and the people of Iraq.” The whole thing was as repulsive as it was repetitive. More

Syria missile strikes: based on what evidence?

2 Comments

Jon Rappoport’s blog

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Based on what constitutional authority?

“Let’s see, US Deep State actors from intelligence agencies, the Pentagon, and the Department of State, along with US allies, played a MAJOR role in creating, funding, supplying, and sustaining ISIS, while purportedly doing everything possible to destroy ISIS. No problem. Why should there be a problem?” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Trump and the Pentagon claim the strikes were based on clear evidence President Assad’s forces used chemical weapons on their own civilian citizens.

The Russians point out that international inspectors were due to investigate the chemical-weapons claims on Saturday—and their findings would have denied Assad chemical attacks took place—therefore, to prevent this embarrassment, the US-led missile attacks were launched one day earlier.

Posted at Washingtonsblog.com:

MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
SUBJECT: Evidence Required for Military Decision on Syria

Mr. President,

 

More

Independence Day: Another Depleted Uranium Nightmare in Iraq?

5 Comments

strip banner

new-logo25Cassandra Anderson

 

______________________________________________________________________________________

As the U.S. considers another war in Iraq, it is important to reflect on the prior wars there on Independence Day.  The war in Iraq cost 4500 American lives and as many as 1.4 million Iraqi civilians have been killed. More

Syria: An obstacle to taking down Iran….

7 Comments

new-logo25strip banner

Marti Oakley        © copyright 2014 All rights reserved

____________________________________________________________________________________________

A major effort is underway to begin yet another war of aggression against another mid-eastern country who refuses to submit to the global bankers or, to allow global oil cartels access to the country’s largest asset….oil.  Syria and Iran stand as the last two countries refusing to submit to global banking and a complete takeover of oil assets.  Syria is the last roadblock to Iran, and the federal corporation we call “government” is desperate to start blasting Iran.

Senator John McCain (R) was beating the war drums yet again on February 10, 2014,  to send us into another unnecessary and illegal war with a country whose leader is marked for destruction, although he did not mention who would be appointed to head up the new government in Syria when we got done destroying another oil rich nation that has not harmed us or threatened us.save

McCain was quoted by ABC News as saying:

“When the images and horrors of this conflict occasionally show up on our television screens, the impulse of many Americans is to change the channel,” McCain said on the Senate floor. “But we must not look away. We must not avert our eyes from the suffering of the Syrian people – for, if we do, we ignore, we sacrifice that which is most precious in ourselves: our ability to empathize with the suffering of others, to share it, to acknowledge through our own sense of revulsion that what is happening in Syria today is a stain on  the collective conscience of moral peoples everywhere.”

Basically, our impulse to change the channel comes from the incessant lies, deceptions, frauds, and continual misinformation fabricated to convince the American public of some fictional threat that can be used to affect policy and the continued efforts to take over the mid east.  All of this issuing from the mouths of government officials who all have their fingers in the cookie jar. More

Grovelling for Petrodollars

3 Comments

  W.R. McAfee

© 2012 All Rights Reserved

______________________________________________________

Historically, buying and selling oil was done  in US-dollars through oil exchanges—bourses—in London and New York.

The bankers’ global depression set-up World War II and their own central banks funded all participants as well as America’s industry via confederates such as J.P Morgan and Goldman; the U.S. supplying the war machinery, provisions, and munitions for the allies in return for  payments in gold.

By one count, more than half  of the world’s gold wound up in America after WWII.

Following Bretton Woods, the US dollar—immune to inflation and then referred to as “good as gold”—was printed and exported worldwide to be used to grab war-weary nations by the economic short hairs.  This, some have argued, was the beginning by the bankers to launch world monetary, resource, and economic consolidation.

A few decades later, the world’s vaults were bulging with dollars; the US having sent/spent more dollars abroad than at home.

Today, analysts pretty much agree that outside the US, of the savings, or reserves, of all other countries—in gold and all currencies—that a massive 66% of this total wealth is in US dollars. More

“The Toronto Hearings on 9/11: Uncovering Ten Years of Deception”

7 Comments

Marti Oakley

_______________________________________________________________________

Ten years have passed since the World Trade Center attacks of September 11, 2001, and there are still many unanswered questions surrounding that fateful day. In 2011, experts and scientists from around the world gathered in Toronto, Canada to present new and established evidence that questions the official story of 9/11. This evidence was presented to a distinguished panel of experts over a 4 day period. Through their analysis and scientific investigations, they hope to spark a new investigation into the attacks of September 11, 2001. (Information on the DVD follows below the videos)
Press For Truth and The International Center for 9/11 Studies Present:

The Toronto Hearings on 9/11 (Full DVD) – Day 1

More

U.S. Military – The NWO Protectorate?

12 Comments

 Gary Jacobucci

_____________________________________________

Similar agreements are being made within the U.S. borders, with the Governor of Idaho making recent trips to China and opening up his state to Chinese colonization…

________________________________________________

 
A recent interview with Texe Marrs added to the picture forming on the geopolitical landscape…
 
Keeping in mind that China has been proclaimed the U.N. model for nations…
 
And last year’s MSM articles on the vast mineral wealth in Afghanistan…
 
Afghanistan Mineral Wealth May Be Greater Than Estimated: $3 Trillion
 
As the New York Times put in back in 2009… China Willing to Spend Big on Afghan Commerce
 
“…Two years ago, the China Metallurgical Group Corporation, a Chinese state-owned conglomerate, bid $3.4 billion — $1 billion more than any of its competitors from Canada, Europe, Russia, the United States and Kazakhstan — for the rights to mine deposits near the village of Aynak. Over the next 25 years, it plans to extract about 11 million tons of copper — an amount equal to one-third of all the known copper reserves in China.
 
While the United States spends hundreds of billions of dollars fighting the Taliban and Al Qaeda here, China is securing raw material for its voracious economy. The world’s superpower is focused on security. Its fastest rising competitor concentrates on commerce…” More

13 Lies: An Abbreviated History of U.S. Presidents Leading Us to War

Leave a comment

 

David Redick
Activist Post

Those of you who long ago figured out that George Bush lied about, and twisted, 9-11, the role of Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and Osama, and WMDs to justify the invasions of Afghanistan, and Iraq, and to create the War on Terror, will not be surprised to learn that our prior Presidents, and their complicit henchmen, have lied us into every war since our Revolution. Their true reasons have not been legal, constitutional, or politically acceptable, so they invent one or more false reasons that they can sell to the people. The recent WikiLeaks disclosures confirm how our foreign policy is riddled with lies. Surprise!

Sadly, most people, especially the troops and their families, believe the lies and proudly support these “wars for defense of our Liberties.”  It doesn’t occur to them that our leaders would be so evil as to spend the lives of our troops to gain their hidden goals for Empire-USA (oil, power, land, etc.).  

Iran is their next target
Thus, the war drums are beating in DC to justify bombing Iran, so this is a good time to consider whether our leaders are lying again. READ MORE
 

The War On Terror

1 Comment

Live Link: Global Research, October 16, 2010

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

__________________________________________________________

Does anyone remember the “cakewalk war” that would last six weeks, cost $50-$60 billion, and be paid for out of Iraqi oil revenues? 

Does anyone remember that White House economist Lawrence Lindsey was fired by Dubya because Lindsey estimated that the Iraq war could cost as much as $200 billion? 

Lindsey was fired for over-estimating the cost of a war that, according to Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes, has cost 15 times more than Lindsey estimated. And the US still has 50,000 troops in Iraq. More

An American Soldier Exposes – Kill Everybody

Leave a comment

One ex-soldier speaks out about the escalation of the wars.  Orders were given to “kill everybody”.   The soldiers know they were sent there on a lie; that they continue to fight a war because politicians refuse to end it.   

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqS4Vd0iD7I

The US should pull out of Washington D.C.

4 Comments

Thoughts to ponder:

Firearm death rates

AN INTERESTING LETTER IN THE AUSTRALIAN SHOOTER MAGAZINE, WHICH I QUOTE:

“If you consider that there has been an average of 160,000 troops in the Iraq theater of operations during the past 22 months, and a total of 2112 deaths, that gives a firearm death rate of 60 per 100,000 soldiers.

The firearm death rate in Washington, DC is 80.6 per 100,000 for the same
period.
That means you are about 25 per cent more likely to be shot and killed in
the US capital, which has one of the strictest gun control laws in the US
than you are in Iraq .

Conclusion: The US should pull out of Washington D.C.

Obey’s “Share our Sacrifice Act”: “Let those who worship the god of war, tithe to that god out of their own pockets”.

Leave a comment

Tell a Friend 

By: Marti Oakley  ALL RIGHTS RESERVED (c) copyright 2009

“Maybe congress and most especially Rep. Obey should submit a “get a conscience; honor your oath of office; honor the Constitution and serve the people who elected your sorry behind ” bill.”

SHARE OUR SACRIFICE?  HR 4130

I would start here by asking who the “our” is in this bill’s title?  Is he referring to the corporate US government?  I want to know what it is those included in the word “our”, are sacrificing? 

I would suggest that Rep. Obey and every other elected official who voted for funding, continued funding, continuing the misuse of our military for corporate benefit, do the right thing:  SHARE OUR SACRIFICE…….please, refuse any further congressional pay and, return all increases in wages and wages paid from the start of these wars you condoned in direct violation of the Constitution, with the full knowledge you were sending our troops to conduct a war on behalf of multi-national oil cartels.

Please forgo any perks associated with your position: limo services, private staff, golden fleece insurance and most especially the “retirement” payments you have supplied yourself even if you are convicted of a felony.  These few “sacrifices” on your part could save the country hundreds of millions of dollars each year and could be used to help offset the borrowing done using the land assets of everyday Americans.  After all, this seems a minor sacrifice compared to our military families having to bury their dead as they come home.  Its not as if any one of you actually represents the sovereign states or their citizens.  I see no reason to continue to pay you for “no services rendered”.     More

Top Ten Reasons for a New 9/11 Investigation

Leave a comment

Original article from:  Strike the Root

The Paradise Perspective:

Commentary from a Free and Compassionate Alternate Reality

Volume 1, Number 33

 

by Glen Allport

Exclusive to STR

Preface for 2009  

It has been two years since this column was first published, and despite a new Democratic administration and further scientific evidence debunking the Official Conspiracy Theory, the situation is largely unchanged. The United States is still occupying the nations of Iraq and Afghanistan, causing an appalling number of civilian deaths, creating resentment and hatred of the U.S. among the local populations, making the world a more dangerous place (according to three former CIA agents) and further bankrupting Americans in the process. Domestically, assaults continue on the rights and freedoms that America was once famous for. The mainstream media (and many on the Internet) continue to characterize those who sensibly disbelieve the Official Conspiracy Theory as “conspiracy theorists” and “nutjobs”; the ever-growing body of evidence against that official version of events continues to be ignored, downplayed, and misrepresented. The “Big Lie” theory espoused by Hitler has thus once again been proven correct. Few Americans are willing to put up with the discomfort of seeing things as they really are in this situation.  

Of the “further scientific evidence” mentioned above, I will highlight only one item: the finding, by an international team of scientists, that a huge amount of high-tech nano-thermite was used in the demolition of the World Trade Center buildings. The PDF of the study published in The Open Chemical Physics Journal  may be read here (25 pages) and is highly recommended.  

Beyond the higher numbers of casualties for both U.S. troops and locals in the occupied areas, little in the column below would merit change. If you have not yet been willing to face the unpleasant truth of this situation, I encourage you to to do so.

September 11, 2007

The List

Introduction

– 1 –

Epic Disaster and Failure All Around  

Six years ago, on September 11, 2001 , America ‘s staggeringly expensive defense system failed catastrophically. Four airliners were hijacked and then used as weapons; three were flown into buildings and the fourth crashed on the way to an unknown target. Three skyscrapers in New York were completely destroyed (although one had not been hit by a plane) and the Pentagon suffered serious damage. Almost three thousand lives were lost, and people are still suffering and dying from the aftereffects. Last Friday, Discover Magazine reported that “Up to 70 percent of first responders are ill as a result of 9/11 contamination. If a similar rate of illness holds true for those who lived and worked near the Twin Towers , the number of seriously ill New Yorkers could climb to 300,000 in the near future.”  

This disaster should have been prevented, but was not. The people and organizations charged with detecting and thwarting such an attack failed. Warnings were in fact given, but as is typical of government action, even the sincere efforts of dedicated individuals were not enough to prevent the organization as a whole from failing, in this case with horrific consequences.  

– 2 –

Accountability  

Imagine that a group of private firms had been in charge of defending America from attack on 9/11, and imagine these firms had failed as completely as did our own defense establishment on that day. What would have happened to those firms and to their executives in the wake of the attacks?  

Businesswoman Martha Stewart went to prison for five months merely for lying to investigators about a stock trade. Any corporation, small business, or other non-government organization responsible for the death of even a single person through negligence or failure of their product or service might well be taken to court, and those at the top charged with negligent homicide or other serious crime in regards the death. What on Earth would we have done to people responsible for the incredible failures of September 11 – if those people had not been highly placed in our own government?  

Not only have those responsible for this massive and deadly failure not been held accountable, they have been allowed to use their own failure as a blank check for staggering new police-state powers and for waging aggressive war against Afghanistan and Iraq – two nations which had neither attacked us nor even threatened to attack us, and which were in fact incapable of realistically threatening the most powerful nation on Earth.  

– 3 –

Using Grenades to Kill a Fly at a Dinner Party  

READ MORE

http://www.strike-the-root.com/72/allport/allport11.html

 

Scientific Supporting texts from ‘Banning Uranium Weapons’ seminar, UN Oct 8th 2008.

Leave a comment

Recent articles appearing here in the PPJ have elicited comments to the effect that depleted uranium does not pose any danger to land, water or persons.  Apparently there are many countries, scientists and other highly qualified people around the world who have a different view.  But…I suppose they are all just liars and not qualified to make such statements (sarc).

While researching to prove out the claims that DU presents no significant threat either to indigenous populations where it is used, or to military personnel who might be exposed to DU,( something that would make me feel much better) I noted that reports of exposure were not annotated in the health reports of veterans.  Also, that any attempts to set up regimented screening and testing to prove the assertion that DU was not a physical threat, all seemed to just fade into obscurity. 

Even the  [US ARMY TRAINING VIDEO: Depleted Uranium Hazard Awareness]   seems to be disregarded in its admonishments that DU contaminates water, soil and personnel and represents a significant threat to the health of those exposed to it.  This training video was made in the early 90’s…but until recently was never shown to military personnel.  Even now, it is on a limited basis.
 
 
ICBUW Science Team

The National Defense Authorization Act of 2007 signed into law by President Bush in October of 2006, contained legislation pertaining to depleted uranium. Section 716 called for a comprehensive study of the health effects of depleted uranium (DU) due to the use of DU weapons, to be completed within a year. The U.S. Department of Defense asked the National Research Council to oversee this project and the result was The Review of Toxicologic and Radiologic Risks to Military Personnel from Exposure to Depleted Uranium

http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11979  During and After Combat published by the National Academies of Sciences in 2008.

Although this is a scientific report and concludes the lungs would be the most available point of transfer of DU dust, it is conspicuously absent in actual testing of the lungs of those exposed to DU.

The report leaves out over two dozen recent peer-reviewed articles, mostly indicating potentially harmful effects of DU.

This document is in PDF format and can be read using Acrobat Reader.

A wide range of scientific articles and observations can be read at this same site.

http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/190.html    Critique of US NRC Report (57 Kb – Format pdf)

 

I also came across all of these efforts:

 

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-177

H.R. 177 Depleted Uraniums Testing and Screening Act

Submitted January 6, 2009  (Serano) 111th congress (sitting in committee)

 

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/109-h5303/show

H.R 5305 Depleted Uranium Munitions Suspension and Study Act of 2006

Submitted May 04, 2006 (MCKinney)

May 04, 2006: Referred to House International Relations  (never addressed)

 

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-2410 

H.R. 2410, The Depleted Uranium Munitions Act, 

Congressman Jim McDermott (D-WA) 109th congress & 110th congress (never addressed)

 

There are multiple bills that have been introduced since 2004 to establish testing, screening and protective measures for military personnel.  Each of them is routinely referred to one committee or another where they are allowed to die a quiet death.  These three are given only as example.

 

Twenty states have introduced or passed legislation regarding depleted uranium testing and study.  Connecticut had implemented their own law by the end of 2006 establishing a health registry for military personnel related to exposure to depleted uranium. At lest twenty other states are considering the same things.

 

April 10, 2007: Star Tribune (Minn., Mn.) reports a state Senate committee OK’d a bill providing for testing veteran national guardsmen returning from Iraq to see if dust from spent-uranium munitions has harmed them. Link: www.startribune.com/587/story/1112856.html.

 

 

There are still those who maintain that depleted uranium poses no health risks or environmental contamination.  If this is true, why do sites that have been exposed to these munitions have to be routinely [decontaminated]? Although I would like to believe DU poses no threat, the fact remains that if it didn’t, it wouldn’t be used.  The idea that it might possibly be poisoning the environment, causing damage to human beings must fall under the category of [collateral damage].  One of those unexpected perks of wars.

 

(C) 2009 Marti Oakley

.

 

 

SHOE THROWING AT THE WHITE HOUSE

3 Comments

bush_worstdisaster

http://shoebush.org/

JOIN US IN WASHINGTON, DC ON PRESIDENT BUSH’S LAST DAY IN OFFICE FOR A SHOE HURLING ACTION

MONDAY, JANUARY 19th
11:00am CONVERGENCE followed by SHOE THROWING AT THE WHITE HOUSE

Why Shoe Bush?
Our president stood in a nation he had illegally invaded and occupied, where his actions had caused over 1.2 million deaths, 5 million people forced out of their homes, millions more deprived of electricity or clean water and afraid to walk the streets.  He stood smiling in a nation he had transformed into a living hell, a place where everyone had seen loved ones and neighbors killed.  And when Muntadar Al-Zeidi threw two shoes at him, our president remarked “I don’t know what his beef is.”

But billions of people around the world believed that the pretended obliviousness of George W. Bush to the pain and suffering he was inflicting had gone on as long as they could stand if not much longer, and Al-Zeidi became a hero overnight.  His two shoes punctured the Bush veil of separation, the distance Bush pretends to imagine exists between his decisions and the human limbs scattered in the sand of his colony.  And while the U.S. media pretended to wonder whether the water torture was “really” torture, the United States and its puppet government in Iraq inflicted on Al-Zeidi one of the more commonly employed torture techniques of the Bush regime: they beat him and broke his bones.

In an ideal world, it would be enough to present the evidence of crimes for Bush, Cheney, and their criminal subordinates to be prosecuted and convicted.  In this world, we’ve presented that evidence ( http://afterdowningstreet.org/keydocuments ) for years, and we are still in a climate in which Bush and Cheney blissfully admit their crimes, apparently believing that they render prosecution less likely by declaring their own crimes acceptable.  While lies may take hold more easily the bigger they are, big lies also collapse quickly, as when a child points to a naked emperor, or a journalist throws his shoes.

We have a president-elect who can save himself from engaging in criminal wars and occupations, in torture and other war crimes, in warrantless spying and other violations of our Constitution, only by prosecuting the actions of his predecessor.  Not to prosecute is itself a crime.  If we are going to persuade the president elect, we must first persuade the U.S. media, and the U.S. media is not attracted by facts and information.  The U.S. media is attracted by throwing shoes.

Bush’s last act is expected to be the unprecedented pardoning of crimes he authorized.  This has never before been done, and to do so is to drop all claim to being a nation of laws.  Thanks to the example set by Al-Zeidi, since emulated by people all over the world, we will know exactly how to make our response visible when those pardons come.

–David Swanson

To receive updates from After Downing Street register at   http://afterdowningstreet.org/user/register

He say’s…..”At least Bush had the balls”…..

Leave a comment

bushbombs_dees

 

It seems not a day goes by anymore that at some point I am not butting heads with another person…usually a man….who thinks he knows how things are, how things work…..but who in reality seems to know very little about much of anything.  In almost every instance, the source of information for Mr. Know-it-all is someone like Limbaugh, Hannity or some other noxious right wing gasbag who makes their living spewing disinformation or outright garbage into the public arena.  How anyone can tolerate listening to these blowhards without feeling vomit rise in their throats is a mystery. 

 

My most recent encounter was with a ‘gentleman’ who insisted that “At least Bush had the balls to go after Iraq!”.  ‘S’cuse me?  My first thought was, “whose balls were they?”.  Bush certainly has none of his own.  That aside, I asked Mr. Know-it-all what he based this on?  I pointed out that Iraq was nearly defenseless, had no WMD, had not threatened us and was not in a position to threaten anyone.  I also pointed out that between us and Britain, we had the upper one third and lower one third of his country under a no-fly surveillance zone, and that Hussein only had control of the middle one-third of his country.  I added that not only did we have the entire country under surveillance, we had stopped any humanitarian aid including food, clean water and medical supplies and had done so for at least ten years.  Where was this threat?

 

Mr. Know-it-all then claimed that Hussein had been responsible for the attacks on 9/11 and that’s why Bush had to go after them.  [At this point I was tempted to start banging my head against a wall.]  How could anyone after all these years and after all the lies have been exposed about 9/11 still believe that Hussein was the culprit in 9/11?   Or that Iraq was in any way involved in those attacks?

 

Before I could stop myself I asked the question:  Where did you get that idea from?  I knew what was coming.  Mr. Know-it-all replied with the kind of self-righteous pride that can only come from self-induced ignorance and willing gullibility…….”Limbaugh was saying on his show……”.  [Let the head banging commence.]

 

Here’s your problem Mr. K…….you’re getting your information from a junkie.  One who is paid handsomely to assault the public with manipulated information to make sure you think and believe what those in the neo-conservative movement want you to think and believe. 

 

As a last resort, Mr. K. screamed at me that Hussein was a bad man and had killed more than a hundred thousand of his own people and we had to stop him.  I responded that we have now killed more than a million Iraqi’s, having bombed them, shot them, blown them up, starved them and tortured some others.  I mentioned the depleted uranium gas that is being dispersed over the entire mid-east resulting in 70% of newborns being horribly deformed and the slow agonizing deaths of those exposed to this radio active waste product, and is also poisoning our troops.  Mr. K., now in a full rage, was now trying to tell me and a few others how Hussein had come into power….according to Limbaugh.  [You don’t even want to hear this part, it exceeds stupidity.]

In retaliation, I pointed out that Donald Rumsfeld had appeared on the front page of the New York Times shaking hands with Hussein after he was carefully selected by the up and coming neo-cons, to head up Iraq after we deposed their last leader.  We knew all along what he was doing to his own people and didn’t care until he refused to co-operate with us.  After all, he was instrumental in the Iran/Contra affair and waged war against Iran on our behalf with weapons we supplied him. 

 

Realizing that I was arguing with an individual who was obviously mentally compromised, having been willfully exposed to auditory waste by-products that comprise the majority of Limbaugh and others broadcasts, I couldn’t resist one final question;  What kind of ‘balls’ did it take to attack a country that was nearly defenseless, that had not attacked us or threatened to?  And how ‘bout those oil production sharing agreements they are still trying to shove through the Iraqi parliament? You know…the oil we attacked Iraq to steal?”

 

At this point Mr. K. informed me that all Iraqi’s should be killed because they are Muslims, not Christians.  I bet God loved that one.

 

So there it is in a nutshell.  Bush had [balls] because he attacked a non-threatening country that was defenseless but it’s ok because they are Muslims not Christians….and the oil is a big perk too.

 

Somehow, considering the low level of intelligence of most of those who listen to these hacks who prey on the worst of human attributes, this doesn’t surprise me although the idea of Bush having [balls] somehow did.

 

© 2008 Marti Oakley

 

 

 

Bush gets the boot in Iraq

Leave a comment

 

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/500.html

Translation

Here’s what the man said as he threw his shoes at Bush:

“This is a farewell kiss for you, you dog.

This is from the widows, the orphans, and those killed in Iraq.”

Well put.

Can we make this man an honorary American citizen?

After all, Bush created a lot of widows and orphans in America too.

It’s a pity all this guy had was his shoes – and he didn’t have better aim.

Bush’s S.O.F.A. agreement with Iraq….not approved by congress

Leave a comment

American Freedom Campaign info@americanfreedomcampaign.org

 

The U.S.-Iraq Agreement’s New Clothes

The document parading around as the U.S.-Iraq agreement is not valid under the U.S. Constitution.  Its legitimacy is based solely on the silence of lawmakers (and members of the media), who seem to be paralyzed by the fear of having an independent and intelligent opinion.  Fortunately, one lawmaker has broken the silence and has acknowledged the truth before everyone’s eyes.

It is now time for others, including you, to join their voices with hers.

A few weeks ago, I wrote about the pending U.S.-Iraq agreement, decrying the fact that the Iraqi Parliament was being given the opportunity to vote on whether to approve the agreement while Congress was being denied – and was refusing to fight for – the same opportunity.

Well, thanks to our efforts and the leadership of Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), the U.S. House of Representatives may finally get to voice its opinion on President Bush’s unconstitutional usurpation of Congress’s legislative power. 

Yesterday, Rep. Lee introduced a resolution related to the U.S.-Iraq agreement, inspired in part by AFC’s call for a “signing statement” resolution.  The primary purpose of this resolution is to express the sense of the House that President Bush does not have the power under the Constitution to negotiate and sign such a far-reaching agreement with another nation without seeking congressional approval of the agreement. 

Passage of this resolution — most likely following re-introduction in January — will send a message to the Bush administration, the incoming Obama administration, and the rest of the world that the agreement holds no legal weight under U.S. law and will be considered merely advisory by Congress. 

In truth, even without passage of this resolution, Congress shall not be bound by its terms.  No president can unilaterally commit $10 billion per month in U.S. treasure to keep our troops in another nation.  The United States has never been a monarchy or a dictatorship and we are certainly not going to accept any similar kind of system today.

Putting aside the question over whether this agreement is currently binding or not, it is important that as many lawmakers as possible openly reject the constitutionality of the agreement.  So please tell your U.S. representative to co-sponsor, support, and vote for Rep. Lee’s signing statement resolution (H.Res. 1535) by clicking on the following link:

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2165/t/1027/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26332

Once you have sent your message, please forward this email widely to friends and family.  In the alternative, you can use the “Tell-A-Friend” option on the AFC Web site that will appear after you have sent your message.

Thank you so much for taking action.

Steve Fox
Campaign Director
American Freedom Campaign Action Fund

 

DownsizeDC.org….Iraqi’s need referendum on continued US Occupation

Leave a comment

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h


Quotes of the Day:

“You can’t walk around unless you’ve got flak jackets, helmets on all the time, no matter where you are. It’s always struck me it’s almost like a Fellini movie, kind of unreal. The American people are told things are stable and secure, and violence is down. No American would walk outside there without a convoy!” — Chuck Hagel, upon returning from Baghdad

“At long last, the fragile state of Somalia seems to be slowly resurfacing from a searing bout of violence and humanitarian crisis. Interestingly, the light at the end of this decades-long tunnel is not burning at the behest of the United States or the United Nations; rather, it burns because Somali leaders, both within the government and without, have banded together. Frustrated by failed foreign interventions, they are now seeking sustainable Somali-based solutions. The key to success, going forward, is to keep it Somali-led. Further intervention from neighboring Ethiopia or the United States will be ruinous.” — Michael Shank, Communications Director, Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution at George Mason University, Senior Analyst at Foreign Policy In Focus

Subject: Real “Change” in Iraq

Many people think the U.S. occupation of Iraq has become a non-issue, for two reasons . . .

1. Violence is down
2. The U.S. government signed an agreement with the Iraqi government to continue the occupation

We feel differently. We think the occupation is still an issue, because . . .

* American soldiers continue to die
* The factions in Iraq haven’t reached a settlement, and have no incentive to do so as long as we remain there
* Somalia and Lebanon show that stable societies are grown from within, not engineered from without
* The “agreement” to continue the occupation was signed by a U.S. government that has now been repudiated
* The public legitimacy of the Iraqi government is also highly questionable
* The dollars being spent in Iraq belong in the pockets of struggling U.S. taxpayers

This is why we think the occupation is still an issue. We still want the occupation to end. We want change.

Barack Obama won election by promising change. He distinguished himself from Hillary Clinton and John McCain by having always opposed the Iraq invasion, and by promising to leave Iraq sooner rather than later. Iraq was a key issue to millions of Obama voters. Will they get the change they sought? Consider these points . . .

* Pro-war Congressman Rahm Emmanuel will be Obama’s Chief of Staff
* Pro-war Senator Clinton may become his Secretary of State
* Robert Gates, who favors an indefinite occupation, may remain as Secretary of Defense

With top advisers like these, who needs neo-con bogeymen? Perhaps in DC-speak, “change” means “let’s fool the yokels who think elections matter, and give them more of the same.”

Are we being too harsh on Obama too soon? We think not. We think our skepticism is justified. Remember . . .

We now know that George W. Bush was already scheming to invade Iraq when he promised us a “humble foreign policy,” and “no nation-building.” He also stocked his cabinet with aggressive interventionists, just like Obama has started to do.

This is how politicians behave. They promise one thing and do another. Obama is a politician, therefore . . .

We assume the worst.

And remember, Senator Obama voted to “legalize” warrantless spying. This, all by itself, is enough to justify extreme skepticism about our incoming president, no matter how much we may like him as a person.

If we want real change we’re going to have to demand it, constantly. Eternal vigilance!

The main argument for the occupation has been, “We broke it, so we must fix it.” But what if the Iraqi people don’t want us to “fix” them? What if they don’t want us there?

We think Congress should pass a resolution asking the Iraqi government to hold a public referendum on the U.S. occupation. This resolution would . . . 

* Show respect to the Iraqi people
* Potentially legitimize the occupation, or end it
* Tell the President-elect that the American people still want what he promised — to leave Iraq

If you don’t buy the argument that Iraq has become a non-issue, and you do buy our argument that the Iraqi people must . . .

A. Settle their own differences
B. Be allowed to say yes or no to the U.S. occupation

And if you want to . . .

* Save American lives
* Save your tax dollars

Then . . .

Please tell Congress to pass a resolution requesting an Iraqi referendum on the occupation. You can do so using our quick-and-easy Educate the Powerful System.

Please also . . .

* Forward this message to others or re-post it on your own blog
* Digg this message on our blog.

Thank you for being part of our growing Downsize DC army.

Jim Babka
President
DownsizeDC.org, Inc.

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h
is the official email list of DownsizeDC.org, Inc. & Downsize DC Foundation

CONTRIBUTE to the Electronic Lobbyist project

http://www.DownsizeDC.org is sponsored by DownsizeDC.org, Inc. — a non-profit educational organization promoting the ideas of individual liberty, personal responsibility, free markets, and small government.

You are encouraged to forward this message to friends and business associates, and permission is hereby granted to reproduce any items herein as long as attribution is provided for articles and the subscription instructions above are included.

Co-opting religion to promote war

Leave a comment

 

The current US President sees the war in Iraq as a Christian crusade…

Is this kind of bizarre thinking a rare and strange anomaly?

Unfortunately not.

The fact is “Christianity”is frequently co-opted and its missionaries are often used as a weapons.

Excepts from a often-banned film on this taboo subject:

 

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/473.html– Brasscheck

Bush criminalizes anti-war movement and humanitarian aid

1 Comment

This is only one of the Executive Orders issued by a tyrant; a man totally dedicated to eradication of the Constitution, civil liberties and inalienable rights. 

What you can read in this Order are the words of man terrified of his own people; one who seeks to silence them.  Notorious for his own criminal activities, threatened by possible prosecution for crimes against humanity, Bush has effectively rendered dissent against government actions as criminal.  This Executive Order is written to be intentionally and broadly interpreted.  On its face it appears to criminalize persons who might be actively involved in supporting Iraq either physically or monetarily against the United States. This can even include those (religious groups?) who might try to give humanitarian aid. 

As in almost all of Bush’s E.O.’s, he grants himself the power at will to be the single or unilateral “decider” of who is or is not one of this newly created class of criminals.

Its an odd turn of events when the most corrupt and criminal among us abuses its power and authority to criminalize Constitutional rights. 

July 17, 2007

Executive Order: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, as amended (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)(IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.)(NEA), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code,

I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, find that, due to the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by acts of violence threatening the peace and stability of Iraq and undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq and to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people, it is in the interests of the United States to take additional steps with respect to the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13303 of May 22, 2003, and expanded in Executive Order 13315 of August 28, 2003, and relied upon for additional steps taken in Executive Order 13350 of July 29, 2004, and Executive Order 13364 of November 29, 2004. I hereby order:

Section 1. (a) Except to the extent provided in section 203(b)(1), (3), and (4) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(1), (3), and (4)), or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the date of this order, all property and interests in property of the following persons, that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of United States persons, are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in: any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense,

(i) to have committed, or to pose a significant risk of committing, an act or acts of violence that have the purpose or effect of:

(A) threatening the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq; or

(B) undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq or to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people;

(ii) to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, logistical, or technical support for, or goods or services in support of, such an act or acts of violence or any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; or

(iii) to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order.

(b) The prohibitions in subsection (a) of this section include, but are not limited to, (i) the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order, and (ii) the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person.

Sec. 2. (a) Any transaction by a United States person or within the United States that evades or avoids, has the purpose of evading or avoiding, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.

(b) Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.

Sec. 3. For purposes of this order:

(a) the term “person” means an individual or entity;

(b) the term “entity” means a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, group, subgroup, or other organization; and

(c) the term “United States person” means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United States.

Sec. 4. I hereby determine that the making of donations of the type specified in section 203(b)(2) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(2)) by, to, or for the benefit of, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order would seriously impair my ability to deal with the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13303 and expanded in Executive Order 13315, and I hereby prohibit such donations as provided by section 1 of this order.

Sec. 5. For those persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States, I find that, because of the ability to transfer funds or other assets instantaneously, prior notice to such persons of measures to be taken pursuant to this order would render these measures ineffectual. I therefore determine that for these measures to be effective in addressing the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13303 and expanded in Executive Order 13315, there need be no prior notice of a listing or determination made pursuant to section 1(a) of this order.

Sec. 6. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense, is hereby authorized to take such actions, including the promulgation of rules and regulations, and to employ all powers granted to the President by IEEPA as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this order. The Secretary of the Treasury may redelegate any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States Government, consistent with applicable law. All agencies of the United States Government are hereby directed to take all appropriate measures within their authority to carry out the provisions of this order and, where appropriate, to advise the Secretary of the Treasury in a timely manner of the measures taken.

Sec. 7. Nothing in this order is intended to affect the continued effectiveness of any rules, regulations, orders, licenses, or other forms of administrative action issued, taken, or continued in effect heretofore or hereafter under 31 C.F.R. chapter V, except as expressly terminated, modified, or suspended by or pursuant to this order.

Sec. 8. This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right, benefit, or privilege, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, instrumentalities, or entities, its officers or employees, or any other person.

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE WHITE HOUSE,

July 17, 2007.

 

Bush should be in jail…….BRASSCHECK TV/video

1 Comment

 

 

If we can put a man on the moon…we can put George Bush in jail.

We have to wait until he’s out of office, but once he is it should be Gray Bar Hotel time.

I don’t care who is friends are or who his daddy is.

The legal theory is bullet proof, the case is rock solid, and the mechanism is in place – almost.

Your help is needed to make it happen:

1. Understand the case

2. Tell others about it

3. Support the Attorney General candidate for the State of Vermont who is legally empowered to bring the case to trial.

Here’s the smoking gun evidence that proves when Bush sent thousands of Americans to their deaths, he did it knowing that the country was in no danger from Iraq.

Under US law, taking a deliberate action knowing that it will result in the death of one or more, without legal justification, is murder.

Once he’s indicted in Vermont for the murder of citizens there who’ve been killed in Iraq only the Supreme Court can protect him – and it won’t be as easy for them to do this as it was when they put this criminal in the White House in the first place.

Now’s the time.

Here’s the info:

 

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/449.html– Brasscheck

– Brasscheck

P.S. Please share Brasscheck TV e-mails and videos with friends and colleagues.

That’s how we grow. Thanks.

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

 

 

Brasscheck TV

2380 California St.

San Francisco, CA 94115

Monkey see, Monkey do……BRASSCHECK TV/video

1 Comment

Who’s in charge?

I was under the impression that Canada and Australia were sovereign countries.

I guess not.

This video shows the heads of both these states reading the same exact statement – word for word – supporting the invasion of Iraq.

Who wrote this thing?

Who distributed it?

Who compelled these obvious puppets to read it?

The Queen? The CIA? Who runs these people.

Note: Canada’s Harper was not yet Prime Minister when he made this speech selling out his country for god knows who – but he is now.

 

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/439.html

US-Iraq “Security” Agreement Includes `Some Secret Provisions`

1 Comment

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article21097.htm

 

By Press TV

October 26, 2008 “Press TV” — The controversial US-Iraq security agreement includes ‘some secret provisions’, which would flagrantly violate Iraq’s sovereignty.

Secret provisions have been incorporated in the so-called Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), which would violate Iraq’s sovereignty in a more direct manner than the provisions disclosed by the Iraqi media, the Saudi daily Okaz reported on Sunday, citing “informed political sources”.

According to the report, although “the secret provisions” would have more adverse consequences for Iraq in terms of the country’s sovereignty and independence, a majority of Iraqi lawmakers have been kept entirely unaware of them.

Based on those provisions, the US would be granted the permission to build military bases, camps and prisons inside Iraq. The scope of the immunity from legal prosecution for the US forces–the most controversial provision of SOFA– would also be extended to include all US security, military and civilian firms as well as the US army’s contractors.

Under the terms of SOFA, Iraqi officials would be prohibited from meddling in operations carried out by US forces or limiting their authority. The US would also be allowed to attack any country, which “represents a security threat to Iraq” from the country’s soil.

After signing the deal, Baghdad would be obliged to ask for Washington’s approval before concluding any regional or international agreements with third countries.

According to the Okaz report, SOFA would bring the Iraqi key ministries of defense and interior under US control for 10 years to facilitate “the training of the Iraqi forces.”

The Saudi newspaper also claimed that under the secret provisions, no timetable would be set for the withdrawal of US troops form Iraq and any pull-out would depend on several conditions.

The conditions for any US withdrawal include the readiness of Iraqi forces, the success in fighting terrorism, the removal of “the neighboring countries’ security threats”, national reconciliation and a consensus among all Iraqi political groups on the issue. Washington would be entitled to stay in Iraq, if even one of those conditions were not fulfilled.

Based on those SOFA provisions which have made public, the US forces must leave the war-torn country by early 2011 without any preconditions.

The report also ruled out the possibility that the US and Iraq would reach an agreement before the term of US President George W. Bush in office ends.

The failure to sign the deal, according to the daily, should be considered as a setback for the Bush administration which is seeking to play the card of SOFA to strengthen the position of the Republican Party before the upcoming US presidential elections.

 

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article21097.htm

 

 

 

Bush’s Iraq Madness…BRASSCHECK TV/video

Leave a comment

Another Bush administration accomplishment.

 

Joseph Stiglitz won the Noble Prize and he was president of the World Bank.

He has two simple messages:

1. The Iraq War will cost the US $3 TRILLION (minimum)

2. The war is one of the chief causes behind the destruction of the US (and the world’s) banking system.

This interview was recorded back in April, long before the seriousness of the banking problems were apparent and long before the multi-trillion dollar bailouts

 

The US put – and kept – a venal moron in the White House for eight years.

 

Using fraud, he launched a war that will cost US taxpayers at least $3 trillion.

 

As if that weren’t enough, the “creative financing”

he employed to pay for the war now threatens to destroy the US financial system.

 

Not just cause a recession, but destroy the US financial system.

 

This is not my opinion…it’s the opinion of the former president of the World Bank and a Nobel Prize winner in economics…

 

This was recorded over six months ago.

 

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/442.html

 

– Brasscheck

Neo-cons Not Aware of Any Impeachable Offenses.

Leave a comment

 

Today I watched with anticipation the Judiciary Committee hearings on whether or not there was sufficient evidence, or any evidence at all, that the Bush Administration was corrupt, had abused its power and had mislead the American people regarding the war with Iraq, illegal spying and wiretapping of American citizens and if it had corrupted the Department of Justice.  Several other issues were touched upon but of course everyone was limited to five minutes to state their case which had the immediate and desired affect of limiting any attempts to actually expose the full scope of criminal activity by this corrupt and shameful administration. 

 

Of particular interest to me were the statements by ranking committee member Rep. Lamar Smith of the 21st District of Texas.

 

According to Representative Smith, not only did he not believe that the Bush Administration and its cohorts in crime had committed any crimes worthy of investigation, he felt the hearings themselves were shameful and a waste of time.  Apparently Mr. Smith has either been in a coma for the last seven years, or is blissfully ignorant not only of what has transpired during this time but the affect these years have had not only on our civil liberties but also what it has cost us as a nation in blood and tears. 

 

Mr. Smith seemed not at all impressed with the facts that more than a million Iraqi’s have been slaughtered in this war for oil and greed, along with 4,127 American military men and women and that these deaths and this carnage was brought about by the lies of the worst president and administration we have ever had to endure as a nation.  Mr. Smith indicated that the president had committed no impeachable offenses.  That this supposed representative of a Texas district could make such statements with a straight face was a shock to the senses of anyone who had paid any attention at all to the illegal activities and actions of this administration since 2001.

 

Two panels were seated during this inquiry, and on the second was a gentleman named Jeremy Rabkin.  Mr. Rabkin is a professor of law at George Mason University although how this man managed to obtain such employment must be a mystery.  Professor Rabkin was brought in as a witness apparently to bolster the neo-con position that it’s only a crime if a non global elitist does it.  What a pitiful example of the neo-con mindset this man is. 

 

In what I can only describe as one of the most overly animated, gesticulating, face contorting diatribes I have ever witnessed, Professor Rabkin loudly proclaimed that the mood of the people in the room was “demented”.  (I found it to be quite passive and docile until he himself began raging.) It would seem, according to the professor, that anyone in the room or out of the room who believed that impeachable offenses had been committed were deranged.

 

While this neo-con buffoon did everything but physically jump on the desk and twist his body into the shape of a pretzel he presented not one shred of legal expertise to support his contention that there was no offense.  Far from coming off as a legal expert on Constitutional law, or any law at all for that matter, the professor seemed more to be auditioning for the Gong Show.  Mr. Rabkin’s appearance must have been more for distraction than for substance.  It was distracting and also quite uncomfortable to watch.

 

So, has the president committed any impeachable offenses?  Let me count the ways!  Illegal spying and wiretapping, data mining on US citizens,  manipulating intelligence to attack Iraq,  launching a pre-emptive war of aggression,  kidnapping and disappearing of foreign nationals,  secret prisons, torture,  signing statements directing departments and agencies not to abide by the law,  claiming powers not delegated to the  executive,  issuing executive orders contrary to constitutional law,  declaring himself above the common law,  illegal imprisonment, holding prisoners without charges, the intentional genocide of the Iraqi people for the benefit and gain of multinational oil cartels, corruption of the Department of Justice,  attempting to launch yet another war of aggression by provoking Iran,  entering into the Security & Prosperity Partnership intended to dissolve our sovereign nation,  failing to secure our southern border from illegal invasion,  and mounting an unmitigated War OF Terror against the American people.  This is the short list.

 

So what do you think, Mr. Smith?  Mr. Rabkin?  Can you look at this short list of offenses and still claim that nothing here is indicative of impeachable offenses? 

 

These two gentlemen were surely not the only ones on the committee or panels who feigned indignation at the mere thought that anyone might want to hold this administration accountable, but they are the two who stood out, especially Mr. Rabkin whose head I thought was surely going to explode at one point if it didn’t break away from his body totally and spin across the room.   

 

This may come as a shock to these gentlemen, but the American public has come to its own conclusions about this administration and its activities, and it was no thanks to either of you or people like you. It is after viewing such things as this hearing today, that I find myself wondering how Mr. Smith and Mr. Rabkin have continued to hold any position at all as both seem to be either clueless or so dedicated to the dead elephant in the room, the herd passed by them unnoticed

 

And the elephant is dead for all intents and purposes.  Yet, as today showed us, there are still those who believe that the neo-con tactics of distortion, manipulation, stonewalling, ranting and over-acting are still clung to by a few who refuse to admit the American people have tired of these antics, are no longer amused by them, and no longer sucked in by them.   

 

Today also exposed one other thing; there is still a number of people willing to forfeit our country, our Constitution, our lives, rather than defend and protect the Constitution of the United States and our laws, as long as there is some benefit for them in doing so, whether hidden or overt.  For these individuals, party affiliation, political pandering and inclusion in what can only be described as an anti-American movement is far more important than preserving our nation and protecting not only our government, but its people as well, from a cabal dedicated to seeing it destroyed. 

 

Whether congress moves to impeach this criminal administration or not, the majority of people in the United States have.  We didn’t have to call in cartoon professors, or put dummy politicians on a committee…..we figured it out for ourselves.  And, if ordinary people can look at the actions of this administration, and admit that they were duped into a war on behalf of oil cartels; if they can find evidence on their own that a massive deception and fraud was perpetrated on the American people that has cost so many lives; if they can comprehend and realize that everything we hold dear is being stripped away from us……why can’t congress? 

 

It seems a strange thing to me that ordinary citizens are willing to speak up and speak out about the travesties of this administration, that they can see the need to bring to accountability those who have so terribly abused their offices for reasons other than the over used “national security” excuse and yet our elected representatives are either unwilling or intentionally obstructing any efforts to act in defense of our country.

 

The neo-con, anti-American faction of the Republican Party has yet to realize that the dead elephant in the room, is them.  The only thing missing in today’s circus sideshow put on by the neo-cons was the lack of some raging Evangelical, born-again, God is putting a word of knowledge in my heart right now, rock star preacher. This was most likely just an oversight. After all, the clowns were there. 

 

©2008 Marti Oakley

 

C-SPAN:

www.cspan.org/videoarchives.asp?CatCodePairs=,

 

C-SPAN | Capitol Hill, The White House and National Politics – C-SPAN

www.c-span.org/

 

Rabkin, Jeremy

www.law.gmu.edu/faculty/directory/rabkin_jeremy

 

Congressman Lamar Smith 21st District of Texas

lamarsmith.house.gov/ 

The Value of Motivational Lies

Leave a comment

I remember seeing Bush on TV at some point in time, telling his tale of how he came to God.  Had that been almost anyone else telling that story I might have believed it.  What I was seeing was a man who realized that a story of this kind would tug at America’s religious heartstrings and maybe we wouldn’t be able to see the monster lurking beneath the surface.  In my opinion, this was one of the greatest motivational lies, told by one of the greatest liars of modern times.

Remember when Bush, the Rice, then Cheney, then Rumsfeld all stood berfore the camera’s at one point or another and not only told the nation that we would get even with those who attacked us, but if we didn’t…..there could be “smoking guns” in the form of mushroom clouds over (name your city).  These were outright motivational lies.  And they worked!  We wanted revenge! And how else could they get us to not only  condone but to send our family members to war on the side of the world, especially one against a country that had no part in 9/11?  And when the lies were exposed? Well……they just mispoke. But we remained motivated, most of us preferring the lie versus the truth.

Other motivational lies have come in the form of statements such as “if you’re not with us, you’re against us”.  We had a president and entire administration along with a cadre of corrupt individuals who had already decided to act unilaterally and if they could induce other countries via monetary donations or quid pro quo, so much the better.  They didn’t care if anyone was with us…..they weren’t the ones who would have to go to war; they would just be those who reaped the rewards.

Another motivational lie was, “if you don’t support the war, you don’t support the troops.”  And how many of us jumped in behind that one?  Then the caskets starting coming home and it became apparent that we were destroying a country that had done nothing to us.  But all of that meant nothing because Bush claimed “God” told him to strike Iraq.  At this point, if you didn’t support the war……you obviously didn’t support God either.  Talk about motivation!

The night Bush appeared on TV and announced that we would wage a pre-emptive war of aggression against Iraq, his concern was not the number of innocent Iraqi’s that might be slaughtered.  He wasn’t concerned that many of our soldiers would likely forfeit their lives or be horribly wounded.  No…..he looked directly into the camera and addressed the American public with a mesaage really intended for the Iraqi people and said, “Do not destroy the oil wells”.  Apparently Bush’s God needs oil for some reason.

I personally believe that if God ever were to speak to George W. Bush, it would be something more along the lines of …..”George! Shut up! You’re lying!”

…………………………………………………………

Under this presidency, a fraud in itself, one fraud after another has been purpetrated on the American people.  It’s our own fault.  We allowed this to continue.  We have allowed ourselves to be lulled into compliance by the notion that government wanted only to protect us from those “terrorists”, while never admitting that those we needed to fear most were walking around unhindered in D.C. 

Many of us also tuned into hate radio and the continuous vomit inducing ramblings of Rush Limbaugh, Anne Coulter and Bill O’Reilly among many others.  And didn’t they make some of feel good with constant pandering to the worst in humanity and continuing the motivational lies.  They almost made you feel like it was OK to be stupid, to hate without reason and to spread unfounded lies and misinformation……right up to the point that listening to them, believing them, started costing you your freedom; right up until it was your son or daughter, your husband or father who had to go fight a war for oil, knowing that they were not being sent to war to bring freedom or demcracy to a country that desired neither, but rather, to help Mobil/Exxon, British Petroleum and Dutch Shell gain access to the massive oil deposits they had been prohibited from accessing prior to the war. 

And here we are today, just months from the next presidential election and what has changed?  Bush no longer claims God speaks to him, but congress sits on its collective rear ends and pretends that it would be a waste of time to hold Bush & Co. accountable for the lies and deceptions that lead us to war.  All our hopes for accountability and punnishment for the mass murder of 1.2 million Iraqi’s and the deaths of more than 4,000 of our soldiers all for the sake of oil cartels and greed…..is a waste of time.  So says our congress.  So says Princess Pelosi and Senator Reid.

The success of the 2006 elections which brought Democrats into control of both houses was premised on the greatest of all motivational lies.  The premise and promise of change.  Change predicated on correcting the corruption of this administration, changes that would reinstate our constitutional liberities and protections and repeal the eggregious actions of the last seven years.  Instead, we got a new majority that has been just as active in assaulting our liberties, just as protective of corruption and deception.

And now as the summer comes into full swing, we have to watch for another motivational lie that will mark the beginning of the war with Iran.  At some point, we will be told motivational lies to meant to make us support war on Iran.  At what point will we motivate ourselves to stand up and say “enough!”

Marti Oakley (c)2007-08

Revealed: Secret plan to keep Iraq under US control

1 Comment

To: Hon. Jack Layton; Rt Hon. Stephen Harper;  L’Hon. Gilles Duceppe;

Hon.Stéphane Dion

 

Sent: 5 June 2008 12:40

Subject: Canada’s position is?

 

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/revealed-secret-plan-to-keep-iraq-under-us-control-840512.html

 

Revealed: Secret plan to keep Iraq under US control

Bush wants 50 military bases, control of Iraqi airspace and legal immunity for all American soldiers and contractors

 

By Patrick Cockburn

Thursday, 5 June 2008

 

A secret deal being negotiated in Baghdad would perpetuate the American military occupation of Iraq indefinitely, regardless of the outcome of the US presidential election in November.

 

The terms of the impending deal, details of which have been leaked to The Independent, are likely to have an explosive political effect in Iraq. Iraqi officials fear that the accord, under which US troops would occupy permanent bases, conduct military operations, arrest Iraqis and enjoy immunity from Iraqi law, will destabilize Iraq’s position in the Middle East and lay the basis for unending conflict in their country.

 

But the accord also threatens to provoke a political crisis in the US. President Bush wants to push it through by the end of next month so he can declare a military victory and claim his 2003 invasion has been vindicated. But by perpetuating the US presence in Iraq, the long-term settlement would undercut pledges by the Democratic presidential nominee, Barack Obama, to withdraw US troops if he is elected president in November.

 

The timing of the agreement would also boost the Republican candidate, John McCain, who has claimed the United States is on the verge of victory in Iraq – a victory that he says Mr. Obama would throw away by a premature military withdrawal.

 

America currently has 151,000 troops in Iraq and, even after projected withdrawals next month, troop levels will stand at more than 142,000 – 10 000 more than when the military “surge” began in January 2007. Under the terms of the new treaty, the Americans would retain the long-term use of more than 50 bases in Iraq. American negotiators are also demanding immunity from Iraqi law for US troops and contractors, and a free hand to carry out arrests and conduct military activities in Iraq without consulting the Baghdad government.

 

The precise nature of the American demands has been kept secret until now. The leaks are certain to generate an angry backlash in Iraq. “It is a terrible breach of our

sovereignty”, said one Iraqi politician, adding that if the security deal was signed it would de-legitimize the government in Baghdad which will be seen as an American pawn.

 

The US has repeatedly denied it wants permanent bases in Iraq but one Iraqi source said: “This is just a tactical subterfuge.” Washington also wants control of Iraqi airspace below 29,000ft and the right to pursue its “war on terror” in Iraq, giving it the authority to arrest anybody it wants and to launch military campaigns without consultation.

 

Mr. Bush is determined to force the Iraqi government to sign the so-called “strategic alliance” without modifications, by the end of next month. But it is already being condemned by the Iranians and many Arabs as a continuing American attempt to dominate the region. Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the powerful and usually moderate Iranian leader, said yesterday that such a deal would create “a permanent occupation”. He added: “The essence of this agreement is to turn the Iraqis into slaves of the Americans.”

 

Iraq’s Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, is believed to be personally opposed to the terms of the new pact but feels his coalition government cannot stay in power without US backing.

 

The deal also risks exacerbating the proxy war being fought between Iran and the United States over who should be more influential in Iraq.

 

Although Iraqi ministers have said they will reject any agreement limiting Iraqi

sovereignty, political observers in Baghdad suspect they will sign in the end and simply want to establish their credentials as defenders of Iraqi independence by a show of defiance now. The one Iraqi with the authority to stop deal is the majority Shia spiritual leader, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. In 2003, he forced the US to agree to a referendum on the new Iraqi constitution and the election of a parliament. But he is said to believe that loss of US support would drastically weaken the Iraqi Shia, who won a majority in parliament in elections in 2005.

 

The US is adamantly against the new security agreement being put to a referendum in Iraq, suspecting that it would be voted down. The influential Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr has called on his followers to demonstrate every Friday against the impending agreement on the grounds that it compromises Iraqi independence.

 

The Iraqi government wants to delay the actual signing of the agreement but the office of Vice-President Dick Cheney has been trying to force it through. The US ambassador in Baghdad, Ryan Crocker, has spent weeks trying to secure the accord.

 

The signature of a security agreement, and a parallel deal providing a legal basis for keeping US troops in Iraq, is unlikely to be accepted by most Iraqis. But the Kurds, who make up a fifth of the population, will probably favor a continuing American presence, as will Sunni Arab political leaders who want US forces to dilute the power of the Shia. The Sunni Arab community, which has broadly supported a guerrilla war against US occupation, is likely to be split.

 

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/revealed-secret-plan-to-keep-iraq-under-us-control-840512.html

 

 

CANADIAN ACTION PARTY/PARTI ACTION CANADIENNE

LEADER, CONSTANCE (Connie) FOGAL

www.canadianactionparty.ca

Telephone Connie Fogal at: 604 872 2128

 

Speaker Pelosi Should Be Impeached

Leave a comment

We should have worked to have her removed from her office when she declared “impeachment is off the table” immediately after assuming the position of Speaker of the House.  This statement was made with the full knowledge that the newly acquired position she occupied was a direct result of the will of the voters to replace the corruption of not only the Republican majority, but also the administration and to impeach Bush and Cheney.  Princess Pelosi made her loyalties very clear, and they are not to the American people.

To add insult to injury, even after millions of American’s repeatedly stood up and demanded that there be no amnesty and that our laws be enforced, effectively preventing the passage of such odorous pieces of legislation such as the Dream Act ….which was a bitch slap to legal citizens….. not once, not twice, but three times at least, the Princess is continuing to work behind the scenes to produce yet another amnesty bill which she will try to ram through congress, due to come out early this summer.  Maybe she’s hard of hearing?  Maybe she can’t comprehend?  Maybe she really does think that what the American people want is not an issue she has to be bothered with. 

Now, Her Royal Hiney is working on a 178 billion dollar package to continue to fund the war in Iraq.  Where, one might ask, does the Princess think she is going to find another $178 billion?  We’ve already borrowed so much from China that they actually own us, and Japan is running a close second.  Revenues are way down from taxes as so many have lost their jobs, their homes, and their quality of life. 

The federal government contiinues to raid the Social Security surplus to pay its operating expenses and to cover the loss of revenues from the tax cuts to the wealthiest people, and the cost of illegal immigrants to the federal government jumped up to 240 billion for 2007.  These two issues alone have bankrupted our country, and this does not include the state by state costs, deficits and resulting debts accrued.  Now add the cost of this illegal war to all of these things.  We are in effect…….not only bankrupt but totally insolvent as a nation.  We can’t even pay the service debt on all the money we have borrowed. But the Princess wants to create another 178 billion dollar debt (this doesn’t include interest, fees, penalties, or other hidden costs) to continue to fund an unwinnable war that the American people have made very clear they want stopped.

I have a plan:

Until congress, the administration and its cohorts in crime work for the American people rather than against them, I believe all of their assets both liquid and invested, including homes, businesses, savings, assets from any source whatsoever, including all the personal funds that they are stashing away in foreign currencies and investments, should be seized and used to pay back these monstrous debts that they have created and claimed that we, the American citizen are responsible for.  Maybe if they have to pay the bill for the money they have spent against our wishes, they might stop squandering it. 

I think we should start with Princess Pelosi.  First, she needs to be dethroned.  Then, all of her ill gotten gains seized and applied to the debt she has helped to create.  Once she is homeless, without any resources, with no political power, she may have an epiphany. 

Ultimately, Pelosi is only one piece of the problem.  Maybe its time we citizens think over the idea that congress is no longer representative of the people.  Maybe its time we end congress.  Having ceded so much of its power and authority to the executive branch, congress has ceased to be a needed branch of government.  God knows congress doesn’t work for the people, opting instead to protect the corporatization of our government and country and actively working to protect those interests rather than those of the people who elected them.  Think of the money that could be saved by ridding our selves of this monumental siphon on the public treasury. 

Think of it as good business practices.  No other corporation would tolerate the inactivity, the bad business decisions, the poor financial practices, or the ignoring of those invested in the corporation.  Our government is in effect, a corporation and if this is how they want to operate, then as investers in that corporation we have a right to call a meeting and demand an accounting,  and a voice in structure and board members. 

Maybe if we start by removing Pelosi from the board of directors which is commonly called “congress”, other board members will get the message.  Maybe not.  But it would sure be a fine start in the right direction.

Marti Oakley (c) 2008

 

 

 

 

Canadians Fighting Lockheed/Martin & Loss of Confidence in Government: Part 3

Leave a comment

 

SUBJECT: Census Data

 

October 13, 2006

 

TO:

Ivan Felligi

Chief Statistician of Canada

Ivan.P.Fellegi@statcan.ca

 

CC:

Industry Canada

Minister Responsible for Statistics Canada Maxime Bernier minister.industry@ic.gc.ca

613-995-9001

 

Cc: Jacques.Morin@a.statcan.ca; Lyne.St.John@a.statcan.ca

 

CC: Lockheed-Martin

President (Canadian operations)

Martin Munro

martin.munro@lmco.ca

613-599-3270 ext 3498 (Martin’s exec asst, Diane Grandy)

 

Dear Ivan,

 

I am in receipt of your registered letter dated October 3, 2006.

 

It does not address my reason for non-compliance with the census, communicated to you consistently and beginning back in 2003.

 

The reason you provide for the necessity of compliance with the census is not truth. I presume that if your reason is an untruth, it is because you do not have a truthful reason to offer.

 

I would be failing my responsibilities as a citizen were I to bow in cowardice to anyone, civil servant or otherwise, who attempts to intimidate me with the threat of the judicial system – jail time and fines – when there is no reasonable basis.

 

Lockheed-Martin is a large part of the American war machine. I will not, through complicity, add to their financial profits. I communicated this to you more than two years before the census, as did many other Canadians.

 

If I am to be treated equally before the Law, then you must equally refer the thousands of other Canadians who have not complied with the census to the Judicial system. I presume you are doing this.

 

The reason you have provided for the necessity of my compliance, quoting from your letter of October 3, 2006 is: “A compulsory response is required of all respondents because the census is essential for providing the information needed by governments, businesses, researchers and individual Canadians to shed light on issues that are critical to virtually every sector of society. If respondents were to arbitrarily choose whether or not they would answer the census questions, the result would not accurately reflect the characteristics of the population and would therefore not be considered useful or reliable.”

 

I am sorry to say, but that is a load of bull. Most people off the street know it’s not the way statistics work. I find it offensive that citizens are treated as though they are ignorant. In my particular case, I am a graduate of the College of Commerce, University of Saskatchewan. I majored in Quantitative Analysis (Statistics) and graduated with Honours. Every day we are provided with reliable statistical information not based on 100% sampling.

 

I repeat my point: if you must resort to blatant untruths I presume it is because you don’t have a valid argument to offer.

 

Another point I would like to make: you chose to define the Canadian census in a way that necessitated the out-sourcing.

 

On your website you record that the first census in Canada was conducted in 1666, the first national census in 1871. For centuries and decades the Government has defined the census in a way that civil servants had the capability of doing the work. To me, quite frankly, it is prudent to keep one’s work within the limits you are capable of managing.

 

If the Government is not capable of doing that which has been successfully managed by civil servants for decades and centuries, then the answer is to fire those responsible for the mismanagement. The answer is not to knowingly create some over-sized census monster which weakens one’s capabilities and then dictates an attitude of “I am so weakened I must rely on Big Daddy LM to help me out.”

 

Statistics Canada and its employees are to serve the interests of the citizens of Canada. Previous administrations have done that very well. If not, there would have been problems in the past. I am not aware of any. So I suggest that you need to re-think what you are doing.

 

Third and final point: in the last paragraph of your letter you say, “I would like to assure you that the information you provide on your census questionnaire will be kept strictly confidential, …”.

 

I reassure children so they may feel safe and secure. I think you mis-read the situation: I am secure, I am an adult. I do not need to be reassured by you. I will arrive at my own conclusions by observing your actions and by reading what you write.

 

Furthermore, not once in my communications with the Government have I mentioned concerns about the confidentiality of information. I have been clear and explicit in the reason for my non-compliance. You repeat this mantra about confidentiality. Not once have you addressed or attempted to address my explicitly-stated reason for non-compliance: the Statistics Canada contract with Lockheed-Martin enriches a corporation that plays a very large role in the American killing machine.

 

I am not being snooty. I am not “radical”. I come from rural Saskatchewan which is small “c” conservative country. I am “mature”, a Mother of 2 children. I do not believe in increasing the hatred in the world through killing other people and their children. Lockheed-Martin profits from the killing.

 

I don’t know into which pigeon hole you have slotted me. I am able to think.

I can connect the dots between my actions and wider outcomes. I was a member of and benefited from the Girl Guides of Canada for many years. I learned service to community. That community and sisterhood extends to women in all countries of the world. I had the privilege of attending an international camp. I slept in the same tent, cooked, laughed and danced with these women when they and I were young. I really don’t like seeing them killed, as in Iraq. That’s killed, as in dead. Why would I participate in, or be a collaborator with Lockheed-Martin? Perhaps you have not read the Washington Post, October 11? 655,000 more people have died in Iraq since coalition forces arrived in March 2003 than would have died if the invasion had not occurred (research overseen by epidemiologists at Johns Hopkins University’s Bloomberg School of Public Health). The killing, once started, does not stop.

 

You were told by thousands of Canadians that Lockheed-Martin is a large part of the American war machine. You made a bad decision to “out-source”.

 

Your letter of October 3 is an attempt to coerce me through the threat of jail time and fines. Were my plate not full at the moment, did I not have more important priorities, I would be researching the avenues through which to lay charges, to “turn the matter over to the Department of Justice”, as you say. So that you might be tried for your tactics vis-a-vis me.

 

Yours truly,

Sandra Finley

Saskatoon, SK S7N 0L1

306-373-8078

Open Letter to Mitch McConnell….we’re not as dumb as you thought we were.

4 Comments

Dear Senator McConnell:

Regarding your New Republican Agenda Survey……I have answered your questions here as I know they would be discarded if I sent them to the RNC, you, or anyone else trying to revive this dead elephant in the room.

These are my answers:

Continue the War OF Terror?

1.  If we are going to take the War OF Terror to the terrorists, capture their leaders and freeze their financial assets I believe it would be far more expeditious to start in Washington D.C..  We have an administration that lied us into war on false pretenses and we are now considered the biggest threat to world peace by almost every nation around the globe.  In addition, the millions, if not billions made by Bush & Co. on this war of aggression should be seized and held for the taxpayers of the United States and returned to them via another rebate. 

Disarm Iran and Korea?

2.  We are in no position to demand that any other country dismantle their weapons of any kind as we have proven in the last seven years in particular that we are not all the responsible ourselves. 

Continue the Wars? (and attack Iran??)

3.  Where were you and the Republican party when our troops were sent into Iraq without body armor?  Without weapons and proper equipment and training?  Oh…I forgot…..you were voting to send them over there.

The Patriot Acts

4.  You were one of those who never read the Patriot Act before voting on it.  Its obvious you still haven’t read it or The Security Enhancement Act (Patriot 2).  Neither act deals with terrorism, or even mentions terrorists unless there is a direct assault on liberty, civil rights or legal protections guaranteed in the Constitution.  I don’t believe any terrorist is living in fear of any laws that rob us of our freedom.

Illegal Wiretapping and Government Spying on US Citizens?

5.  Prior to the Pat Acts……the FBI had every legal right to wiretap when there was reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.  The laws that you have helped pass are not targeted to terrorists (expanded now in your survey to include terrorist sympathizers overseas).  These Acts do nothing but allow the unfettered spying on US citizens…ALL US citizens. How can overloading the system with billions of unnecessary eavesdropping and spying pieces of data, gleaned from domestic phone calls, emails, snail mail, net chats, any and all sources by people everyday, do anything other than bog down a system that was already dysfunctional?  We need the focus of intelligent and efficient intelligence agencies, not wholesale spying on everyone just for the sake of doing it.  This could start with dismantling Homeland Security.

Are we scared enough to claim everyone is a terrorist? 

5.  And please tell me how you identify these known terrorists?  Do they wear a sign?  A uniform?  How could you possibly determine in the massive amounts of information that is gathered daily and unnecessarily who is contacting a terrorist, and who is a terrorist?  The fact is you can’t! 

Build the fence?  Defend the border?

6.  Why not invoke that new Civil Assistance Plan with Canada and have them send their military down here to defend our border?  That would beat building a fence and we could maybe stop the illegal colonization of our country.

Should Democrats raise taxes to pay off the massive debt we accumulated?

7.  Should we stop the Democrats from raising taxes?  OOOHH!  That should snag the suckers.  Maybe the real question should have been:  Will the Democrats be forced to raise taxes to cover all the spending, tax cuts to the wealthiest 1%,  bail outs of predatory lenders,  loss of jobs,  and billions spent on this War OF Terror.  Considering the Republicans borrowed us into massive and unrepayable debt……this is really a moot point.

Continue the tax cuts so the wealthiest don’t have to contribute?

8. No. The tax cuts to those who didn’t need them should be stopped.  After all, we’re at war, the troops need those “tools”, and the economy is tanking big time.  Wouldn’t it be more patriotic to ante up when you have so much, than to expect those who are losing their jobs and homes, pensions and everything they have worked for to continue to finance those who contribute so little?

Should we allow multinational corporations to rape and pillage more of the country and then threaten you with your job if you object?

9.  Job killing environmental regulations?  And what jobs would those be? (I can’t wait for the answer to this one!)  I think what you are concerned about are those CAFTA provisions that you have not been quite successful at implementing just yet.  Read “trade illegal” regarding environmental obstacles to pollution and other “job killing” provisions. 

Could someone please balance the budget?  We’ve made such a mess of things!

10. A balanced budget amendment????  You’ve got to be kidding!  This from someone who has been part of the biggest expansion in government since its inception, who has helped kill the economy with massive borrowing and spending……and now you want a balanced budget amendment???  You are such a funny guy!

Fair trade or, corporate greed supported by this government?

11. There is a difference between free trade and fair trade.  The free trade policies of this administration and the 108th and 109th congress and now the 110th, have decimated our wages, jobs, caused massive home foreclosure, loss of health insurance and more families slip below the poverty line every day.  What do you think Mr. McConnell?  Do you think maybe its time someone put the brakes on this disaster and admitted that without regulation, without controls, businesses in the US (the few that remain) cannot be trusted to act in the best interest of the country?  Wage and price controls would be just the tip of the iceberg in what is needed to salvage our country from the pile of rubble the Republicans have helped to create.

Gay marriage will divert your attention from our corruption…Should we pass an Amendment?

14.  We have far more important issues that are of true priority without creating problems where none exists.  Don’t believe in gay marriage?  Don’t marry a gay person!  Problem solved!  With the divorce rate hitting 60% on those “traditional” marriages you trotted out there……I dont’ think you have a leg to stand on.  Your argument has no merit. 

