Posted by: quiscus | May 18, 2009

May 18. 2009

1.  “Vice President Biden confronted with conclusive scientific proof of criminal demolitions on 9/11/01

After the last words were spoken, it was obvious that the press would not have an opportunity to ask questions, so Jeremy and Bruno moved quickly, crammed against the wall, toward the podium in an effort to create an opportunity to ask a question. We were at an advantage with our hand held cameras, and we actually found ourselves right next to Biden as he moved chairs aside to fulfill requests for photos with residents in attendance. The moment generated many smiles and laughter, and genuine joy could be seen in the faces of all the residents. Biden stood and addressed the residents, and the instant that the photo op was finished, Jeremy engaged him: “Vice-President Biden, I’m Jeremy Rothe-Kushel with WACLA Media.” Biden said, “If I had your hair, I would be President!” Jeremy couldn’t disagree with that and offered up that Biden could have some since there was “enough to go around.” Then it was time to get serious and Jeremy jumped right into the preliminary part of his question.

“It seems like with the kind of work that Esparanza and communities around the world are doing in terms of rejuvenating themselves, we could all rejuvenate our communities. So, I want to ask you about the role, the foundational role, [that] restoring the rule of law has in terms of rejuvenating our economy… because there was a recent scientific paper that came out, I don’t know if you know about it, but it basically is conclusive that the World Trade Center was blown up by very high, advanced explosives and it should have been and continue to be the very highest news story right now. So, my question to you is, when are you and President Obama going to ask the Department of Justice to start a criminal investigation in terms of who produced this advanced nano-thermite and who put it in the World Trade Center?”

The space had gone silent, and every single person, including the press, the residents, the politicians and the Secret Service were listening intently to Jeremy’s question, and they all could not help but witness Biden’s discomfort and his loss for words. At this point Biden asked to see the report and took it to into his hands to look at it.

With the paper in the Vice-President’s hands, Jeremy finished up the question by asking: “And if you all are not going to do that, is it possible for We the American People to trust you with our economy if we can’t trust you with restoring the rule of law?” Biden, obviously caught in an awkward moment, handed the scientific paper back to Jeremy, and said “Yes,” then said “thank you” to everybody, and quickly turned to leave. While leaving the scene, offered up a little bit more in terms of his ambiguous answer. “That it’s possible to trust—you can trust us.”

Unsatisfied with the evasiveness and ambiguity of the Vice President’s answer, Jeremy continued to call out to Biden, asking him to clarify his position in regards to the 9/11 cover-up, but Biden did not clarify his position any further. “Are you going to do an investigation? Sir, are you part of the treasonous cover-up of 9/11 or are you going to help clear this up? Vice President Biden, this is about treason under Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution.”

Today we managed to get the only question asked, and every single person present walked away from that event with Jeremy’s question about scientific proof for military grade explosives used in the destruction of the Twin Towers on their mind. On our way out, a reporter complained to Jeremy that “it doesn’t matter what story you are after you should always keep it with the agenda of the moment,” to which Bruno’s pleasant response was, “When is 9-11 ever the agenda of the moment?” The reporter bowed his head and walked away.

As we stood in the street, smiles on our faces for having just had an intense experience of engaging high rank politicians about 9-11 and treason, the same Secret Service agent we had interacted with before the press conference came walking out. He smiled and pointed at us, “Great work guys!” then he saluted us! Yes, a Secret Service agent saluted us for asking the Vice President a hard question about scientific proof of the controlled demolition of the towers on 9-11. Bruno called out to him “Thank you! You did a great job running a smooth operation!”

With the truth action never over, Bruno handed out Oathkeepers cards to some of the remaining security personnel who we passed on our way to the car, and they took the cards, and looked at him with respect. It was a very good day.”

http://www.911blogger.com/node/20131

2.  “Controlled Demolition at the WTC: a Historical Examination of the Case

In the case of building 7 the initial acceleration was so close to free fall that there could
be no doubt that all the columns, or most of the columns, must have been severed
simultaneously. I found this particularly compelling after noting that the north face had
little fire while the south face, according to the proponents of the official story, had
severe fire. We have clear photos and videos of the north face but not of the south face.
It is inescapable that if one side of a tall steel structure is heated to the point of failure,
while the other side is not, the structure must lean toward the heated side. WTC 7 did
not lean however, it just came straight down,
and there was so little hesitation at the
beginning that it was almost undetectable.

http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2009/LeggeCDatWTC.pdf

3.  “The Tortuous Logic of Nancy Pelosi

He tried to get frequent guest Jonathan Turley, a noted legal expert, to agree with his pro-Pelosi spin, but Turley wasn’t biting: he pointed out that even if what Pelosi is now saying is true – that she didn’t know anybody had been waterboarded, that this was going to be a future scenario – there is no record that she had any objections. She avers it was her job just to be notified, but, as Turley says, the point of notification is to act.

The speaker of the House is in an increasingly tenuous position. Nothing less than her credibility is at stake. To have Leon Panetta directly contradict her, by issuing a statement declaring that the CIA briefed her “truthfully” and appending to that a general statement addressed to CIA agents who might have been demoralized, even angered, by Pelosi’s charges, is a real slap in the face.

One amusing side aspect of all this is gauging the reaction from Democratic Party loyalists. Speaking of which, we hear not a peep from the bloggers over at the Huffington Post. Arianna herself is too busy calling for the legalization of drugs to bother with such mundane matters as whether prominent figures in both parties went along with the Bush administration’s torture agenda, and her Hollywood-celebrity fellow airheads are similarly preoccupied with such pressing matters as the evil of Dick Cheney. Yet no drug ever invented is going to anesthetize them and their partisan comrades against the pain they’ll experience if they continue to press on the torture issue, as it becomes increasingly clear that no one in D.C. is going to emerge from this with clean hands.

For a long time, Speaker Pelosi has coasted along on the strength of her position in the Democratic Party machine. She has never faced a serious challenge to her congressional seat in San Francisco, where Democratic Party machine politics rules. Yet now that the focus is on her, and her ability to react, speak, and make a coherent argument, it is clear

that she can do none of these things competently. She’s become an embarrassment to her party, to Congress, and – most importantly – to the Obama administration, which, you’ll notice, is refusing to defend her. Maybe they know something that Laura Rozen and Marcy Wheeler don’t – ya think?

What I know is this: it is truly a disgusting sight to see the blue-state propagandists churning out complex (and incoherent) “explanations” that give Pelosi a “get out of jail free” card. If she were a Republican, these same people would be calling for her head.

As for Pelosi herself, she has always been second-rate, and now she’s in way over her head. The sooner she admits she lied and takes her lumps, the better off she’ll be. It’s sheer arrogance that has her denying the obvious and making a bigger fool out of herself every time she opens her mouth – and, as with so many others, that sort of hubris will be her downfall.”

http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/05/17/the-tortuous-logic-of-nancy-pelosi/

4.  “These days, the Washington Post has the look of one of those Southern newspapers in the 1960s standing firm for segregation as the wave of civil rights swept across the region. Except for the Post, the blind commitment is to neoconservatism.

The Post editors probably believe they are upholding some twisted journalistic principle, defying the views of most readers in a city that has a large African-American population, voted overwhelmingly for Barack Obama, and shows little sympathy for the neocons who rode roughshod over so many when George W. Bush was in power.

Even as the power balance has shifted – and many readers have dumped their subscriptions – the Post has chosen to remain a neocon bastion, turning its op-ed page into something of a clearinghouse for the excuses from all the ex-President’s men.

It also remains a comfortable home for pundits who pushed the Iraq War and seem to get a kick out of Muslims getting stripped naked and waterboarded.

As the Post faces today’s economic crisis amid talk that it may not survive as a going-concern, the newspaper may look for sympathy from the community that it purports to serve. But the Post’s endless excuses for the crimes of the Bush administration have left many readers with an ambivalent sense of whether the Post deserves to survive.

Even some journalists privately feel such disgust at the Post’s neocon positioning that they tell me that if they woke up tomorrow and the Post had ceased to exist, they wouldn’t shed a tear.”

http://consortiumnews.com/2009/051209.html

5.  “The American accountability gap

Last week a trolley accident in Boston caused the injury of nearly 50 people.  The operator of the Trolley had been texting a message on his cell phone when the accident occurred.  Naturally this touched off a “debate” regarding the use of cell phones while driving or operating a vehicle.

This control freak culture of demanding accountability for the uncontrollable- for the unforeseen- however, ends at the borders of the United States.  It doesn’t apply to foreigners.  And it most certainly doesn’t apply to foreigners who happen to be blessed by the presence of American combat troops.  Not only do we not demand accountability from our armed forces in foreign lands, except in the most extreme cases in which criminal intent can’t be denied, we actually blame the innocent civilians killed by American forces for their own deaths. “

http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-3665-Boston-Libertarian-Examiner~y2009m5d15-The-American-accountability-gap

6.  “Lt. Erin Watada and a Standing Army

The case of Lt. Erin Watada provides a good example of why our American ancestors opposed a standing army. You’ll recall that Watada is the U.S. military officer who refused orders to deploy to Iraq on the ground that to do so would constitute the war crime of waging a war of aggression. The U.S. Army prosecuted him for refusing to obey such orders but then screwed up by agreeing to the granting of a mistrial after Watada’s trial had already begun. Since another trial would have violated the constitutional provision on double jeopardy, U.S. military officials have recently decided to drop the charges. Still pending are charges relating to Watada’s criticism of President Bush.

But the U.S. military considers him to be the bad guy, which is why they prosecuted him as a criminal. In the eyes of the military, the good guys are the officers who loyally and obediently obeyed the president’s orders to invade and occupy Iraq, just as the good guys are those CIA agents who loyally violated the laws against torture.

The upshot of all this is that the president essentially has an enormous personal army at his disposal, one that is prepared to loyally and obediently carry out whatever orders he issues. That’s not a good thing when it comes to a free society. The Founding Fathers understood that principle, which is precisely why they opposed a standing army for the United States.”

http://www.fff.org/blog/jghblog2009-05-13.asp

7.  “Obama-Netanyahu must not be Kennedy-Khrushchev

Far rightwing Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is meeting Monday with President Barack Obama in Washington.

