1. “Experts dismiss Lieberman terror bill”
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36896.html
2. And the US apology for its own war crimes, like all the fire-bombings of German and Japanese cities?
“Russia owes Poland, world an apology for massacre, U.S. official says”
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/05/06/93658/russia-owes-poland-world-an-apology.html
3. “
Lieberman’s Modest Gulag Proposal
In order to prevail in his attempt to have the US citizenship of ‘obvious terrorists’ revoked, Sen Joe Lieberman would have to overturn the Fourteenth Amendment, which says, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States . . . are citizens of the United States . . .” Moreover, he would have to overturn a Supreme Court ruling which held that the citizenship of Americans who vote in foreign elections (.e.g in Israel) cannot be revoked by the State Department.
…
Lieberman is most likely proposing his dishonest and unconstitutional law on behalf of the Israeli right wing. Rightwing Zionists have managed to get most organizations opposing Israel’s colonization project in the West Bank declared terrorist organizations. They hope that then anyone who objects to the aggressive expansionary policy of the Israeli government can be branded as giving material support to terrorist organizations and so could be denaturalized and even deported from the US. In other words, Lieberman, a latter-day McCarthyite, would like to do to the American Left and Realists what Israel has already done to the Palestinians, and render them stateless and voiceless.
…
The ruthlessness and frankly fascist tactics of these rightwing nationalists (I know Lieberman is a domestic liberal, but then in some ways so was Peron) are astonishing. And likely they would boomerang against the Jewish-American community. Might not proponents of the West Bank settlers be construed by some courts as giving material support to terrorism? But then they are not designed actually to benefit Jews or Israel; they are designed to benefit Greater Israel ideology.”
http://www.juancole.com/
4. “Fed Audit Deal Reached In Senate
The White House has also apparently signed off on the legislation.
The bill would:
Require the non-partisan General Accountability Office to conduct an independent audit of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System that does not interfere with monetary policy, to let the American people know the names of the recipients of over $2,000,000,000,000 in taxpayer assistance from the Federal Reserve System, and for other purposes.
Ron Paul – the original sponsor of the efforts to audit the Fed – writes:
Bernie Sanders has sold out and sided with Chris Dodd to gut Audit the Fed in the Senate. His “compromise” is what the Administration and banking interests want: they’ll allow the TARP and TALF to be audited, but no transparency of the FOMC, discount window operations or agreement with foreign central banks. We need to take action and stop this!”
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2010/05/fed-audit-amendment-deal-reached-in.html
5. “Specie, Script, and War: The Contradictory Practices of the Global Economic System
“Wars are never fought for altruistic reasons. They’re usually fought for . . . business. And then, of course, there’s the business of war.” Arundhati Roy
Ms Roy’s view is widely held, and it’s certainly true—as far as it goes. But the view has a logic to it that, to my knowledge, no one has ever elucidated.
…
Net exporters become rich while net importers are bankrupted. To keep this system working, colonial wars were fought, peoples were subjugated, and their lands were plundered. Theft became a global practice.
The colonial wars fought after the discovery of the Americas by Europeans were fought for this reason. England, France, Spain, Portugal, and Holland, not themselves rich in mineral resources, all not only fought wars of conquest but fought each other to gain control of what precious metals could be extracted from the so called New World. Trade required access to these metals. No inhumane act was beyond use. Genocide, enslavement, piracy, cruelties of all kinds were commonly practiced. These practices continue today. These wars were necessitated by the need for specie which the trading economy requires.
…
As natural resources become scarce domestically, the economic infrastructure created in earlier times still requires them. As domestic oil production shrinks, for instance, the need for imported oil increases. But no products are being manufactured domestically to barter for the oil. Without commodities or a credible scrip, trade cannot be relied upon to provide the required commodities.
How can such nations acquire the resources needed? There is but one answer—conquest for plunder! Human life becomes the medium of exchange. The world has been turned topsy-turvy. Rather than an economy that functions to fulfill the needs of people as it originally did, people are sacrificed to fulfill the needs of the economy, and the economy exists for no purpose whatsoever. It just is. The current attempt by the European Union and the IMF to resolve the sovereign debt crisis by sacrificing the well being of people to preserve the European economy demonstrates this topsy-turviness. The European Union, which is nothing but a trading association, has made the economy more important than the welfare of its people.
…
But Arundhati Roy is right. Wars are fought for business, but business and the economy are synonymous. Wars will continue to be fought for the economy as long as this economy is not abandoned. War is a logical consequence of it, not, as most seem to believe, a means utilized by it. No attempt to eliminate war and preserve the economy can succeed. A globalized economy leads only to a global disaster, as everyone should have now seen. Net exporters become rich while net importers are impoverished. Self sufficiency (autarchy), not trade, is the only possible way to extricate the human race from the consequences of the specie/scrip/plunder economy. A nation that doesn’t need the resources found in other lands has no reason to go to war. Globalized trade, rather than being a path to peace and prosperity, inevitably leads to war, poverty, and destruction. The economists have it all wrong.”
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=19023