Activist judges……are they only worthy if we picked them?

15. Activist judges?  Why not!  We just approved a several religious lunatics and a few even got on to the Supreme Court!  No one is more “activist” than than when they claim to be doing “God’s work!”

The federal government needs more of your money……blame someone else?

16. If Bush and other presidents hadn’t used the Social Security surplus (Bush has used it every year to finance the federal government to cover the loss of revenues from the tax cuts to those poor rich people) there would be no need to raise the SS tax.  But I’m sure you would have no problem raising the SS tax if it meant your wealthy friends could keep their tax cuts.

The 2nd Amendment

17. I fully support the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

Tort reform….A good way to stop the common people from holding anyone accountable?

18. Medical liability and tort reform are just the current attempts to prevent everyday people from holding these demigods in the medical industry and pharmaceutical’s from being accountable for the harm they cause the public.  Considering that so many in congress are attorneys…….you might be shooting yourself and your trade in the foot with this one.

The Grand Old Party?  Or, How we destroyed an entire nation with greed and more greed.

19. & 20

We now call it the Greedy Old Party.  There is nothing to revive.  As it is, this party has shown us that given the power to change things, they will change it only for the benefit of a few.  The corruption that these last seven years in particular has exposed from supposedly religious, moral and family values officals is enough to drive the best of us away. 

You have spent us into abject debt, started wars of aggression, helped construct the biggest expansion in the size of government ever.  You have allowed corporations and multinationals to take our jobs, reduce our wages and quality of life all for the almighty “global trade”.  You are not conservatives, you are not compassionate, and I don’t believe you have a conscience. 

The Republican (neo-conservative) party has been the worst disaster ever to hit our nation.  And now you want us to donate to keep you going?  What happened? Did the corporate soft money dry up?  Did the lobbyists leave “k” street?  Get your money where you have gotten it while pretending you didn’t know that what you were supporting was going to destroy our nation.  Or have all the really big money suppliers moved to the cheap labor markets in foreign countries where they don’t need you any more?

The best thing voters could do is to vote every one of you on both sides out of office and start over.  Either that or dispense with the congress altogether.  Congress has become nothing but a huge siphon on the public and regardless of which side of the “isle” you pretend to be on……the fact is that you are not on our side. 

Since you can vote yourself raises and benefits any time you want, why not just go ahead and vote yourself some money to keep this pathetic charade going?  It wouldn’t be any less ethical than what you have done to us in the past.

Marti Oakley (c) 2008

 

 

Why Don’t We Just Buy the Oil…..and Get Rid of Congress?

Leave a comment

From my mathematical friend who is consumed with the real meaning of the numbers that are flung about by that collection of dregs that now parades as our Federal government, I received this small note this morning:

“quote”……

 How Much Is Too Much To Spend On a Preemptive War?

As of this third week in March 2008, the wars in the Mideast (Afghanistan and Iraq) have cost us $538.6 Billion.  That is $5,686 per U.S. family.

Let’s see if we can wrap our minds around the numbers.

·         $538.6 Billion dollars would buy ALL the fuel for ALL the commuters in Minnesota for 116 years and four months.  (At 12,000 miles per year, 20 mpg, $3.10 per gallon)

·         $538.6 Billion dollars would pay a year of premiums on a $955 per month health insurance policy for EVERY uninsured person in the United States.  (46,995,000 as of August, 2007)

·         At $250 Million per bridge, $538.6 Billion dollars would replace 2,154 bridges

·         $538.6 Billion dollars is a LOT of money.

My $5,686 could have been spent in many better ways.

At the risk of sounding naïve, why don’t we just buy the oil, instead of trying to control it?

Dan Martin (end quote..)

I agree Dan.  Why didn’t we just save our selves, our country and the world a lot of grief, and just pay for the oil we needed or wanted?  Why?  Because blasting other countries off the map, killing indigenous populations, manufacturing weaponry and making war a business was far more profitable on so many fronts. 

Think what we have accomplished by attacking non-threatening countries that had something we coveted.  Just look at the “freedom” we brought to Afghanistan and Iraq!  Look at these burgeoning democracies that have governments we hand picked to make sure things were done our way to benefit the elite.   We have many things to be thankful for in this massive genocide for oil and thanks to the use of Depleted Uranium on the Iraqi’s, massive and horrendous birth defects are occurring at an alarming rate.  Not that it matters, those exposed to this radio-active gas are going to have a short life anyway, and that includes our military that was also exposed.

Thanks to Paul Bremer, Iraqi farmers can no longer even save seed for next years crops.  It’s illegal.

Thanks to the World Bank, an Iraqi national cannot be loaned money for a business start-up . . . only foreign investors allowed.”

Thanks to Halliburton and KBR and others like them, reconstruction has cost billions upon billions, most of which can’t be accounted for and nothing is getting built that would account for the massive amount of money American taxpayers have had to ante up.

Thanks to Cheney and the oil cartels, we are building a multi-billion dollar embassy in the middle of a pile of rubble we created.  This….while we keep destroying everything in sight and killing anything that moves. 

Thanks to Blackwater and CACI, we now have roving gangs of hired killers that are not subject to any laws anywhere.

Thanks to these wars of aggression to benefit the greed of a few, we are faced with a staged collapse of our own economy. As Americans, we now own less than 18% of our own country while our infrastructure is sold off to foreign investors, home foreclosures skyrocket, and jobs are shipped to foreign countries.

Thanks to the phony War OF Terror, we have lost the writ of habeas corpus, due process, and the right to defend ourselves.  We can now be declared “domestic terrorists” for speaking out against the policies of corporate government.

Thanks to the failure of Homeland Security or the Attorney General, our borders remain wide open while we are colonized by people who not only do not respect us, but openly express their contempt for us; all to benefit the free movement of people and goods for the benefit of business under the S&PP and to facilitate the North American Union Merger.

Thanks to the phony War OF Terror, the president can now declare a national emergency even if he is the only one to perceive one (congress can’t review it for six months); and declare martial law, suspending the Constitution with its Bill of Rights and any upcoming elections, and effectively establish himself as king and dictator. 

Thanks to the Civil Assistance Plan signed with Canada (also with Germany and Mexico and others) we can look forward to foreign militaries patrolling our streets, among other things.

And thanks to our do nothing congresses, nothing has been done or will be done to halt or stop any of this.  What this tells me is that they are part of the problem.  We already know they are math challenged and don’t understand that the money they blow is ours.  For some reason they have come to believe that the money they waste is theirs.  This siphon on the public monies is so addictive that these parasites on the public couldn’t even vote to stop their selves from “earmarking” funds for wasteful and stupid projects but they sure don’t have any problem passing an almost unanimous vote nine times in the last seven years giving their selves raises and perks.

Then there is that illegal immigration thing.  For some reason, Speaker Pelosi just can’t seem to understand that her constituents, and 78% of her countrymen oppose amnesty, increases in visa’s, and continuing to support to the tune of billions of dollars a year just to the Federal government (your tax money) people who broke our laws.  Ms. Pelosi now works behind the scenes trying to pass or include one anti-American amnesty plan or another.  This after Americans rose up in massive numbers in opposition to each and every form of the “Dream Act” that was put forward last year.  Billions of dollars that could have helped American families, created jobs, shored up our infrastructure or built that damn fence!  have gone to pay the livelihood of people who are not even legal residents of this country.  Thank you so much, Princess Pelosi! 

I have come to the conclusion that the best thing we could do at this point is to rid ourselves of congress.  This institution has become nothing but a siphon of taxpayer money and is totally useless in either defending or protecting the citizenry from what has become an evil empire or is conspiring with it to dismantle our country.  Dismantling the federal congress would allow states to individually decide what they will support or not.  My, but that would change the landscape of corporate government wouldn’t it?  If the senators and representatives were only on the state level and had to stay in-state and actually face the people they are trying to screw over, maybe then things would change.  I would be thankful for that.

Maybe we need to send Dan to Washington (he always has his super-duper calculator with him) and have him sit down and explain to these imbeciles that the math just doesn’t work.  Maybe we could all send each of our legislators a calculator and maybe provide them with a tutor or math translator (after all we’re paying for translators in public schools for kids who don’t speak English) to help them better understand that we are no longer willing to pay for private wars, illegal immigrants, or bridges to nowhere, and that we cannot afford to continue these devastating policies.

But, thanks to those who cling to the right vs. left paradigm, who think God loves us more than others, that gay people are demon possessed, who hate the Muslims because some money grubbing preacher said that God wanted us to hate them and kill them, who believe that killing people “over there” is not going to happen “over here” or that supporting candidates from either side who will only give us more of the same things we have been enduring…. thanks to those people, nothing is going to change. 

In the end I have to repeat Dan’s question: “Why don’t we just buy the oil?”  Think of all the grief, the killing, destruction, hatred, bigotry, jobs, homes, businesses that would have been preserved.  Think of all the good that could have been done throughout our own country with 500 billion that has been squandered for war and to enable the destruction of our Republic. 

Then ask yourself, why we didn’t just buy the oil? 

 Marti Oakley     (c) 2008     

Wrapping our minds around the lack of math skills in D.C.

1 Comment

How Much Is Too Much To Spend On a Preemptive War?

 

 As of this third week in March 2008, the wars in the Mideast (Afghanistan and Iraq) have cost us $538.6 Billion.  That is $5,686 per U.S. family. Let’s see if we can wrap our minds around the numbers. 

·         $538.6 Billion dollars would buy ALL the fuel for ALL the commuters in Minnesota for 116 years and four months.  (At 12,000 miles per year, 20 mpg, $3.10 per gallon) 

·         $538.6 Billion dollars would pay a year of premiums on a $955 per month health insurance policy for EVERY uninsured person in the United States.  (46,995,000 as of August, 2007) 

·         At $250 Million per bridge, $538.6 Billion dollars would replace 2,154 bridges 

·         $538.6 Billion dollars is a LOT of money. My $5,686 could have been spent in many better ways. At the risk of sounding naïve, why don’t we just buy the oil, instead of trying to control it? 

Dan Martin

%d bloggers like this: