1. “member fulfills misprision of treason code duties by delivering 9/11 nano-thermite evidence to CA Superior Court”
http://www.911blogger.com/node/20635
2. “Senator Dick Durbin Says He’ll Consider Terminating Bush’s Declaration of National Emergency on 9/14/01″
http://www.911blogger.com/node/20633
3. “Defending the indefensible settlements
A former insider at Aipac has spilled the beans on a major secret initiative by The Israel Project (TIP) designed to counter opposition in the US to Israeli settlements in the occupied territories. Douglas Bloomfield, former chief lobbyist for Aipac, writes that TIP, a group dedicated to promoting Israel‘s positive image among the US media and policymakers, has circulated a 140-page primer designed to prompt supporters in their exchanges with US journalists and key decision-makers when they are arguing in favour of the settlements:
If you can’t convince ‘em, accuse ‘em. That’s the advice from The Israel Project (TIP) for pro-Israel activist. … Rather than try to defend Israeli settlements, change the subject. If that doesn’t work, try accusing those who advocate removing Jewish settlements of promoting “a kind of ethnic cleansing to move all Jews” from the West Bank. TIP calls that “the best settlement argument” in its 2009 Global Language Dictionary.
You read the full document posted on Newsweek’s site [PDF], and includes a preface by its author, the Republican pollster and spin doctor Frank Luntz. What is especially instructive about the document is that it concedes that Israel is on the defensive here in the US.
…
Bloomfield notes another specious argument in the TIP manual: “It falls back on the old and disproven argument that ‘the settlements are necessary for the security of Israel.’”
By no measure can anyone claim that the settlements improve Israel’s security. In fact, violence perpetrated by extremist settlers against Palestinians is a continuous source of friction, which forces thousands of IDF personnel to be stationed there to protect Jewish residents as they pursue their campaigns. Palestinians see the settlements and the occupation in general as painful reminders of their disenfranchisement. This in turn fuels acts of terrorist violence against settlers, which are often repaid in kind by Jewish extremists. Security? I think not.
Americans for Peace Now’s Ori Nir places the issue in a broader context, also contradicting the TIP claim. “American Jews increasingly realise that settlements undermine Israel’s ability to survive, long term, as a democratic Jewish state and that they undermine America’s national security interest in a stable, peaceful Middle East,” he told Bloomfield.
Barack Obama sees the settlements in this light, which is why he has made a full freeze a centrepiece of his policy. Generally, congressional Democrats, even those known to side with the Israel lobby in the past, have adopted the administration’s position on the issue. All of which must be a painful reminder to TIP of how low its fortunes have sunk in the current domestic political environment.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/jul/13/israel-west-bank-settlements-obama
4. What a hilarious title!
“CIA Lies and Other Redundancies”
http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/election/1397
5. Neocons are not only delusional, as the quote describes, but murderous:
“I do agree with this part completely:
The neocons’ democratist ideology should be treated as just another example of fuzzy-headed utopianism. Bringing “liberal democracy” and “democratic capitalism” to the entire world should be added to the category of ridiculous, never-going-to-happen ideas. The best argument against the neocons is that they are delusional. They are the eggheads dreaming up sentimental, utopian schemes, not us.
Couldn’t have said it better myself. Nonetheless, we will gain nothing from adopting the language and posture of the neocons and their fellow travelers. Non-interventionism’s only “tough-guy problem” is the widespread attachment to a mindset derived entirely from dumbass action flicks, which are about as useful a guide for foreign policy as romantic comedies are for romance.”
http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2009/07/13/dont-fck-me-up-with-peace-and-love/
6. “Mandatory Swine Flu Vaccination Alert
It’s crucial to understand that these vaccines are experimental, untested, toxic and extremely dangerous to the human immune system. They contain squalene-based adjuvants that cause a host of annoying to life-threatening autoimmune diseases. They must be avoided, even if mandated. It’s also known that vaccines don’t protect against diseases they’re designed to prevent and often cause them. They should be banned but proliferate anyway because they’re so profitable, and if globally mandated to the greatest extent ever.
Get ready because that’s precisely what’s coming – universal orders to risk toxic vaccine hazards. In the coming weeks, the dominant media globally will get into high gear fear-mongering mode to convince people voluntarily to submit to jeopardizing their health and well-being. It’s essential to refuse and be safe and international law absolutely protects us.”
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14370
7. “Why is it OK for Alito to decide cases based on heritage, but not Sotomayor?
Once again, we see that right-wing talk radio positions are not only wrong on their face, but amazingly stupid.
“Unasked Question about Sam Alito
At his Senate confirmation hearing, Sam Alito used his opening statement to emphasize how his experience as an Italian-American influences his judicial decision-making (video is here):
But when I look at those cases, I have to say to myself, and I do say to myself, “You know, this could be your grandfather, this could be your grandmother. They were not citizens at one time, and they were people who came to this country” . . . .
When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account.
Two weeks ago, Alito cast the deciding vote in Ricci v. DeStefano, an intensely contested affirmative action case. He did so by ruling in favor of the Italian-American firefighters, finding that they were unlawfully discriminated against, even though the district court judge who heard all the evidence and the three-judge appellate panel ruled against them and dismissed their case. Notably, the majority Supreme Court opinion Alito joined (.pdf) began by highlighting not the relevant legal doctrine, but rather, the emotional factors that made the Italian-American-plaintiffs empathetic.
Did Alito’s Italian-American ethnic background cause him to cast his vote in favor of the Italian-American plaintiffs? Has anyone raised that question? Given that he himself said that he “do[es] take that into account” — and given that Sonia Sotomayor spent 6 straight hours today being accused by GOP Senators and Fox News commentators of allowing her Puerto Rican heritage to lead her to discriminate against white litigants — why isn’t that question being asked about Alito’s vote in Ricci?”
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/