It is the most fateful encounter of two world leaders since Kennedy met Khrushchev. And Obama absolutely must not allow himself to be cowed or misunderstood as timid by Netanyahu, who is a notorious bully and warmonger. (Bill Clinton complained that Netanyahu when last prime minister thought that he was the superpower). If Obama can cow Netanyahu, his Middle East policy may have a chance. If Netanyahu comes away thinking he can thumb his nose at Washington, the whole Middle East could be in flames by the end of Obama’s first term.”

http://www.juancole.com/

8.  “Obama’s Animal Farm: Bigger, Bloodier Wars Equal Peace and Justice

“The Deltas are psychos…You have to be a certified psychopath to join the Delta Force…”, a US Army colonel from Fort Bragg once told me back in the 1980’s.  Now President Obama has elevated the most notorious of the psychopaths, General Stanley McChrystal, to head the US and NATO military command in Afghanistan.  McChrystal’s rise to leadership is marked by his central role in directing special operations teams engaged in extrajudicial assassinations, systematic torture, bombing of civilian communities and search and destroy missions.  He is the very embodiment of the brutality and gore that accompanies military-driven empire building.  Between September 2003 and August 2008, McChrystal directed the Pentagon’s Joint Special Operations (JSO) Command which operates special teams in overseas assassinations.

The point of the ‘Special Operations’ teams (SOT) is that they do not distinguish between civilian and military oppositions, between activists and their sympathizers and the armed resistance. The SOT specialize in establishing death squads and recruiting and training paramilitary forces to terrorize communities, neighborhoods and social movements opposing US client regimes.  The SOT’s ‘counter-terrorism’ is terrorism in reverse, focusing on socio-political groups between US proxies and the armed resistance.  McChrystal’s SOT targeted local and national insurgent leaders in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan through commando raids and air strikes.  During the last 5 years of the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld period the SOT were deeply implicated in the torture of political prisoners and suspects.  McChrystal was a special favorite of Rumsfeld and Cheney because he was in charge of the ‘direct action’ forces of the ‘Special Missions Units.  ‘Direct Action’ operative are the death-squads and torturers and their only engagement with the local population is to terrorize, and not to propagandize.  They engage in ‘propaganda of the dead’, assassinating local leaders to ‘teach’ the locals to obey and submit to the occupation.  Obama’s appointment of McChrystal as head reflects a grave new military escalation of his Afghanistan war in the face of the advance of the resistance throughout the country.”

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13644

9.  “Condemning Torture, Condoning Mass Murder

A peculiar notion has arisen of late, maintaining that things like torture, domestic spying and illegal wars are all attributable to the Right — namely, the administration of President George W. Bush — and are in fact historical anomalies, not at all in keeping with the traditions of these great United States . The idea that war crimes and civil liberties violations are strictly conservative affairs is particularly comforting to wide-eyed Democrats in awe of America’s First Black President ™, and it affords the heirs to the same liberal establishment which brought us Vietnam and Hiroshima another opportunity to grandstand about their commitment to human rights even as the noble humanitarian Barack Obama continues to extra-judicially murder foreigners with unmanned drones. Unfortunately for partisan Democrats – and even more so the victims of U.S. exceptionalism – American imperialism and its associated evils have long enjoyed bipartisan backing, though liberals tend to be somewhat more sheepish about their support for killing, torturing and maiming poor people overseas.

That many, albeit certainly not all, liberals feel compelled to rationalize even the greatest war crimes committed by Democrats goes beyond a mere partisan desire to absolve past progressive icons, however. Rather, justifying past acts of premeditated murder is necessary to maintaining popular support for the state, which they envision implementing their resplendent progressive utopia. For if the public was convinced their government was nothing but a gang of murderous criminals and thieves and always had been, they might perceive that their rulers really don’t have their best interests at heart – hell, they might even start joining those reactionary “tea parties” — undermining belief in the state as a vital institution and a means for improving the human condition. Thus, past crimes are, if not absolved completely, written off as aberrations committed by a few bad apples or as “complicated decisions” we mere mortals are not qualified to question.

Of course, the crushing enormity of the U.S. government’s criminal record belies claims of its benevolence, or that said crimes are merely a departure from the state’s regular functioning. The reality, as Albert Jay Nock noted more than 80 years ago, is that the state’s crimes are not mere aberrations, but manifestations of its true purpose and entirely in keeping with its founding

Policies promoting the general welfare are the true aberrations, Nock writes, but because of the deeply ingrained conception of the state most people adhere to, this reality is obscured. Yet if any other institution nine times out of 10 did the opposite of what its supporters claimed was its intent, wouldn’t many people start to think that, hey, maybe what that institution does 90% of the time provides a good indication of what it was always intended to do?

That the U.S. government spends the majority of the tax dollars it expropriates from its subjects on empire and incarceration, and trillions more on propping up the financial elite while regular folks face stagnating wages is not an accident – it’s by design.”

http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22644.htm

10.  “U.S. Health Care Lies About Canada

Greed, U.S. Politics, Dysfunction”

http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22649.htm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: